Pandas and Magic Cups: Comparing modern Chinese and twelfth century English diplomacy

Pandas, famous for their lacklustre love-making and poor wrestling careers, have more often been the subject of hilarious internet videos than discussions of international relations. However, over the last 50 years these bears having been living a double life: sometimes looking cute for the cameras, and at other times influencing the geo-political landscape.

And no, they haven't been secretly negotiating the cage match we're all dying to see ...

Since 1965, when the Chinese leader Mao Zedong sent Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev a panda as a present (I suppose because iTunes vouchers hadn’t been invented yet?), pandas have held an important position in China’s foreign policy.

See Theresa, there’s a better option than Boris for Foreign Secretary!

In recent years, China has sent pandas to countries it has established new trade relations with. For example, in 2011 China was looking for a new trade partner to import salmon from after Norway, their previous supplier, awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. They turned their eyes to Scotland and negotiated a contract worth £2.6 billion which saw them receive salmon and land rovers, as well as petrochemical and renewal energy technology from Scotland. In the aftermath, Edinburgh Zoo was loaned two pandas.

Sadly the joke that there are more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs ended when 13 Mps were elected there in 2017.   Turns out Conservatives breed much faster than pandas.  

A similar deal occurred with Canada in 2011, as China loaned it two pandas in return for an agreement to trade uranium oxide (you decide what you’d prefer as a present).

Therefore, the sending of a panda seems to represent good relations between China and the recipient country. However, the feelings are not supposed to be one way. China expects love in return. This was shown by China’s decision to recall Tai Shan, a panda at Washington Zoo, in response to Obama’s plan to meet with the Dalia Lama. The US had violated the good relationship Tai Shan signified, so China took him back to demonstrate this.

The concept of sending a creature or object to another state to symbolise good relations is not new. In the twelfth century Henry I of England made an effort to cultivate a good relationship with David I of Scots. He knighted David I, sorted out a bride for him, and invited the Scot to spend a year at the English court. Furthermore, according to William of Newburgh, Henry I gifted David I an expensive cup which he displayed for the rest his life amongst the ‘treasures of Scotland’.

The friendly Anglo-Scottish connection the cup was intended to represent was clearly a reality. Following Henry I’s death David I supported Matilda, Henry I’s daughter and chosen heir, on numerous occasions. He invaded northern England on her behalf several times in the 1130s, after her rival, Stephen of Blois, seized the throne. He even campaigned alongside Matilda, joining her in the siege of Winchester in 1141, and knighted her son, the future Henry II.

However, the cordiality between the English and Scottish royal families definitively ended in 1173. That year Henry II of England’s son, Henry ‘The Young King’, rebelled against his father’s rule. He was supported by King William the Lion of Scots (David I’s grandson), who invaded northern England. William of Newburgh describes the attack as excessively violent: ‘Everything was consumed by the Scots, to whom no food was too filthy to eat … and while they sought out their prey it was the delight of that inhuman nation, more savage than wild beasts, to cut the throats of old, to slaughter little children, to disembowel women and to commit other atrocities’.

Ultimately the rebellion failed. William the Lion was taken prisoner and forced to submit to Henry II. Interestingly, Newburgh records that Henry II took the cup back (at this point it had been in Scottish hands for at least 39 years). Clearly, Henry II felt the friendly Anglo-Scottish relations the cup had been given to represent were no longer intact. Thus, as China repossessed Tai Shan, Henry II reclaimed the cup.

Whilst a twelfth century cup and a giant panda do not appear particularly similar to the casual observer, they both have special attributes that make them ideal for employing in international diplomacy. For their part, since pandas are unique to China, they have come to represent the country. Thus, seeing one in your local zoo is a clear and obvious demonstration of your country’s link to China.

Further, their universal appeal can fuel disputes between governments and their people. Everyone loves pandas. Speaking to people, it seems to be their cuteness combined with their objective uselessness that wins everyone over. Thus, when Taiwan’s government rejected the gift of two pandas from China in 2006, it was met with popular opposition. China wishes to bring Taiwan under its rule and was pitching the gift as a domestic transfer. Therefore, the then ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) rejected the pandas, on the grounds that acceptance would have constituted acknowledgement of Chinese rule. Whilst, it would be an over exaggeration to claim that rejecting the bears caused the DPP to be voted out of office in 2008, it’s interesting to note that the party that replaced them, the Kuomintang, almost immediately accepted the pandas from China. The correlation suggests China can, to a degree, use pandas to influence the situation in other countries.

Similarly the cup was perfectly suited for influencing international relations, due to its magic origins. Newburgh claim’s that before Henry I gifted the cup to David I, it had belonged to a peasant man, who had come across it in unusual circumstances. The man had been wandering home from a neighboring village one night when he heard singing from a nearby hill. Upon closer inspection he saw there was a door in the hill. On the other side of the door he discovered a massive party. People were feasting, singing and drinking. When one of the revellers spotted the new arrival he gave the man a cup of something to drink. Our man, perhaps a little freaked out, ran away, taking the cup that would eventually end up in the hands of Henry I with him. It’s perhaps worth noting the source describes the man as ‘a little drunk’.

You know how it is. You go out for one drink, and you end up in a hobbit hole/nightclub

The cup’s mythical origin would have played a role in Anglo-Scottish relations. Firstly, it would have increased the cup’s value, making it a more worthy gift. Secondly, it would have made it a more memorable item at the Scottish court. Thus it would have stuck in people’s minds, further broadcasting the friendly Anglo-Scottish relationship it represented.

On the face of it, pandas seem like a better choice than cups. Whilst the cup was memorable, its uniqueness and what it represents might not be obvious upon first inspection. It would likely have required some context to understand its full meaning. Conversely, pandas are so universally seen as Chinese that this is not necessary when it comes to understanding them. Moreover, China can use their mass market appeal to divide China-fearing governments from panda-loving citizens.

However, the bears have a major downside for the receiving parties: cost. Zoos pay China $1 million a year, per panda, for the right to keep them. Additionally, zoos pay $400,000 if their pandas give birth.

'This time next year Rodney ....'

It’s hard to imagine a cup, no matter how magic, costing that much (nor producing offspring).

The purpose of this essay was to shed light on how the sending of objects and animals to other countries can be used to demonstrate good relations between states. By contrast, repossessing them can send a clear message that the relationship the item was sent to show has been damaged. Such a strategy is not unique to the modern period, but has its roots in the past, and can clearly be seen in twelfth century Anglo-Scottish relations. However, pandas are perhaps the ultimate version of this tactic. Their uniqueness to China, combined with their worldwide appeal, helps the Chinese government display their opinions of other states incredibly clearly, and alter the state of affairs within a country.

Moreover, this paper has been a shameless attempt to increased readership, through the discussion of a cute animal.

Objectively, pandas are just better than Trump, the Palestinian crisis and Catalonia  

Bibliography

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in Douglas D C, Greenaway G W (eds.), English Historical Documents II (London, 1953)

Buckingham K C, David J N W, Jepson P, ‘Environmental Reviews and Case Studies: Diplomats and Refugees: Panda Diplomacy, Soft ‘Cuddly’ Power and the New Trajectory in Panda Conservation’, Environmental Practice, 15 (2013)

‘China's panda diplomacy, explained’, 22 March 2017 Vox: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR2GpiDE4FI . Accessed 25 January 2018 (Really good video. Explains Panda-diplomacy in under five minutes)   

Hong C, ‘Taiwan 'unlikely' to want pandas’, 9 January 2006, BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4594452.stm . Accessed 25 January 2018

Lind D, ‘Why US-born panda Bao Bao is leaving for China: panda diplomacy, explained’, 21 February 2017, Vox: https://www.vox.com/2014/5/23/5742002/panda-diplomacy-china-soft-power-kathleen-buckingham-malaysia-panda-loan . Accessed 25 January 2018

‘Panda diplomacy’, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panda_diplomacy . Accessed 25 January 2018

William of Malmesbury’s Chronicle of the King’s of England, Giles J A (ed.), (London, 1966)

William of Newburgh’s History of English Affairs, Walsh P G, Kennedy M J (eds.), (Warminster, 1988)