近年来，随着新一轮改革开放的展开和“一带一路”倡议的实施，我国对外人文交流迎来了大转折、大升级、大发展的新时期，交流总量猛增，交流范围拓展，交流机制相继建立，有力地支持和配合了我国的国家总体外交和世界范围的民心相通事业，引起了国际社会的关注。与此同时，对于人文交流的内涵与实质、作用与定位、困难和前途等，我们仍在不断探索之中。

内涵与实质

　　顾名思义，中外人文交流是指中国人民与其他国家的人民之间进行的教育、科学、文化、体育等方面的交流。它有几个方面的特点：一是交流的主体是人民而不是政府，因此，有时被称为人民外交或民间外交。这里的人民，既指单称的中国公民，也是组织起来的中国公民或者社会组织、人民团体；二是交流的领域有限定，主要限于教育、科技、文化、体育、青年等密切联系人的文化生活和人的主体性价值的领域。政治交往、经贸交往虽然也属于广义上的社会交往，但不属于人文交流；三是以民族、国家为界面进行交流。无论是中英人文交流，还是中美人文交流，都有着明确的国家属性和民族属性。当然，中外人文交流是以我国为出发点的，因此，又可分中外双边人文交流，以及中外多边人文交流，中国人民与联合国教科文组织机构及其组织的活动发生的联系，主要属于后一种人文交流；四是具有自发交流模式和组织交流模式两种生成方式。那些由单个或多个中国公民根据自己的意愿不自觉地进行了对外文化或其他人文交流，可以视为自发交流模式，包括国际通讯、文学翻译、自费留学、移民、跨国婚姻、个人文化交流等。相反，则属于组织模式。而组织模式的人文交流又分社会团体组织的人文交流和政府组织的人文交流。无论在发达国家，还是发展中国家，组织模式交流的增速都远远大于自发模式交流的增速。这是与国际社会的整体性发展和世界范围内社会组织力量的日益强大分不开的。与此同时，由于政府在治理现代化和当代公共事务管理仍然发挥着主导作用，因此在组织人文交流方面具有重要的地位。

　　从国际政治社会学的角度看，不同民族、国家间的人文交流是国际社会交往的一种方式，尽管这种国际交流有着丰富的形式和内容，但是实质上从属于国际政治生活。首先，国际政治的主体已经扩大到包括个人、社会组织和政府间国际组织在内的各种类型的国际关系行为体。其次，国际社会的政治化与国际政治的社会化一样，已经发展到相当的程度。国际社会的活动领域不再是高级政治的领域，还涉及经济、民生、文化等低级政治领域，这些领域的变化都影响着国际间权力的分配。再者，人文交流直接影响着国际沟通的结果，影响区域治理乃至全球治理的效能，并一定程度上反映了当事国的软实力。

　　

要求与使命

　　如上所述，中外人文交流有着广泛的内涵，但在当下中国改革开放的语境内有着特定的语义，带有明显的人文外交的色彩。这主要是因为，“2.0版”的国家对外开放指向全面的开放，“一带一路”构想和参与全球治理要求加快转型，包括由经济基础的交往向社会层面的交往转型，由硬实力的竞争向软实力的竞争转型，由物的开放向人的开放转型，其核心特征是社会的开放。而社会的开放，不是所谓自由的或者无序的人员要素的流通，而是要形成有序的、有引导的、递次开放的格局。在现阶段，首先急需大量有组织的中外人文交流，以上述的组织模式带动自发模式，促成中外教育交流、科技交流、文化交流和青年人员交流的大发展，推动形成生机勃勃的对外开放局面。这样，中外人文交流就历史性地被赋予了一种外交使命。这种使命的目标是，人文交流要开拓外交战线的第二战场（社会战场），发挥中国新时期软实力外交的生力军作用，在为政治外交、经济外交服务和协同的同时，形成独立的社会化交往力量，成为与政府外交、政党外交一样的对外交往模式，在增进理解、增进信任、增进友谊方面发挥作用，为中华民族伟大复兴和参与全球治理体系建设创造有利的国际环境，奠定社会民意基础。

　　要完成这个外交使命，中外人文交流要充分发掘和运用已有的国内外条件与优势。一是中国文化的固有优势。中华民族几千年的灿烂文化赢得了世界人民的尊重和世界历史的尊重，推进中外文化交流符合各国人民的愿望和期待；二是国际社会的共识。人类的未来在于青年，中外教育各有千秋，青年人到国外留学或来华学习，顺乎天性，符合人类利益和国际社会共识。中国经济社会发展良好，国力跃居世界前列，各国人民希望了解中国，中国人民也想讲好中国故事，这符合国际社会交往的规律；三是国际政治的趋势。进入新世纪以来，国际政治社会化加快，各国越来越倚重软实力的竞争与合作，联合国教科文组织等国际机构对于教育、科技、文化、体育、环保、青年等领域的合作给予了更多的方便和鼓励；四是中国社会的开放潜能。近代以来的中国社会由于半殖民地半封建社会的局限，存在着某种对外关系的张力，一段时期内甚至形成了某种保守和自闭的特质，制约了深度改革开放，故而祛除社会不良特质，释放中华文化的开放本能，目前是较有利的历史时期。

　　

困难及破解之道

　　相对于经济开放而言，社会开放和中外人文交流面临着更多的困难，因为人文交流本质拥有社会交往、国际关系和民心相通等多重属性，不但具有一般社会工作需要面临的难以组织、难以控制、投入产出比不高、见效时间长等困难，还要落实外事工作和软实力战略等要求。诚然，当前中外人文交流成绩斐然，可圈可点。但前进的道路并不平坦，主要有3个方面的原因：首先，有不少人对于中外人文交流的重要性认识不够，多是把它停留在一种文化交流或者民间外交的认识水平，没有从战略上看待；其次，也有人虽然对于中外人文交流很重视，但是研究不够，没有理直气壮地阐述其道理，理论上不硬气，认识有偏差，方向不对头；第三，一些人虽然很重视，也抓住了大方向，但是在组织保障方面有畏难情绪，导致出现“战略上重视、战术上轻视”。上述3个方面的问题都涉及人，对应了思想、理论和实践3个层次，其实质是影响中外人文交流的思想障碍、理论障碍与制度障碍。

　　破除第一个障碍是最难的。冰冻三尺非一日之寒，轻视中外人文交流的思想障碍所以能够顽固存在，既有农耕文化政治传统因素和近代社会受外敌压迫的因素，也有我们一段时期以来对于现代开放社会的看法和办法因素。实际上，上述3种因素形成了制约中外人文交流的超稳定社会结构，加之战略思维和使命感的缺乏，导致这项事业无上光荣，前途却并不乐观。怎么办呢？最为关键的是要加强国家对中外人文交流的领导，提高认识，解放思想，把工作当事业，提升其战略地位，将之列入国家讨论外交大事和国家战略的重要议事日程，适时推进相关国家立法，运用战略思维、国际思维和法治思维解决思想障碍。

　　破除第二个障碍最为紧要。常言道，没有理论的正确性，就没有政治的自觉性和工作的主动性。本文特指的中外人文交流仍属“新鲜事物”，当前主要呈现实践状态而非理论状态，但实践一段时间后，就需要逐步加以厘清。比如，中外人文交流的外延是否可以无限制地扩大？如果有限制，那边界在哪里？它主要属于社会科学（国际关系与外交学）还是人文科学的研究领域？它的主要研究方法有哪些？它主要是社会工作还是外交工作？本国政府和国际组织在中外人文交流组织的功能与地位如何界定？相关卓越人才培养是否有规律可循？初步研究认为：中外人文交流有着大致的边界，概念不宜泛化和俗化；宏观层次属于国际关系学等社会科学范畴，微观层次属于人文科学范畴；政府应当发挥适当的组织、协调和保障作用，但不能代替社会力量的作用。需要特别提出的是，这里的“组织”功能，不仅是一般外事活动的组织，还包括国内的相关社会建设、交流人员素质培养、参与相关国际治理及相关学术研究的组织等。从长远看，大写的中外人文交流，事业发达的前途在于社会建设的国际化和国际治理的社会化、大众化，而不仅仅是做一国之事、举一国之力。

　　破除第三个障碍最为关键。鉴于我国还处于社会主义初级阶段，现代化建设特别是社会建设的任务很重，国家在推进中外人文交流方面负有历史性的义务。应当加强顶层设计，强化统筹规划和集中领导，调整有关管理体制，加大专项资源配置；实行直接投入和间接投入相结合，短期安排和长远布局相结合，多部门密切协同相结合；以人文素养和相关人才培养为基础，以深化体制机制建设为突破点，以国际化工作为核心；重点在夯实改革发展的社会基础，整合中外人文交流资源，建立多部门协同工作机制，培养专业强、外语好、有世界眼光的交流人才，打造世界一流的大学群体和文化产品，谋求与国力相匹配的交往权、话语权，促进世界文明多样化等方面形成新政策、新机制、新成果。 （作者系上海外国语大学国际关系与公共事务学院院长、博士生导师）

Promoting People-to-People Exchanges



In recent years, with the launch of a new round of reform and opening up and the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative, China’s people-to-people exchanges with foreign countries have been utterly transformed and entered a new era of development. The number and scope of exchanges have increased considerably, and new exchange mechanisms are being set up all the time. Such exchanges support and compliment China’s overall national diplomacy and global people-to-people communication efforts, and they have attracted a great deal of attention from the international community. At the same time, China is constantly looking at the content and essence, role and positioning, and difficulties and prospects of people-to-people exchanges.

Content and Essence

　

As the name suggests, people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries are exchanges between the people of China and the people of other countries in areas such as education, science, culture and sports. Such exchanges have several distinct features. First, the subjects of such exchanges are people and not governments, leading to them sometimes being referred to as “people’s diplomacy” or “private diplomacy”. Here, “people” means citizens or organized groups of citizens, social organizations or people’s groups. Second, the areas in which exchanges take place are largely restricted to education, science, culture, sports, young people and other areas closely linked to cultural events and subjective human values. Although political exchanges and economic and trade exchanges fall within the scope of social exchanges, they are not people-to-people exchanges. Third, nationalities and countries are the interface of exchanges. Regardless of whether it is China-UK or China-US people-to-people exchanges, all of them have clear country-specific or national characteristics. Naturally, people-to-people exchanges between China and other countries are predicated on involving China in some way. As such, they can be further divided into bilateral exchanges and multi-lateral exchanges. Links between the Chinese people and UNESCO and its organizations mainly belong to the latter type of people-to-people exchanges. Fourth, they can be generated spontaneously or in an organized manner. Foreign cultural or other people-to-people exchanges organized by individuals or groups of Chinese citizens themselves, including international communications, literature translation, self-financed studying abroad, emigration, cross-cultural marriages and individual cultural exchanges, are considered to be spontaneous. The opposite would fall into the category of organized exchanges. Organized people-to-people exchanges can be divided further into society- or community-organized exchanges and government-organized exchanges. In both developed and developing countries, organized exchanges are growing at a faster rate than spontaneous exchanges. This is directly related to the general development of the international community and the increasing power of global social organizations. At the same time, because governments still play the leading role in modernizing governance and management of contemporary public affairs, they are important for organized people-to-people exchanges.

　

From the perspective of international political sociology, cultural exchanges between different nationalities and countries are a type of international social exchange. Although such international exchanges have a variety of forms and content, they are essentially a part of international political life. First of all, international political bodies have been expanded to include all sorts of international relations organizations, including personal and social organizations and inter-governmental organizations. Second, the international community has already been politicized and international politics socialized to a considerable extent. The activities of the international community are no longer restricted to high-level politics; they now involve economics, people’s livelihoods, culture and other low-level areas of politics, and this change has affected the international distribution of power. Third, people-to-people exchanges directly affect the results of international communication as well as the effectiveness of regional, and even global, governance, and they reflect, to a certain extent, the soft power of the states concerned.

Requirements and Mission

　

As described above, Chinese and foreign people-to-people exchanges cover a wide range of subjects, but they have special meaning in the language of China’s present reform and opening up, as it alludes to cultural diplomacy. This is mainly because reform and opening up “2.0” is about complete openness. The implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative and China’s participation in the global governance system require China to speed up its transformation. This includes the transformation from economics-based exchanges to social exchanges, from competition over hard power to competition over soft power, and from openness for materials to openness for people, the key to which is an open society. And having an open society is not just about the free or disorderly movement of personnel; rather, it is about creating a society that is open in an orderly, supervised and progressive manner. At this stage, there is an urgent need, first of all, for a large number of organized exchanges between China and foreign countries. The organized exchanges mentioned above drive spontaneous exchanges, thereby encouraging educational, scientific and cultural exchanges, as well as exchanges between young people, thus imbuing China’s opening up with greater vibrancy. This has given people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries an historic diplomatic mission, the goal of which is to open up a second diplomatic front (the societal front) through people-to-people exchanges and to use Chinese soft power diplomacy in the new era to serve and work in tandem with political and economic diplomacy as well as form an independent social diplomatic force so as to become a mode of diplomatic exchange similar to government diplomacy and party-to-party diplomacy. As such, people-to-people diplomacy will help to promote understanding, enhance trust, foster friendship and create a favourable international environment and consolidate public support for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and China’s participation in the global governance system.

　

To accomplish this diplomatic mission, people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries need to utilize fully existing conditions at home and abroad. First is the inherent advantage of Chinese culture. The incredible millennia-old culture of the Chinese nation has earned the respect of people around the world, as well as of world history, and China should promote cultural exchanges that meet the desires and expectations of people from various countries. Second is the consensus in the international community. Humanity’s future lies in its youth. Chinese and foreign education systems each have their own merits. It is natural for young people to go abroad or come to China to study. It accords with the interests of humanity and the consensus of the international community. China’s economy and society are developing well, and it ranks among the world’s most powerful nations. People of all nations want to understand China, and the Chinese people are keen to tell them about their country. This is in line with the laws that govern international social interactions. Third is the trend of international politics. Since entering the new century, the socialization of international politics has accelerated, and countries are increasingly engaged in competition and cooperation using soft power. International organizations like UNESCO have encouraged cooperation and made it easier in such areas as education, science and technology, culture, sports, environmental protection and young people. Fourth is Chinese society’s potential for opening up. Due to China’s recent semi-colonial and semi-feudal history, its foreign relations have been characterized by a degree of tension, and it has even displayed tendencies of being conservative and closed-off, which has limited the scope of reform and opening up. Therefore, now is a more favourable time to eliminate adverse social traits and liberate the innate instinct to open up Chinese culture.

Difficulties and Prospects

　

Compared to economic openness, achieving social openness and people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries is fraught with far more difficulties. This is because people-to-people exchanges involve multiple elements, including social interactions, international relations and people-to-people communication, and they not only face the difficulties of normal social work, such as being difficult to organize and difficult to control, having a low input-output ratio and taking a long time to produce results, but they also involve diplomatic and soft power strategic considerations. Although remarkable achievements have been made recently in people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries, the road ahead does not look smooth. There are three main reasons for this: First, there is a lack of awareness of the importance of people-to-people exchanges, with most people seeing them simply as cultural exchanges or a form of civil diplomacy, rather than taking a strategic view. Second, although some people take people-to-people exchanges seriously, they have not done sufficient research and have failed to set out confidently the reason and theory behind them. Their understanding is biased and efforts are misguided. Third, although some people recognize the importance of people-to-people exchanges and understand the correct way to pursue them, they lack confidence in organizational guarantees which leads to a focus on strategy over tactics. These three problems all involve people and are essentially obstacles to people-to-people exchanges in the three areas of thought, theory and practice.

　

The first obstacle is the most difficult to overcome. The obstacle of people’s way of thinking, namely underestimating the value of people-to-people exchanges, is a persistent one and will take time to resolve. It is due to China’s traditional farming culture and politics and social oppression at the hands of foreign powers in recent memory, as well as views and approaches toward modern open society that have existed for some time. These factors have led to the creation of an ultra-stable social structure that constrains people-to-people exchanges. This social structure and a lack of strategic thinking and sense of mission means the cause is great, but its future is not necessarily bright.

　

What can be done? The key is to strengthen the country’s leadership of people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries, increase awareness and emancipate people’s minds, foster enthusiasm for exchanges, elevate their strategic status, include discussion of them on diplomatic and national strategic agendas of the country, set out relevant national legislation in a timely manner, and apply strategic, international and legal thinking to overcome the obstacle.

　

Overcoming the second obstacle is most urgent. Without correct theory, there can be no political consciousness and work initiative. The people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries referred to in this article are still a new phenomenon, and they are mainly practical rather than theoretical in nature. But after a period of practice, they need to be gradually clarified. For example, can people-to-people exchanges expand indefinitely? If there are restrictions, then what are their boundaries? Do they mainly belong to the field of the social sciences or humanities? What are their main research methods? Are they mainly considered to be social work or diplomatic work? How can the functions and statuses of the Chinese government and international organizations in people-to-people exchanges be defined? Are there rules governing the training of outstanding talent related to this work?

　

Preliminary studies suggest that there are approximate boundaries to people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries, but the concept should not be expanded to the extent that it could include almost anything; at the macro-level, they belong to the social sciences, such as international relations, but at the micro-level, they belong to the humanities; and governments should play an appropriate role in terms of organization, coordination and support, but should not seek to replace the role of social forces. It is particularly necessary to highlight that the “organizational” role mentioned here refers not only to the general organization of foreign affairs, but includes relevant domestic social development, training of quality personnel involved in exchanges and participation in relevant international governance and academic research. In the long term, advancing people-to-people exchanges depends on internationalizing social development and socializing and popularizing international governance, and countries not simply concentrating on their own affairs by relying on their own power.

　

Overcoming the third obstacle is most critical. Given that China is still in the primary stage of socialism, modernization, and particularly social modernization is the most important task, and the government has a historic obligation to promote people-to-people exchanges between China and foreign countries. The government should strengthen top-level design, improve overall planning and centralized leadership, adjust related management systems and increase the special allocation of resources; combine direct and indirect investment, integrate short-term plans with long-term arrangements and achieve close coordination of multiple sectors; make humanistic qualities and personnel training the basis, the establishment of institutions and mechanisms the breakthrough point, and the internationalization of work the core of exchanges; and focus on consolidating public support for reform and development, integrating foreign and domestic resources for people-to-people exchanges, establishing multi-sectoral collaboration mechanisms, cultivating professional exchange personnel who have an excellent knowledge of foreign languages and a global outlook, creating world-class groups of universities and cultural products, seeking a right of association and right to speak commensurate with China’s national power, and promoting the diversification of world culture along with other new policies, new mechanisms and new achievements.

　

(The author is a doctoral supervisor and the Dean of the Department of International Relations and Public Affairs at Shanghai International Studies University)