October 16, 2024

Taipei — The Chinese government has confiscated passports from specific groups, restricting teachers, civil servants, and senior executives in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) from leaving the country. Analysts say that under Xi Jinping, China is reverting to Mao Zedong-era policies of "internal control and external defense" to maintain isolationism. While challenging U.S. hegemony, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) lacks confidence in its so-called "four confidences." Deeply mindful of the Soviet Union’s collapse from internal implosion, the CCP prioritizes internal control over external defense. Confiscating passports is one of the key strategies of internal control.

According to The Financial Times, since last year, more teachers and public sector employees in China have been required to submit their passports, which are then controlled by local government officials. Some educational institutions have issued notices explicitly stating that if individuals travel abroad, they must not engage with "foreign hostile forces."

The report also noted that the Chinese government views "instilling loyalty in students" as a top priority, with teachers playing a key role in political education. Therefore, authorities want to prevent teachers from being influenced by "foreign forces" and spreading ideas deemed unfavorable to the state.

Legal Concerns

However, under China’s Exit and Entry Administration Law, only public security organs, the original issuing authority, the People’s Procuratorate, and the People’s Court have the legal right to revoke or seize passports. According to Article 16 of the law, no other agencies, organizations, enterprises, or individuals may seize passports. This means that schools and other institutions confiscating passports are acting illegally and infringing on personal privacy.

A Chinese lawyer, speaking anonymously to Voice of America, sarcastically remarked, "China is a society ruled by law—you understand!" He added a laughing emoji and declined to comment further, hinting at the irony of the situation.

In recent years, Chinese authorities have increased travel restrictions on public officials and employees of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and banks. A university professor in Fujian, surnamed Li, told Voice of America that back in 2019, his school began requiring teachers to submit their passports. However, only associate professors and higher-ranking faculty were subject to this rule. To travel abroad, teachers had to submit applications explaining the purpose, destination, duration of their trip, and funding sources. Approval from higher authorities was required before travel was allowed. There were also restrictions on the timing of travel, with senior officials above a certain rank only permitted to travel during summer vacations. These restrictions were reiterated in 2021.

Li explained that the official reasoning was to ensure normal teaching and research activities, but the school also mentioned compliance with "relevant higher-level documents" without specifying what those documents were.

Li added that after returning from abroad, teachers must submit their passports within five working days. Even retirees are required to submit their passports and Hong Kong-Macau-Taiwan travel permits. For senior officials, passports are returned only three years after retirement, when their records in the national personnel system are removed.

Preventing Emigration

Li believes the government confiscates teachers’ passports primarily to prevent them from using winter or summer holidays to travel with their children to Western countries or, under the guise of their children's education, assess foreign environments with the intention of emigrating. He noted that many people with financial means are trying to move their assets overseas, and teachers who tutor on the side may have enough income to consider emigration or purchasing overseas properties, especially given China’s worsening economic environment. Another reason is that teachers and civil servants are seen as sensitive groups with access to more information, and the government fears they might leak information abroad.

Li further pointed out that SOE employees are even more inclined to send their children abroad or emigrate themselves. "They first send their children out, and the next step is for them to leave too," he said. Civil servants also face similar restrictions, although only those at higher ranks need to submit their passports. For lower-level civil servants, applying to travel abroad is generally approved without issue.

However, not everyone is as fortunate. A netizen posted on Weibo that her friend, who works for an SOE in Changsha, had to submit their passport. The friend initially believed that they could easily retrieve the passport by applying for leave to visit Japan, but recently, the friend told her they would have to wait until they retire at age 63 to reunite, as the passport would not be returned before then.

Self-Imposed Isolation

Professor Hong Jingfu from the Department of Political Science at National Cheng Kung University in Taiwan told Voice of America that the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) confiscation of passports from teachers, civil servants, and senior executives of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) or banks reflects a mindset of accelerating isolationism. He explained that this is a pattern that has been emerging. Around mid-2022, a research group from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Institute of Chinese History published a lengthy article justifying the self-imposed isolation policy of the Ming and Qing dynasties. The article argued that such isolation was both rational and necessary, framing it as a form of "self-imposed limits" to protect the nation.

In other words, given the current international geopolitical tensions, particularly the worsening U.S.-China relations, the CCP believes that "self-imposed isolation" is both reasonable and necessary. Therefore, it feels the need to enhance the awareness of national interests and political loyalty within the system to prevent officials and key figures from being influenced by so-called "hostile foreign forces." This, the CCP argues, would prevent the leakage of confidential information, talent loss, and erosion of national security.

At the same time, China’s economic downturn has eroded the confidence of the middle class, prompting the CCP to take measures to stop the outflow of domestic capital. Statistics show that China’s foreign exchange reserves have dropped from 4 trillion yuan in 2014 to 3 trillion yuan today, a telling sign. Hong Jingfu explained that the CCP is also worried that if the confidence of people within the system collapses, their loyalty to Xi Jinping’s regime and the Chinese system would weaken. This could result in an outflow of personnel and capital and even set an example for the broader population on how to "escape" the country.

Hong further noted that under Xi Jinping, China has adopted a more assertive approach, even seeking to reshape the global order. It has emphasized a China-centric narrative and governance model. To challenge U.S. hegemony, China feels the need to prevent Western, particularly American, ideological influence from infiltrating its officials and institutions. This involves tightening internal controls to ensure political loyalty to the Party and state, which in turn helps defend the CCP’s domestic narrative.

Internal Control Over External Defense

Hong emphasized that China is reverting to the Mao-era strategy of "internal control and external defense." The CCP lacks true confidence in its "four confidences" and fears internal contradictions might escalate to the point of an internal collapse. To avoid a fate similar to that of the Soviet Union, the CCP prioritizes internal control over external defense, and confiscating passports has become one of the key instruments of internal control.

"In the context of its overall national security concept, China’s demand for security is constantly rising, which ironically highlights how hollow the four confidences, especially under Xi Jinping, truly are," Hong said.

He added that part of China’s strict passport control is also aimed at keeping the middle class within the country to stimulate domestic consumption and promote the so-called "internal circulation" of the economy, thereby restoring consumer confidence and spending. However, whether this strategy will work remains uncertain.

Wang Jian, a senior Chinese journalist living in the U.S., told Voice of America that the CCP has long had a tradition of "confiscating passports." In his memory, this started during Hu Jintao’s era, when the focus was mainly on seizing official passports from government officials. "After Xi Jinping came to power, this expanded to include passports from various sectors," Wang said.

Three Levels of Passport Seizures

Wang Jian pointed out that China’s confiscation of passports operates on three levels. The first is policy-driven, targeting individuals in key positions, such as officials involved in corruption or those who may flee the country. The second level involves large-scale confiscation of passports from civil servants, state-owned enterprise (SOE) employees, and those in public institutions, often motivated by specific needs. For example, during periods when China faces a shortage of foreign currency, the government may seize passports from these groups to limit international travel, particularly to reduce the middle class’s overseas tourism, which consumes significant foreign exchange reserves.

Wang Jian said the third level is about controlling the population. Gradually expanding passport confiscation reduces the number of people who possess a passport, which is essentially a means of exercising personal control over citizens.

However, Wang believes that after years of reform and opening up, China can no longer completely close its borders. China’s economy relies heavily on external trade, importing raw materials to manufacture goods for export. Even the government’s efforts to restrict internet access by building the Great Firewall cannot fully succeed because many foreign trade companies need access to the global market. They need dedicated internet connections to advertise on platforms like Google or to take orders via messaging apps like WhatsApp and Line; otherwise, they cannot export goods.

Wang explained, “China’s current foreign trade model already makes it impossible to close the door completely. So, given these conditions, isolationism is simply not viable.” He added that Chinese people also wouldn’t accept this. During Mao Zedong’s era, after the war, the country was closed off by declaring external enemies. But now, with the internet and open access to information, people are more aware of the world beyond China’s borders, and closing the country again is not feasible.

Wang emphasized that the reason the Communist Party seeks to control people’s movements is that it treats the population as raw materials for achieving its political goals, rather than viewing them as individuals with rights. This is a fundamental characteristic of the Communist Party. But as seen during the pandemic, even extreme control measures, like the three-year-long "dynamic zero-COVID" policy, led to resistance, culminating in the "White Paper Movement," where slogans like "Down with the Communist Party" and "Xi Jinping, step down!" were chanted. These slogans reflect the fact that the Party has lost the foundation of its power.

China’s Losses

Hong Jingfu noted that the CCP could have benefited from interacting with the West, learning from innovation and entrepreneurship models to invigorate China’s own economy. However, by tightly controlling passports, the potential for economic vitality is gradually disappearing. With the rise of nationalism in China, not only are foreign investments declining, but even foreign tourists are hesitant to visit. This has deprived China of an opportunity to integrate into the international community and tell a positive "China story."

Hong added, "In reality, this is accelerating your internal collapse because you can’t resolve internal contradictions."

He explained that the CCP’s 75 years in power have now surpassed the Soviet Union's 74-year rule, and this longevity is largely due to China’s reform and opening up, which helped sustain the Party’s survival. If China now reverts to Mao-era isolationism and fails to address its internal conflicts, it could ultimately lead the CCP down a path toward its demise.