Opening to the Outside World } 377
not returning to China after the end of their studies. Instead, they remained
in the United States to work. The US government had cooperated to address
this problem in a bilateral agreement on educational exchanges by requiring
that PRC students studying in the United States with official Chinese finan-
cial support (gong fei xuesheng) return to China for at least two years before
becoming eligible to reapply for entry into the United States. As the number
of “privately financed” (zifei xuesheng) students increased, this regulation be-
came less effective. Moreover, some portion of Chinese students in the United
States simply went “underground” after finishing their studies, living and
working as illegal aliens—usually an only modestly inconvenient status. In
the early decades of opening, the gap between living standards, professional
opportunities, and individual freedom in the PRC and the United States was
immense, offering strong incentives to remain in the United States.
As the number and percentage of nonreturning students grew, so did con-
servative calls for the restriction and control over educational exchange. Once
again Deng took a broader view and upheld opening. Even those that did not
immediately return to China would still serve as bridges assisting China’s
modernization. They would maintain links with Chinese colleagues in their
fields, participate in China-based conferences, undertake joint projects, and
sponsor other Chinese students or scholars to study in the United States. And
some years down the line, perhaps after several decades, a few would return
to China, bringing with them deep and mature understanding of the fields in
which they had labored in America. Tightening administrative controls on
overseas study and travel would create further incentives not to return, since,
once having returned, it might be difficult to travel overseas once again. But,
as was so often the case, Deng agreed to marginal concessions to his crit-
ics. Older, married, more established scholars (deemed more likely to return
home) were preferred over younger, unmarried ones. And even older scholars
were sometimes required to leave their children in China—again to increase
the likelihood they would return home. But the flow was not restricted; the
numbers of Chinese going overseas to study rose steadily throughout the
1980s. By the 2000s, as Chinese levels of income rose, it would become a flood.
By 2013–2014, 274,439 Chinese were studying in the United States.^49 This con-
stituted 31 percent of all foreign students in the United States and made the
PRC the top consumer of US higher educational services. The second- and
third-ranking consumers of US higher education were India with 12 percent
and South Korea with 8 percent.^50
From “War and Revolution” to “Peace and Development”
During the “theoretical” debates with the CPSU in the early 1960s, Mao had
defined that era as one of war and revolution. The existence of imperialism