China’s panda diplomacy, once celebrated as a charming gesture of international goodwill, now faces significant scrutiny. The practice, which involves leasing giant pandas to foreign zoos, was intended to foster diplomatic ties and support conservation efforts. However, recent reports reveal underlying issues that undermine its effectiveness and integrity.

Misallocation of Conservation Funds

American zoos have invested millions in hosting pandas, believing their contributions directly support panda conservation. Contrary to these intentions, investigations indicate that funds have been diverted to unrelated infrastructure projects. The New York Times reports that millions intended for conservation have been spent on roads, apartment buildings, and museums in China.

Kenneth Stansell, a former Fish and Wildlife official, expressed frustration over the lack of accountability.

“There was always pushing back and forth about how the U.S. shouldn’t ask anything,” he told The Pinnacle Gazette. This misallocation not only detracts from conservation goals but also erodes trust in the panda diplomacy program.

Political Leverage and Conditional Loans

Under President Xi Jinping, panda diplomacy has increasingly become a tool for political leverage. The leasing agreements now come with conditions tied to diplomatic relations between China and the host countries. Steve Tsang from the School of Oriental and African Studies highlighted this shift.

“China now requires countries that have been given the privilege of hosting pandas to be friendly to China, and if they’re not doing so sufficiently, then pandas will be withdrawn,” he told The Washington Post.

This conditional approach reflects a broader trend in Chinese foreign policy, often referred to as “wolf warrior” diplomacy. Chinese diplomats adopt a more assertive stance, prioritizing national interests over international cooperation. This aggressive posture complicates relationships, making the extension of panda loans contingent upon favorable diplomatic ties.

Impact on Panda Conservation

The diversion of funds has had tangible impacts on panda conservation efforts. The National Zoo in Washington, D.C., returned its pandas to China after over 50 years, leaving the U.S. without any pandas for the first time since 1972. Similar actions by zoos in Atlanta, Edinburgh, and Adelaide signal a decline in international cooperation for panda preservation.

Melissa Songer, a conservation biologist at the National Zoo, defends the collaboration.

“They have done so much in terms of setting aside protection and doing all the right things — stopping logging, investing,” he told The New York Times. However, evidence supporting these claims remains limited, and the fragmentation of panda habitats due to infrastructure development continues to pose a significant threat.

\

Lack of Oversight and Transparency

A core issue with panda diplomacy is the lack of oversight and transparency in fund allocation. American zoos, eager to host pandas, often overlook how their contributions are utilized.

“You had to take their word; China felt it was not our business — we got the pandas, and we shouldn’t tell them how to spend the money,” David Towne, former director of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums told The Pinnacle Gazette.

This complacency has allowed funds intended for conservation to be misallocated without proper accountability. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has repeatedly raised concerns over the decades, but efforts to enforce stricter monitoring have been met with resistance from Chinese officials. Consequently, the integrity of panda conservation programs remains compromised.

Future of Panda Diplomacy

The future of panda diplomacy remains uncertain. While President Xi Jinping recently announced new pandas for the San Diego Zoo, the overarching issues of fund misallocation and political conditionality cast a shadow over these gestures. The recent thaw in China-U.S. relations, marked by cooperative efforts on AI safety and anti-drug initiatives, provides a glimmer of hope. However, underlying tensions, such as the Taiwan question and trade conflicts, continue to complicate the diplomatic landscape.

Experts argue that without rigorous oversight and genuine commitment to conservation, panda diplomacy may fail to achieve its intended goals. The charming facade of panda exchanges might conceal deeper inefficiencies and misplaced priorities, ultimately hindering the survival of these beloved giants in the wild.

China’s panda diplomacy, once a beacon of international goodwill, now grapples with significant challenges. The misallocation of conservation funds, intertwined with political leverage, undermines the core mission of protecting pandas. For panda diplomacy to regain its integrity, stringent oversight and transparent practices must be implemented. Only then can this diplomatic tool truly contribute to the conservation of one of the world’s most endangered species.

Click below to take action for pandas!