Panda diplomacy is a long-standing Chinese tradition of fostering goodwill, friendship, and cultural heritage by lending the panda animal to foreign Countries. With the species endemic solely to China, it is a tactic in diplomacy applied solely at their discretion. During the Tang Dynasty (624–705), two pandas were gifted to Japan. In the 1960s and 1970s, Mao Zedong used ‘panda gifting’ to strengthen alliances, a practice later transformed by Deng Xiaoping (1978–1989) into ‘panda loans,’ which continue until today. In 1972, Chairman Mao gifted two pandas to the United States, and between 1957 and 1983, China sent 24 pandas as “goodwill ambassadors” to nine nations. Under President Xi Jinping, ‘panda loans’ highlight guanxi, relationships rooted in trust, reciprocity, loyalty, and longevity. Currently, while nineteen countries host pandas, only the US has recently been promised new ones.
In December 2023, two Pandas named Tian Tian and Mei Xiang from the National Zoo in Washington D.C. were sent back to China to their new home at the China Conservation and Research Center for the Giant Panda.[i] A number of unrelated video is used to accuse the result of pandas as ‘mistreatment’ by the US creating misunderstanding.[ii] These rumours spread tarnish the image of zoos in US. To maintain a steady relationship with the United States—President-elect Donald Trump returning to the white house, China cleared the misleading information regarding their pandas being treated poorly in the US.[iii] The police officers from the Public Security Bureau of Panzhihua City, Sichuan Province launched an investigation that identified two key figures of provocation suspects with evidence on November 2023.[iv]
This essay argues two interrelated points: (1) China’s soft power strategy through panda diplomacy towards the US is re-emerging despite controversies, and (2) while effective in achieving its goals, the use of pandas carries significant risks of diplomatic backlash due to conservation challenges. The death of panda Le-Le at the US’s Memphis Zoo on 1 February 2023 and the allegedly mistreated panda Ya-Ya sparked public outrage in China and demands for Ya-Ya’s return[v]. As ‘panda diplomacy’ symbolises friendship extended by China to other countries, the Le-Le and Ya-Ya incidents prompted political discourse that aligned with narratives of ‘China’s combative’ diplomacy and deteriorating China-US relations. This essay presents counter-evidence demonstrating that China’s panda diplomacy remains active, signalling its re-emerging soft power strategy towards the US—a perspective vital for informing public and policy stakeholders as a counter-narrative to the combative ‘wolf-warrior’ diplomacy[vi]. While competing for global hegemony, the two countries should be encouraged to cooperate on critical issues such as nuclear risks, climate change, artificial intelligence, and the next global pandemic.
Soft Power, Panda Diplomacy, and China-US Relations
Nye’s concept of soft power—a state’s ability to influence others through persuasion and attraction rather than coercion—has historical roots, including in China’s military and cultural thinking for over 2000 years.[vii][viii][ix] Panda diplomacy is part of China’s long-standing tradition of promoting goodwill, friendship, and cultural and natural heritage. During the Tang dynasty (624-705), two pandas were gifted to Japan; under Mao Zedong (1962-1970s), ‘panda gifting’ was linked to building strategic friendships.[x] Under Deng Xiaoping (1978-1989), ‘panda gifting’ shifted to ‘panda loans’, involving a financial lease structure in which any offspring born abroad had to be returned to China.[xi] President Xi Jinping’s model of ‘panda loans’ symbolises China’s willingness to build guanxi—trade relationships characterised by trust, reciprocity, loyalty, and longevity.[xii] World leaders are expected to request pandas in person, and their receipt signals China’s trust and an expectation of reciprocated loyalty in trade relations.[xiii] China withdraws pandas if recipients are perceived as unfriendly or hostile but continues or extends loans to nations with which it seeks to improve relations.[xiv]
Modern panda diplomacy began in 1941 when a pair of pandas were gifted to the US as a gesture of gratitude for support against Japan’s occupation.[xv] In 1972, Chairman Mao gifted two pandas to US President Nixon during his state visit to China.[xvi] Between 1957 and 1983, China’s 24 pandas acted as “goodwill ambassadors” to nine nations.[xvii] Today, 19 countries host pandas, including the US, Japan, Belgium, Germany, France, South Korea, Spain, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Singapore, Indonesia, Russia, the UK, Australia, Taiwan, Austria, Denmark, Finland, and Qatar.[xviii] These cases demonstrate that China’s soft power strategy via panda diplomacy is still active, countering the media’s ‘wolf warrior’ narrative portraying China as assertive and hostile in foreign affairs.[xix] Some suggest that President Xi’s diplomacy incorporates an egalitarian “shared future for mankind” alongside a realist “dare to fight” approach,[xx] a view supported by empirical evidence.
While 19 countries host pandas, only the US has recently received a promise of new pandas. President Xi made this commitment during his meeting with President Biden on 13 November 2023[xxi], signalling China’s willingness to extend trust and improve relations with the US, despite mainstream narratives of their worsening relationship. A subsequent meeting on 16 November 2024 saw the two presidents express further willingness to properly manage differences, advance bilateral and regional cooperation, and address international issues of mutual interest[xxii]. This included cooperation on urgent and critical issues such as nuclear risks, climate change, artificial intelligence, and the next global pandemic[xxiii]. President Xi’s promise of new pandas for the US, contrasting with previous refusals to extend panda loans to the US[xxiv][xxv]underscores China’s re-emerging soft power strategy—a shift from years of hostile political rhetoric and trade and technology conflicts.
The Challenges of Panda Diplomacy
While panda diplomacy has historically supported China’s soft power strategy, it also carries significant risks. The 2023 mistreatment allegations concerning two pandas at the US’s Memphis Zoo, one of which died, sparked Chinese public outrage and prompted the withdrawal of pandas from the US[xxvi][xxvii]. As endemic species, pandas require intensive and specialised care, including a bamboo-exclusive diet, a limited 1–3 day per year fertility window for females, solitary behaviour, and large territorial requirements of 3.9-6.4 km²[xxviii][xxix]. Consequently, pandas are difficult to breed in captivity and vulnerable to health risks[xxx]. Maintaining pandas poses ethical challenges, reputational risks, and high financial costs. For instance, Finland decided to return pandas Lumi and Pyry in November 2024, citing cost concerns[xxxi][xxxii][xxxiii].
In contrast to animal diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, such as South Korea’s K-pop or China’s ‘ping-pong diplomacy,’ involves lower risks while still serving soft power objectives[xxxiv][xxxv]. The latter famously eased China-US tensions in the 1970s.[xxxvi] Cultural artefacts and human-centred programmes are easier to manage and conserve than live animals, making them viable alternatives to panda diplomacy.
Conclusion
This essay has demonstrated two interrelated arguments: (1) China’s panda diplomacy towards the US is re-emerging, signalling its soft power strategy, and (2) while panda diplomacy has historically supported China’s soft power goals, it carries substantial risks due to conservation challenges. Promoting goodwill and strengthening bilateral ties, panda diplomacy aligns with China’s broader economic and cultural objectives as a global leader. President Xi’s recent promise of new pandas for the US indicates China’s intent to improve relations that had worsened in previous years. However, given the ethical and financial challenges of keeping pandas, and the potential diplomatic backlash if they suffer illness or death, China might consider diversifying its diplomatic instruments. Adopting alternatives such as sports and cultural diplomacy could complement panda diplomacy, while also supporting recipient countries in meeting panda welfare requirements.
[i] Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute. (2023, December). #PandaStory: A Happy Homecoming. Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute. https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/news/pandastory-happy-homecoming
[ii] WANG, T. (2024, April 17). Unrelated clips misused in false posts claiming “US abused panda Mei Xiang.” Fact Check. https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.33YH9BR
[iii] Xiao, J. (2024, December 30). China Fights Rumors of Panda Abuse at US Zoo in Sign of Goodwill. Bloomberg.com; Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-30/china-fights-rumors-of-panda-abuse-at-us-zoo-in-sign-of-goodwill
[iv] Chengdu Public Security Bureau. (2024, December 9). 人民日报：这些涉大熊猫网暴、诽谤等不法行为，公安机关严厉打击！. Baidu.com. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1819701431013305735&wfr=spider&for=pc
[v] Liu, C., Ma, L., Liu, S., & Tang, S. (2024). Increasing or depressing: Animal diplomacy impacts on inbound tourism of host countries–a natural experiment based on panda diplomacy. Journal of Hospitality andTourism Management, 61, 338-349.
[vi] Dai, Y., & Luqiu, L. R. (2022). Wolf Warriors and Diplomacy in the new era. China Review, 22(2), 253-283.
[vii] NYE JR Joseph S. (1990), Soft power, “Foreign policy”, vol. 80.
[viii] NYE JR Joseph S. (2008), Foreword, in: Yasushi Watanabe, David L. McConnell (eds.), Soft power
superpowers: Cultural and national assets of Japan and the United States, ME Sharpe, Armonk, New York.
[ix] HUNTER Alan (2009), Soft power: China on the global stage, “Chinese Journal of International Politics”,
vol. 2, no. 3.
[x] Watts, J. 2007. 1,300 Years of Global Diplomacy Ends for China’s Giant Pandas. Guardian (London), September 14. Available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/sep/14/china.conservation (accessed December,12, 2024).
[xi] Ibid.
[xii] Buckingham, K. C., David, J. N. W., & Jepson, P. (2013). Environmental Reviews and Case Studies: Diplomats and Refugees: Panda Diplomacy, Soft “Cuddly” Power, and the New Trajectory in Panda Conservation. Environmental Practice, 15(3), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1466046613000185
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Sands, L. (2023, September 28). China takes back pandas from zoos in U.S., U.K. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/28/pandas-returning-china-dc-zoo/
[xv] E Elena Songster. (2018). Panda nation : the construction and conservation of China’s modern icon. Oxford University Press.
[xvi] E Elena Songster. (2018). Panda nation : the construction and conservation of China’s modern icon. Oxford University Press. (accessed December 12, 2024).
[xvii] Schaller, G.B. 1994. The Last Panda. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 312 pp.
[xviii] World Population Review. (2024). Giant Panda Population by Country 2024. Worldpopulationreview.com. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/giant-panda-population-by-country
[xix] Schaller, G.B. 1994. The Last Panda. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 312 pp.
[xx] Ibid.
[xxi] World Population Review. (2024). Giant Panda Population by Country 2024. Worldpopulationreview.com. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/giant-panda-population-by-country
[xxii] Ibid.
[xxiii] Cuéllar, M. F. T., Chivvis, C. S., Medeiros, E. S., Walt, S. M., Culver, J., Foot, R., … & Wertheim, S. (2024). US-China Relations for the 2030s: Toward a Realistic Scenario for Coexistence.
[xxiv] May, J. (2024, April 18). Parsing China’s Panda Diplomacy. Thediplomat.com. https://thediplomat.com/2024/04/parsing-chinas-panda-diplomacy/
[xxv] MADHANI, A., LONG, C., & TANG, D. (2023, November 15). Biden, Xi emerge from hours of talks, agree to curb illicit fentanyl, restart military dialogue. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/biden-xi-apec-san-francisco-58d11e7e3902955302182c2bc41430e0
[xxvi] Liu, C., Ma, L., Liu, S., & Tang, S. (2024). Increasing or depressing: Animal diplomacy impacts on inbound tourism of host countries–a natural experiment based on panda diplomacy. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 61, 338-349.
[xxvii] Xiong, Y., Gray, M., & Culver, D. (2023, November 8). The National Zoo’s panda program is ending after more than 50 years as China looks elsewhere. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/08/world/panda-diplomacy-us-china/index.html
[xxviii] Peng, J., Z. Jiang, G. Qin, Q. Huang, Y. Li, Z. Jiao, F. Zhang, Z. Li, J. Zhang, Y. Lu, X. Liu, and J. Liu. 2007. Impact of Activity Space on the Reproductive Behaviour of Giant Panda ~Ailuropoda melanoleuca! in Captivity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 104(1–2):151–161.
[xxix] Schaller, G.B., H. Jinchu, P. Wenshi, and Z. Jing. 1985. The Giant Pandas of Wolong. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 318 pp.
[xxx] Schaller, G.B. 1994. The Last Panda. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 312 pp.
[xxxi] Magazine, C. (2024, September 26). Finnish Zoo to Return Giant Pandas to China Due to Lack of Funds – CorD Magazine. CorD Magazine. https://cordmagazine.com/living/chill-out/finnish-zoo-to-return-giant-pandas-to-china-due-to-lack-of-funds/
[xxxii] Shao, O. (2024). China’s influence in Northern Europe. https://www.centrumbalticum.org/files/5999/BSR_Policy_Briefing_1_2024.pdf
[xxxiii] Lehto, E. (2024, September 24). Finland zoo returns giant pandas to China over cost. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-zoo-returns-giant-pandas-china-over-cost-2024-09-24/
[xxxiv] Minami, K. (2024). Sino-U.S. Exchange Diplomacy. Diplomatic History, 48(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/dh/dhae006
[xxxv] Griffin, N. (2015). Ping-pong diplomacy : the secret history behind the game that changed the world. Skyhorse Publishing.
[xxxvi] Field, R. (2020). Sport and Diplomacy: Games within Games ed. by J. Simon Rolfe. Journal of Sport History, 47(1), 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1353/sph.2020.0018
