China, explained.
South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, left, alongside China's Premier Li Qiang at the Adelaide Zoo in June (Asanka Ratnayake via AFP/Getty Images)
While popular with the public, there is little evidence that these “envoys of friendship” will reshape Australia’s ties with China.
Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
China’s panda diplomacy is cute politics but with fuzzy resultsChina’s panda diplomacy is cute politics but with fuzzy results
Panda diplomacy refers to the Chinese government’s loaning of giant pandas to selected countries as goodwill ambassadors or – in Xi Jinping’s words – “envoys of friendship”. It serves two interrelated objectives, namely, (a) to establish and strengthen positive relations with selected countries to benefit China’s standing in global politics and the economy and (b) to foster pro-China sentiment among the foreign public.
Historically, Beijing gifted pandas as goodwill gestures to underscore improved relations with specific countries. In 1941, the Chiang Kai-shek regime offered pandas to the United States. The Mao regime sent pandas to the Soviet Union and North Korea. In 1972, it gifted pandas to the National Zoo in Washington DC, after President Richard Nixon visited China. That same year, Japan, West Germany and Spain received pandas after establishing diplomatic relations with China.
More recently, to ease strained relations with the Biden administration, Xi announced the loan of pandas to the Washington and San Diego zoos in late 2023. After Mayor London Breed’s lobbying, Beijing also agreed to loan pandas to San Francisco. The sudden influx of pandas to California reflects the pro-China stance of Californian officials, which contrasts with nationwide efforts to bolster defences against perceived threats from China.
Beijing also leverages pandas to enhance its image in territories it controls or seeks to control.
Some suggest that Beijing also uses pandas as a reward for policies aligned with China’s interests. For example, Adelaide in South Australia received pandas in 2009, shortly after Australia agreed to sell China uranium. It was also a nod to Alexander Downer, a native of Adelaide and Australia’s foreign minister at the time.
Over the past decade, panda diplomacy has taken on a more prominent role in China’s broader efforts to strengthen ties with key partners. Panda loans to France (2012), Malaysia (2014), Indonesia (2017), Russia (2019) and Thailand (2025) commemorated the anniversaries of diplomatic relations between China and these countries. The loan of pandas to Germany in 2017 coincided with Xi’s visit to Berlin, and Premier Li Qiang announced a new panda loan to Adelaide Zoo during his visit to South Australia in mid-2024. Perhaps coincidentally, Australia’s current foreign minister, Penny Wong, hails from Adelaide.
Beijing also leverages pandas to enhance its image in territories it controls or seeks to control. Hong Kong has just received its third pair of giant pandas. In Taiwan’s case, Beijing sent two pandas (aptly named Tuan-Tuan and Yuan-Yuan or Unification) to Taipei in 2008 following the inauguration of the China-friendly Ma Ying-jeou administration. This transfer bypassed the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, thereby underscoring Beijing’s assertion regarding Taiwan’s provincial status.
There are currently about 60 pandas housed in 20 foreign zoos. Since 1984, pandas have been loaned rather than gifted, usually for up to ten years, with the possibility of extensions. For example, Adelaide secured a five-year extension in 2019.
Zoos hosting pandas must pay up to US$1 million annually to support panda conservation efforts in Sichuan Province. However, The New York Times suggests that the money does not necessarily go towards conserving pandas in their natural habitat. Additional expenses involve building special facilities, providing veterinary care and sourcing tonnes of bamboo.
Despite these costs, some zoos, such as those in Toronto and Edinburgh, report significantly increased revenues from hosting pandas through higher ticket sales, merchandise and special events. In some cases, including Adelaide, local authorities cover the US$1 million annual fee. Still, Adelaide Zoo faced financial difficulties when the expected financial windfall from the pandas failed to materialise.
The arrival of pandas Wang Wang and Fu Ni in Adelaide as “friendly messengers of China-Australia relations” reflects the Xi regime’s attempt to restore productive relations with Australia after years of diplomatic tensions.
Financial challenges compelled a private zoo in Finland to return pandas to China well before the expiration of the loan agreement. In San Francisco, the concerns over the zoo facilities and the cost of hosting pandas (estimated at $70 million over a decade) may derail Mayor Breed’s plan to welcome pandas in 2025.
How effective is panda diplomacy in promoting Chinese geoeconomic objectives?
Cuddly pandas symbolise a generous, friendly and peaceful China. Panda loan announcements, often made during state visits by Chinese leaders, receive extensive local and international media coverage. The arrival and departure of pandas also generate positive press, while the birth of cubs attracts even more attention and boosts zoo attendance.
Zoos organise special events that raise awareness about panda conservation and indirectly promote Chinese culture. Cities compete to house pandas, seeing them as tools for branding and attracting tourists. To extend loans or secure new pandas, city officials are typically cautious not to antagonise Beijing on issues sensitive to the PRC.
However, there is little evidence to support the claim that panda diplomacy “benefits China as a tool of public diplomacy”. Pandas are symbols of friendship only when relations with recipient countries are amicable; their symbolic value fades when tensions arise. For example, Beijing’s partnership with the Soviets deteriorated in 1960, just a year after a panda’s arrival. Similarly, China loaned two pandas to Ueno Zoo in 2011, yet the China-Japan conflict over the Senkaku Islands escalated in 2012. In Australia, the extension of the panda loan in 2019 did not prevent the China-Australia diplomatic fallout the following year. Recent panda loans to Washington and San Diego zoos have not affected US policy towards China.
The arrival of pandas Wang Wang and Fu Ni in Adelaide as “friendly messengers of China-Australia relations” reflects the Xi regime’s attempt to restore productive relations with Australia after years of diplomatic tensions. It also reinforces South Australia’s alignment with China in domestic politics. Premier Peter Malinauskas hailed the panda loan as “yet another sign of the strengthening of [South Australia’s] relationship with China” as a “very important trade and economic partner”.
The festivities briefly shifted focus from contentious issues, such as the imprisonment of an Australian blogger and China’s growing influence in the Pacific. However, despite their symbolic appeal, pandas remain irrelevant to the core challenges in bilateral relations. While panda diplomacy is making a comeback, these cuddly ambassadors will not shape the future of Australia-China relations.
About the author
Czeslaw Tubilewicz
Czeslaw Tubilewicz is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Thursday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
