Thailand as a bridge builder: a conversation with Ambassador Nikorndej Balankura

On Thursday 24 September 2026, H.E. Mr. Nikorndej Balankura, Ambassador of Thailand to France and Permanent Delegate of Thailand to UNESCO, was the guest of HD Thursdays, the HD speaker series. His talk centred on middle power diplomacy: how a fragmented, multipolar world leaves countries such as Thailand and France room to choose their partners, and why he reads the international system through functional convergence rather than a binary lens.

Before taking up his post in Paris, the ambassador was the spokesperson of Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs during the 2025 border crisis with Cambodia. The Ambassador gave a short interview on strategic communication in the age of social media, Thailand’s bid to join the OECD, heritage and the work of UNESCO, and the traces that 170 years of diplomatic relations have left in both countries.

LDD: Before Paris, you were the Foreign Ministry spokesperson during the border crisis with Cambodia in 2025, at a time when much of the conflict was also fought on social media, with misinformation spreading faster than official statements. In that situation, what did that experience teach you about the place of communication in modern diplomacy and digitally evolving nations?

H.E. Mr. Nikorndej Balankura: It is a very good question. It taught me, and it gave me, a very important policy change during my time as spokesperson.

During that time there was a lot of misinformation and disinformation. Some of it was out of good intention, and some of it was intentionally meant to misinform people. So the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand became aware that, first, the speed of communication is one of the most important things. However, we cannot catch up with social media, because we have to be accurate, right? To be 100% accurate before you issue anything, you have to check, double check and triple check. So it was almost impossible to issue anything faster. My interviews had to be checked and double checked again, because they became the national position.

So what we developed at the time, and I think it is a very important thing, is strategic communication. Strategic communication is to have a narrative of what we believe in, from front to end. That gives you the tools to deal with misinformation and disinformation: you can counter it. We will not correct misinformation or disinformation that has no source, for example, or that does not come from an office, that does not have any official line in it. So that narrows it down.

But to have a strategic communication team, first, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot work alone. We have to work with the military and defence, we have to work with the communication ministry, we have to work with the Prime Minister’s Office and the foreign minister. That has helped us with speed and accuracy, because instead of me waiting for everyone to check their script before I say anything, we have a committee, which we call the committee on strategic communication. I will give them less than an hour to check and counter-check before I respond. So that is what we do.

France has said it fully supports Thailand’s bid to join the OECD, and Thailand could become one of the first Southeast Asian countries in an organisation long seen as a club of rich Western economies. Is this mainly about reforms to escape the middle-income trap, or also a statement about where Thailand wants to stand in the world, alongside its ties with China and the United States?

First, the middle-income trap: yes, it is. It will certainly help us, but that is not our main goal. And for the second part of the question, do we want to stand in the world alongside them? No, we don’t.

What we want, the main aim of the OECD, and what we have always told France (France has supported us very greatly in this endeavour), is to use the OECD to improve our standards. That is very important: writing new laws, adopting new environmental standards, a new government procurement system, labour law, to name but a few. These will make Thailand, first, more competitive in a world where competition is so fierce, more visible, and more attractive for foreign direct investment. And that will answer the middle-income trap.

Also, what we want from the OECD is a place to stand: the visibility of Thailand for the Western hemisphere, in terms of how our standards and our economy are ripe to partner with Western countries. I have to admit that when Western countries want to partner with, or invest in, a country, the first thing they look at is human rights standards. Thailand does not have that issue, but we have environmental standards issues, and we have labour law issues. If these are taken care of with the help of the OECD, France and many other OECD members like Japan or Korea, then Thailand would be on that level playing field with everyone else.

You are also Thailand’s Permanent Delegate to UNESCO. Heritage can connect countries, but in Southeast Asia it has also been a source of tension, as the Preah Vihear temple listing showed in 2008. Can UNESCO help countries in the region share their heritage rather than compete over it, and what would you like Thailand to bring to the organisation during your time here?

I am a true believer that UNESCO, with the spirit of UNESCO, to promote education, science and culture, can bring countries closer together, and has brought countries closer together.

On the Preah Vihear temple, it was not a conflict about the temple at all. It was a border misunderstanding, a border conflict, but the temple was brought into the conflict. And actually UNESCO has helped solve that, because Preah Vihear has now been listed as World Heritage by Cambodia, and Thailand has been on the committee that helps the restoration of Preah Vihear. UNESCO is also on that committee. So I think it is a very beneficial platform for countries to list archaeological or historical monuments. My answer to you is that UNESCO has brought, and is successful in bringing, countries closer together.

What can I, or Thailand, bring to the organisation? Right now, we think we are a bridge builder. We are the vice-chairman of the Asia-Pacific group in UNESCO, 44 countries. Next year we will be president of the Asia-Pacific group. We intend to bridge, you know, 44 countries; it is a very big group, the largest group. We have to find a common position for the Asia-Pacific group, and we will bring that to UNESCO: a common ground for the Asia-Pacific. That is what we can contribute to UNESCO.

Thailand and France have a long shared history, going back to the Siamese embassy of Kosa Pan to the court of Louis XIV in 1686, and this year marks 170 years of diplomatic relations. Beyond official visits and agreements, where do you still see traces of Thailand in everyday life in France, and of France in Thailand, whether in food, language, architecture or the way international politics is conducted?

Well, you know, Thailand and France go back a very long way. The trace of Thailand in France is very easy to see. You can go to the Musée des Arts Décoratifs today and you will see an exhibition where we showcase the dresses, the Thai textiles, made by French haute couturiers like Christian Dior and Pierre Balmain. And they are still being worn today, you know. Those are the dresses of the kings and queens of Thailand. We believe in the craftsmanship. We have the textiles, we have the raw materials, but we don’t have the skills, the craft of the French designers. That is just an example.

But the trace I see, and this goes beyond both Thailand in France and France in Thailand, is the art de vivre. We are both very similar in that sense. You have the best gastronomy in the world. We have a very strong food industry; you know Thai food very well. And we like to enjoy that, you know, the love of living. I think, as Thai ambassador, I see very similar things between us in this art de vivre.

Your Excellency, you have been in France for about six months now, which is quite long enough to start picking up some local habits. Which French habit have you already adopted without realising it, and which one do you think you will never adopt, however long you stay?

Firstly, coffee. I drink much more coffee. I loved coffee before I arrived in France, but I have adopted this French culture. I think I drink about seven espressos a day, which is not too much for French people. I enjoy coffee and I like to go to cafés, and I think I have absorbed that. And I take more time for lunch. When I was in Thailand, sometimes I had 15 minutes for lunch, during my time as spokesperson. Now you cannot rush me. I want to take my time: my lunch break is my lunch break. And I think that’s very French.

And what I will never adopt is, unfortunately, I don’t drink alcohol, so I will not ever be able to enjoy French wine. I’m allergic. So that’s one unfortunate thing, because I see people, you know, commenting on such great wine.

龍

Interview with Dean Lazarus

On the occasion of the rentrée solennelle of Sciences Po’s campus of Le Havre, LDD has the opportunity to interview Jeanne Lazarus. As the Dean of the undergraduate college, her role involves being in charge of academics for the bachelor program.

LDD: I am very glad to be meeting you, Dean Lazarus. First of all, I attended your conference with the 1As this morning: is there anything that you got from that conference that was new to you? How do you feel about the new cohort?

Dean Lazarus: Yes, well, it was a very interesting time for me. I’m always glad to meet the students— the new students— when they arrive in Sciences Po, and they have, um, a new vision of everything, and especially this year, because we’re implementing a reform of the curriculum. So it was very interesting to get their feedback. I also felt that the atmosphere was very calm and focused on studies; and also people seemed happy to be here. So I enjoyed that exchange with the students.

I’m very glad to hear that. Continuing on the new bachelor program, which is, I think, one of the main objects of your visit here. What do you think was the main challenge in the internal process of figuring out how to work out the new curriculum?

I think um, when we did that reform, the challenges moved along the way. The first challenge was to find a way to change the second year and to have more choices with the majors, the different disciplines. So it was, like, a really technical challenge. We wanted to change the architecture and also get many different things in the curriculum. So we had to find like a tetris, find ways to make everything enter in our programs. And then, I think there is also a diplomatic part because many of the things we are implementing depend on the professors. We need the professors to be on board and to agree on changing some of the courses, some of the assessment of the organisation of the curriculum. So I spent a lot of time discussing with the departments or with some professors. I also wanted to discuss with the students, with the administrative part. So it’s not only creating something new, it’s also taking people on board. So, it was, yes, it was quite interesting, but sometimes we had some difficulties because we thought that some new ideas would be great and that everybody would like them. But then some people raised organisational problems or intellectual problems. So, yes, I would say I really wanted to have a consensus, because it’s going to be for— I hope— a long time, that we’re going to have this curriculum. So I don’t want people to get into that in um, a bad mood. So, and I think that we’ve succeeded on that part. And yes, no, it is the real test; the reality test I would say, with the students starting this new curriculum. So we’ll see what is happening, but I feel that everything’s ready, all the campuses are ready, and until now the first two weeks seem to have been okay.

That’s a whole new reform that was implemented this year, but I also heard a lot about the new report on how to move Sciences Po and both the undergraduate and graduate programs towards a more European perspective. So, from the report of the Europe committee that was published, I think, yesterday or the day before, there is a lot of new information, axes of recommendations. And there’s one that, um, was brought to my attention specifically, which is the choice of having a new European track implemented in the undergraduate college. I saw that the different alternatives that were proposed were either to mix Dijon and Nancy, or to have Paris as a new European campus, but keeping Nancy and Dijon as distinct entities, but also a third one to have a new Brussels campus implemented. What I want to ask you is why were the choices of these alternatives pushed forward rather than simply strengthening the current European minors that were already on Dijon and Nancy, and offering simply more classes in English?

Yes, so this report, um, has been written by the two presidents of this group that has been decided by Luis Vassi or president. So he decided to have around 30 high-level people to think about Europe. And so we had many people who work on the European Commission, who had responsibilities within Europe, from many different countries, and also some deans, like me, who were involved in the discussion, and then they gave some thoughts and direction. But a report doesn’t mean that we’ve made decisions. So now we have those ideas, those directions, and we need to process them, to examine all the advantages and maybe weaknesses of some propositions. The first thing that I must say is that we don’t think about opening a Brussels campus for the bachelor. So if it happens, it’s going to be for the master level. And the question of having two campuses focusing on Europe, is a very old question for the bachelor. So it’s not a surprise that it’s been raised by the committee, and I think that’s something we need to think about, because sometimes for the candidates, it’s not completely clear. And we need to just examine what is working or not working. And for me, that’s very important to say what you said, strengthening what we already have, and that’s also how I did the reform. My idea has always been to keep what is working, and to deepen that, and to add other things. So that will be the spirit of how we will deal with those propositions.

I had a question that is kind of in the same theme. Many students are raising questions here, as well as in other campuses, about equality of opportunities across different campuses. Last year, when you and Luis Vassy were present in Le Havre for the inauguration of the new common room, you were asked about conferences being organised mainly on the Paris campus and scheduled mostly on Tuesdays, which is a day that is widely inaccessible for us to go to Paris on as accommodation for the night is very expensive for students. Is there any way that this could be resolved? How do you plan on balancing out those opportunities?

Well, I think equal opportunity is a bit different than that. Yeah, equal opportunities means to admit students from different social backgrounds, which is much more important than accessing some conferences.

Sorry, I meant it in general, as access to intellectual events.

And yes, that’s something different between Paris and the rest of the campuses; there are more events in Paris. But still, as we answered last time, for the bachelor students in Paris, it’s not always possible to go to those events because they are very crowded and there are also all the master students on the campus. So, on paper, you may think that the Paris campus students spend their time going to conferences and having access to everything, but it’s not the case for everybody; there are limits to what they get. And in the campuses, you got the proximity of the campus staff, the fact that the teachers are closer to you than in Paris. So, you have things in the [regional] campuses that are different than in Paris; and I won’t say that you lack opportunities. We also organise many conferences and events in the campuses, by the campus administration and also by the students. So there is a long list of speakers and interesting people who come to your campus. You can always invite people: the Sciences Po brand also works for the campus. So, when you invite people from Sciences Po, if you’re in Le Havre, they will come because it is Sciences Po. So you have this equal opportunity I think. But, yes, I know that some events are only in Paris; but then when you will have your bachelor’s, you will be able to come to Paris and to go to that.

Let me just check the time so that you don’t miss the [rentrée solennelle] opening conference. Maybe one last question. At different times where you were there talking in the last year, you emphasized a lot the role of having a secure environment for students’ mental and physical well-being. However you also claim to not be in favour of having credits attributed to students for their participation in sports or arts. How do you plan on getting more students to participate in arts, to participate in sports, and to engage in that student life that is so good for their mental well-being without having it institutionalised in the curriculum?

Yes, well, for the art, it is credited. In the first and second years, we have the artistic workshops that are worth three credits. So, it is completely

credited in the curriculum. For sports, you have credits, but they are optional credits. So it’s not mandatory to have sports. They have credits but those don’t really count for getting your degree.

I meant it more so in the context of associations and artistic BDA events, rather than the artistic workshops.

Yes, but that is, and we already had the discussion last year as you noticed, I think the limit is at one point it is still voluntary activities. So we can’t organize everything in students’ lives. We give a lot of help for student lives: you have rooms, you have money for that, you have organisational help from the campus. So at one point, this is about your will to participate or not. And, I can say also that sometimes, for the well-being of students, it’s also good not to have too many things. Some students are involved in four different associations and they’re exhausted by all the different projects that they have because they don’t want to miss anything; and sometimes it’s too much. But I don’t want to monitor that for you. You are young adults, so you have to do your own experiences on that. And, yes, that’s how we do things. We try to get a balance between what we organise ourselves and what is outside; but you know that you will always find help from us for this organisation. However, giving credits would mean that it is an academic requirement, which is not.

I think we are out of time, thank you so much for sitting down with me, and LDD today.

You’re welcome. Thank you for your questions.

龍

“It’s About Us”: Thibaut Bruttin Opens the Academic Year on Press Freedom

“Freedom of the press is not a privilege for journalists,” Thibaut Bruttin told students at this year’s Rentrée Solennelle.

“It’s about us,” he said. “Every one of us needs information.”

When Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), stepped up to deliver the inaugural lecture at Sciences Po Le Havre on Sept. 2, 2026, he came with a warning: the free press is losing ground almost everywhere, and the public has the most to lose.

The afternoon opened the 2026-27 academic year before a packed amphitheater, under a theme that has never been more urgent: the reliability of information in an age of disinformation and foreign interference. Jeanne Lazarus, Dean of Sciences Po’s undergraduate college, gave the opening address, and the Bureau des Arts (BDA) followed with a music and dance performance on press freedom. “I was very moved by the music and dance around freedom of the press,” Bruttin said.

For Bruttin, the afternoon was also a return home. A Sciences Po alumnus, he joined RSF in 2014 and has led it since July 2024. “I am a student of Sciences Po, deep in my heart,” Bruttin said.

The organization he leads runs a large Asia-Pacific bureau in Taipei and publishes the World Press Freedom Index, which ranks 180 countries using a tally of abuses against journalists and a survey of experts on each country’s political, economic, legal, social and security conditions. The 2026 edition recorded the lowest global average in the index’s history. When the index began, the average country was 72 out of 100, compared with 54 today.

Violence against journalists is returning, with more than 200 killed in Gaza alone. “Donald Trump has not been elected despite the media; he’s been elected because he repeatedly assaults the media,” Bruttin said. Platforms favor posts from friends over news, newsrooms are shrinking, and polls rank the media among the least trusted institutions.

“We might be seeing the beginning of an extinction event for the press as we knew it,” Bruttin said. He compared journalism to jazz, which still has its clubs and magazines but no longer sits at the center of culture.

In the lecture, he identified two main recurrent trends. The first is a backlash against the universality of press freedom, a view that casts a free press as something for “a white dude in Europe, fairly wealthy, fairly bourgeois.” The Chinese Communist Party has used international forums to present it as a Western idea, he said. Against that claim, he presented the people RSF defends, including Jimmy Lai, founder of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy Apple Daily, sentenced in February to 20 years in prison under the National Security Law, largely for what his newspaper published.

The second trend is the confusion between freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Bruttin pointed to the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which names the two separately. In his reading, press freedom carries a duty to gather facts and bring them to the public, and it gives neither journalists nor their employers a license to broadcast their beliefs.

Bruttin called his picture of the situation “fairly bleak,” then turned to remedies. RSF refuses to defend propaganda that poses as journalism, he said, recalling a request from Russia Today for support against legal action in Latvia. “Freedom of the press was not invented for foreign powers to intervene in national political debates,” Bruttin said.

When Russian networks circulated fake videos of Bruttin on X, the company refused to remove them because the man in them looked like him. “Yes, it looked like me because it was an impersonation,” Bruttin said. RSF wants democracies to guarantee “due prominence” for news media online and a “new deal for the press” to fund reporting. “Sometimes we have subscriptions to TV platforms, or Netflix, and we don’t access it, but we just pay for it,” Bruttin said. “Let’s do that with the media.” Both the Russia Today letter and the fake videos on X show foreign interference working through the language of liberty.

The image that lingered came from a story Bruttin told midway through. In Hong Kong, he once met a North Korean woman who realized that a foreign visitor knew more about her country than she did, and she cried from shame. Her ignorance had been imposed by the state. In democracies, nobody needs to impose it: the information is there, often only a click or a subscription away, and people still let it pass. That is the ignorance Bruttin fears, built up one autoplayed video and one unopened subscription at a time.

The index makes the stakes plain: fewer than 1% of the world’s people live in a country where press freedom is rated good, and France, ranked 25th, is not among them. Censorship is the loss everyone can see, with its jailed reporters and shuttered newsrooms; while indifference works quietly, through feeds that crowd out reporting, and it needs no law to take hold.

Bruttin said that as a Sciences Po student 20 years ago, he did not see the need to follow the news every day—a confession that carried particular weight in a room full of aspiring diplomats and policymakers who will depend on reliable information to do their jobs. If  free press is to outlast this decline, it will need readers who treat the news as a habit worth paying for. The students he addressed at the Rentrée Solennelle are among those who will decide whether that habit survives. 龍

La Rentrée Solennelle: A Conversation with Dean Jeanne Lazarus

by Carmen Leong

Source: Tyler Jaewon Kim

The campus is waiting when I arrive that morning on my bike, daylight streaming through its glass walls into the quiet hallway. It’s a rare sight to see at ten A.M., but today is a special day — the Rentrée Solenelle, official welcoming ceremony for the incoming and returning students. Soon, they will arrive in batches from the different directions of the nearby dormitories, some dressed in colourful traditional clothing and others in suits and formal dresses. The familiar buzz of conversation will fill the air as they settle into the Grand Amphi to listen to guest speakers and performances; but for now, I enter the doors, go up the lift and head to the office at the very end of the hallway to meet one of the speakers before her speech. 

Professor Hauchecorne is there already, settling himself down after a staff briefing. I’m slightly on edge, not having done a proper interview in a few months. But then my interviewee walks in, and she pats her hair down, rearranging her well-tailored suit. Jeanne Lazarus greets me with a smile, and I feel at ease immediately. We shake hands and I lead her to her seat so that we can begin the interview. 

It is not her first time in Le Havre, of course. Since becoming Dean two years ago, Madame Lazarus has come here twice a year as part of her duties to coordinate the campuses and organise the curriculum. It is common to hear complaints in Le Havre directed particularly at the bleak weather and even bleaker architecture, so I am pleasantly surprised when she compliments the modern look of our campus, and its position overlooking the sea. 

“Also, I’m quite interested in the topic of the campus because I used to learn Chinese when I was in high school,” she adds. “And I did an internship in Taiwan for six months when I was twenty. So I used to speak Chinese, but unfortunately, I didn’t pursue it, and I wouldn’t dare to speak [it] now; but I’m still very attached to that region, to Asian Studies.”

In addition to her role as a leading administrator, Madame Lazarus has also been a sociology professor in Sciences Po for thirteen years; seven years of which she was in charge of the Introduction to Sociology course at the Nancy campus. Over the course of her career, she became the director of the Department of Sociology at Sciences Po and simultaneously an elected member — then president — of the conseil de l’Institut. 

“And after all that, at one point, I thought that I really wanted to be more involved in the administration of Sciences Po, because I was involved in many ways, but more — I would say, on the side — as someone who could give some ideas or comments, but I really wanted to be in charge more. So that’s why I applied to become the Dean of the undergraduate college.”

So, why Sciences Po? I ask her. What makes our education stand out in the French and global landscape?

Madame Lazarus smiles and takes a breath. She must get this question a lot, I think. 

“First, what is distinctive is the plural disciplinarity of Sciences Po — the fact that you don’t

choose too early to specialise on one topic. And that is a very strong choice, for the students as well, because it means that — compared to students who go to the university to study economics or law — you won’t have the same density in one topic. But what we think is that you will have, instead, an openness that will allow you to do whatever you want after having these first three years of general education.

“The second thing is the international view of Sciences Po,” she continues. “Sciences Po is one of the first French universities to [open itself up] to international students and international programs. The fact is that, in the bibliography of the courses you have here, you will read research from everywhere in the world. Also, of course, we have the third year abroad that opens students to other educational systems. We really cherish this international part of Sciences Po.

“And the third distinctive thing in Sciences Po is the fact that it is open to public life. Of course, with the parcous civique, but also with the fact that we have conferences open to the public, that our students are involved in many, many associations, initiatives… We want students to be, firstly, very good [in their] academics, but also to use their skills for the community — for others, at whatever level. It can be at a very local level, in associations; and also at national level, maybe.”

At this point, Madame Lazarus takes a pause, trying to find the words to convey her thoughts.

“I know we used to say that we are here [to teach] the students to become leaders. But I don’t really like that word, because I think that if you say that to people, then you will tell them that [being a leader] is for themselves, like you will be someone different from others. And I prefer to think that the students are going to be part of communities — maybe they will distinguish themselves, maybe they will lead some projects — but the idea that you are a leader…” 

“Seperates them from the community?” I offer.

“Yes, and you have to, I think, be a little slower. To just think, first, that you will bring things to others,” she agrees. “You can also have a very good life not being a leader, but [just] being a part of something. It’s not only being a leader that is interesting.”

It is interesting to hear this from her when most top universities explicitly state otherwise — I recall writing numerous applications just over a year ago, trying my best to portray myself as a budding leader to gain better chances of admission. But Madame Lazarus has been involved in student life at Sciences Po to know enough about students and their ability to succeed beyond leadership. In fact, in 2001, she graduated as a Master’s student at the Paris campus. Back then, she tells me, the ‘internationalisation’ of Sciences Po had only just begun. Only the Paris campus existed, researchers numbered less than 50, and they had only just introduced the Conventions Éducation Prioritaire (CEP) programme. 

“It’s much more aligned with the world now, I would say,” she concludes. I ask her if there’s any advice she may have for the incoming first-years. 

“Well,” she begins, “really take what we as professors and administrators give you — which is a lot of knowledge, a lot of good research that is brought into the classroom; I think that it’s very important for the students to work on top of it, to make that knowledge their own.

“We know the abilities you have, so trust us, and work as much as you can to reach what we await from you. Sciences Po is more and more renowned in the world, and I think it opens many possibilities for us, of partnership and also research. 

“We were asking ourselves before, are we a university, a school, an institute? We are sure today that we are a university, and we still attract students from everywhere. And that is very special in France, especially at the bachelor level, because it means that students at seventeen, eighteen years old, decided to cross the world to come here.

“We are in a very uncertain world today, so we need to reinvent ourselves. We have very good basics, and we can build on that, but we also need to think about what we have in front of us, which is a very difficult world to understand. But we have the resources for that. We have the students.”

Author’s Note: I would like to thank Madame Lazarus for taking the time to speak with me during the interview, and to congratulate her on the thoughtful speech she gave later on that day in the Grand Amphi.

Between Adaptation, Persecution and Modernity: Christianity in East Asia in the 18th and 19th century

by Giulia PORCU and Anish PARCHA

Intro: The afternoon turned thoughtful on 16 September, as students trickled into the Petit Amphitheatre with notebooks in hand and quiet curiosity in the air. Professor Pierre Emmanuel Roux, Co-editor-in-chief of the magazine Extrême-Orient Extrême-Occident and senior lecturer of history at Universitè Paris Citè,  took the floor for a talk titled “Between Adaptation, Persecution and Modernity in East Asia in the 18th and 19th Centuries.” Minds eager to learn and pens ready to chase his words set the stage for an engaging session. The session was brief yet intuitive, insightful and packed with value. What was the discussion about? What were the most significant insights and how do they correlate to our 21st century understanding of the modern world?
A brief breakdown of the lecture and the subsequent interview is as follows:
A recap of the lecture: Accepting the unacceptable 

Covering the history of Christianity in East Asia through the 18th and 19th century, professor Roux gave us essential historical context starting from the 16th century. Further highlighted the importance of three key terms when analyzing local context: proscription, adaptation and modernity. Starting with the idea of persecution between the 16th and 18th centuries,, he stated that local Christian communities had to deal with constant repressions and tensions caused by the contrapposition of Christian preaching and Confucianism order. These were, for example, revealed by debates over practices like ancestor worship. Despite being a minority, Christians sustained their faith through a lineage of personal connections, preexisting networks and local religious figures. These local challenges reveal that Christianity’s survival relied as much on East Asian networks as on Western missionaries. This challenges the common assumption that East Asian conversions were based on the mere arrival of missionaries in local territories, hence the traditional vision which attributes great importance to the West in the making of Christianity in Asia. 

Upon this, the focus of this lecture was on the recent reverse theory in academia: ‘‘Are we ready to accept the unacceptable by fully recognizing Asia’s role in the making of world Christianity?’’. As a starting point “Inculturation” is the term used by many historians to describe Matteo’s Ricci ambitious but failing project. He was the first to realize the importance of finding shared knowledge between the two civilizations, using Chinese concepts adaptable to Christianity, specifically the Confucianist ambition to a virtuous society and inner self, so as to allow reciprocal comprehension and common grounds. Despite the failure of his project, as demonstrated by the 1724 expulsion of Christian missionaries, the greatness of Ricci’s work lies in highlighting how impossible it would have been for the West to be the only factor in the spread of Christianity in the East.

As stated by Nazarudin in ‘Bijdragen tot de taal-, land- en volkenkunde’: 

‘When something is transmitted, it is received in the mode of the receiver rather than the transmitter. Thus, what has been transmitted as Western Christianity has been received as Asian Christianity. Therefore the ownership of the Christian tradition — both for East and Southeast Asian people — grows stronger when it’s passed on intergenerationally’.

After the address by Professor Roux, we had the opportunity to speak with him via a Zoom interview.  This was done not only to build a deeper understanding of his work but also to cultivate a new sense of curiosity around Christianity’s central role in shaping Asian societies. The interview was carried out through three main questions, the first one being:

  1. As you presented during the lecture, many Western books acted as the major means of spreading Christianity among the elites in China, Vietnam and Japan. Considering the fact that they were based on European ideas of utopia, how were they received  by their audience?

It is important to keep in mind that there were different categories of books, specifically scientific and religious. In the Jesuits missions, especially, both were used. Given the importance of Jesuits in Beijing and their knowledge, it is only natural to conclude that Asian scholars were curious to meet them and grateful to receive their books. 

Missionaries were scarce in East Asia, so it was religious and catechetical books that were diffused among the faithful. Qing China is emblematic in this matter: in the early 19th there were 100 missionaries spread among the territory, while in the early 18th century only 20-30. Missionaries and local priests visited the main local villages once a year, hence the importance of books for conversion, maintenance of faith and continuity of prayers. “In many places it still works like this,” commented Professor Roux. “You can’t imagine the number of Bibles I received in Chinese and Korean because of this strong desire to spread faith!”

(2) What events led to the ban on Christianity in East Asia?

Fundamentally, the main common denominator for the ban of Christianity in East Asia was political.

Korea, Japan and Vietnam were small countries that embodied the idea of protonations state. Hence, when Christianity arrived as a new phenomenon, it was perceived as a possible threat to the social order. Obviously, this was not the case in China as it was a huge multiethnic empire, so the spreading of new ideas and beliefs was slow and further minimized by the ridiculously low number of missionaries in loco. 

(3) “The elaboration of this ‘European Utopia’ first took form in Matteo Ricci’s world map. Given the diverse perceptions around his work and that of other figures, how far did they actually influence the perception that the West had of the East and vice versa?”

There certainly were missionaries who had influence in China mainly at the national or regional level, but the majority of them had a local impact.

For example, Francis Xavier, who travelled all around Asia, is remembered as a great missionary, but there are some inaccurate narratives regarding the extent of his influence on conversions. Rather than influencing the East, his influence was far more prominent among young Jesuits who now dreamt of going to East Asia. Matteo Ricci, on the other hand, did have quite an influence in the 17th century, even though not as much as Francis Xavier did. That being said, it is important to note that Matteo Ricci’s influence was profound in East Asia itself, shaping local knowledge, religious practice, and cross-cultural exchange across China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam. Unlike missionaries whose impact was measured by conversions abroad, Ricci’s legacy lies in his intellectual and cultural contributions within East Asia, from maps to catechisms. Since his catechism, books and map were dissaminated in Korea, Japan, Vietnam and China, he came to be known everywhere in East Asia. His map became the first world map shown in China, which continues to be used to this day. Institutes built in his honour are located all over the world (Paris, Boston, Taipei), proving the growth of his prestige after the major clash between Beijing and the Vatican. By nominating new Chinese saints in the early 2000s, the Vatican underscored Ricci’s enduring influence, indicating that his contributions continued to be respected despite historical tensions with Beijing.

The Asia-Pacific campus of Sciences Po Paris was arguably the most fitting venue for such a lecture. With its focus on the region, the campus offered not just an audience but a context where the intersections of faith, power, and society in East Asia and South Asia could be understood in a more nuanced way, where students could link theological insights to their cultural exposure. Sciences Po’s diversity is exemplified by lectures like these, where students from all around the globe seek genuine knowledge about the world that surrounds them — about the rise of religions, institutions and environments that shape modern history. As the lecture drew to a close, what lingered was not just a story of persecution and resilience, but also a reminder of how ideas travel, change, and survive across borders. Christianity in East Asia, as professor Roux emphasized, was never a simple tale of importation from the West — it was a dialogue shaped by local traditions, state power, and the challenges of modernity.