Here we go again (or, perhaps, I should say, here we keep on going): another example of the Chinese government trying to claim Confucius as a means of legitimating their regime.  The story starts out without fanfare: an announcement of a second "Confucius Institute" opening in Japan.  These places seem to be mostly about learning Chinese language and a bit of "Chinese culture," modeled loosely on the Goethe Institutes run by the German government.  But then we get to this:

Wang also said that the Confucius Institute is a significant platform for both
China and Japan to probe into Confucius’s studies and promote Oriental
civilization. Confucianism oriented towards Confucius’s studies is the essence
in oriental civilization and a crucial part in human civilization. Confucianism
advocates such thoughts as "Do not unto others as you would not be done by" and
"staying friendly with neighbors," emphasizes "keeping your promises in
friendship" and upholds "applying courtesy and cherishing peace." These sophic
ideas have not only brought up the gorgeous oriental civilization but also
remain inspiring for standardizing relationship among people and even nations.
They have practical significance for men to build up a harmonious society and a
peaceful world.

   There is much wrong in this.

     It is a clumsy effort to construct a category, "oriental civilization," that serves the foreign policy interests of the PRC state.  Now, it is absolutely true that Confucianism, and many other cultural practices, spread from China, through Korea, to Japan.  But at each step along the way, the tradition was interpreted in light of indigenous conditions.  What Confucianism became in China (a hegemonic cultural practice reproduced through the examination system and bent to the service of the state) is not what it became in Japan (with its very different understanding of imperial legitimation). 

     What the term "civilization" is supposed to mean here is not clear.  Cultural borrowing and interpretation happens across all sorts of borders, but, in itself, cultural flow does not mean cultural similarity sufficient enough to justify a singular categorization.  Why isn’t the spread of Buddhism from India to China just as "essential" an element of "oriental civilization"?  The short answer is: because Confucian Institutes, and their message of Sino-Japanese cultural amalgamation, are not about honest and open analysis of cultural flows; they are about creating a definition of "oriental civilization" that is implicitly critical of Japanese politics and foreign policy. 

    Look at the selective choices of Confucian wisdom mentioned in the paragraph.  They are all in perfect accord with recent Chinese complaints about Japanese claims for territory in the East China Sea ("staying friendly with neighbors") and the visits of the Japanese Prime Minister to the Yasukuni Shrine (where WWII war criminal are interred) ("applying courtesy and cherishing peace").  Of course, it is fine for the Chinese government to articulate its interests; but cloaking them in Confucian garb and suggesting that an "oriental civilization" just happens to support their political interests is transparent propaganda.

    At the end of the day, I remain deeply suspicious of governments using Confucian thinking for their political purposes.  If we are to continue to reinterpret and apply the ancient texts (something I am obviously sympathetic to), we need to do it in ways that minimize the overt politicization of the endeavor.  Best to keep it on a personal level, not a governmental one.  And, if the PRC continues to try to use Confucius for regime legitimation, they will then have to accept the obvious critique of their rule that would come from a modern application of Confucius.  Remember: Confucius (especially as elaborated by Mencius) was against an aggressive foreign policy; he was against conspicuous consumption on the part of the social elite; he was against the veneration of profit over humanity; and he was against capital punishment.  Does the PRC really want to open up all those questions for honest debate and critique?