[gunsequalfreedom]

History has many examples of language and culture being used as a pretense for invasion.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong. But if this were true, why would China of all places have a bilingual education system where English is a required second language?

[Azeem]

Science, Finance, and Transportation (air and naval) are done in English.

[River Hawk]

It’s apples and oranges. In China, “bilingual education” is for a certain segment of the Chinese population to learn English as an aid to commerce. In the U.S., “bilingual education” is a mechanism to impede the assimilation of Spanish-speakers.

[jameslalor]

“But if this were true, why would China of all places have a bilingual education system where English is a required second language?”

Because the author of this piece is using common academic weasel-speak to avoid mentioning the elephant in the room - ethnicity. The term “Language” is often used to refer in a roundabout fashion to a specific package of ethnic, cultural, and religious traits that make up a distinct “nation” or “people”.

Hence, teaching English to ethnically and culturally Chinese students is not a problem, just as teaching French in U.S. high schools is not likely to inflame identity-based politics or encourage secession or civil disobedience. Such is not the case, for example, with Canada.

However individuals who wish to foment civil strife and ethnically based violence in a nation understand that they must block cultural, linguistic, and ethnic assimilation by minorities.

[Cronos]

you're correct -- the author has mixed up language and culture -- mostly they're the same, but not always. People won't invade to protect fellow linguists, but fellow cultures, yes

Also, mostly the invasions are, like in the Anschluss or Crimea, for fellow ethnics