The case of renowned MIT professor Chen Gang, who was charged with wire fraud and tax return violation related charges for concealing his cooperation with China, has aroused widespread concern and discussion in the academic community. Harvard University hosted an online symposium yesterday (January 25), inviting Temple University scholar Xi Xiaoxing to discuss “Scientific Espionage, Open Communication, and American Competitiveness “The discussion was attended by more than 460 people online.
The U.S. Department of Justice charged Xi Xiaoxing in 2015 with illegally sending a design for a sensitive laboratory device, commonly known as a “hand warmer,” to China, but the case was dropped a few months later because FBI agents and prosecutors got the core evidence wrong and mistook an insensitive design for a sensitive one. As a result of the wrongful conviction, Xi Xiaoxing also gained insight into the sensitive issue of foreign influence in the U.S. scientific research field and thought more about it.
Xi said the federal target was not just the Chinese, but “anyone who has academic collaborations with China. The question before researchers is how to recognize the openness and risks in basic research and international collaboration. In terms of how the academic community deals with this issue, he believes that the report “Security in Basic Research,” released by the National Science Foundation (NSF), “speaks for the scientific community to the U.S. government.
JASON Report: U.S. Open Research Exploited
The report is a study commissioned in 2019 by NSF to deepen its understanding of the threats to basic research posed by foreign governments in violation of the principles of scientific ethics and research integrity by an independent group of defense consultants called JASON, which advised the U.S. government on national security back during the Cold War.
The report says that for decades, U.S. agencies have worked to promote openness, transparency and mutual international cooperation in basic research, and that “the integrity of our research enterprise depends on the core principles and values of transparency, openness and performance-based competition. Principled international collaboration and foreign scientific talent are critical to the success of the U.S. research enterprise in the United States.”
Yet the open research ecosystem of the U.S. academic base is being exploited by other countries, the report said. “The Chinese government and its institutions have different scientific ethics and values than those of the United States, raising concerns about foreign influence in the U.S. academic sector.” “Their tactics include the use of foreign talent recruitment programs on the condition that beneficiaries may be required to use deceptive practices or other behaviors to circumvent the purpose of enabling international research collaborations to flourish.”
The JASON report examines the intelligence community’s evidence on foreign influence in four categories: rewards (cash, high salaries, residences, titles, or research grants or facilities), deception (such as sharing information without authorization), coercion (such as China’s status as a totalitarian state whose National Intelligence Act requires citizens to cooperate with government requests) and theft (such as theft of samples or prototypes), unequal transparency, etc., that may practices that may run counter to the ethical values of science in the United States.
The report refers to the substantive details of the operation of the Thousand Talents Program, including contracts and case studies of individuals recruited to work on talent program activities.
In 1985, the Reagan administration decided to make unclassified areas of basic scientific research open to all and established National Security Directive 189 (NSDD-189) to govern them. The JASON report argues against segregation and advocates that the academic community do more to secure U.S. research units from foreign intrusion without segregation. Some foreign students and scholars in the United States, for example, may believe that it is acceptable to share confidential research information with foreign governments. In response, JASON urges U.S. institutions to strengthen their efforts to educate foreign personnel about research ethics.
JASON Report: Addressing Problems within a Framework of Integrity
In terms of specific countermeasures, the JASON report says that “there are greater benefits to opening up research and absorbing foreign excellence than isolating certain areas of basic scientific research from the outside world.” JASON suggests that the threat of foreign influence is a complex issue that “can be addressed within a framework of research integrity.”
JASON’s report notes that Chinese scholars, whether Chinese citizens or U.S. citizens of Chinese origin, are usually not representatives of the Chinese Communist Party or the Chinese government, nor do they necessarily agree with its goals or the policies of those institutions.
Xi Xiaoxing said it is extremely important for researchers in academia that people disclose all of these Chinese ties related to transparency. In very serious cases where someone intentionally hides something, that certainly could be a crime. But most of the Time, if you just make a momentary mistake or it’s not clear, there are policies that don’t specify what non-financial information needs to be disclosed that can lead to a conflict of interest. So he believes that if the institution doesn’t have a clear requirement, then there’s no way to prosecute someone for failing to follow it.
It is not uncommon in recent years for highly educated individuals to fall foul of the law for cooperating with the CCP in surrendering valuable trade secrets. Xi Xiaoxing believes it is important to educate the public, and it is also important to ensure justice. His case illustrates the need for the United States to better understand how academia works, and fortunately in the United States there is reason to be able to speak clearly, which is what makes the United States great.
Recent Comments