Zhigang Suo, a professor of mechanics and materials at Harvard University, retweeted a joint letter from “100 MIT professors” to MIT President Reif. (Twitter screenshot)
The case of MIT professor Chen Gang being charged by the Department of Justice continues to ferment in Chinese academic circles, as Zhigang Suo, who is identified as a professor of mechanics and materials at Harvard University on Twitter, retweeted a letter addressed to MIT President L. Rafael Reif from “100 MIT professors” on the 22nd. On the same day, President Reif also issued a letter to the MIT community. On the same day, the Wall Street Journal revealed that U.S. Justice Department officials were considering an Amnesty program that would allow U.S. academics to disclose past foreign funding without fear of consequences.
Chen Gang faces three criminal charges: wire fraud, failure to report foreign bank accounts and making false statements on tax forms, respectively, for what prosecutors allege was concealing the fact that he worked for China while doing U.S. government-funded nanotechnology research work.
Government misunderstanding of ordinary, harmless professional activity?
The joint letter from 100 MIT professors expresses several main points: 1) Chen Gang’s partnership with China’s Southern University of Science and Technology was approved and overseen by the highest levels of MIT, and this foreign funding did not go into his personal pocket; the MIT university was the one who benefited.
2) The prosecution alleges that Southern University of Science and Technology is an agent of the Chinese government and therefore not a legitimate partnership organization. The joint letter states that “most of the world’s major universities are public institutions and can therefore reasonably be described as belonging to some branch of that government. If U.S. government leaders believe these collaborative research relationships are improper, they can be addressed legislatively or using executive authority.”
3) The prosecution alleges that Chen Gang committed “wire fraud” by concealing his affiliation and partnership with China when applying for a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) grant. The letter counters that “Gang Chen’s extensive scientific and other contacts with China have been extensively disclosed and publicly documented, and his curriculum vitae contains 62 references to China that can be downloaded from the MIT website, and thus is not considered ‘concealed’.”
4) The prosecution alleges that Chen Gang recommended students for positions in China and received scholarships funded by the Chinese government. Chen Gang served as a reviewer for China’s National Science Foundation and in doing so served China. The letter states that this is just a “regular activity” that is essential to a teacher’s job.
5) The prosecution alleges that Chen Gang “knowingly and intentionally defrauded (taxpayers) of $19 million in federal grants to use our system to enhance Chinese research in nanotechnology.” However, the joint letter argues that this claim “provides no evidence.”
Hundreds of MIT professors are puzzled if China is involved
In short, the 100 MIT professors argue that “the criminal prosecution of Chen Gang has nothing to do with intellectual property protection” and that “if China is not involved, it is considered normal academic and research activity,” so why is it abnormal when China is involved? The letter ends by emphasizing that “we are all Chen Gang,” claiming that “in many ways, the complaint against Chen Gang is a complaint against all of us.”
In an open letter, MIT President Reif confirmed that MIT established a partnership with SUSTech in 2018, and that although Professor Chen Gang was the first director of the MIT side, it was a faculty collaboration with the support of the university. Reif reassured the Chinese-American researchers, assuring them, “You are valuable at the university.”
In addition, according to court information, a team of MIT lawyers has taken over the case and is fighting for Chen Gang, covering his legal fees. Chen Gang himself denied all charges when he crossed the courtroom on the 22nd network.
Indictment: Cooperation with China Gives Name and Profit
According to the prosecutor’s office indictment against Chen Gang, the charging documents contain the following details: 1) The investigation of Chen Gang revealed that he failed to disclose “contracts, affiliations, and Chinese sponsors” with various Chinese entities, many of which appointments were explicitly aimed at promoting China’s scientific and technological goals.
2) Chen Gang had at least three accounts with Chinese banks in 2018 that were not disclosed to the IRS.
3) Chen Gang’s attempts to promote China’s science and technology through his expertise, sometimes directly to Chinese government officials, often in exchange for financial compensation and awards.
4) Failure to provide material information regarding his longstanding affiliation with China as requested by the U.S. Department of Energy.
5) Chen Gang’s research area, nanotechnology, was identified as a “major project of special interest” by the Chinese Communist government in China’s 13th Five-Year Plan. His nanoengineering group at MIT focuses on “nanoscale transport and energy conversion phenomena” with applications in energy storage, conversion and utilization.
(6) Chen just sent an email from his MIT email account in February 2016 with a number of suggestions on the development of science and technology in China. Among them, he wrote: “How to promote cooperation between MIT and China, Ambassador Zhang (Consul General of the Chinese Consulate in New York) here, we should work together, we share common grants for R&D on many things (we share common grants), how to organize scattered activities into a framework… “
CCP’s Innovative Initiative: Let You “Serve China from Abroad”
(7) Since 2012, Chen Gang has signed at least four contracts with “various entities within or close to” the Chinese government, including the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation and the Zhongguancun Development Group.
Eight of the world’s top scientists, including Zhang Shoucheng and Chen Gang, were appointed as the first batch of “Zhongguancun Overseas Strategic Scientists” at the “Beijing Silicon Valley High-End Talent Summit” hosted by the Beijing Leading Group for Talent Work and organized by the Zhongguancun Development Group. This strategy allows the world’s top Chinese scientists to “contribute to Chinese scientific research in the U.S.” (serve China from abroad), according to the CGDC leadership, “an innovative move for scientists who want to serve their country. “
8) Chen Gang is an “overseas expert” advisor to the Chinese government, providing “advice and counsel on China’s foreign policy and recommending others to join China’s talent program. He is also an advisor to the China Scholarship Council, which receives the bulk of its program funding from the Chinese government.
Gang Chen is a “Wuhan Partner Outstanding Talent” and has joined Wuhan’s “3551 Guanggu Talent Program”, receiving a resettlement compensation of RMB 10 million (approximately $1.4 million) and a one-Time cash award of RMB 2 million. Gang Chen also participated in both Chinese talent programs to establish a thermal energy storage company in Wuhan, China, a project with a grant of 100 million RMB (approximately $14 million). In one communication, Chen Gang instructed his colleagues at MIT to remove any information that identified him (Chen Gang) as a participant in the China Talent Program based on relevant documents.
Concealment vs. Conflict of Interest Disclosure
9) Chen Gang also concealed most of these affiliations from MIT, which requires professors to file conflict of interest disclosures and external professional activity reports at least annually.
(10) Chen Gang traveled to and from China 19 times in the three years from 2016 to 2019, and on January 22, 2020, when he was checked by U.S. Customs upon his return from China, he responded that the meeting in China was “a collaboration” and claimed that all of his research was conducted in the United States. However, when he finally published his results, the acknowledgements in his article with several Chinese researchers from “Huazhong University of Science and Technology” thanked both the U.S. Department of Energy and the Chinese funder. The prosecution argues that if Chen had disclosed this information in the first place, the DOE’s approval of the grant might have changed, or at least further inquiries would have been made to ensure that his work affiliation in China did not create a material conflict of interest.
Amnesty, but not for Chen Gang?
The Wall Street Journal 22 exclusively disclosed that Justice Department officials are considering an amnesty program under which U.S. academics could disclose past foreign funding without fear of punishment for their disclosures. The plan has not yet been implemented, however, and some prosecutors fear it could weaken existing cases, sources familiar with the matter told the WaPo.
The article said the proposal comes as opposition from MIT faculty members to the criminal case escalates and the Biden administration tries to strike a balance between international academic cooperation and proper disclosure, and that at this point, Biden Administration officials “have not yet indicated how they would handle a federal funding case against an academic institution. But both current and former officials have said they do not anticipate significant changes in the way the department handles China-related issues.”
Recent Comments