The Academy, Openness, and "Competition"

In a recent Nature article bemoaning the strictures placed upon foreign researchers by the Government, they note:

“[W]e must take great care not to create a toxic atmosphere of unfounded suspicion and fear,” reads an open letter published on 25 June by MIT President Rafael Reif. “Yet faculty members, post-docs, research staff and students tell me that, in their dealings with government agencies, they now feel unfairly scrutinized, stigmatized and on edge — because of their Chinese ethnicity alone.” Government agencies dispute the charge that they are singling out ethnically Chinese scientists, and emphasize the need to contain undue foreign influence at universities while preserving scientific integrity and international collaboration. But MIT scientists who spoke to Nature described a variety of discomfiting experiences with government officials in recent months — and said they were changing their behaviour in response to the climate on campus and around the country. 

Having gone back to MIT from 2005-2012 I found that in EECS where I was helping Doctoral students not a single one was a US citizen and yet all were being funded by DoD or DoD related contracts. Most, I believe, went back to their home countries, many in Asia.

One must think back to Admiral Yamamoto of the Pearl Harbor fame and Harvard. Yet he was not funded by the Navy or War Departments then.

Are these relationships challenges to the security of the United States? Perhaps. Yet China seems to be developing its own technology base, even in the biotech arena. There is a real challenge. China has challenged the US to some form of global supremacy. So is "psychological stress" real, perceived, a millennial artifact, or what. Every time I went back and forth to Russia I knew that I was entering a world of a competing power. Was there "psychological stress"? No, it was a rational understanding of competing global powers. Understand the rules and live with it.

Science has detailed some of the concerns coming from NIH. Their conclusion states:

Many members of the Asian American community believe that U.S. agencies have been targeting Asian-born scientists simply for their participation in Thousand Talents and similar Chinese recruitment programs. But Lauer says NIH has no problem with U.S. scientists participating in Thousand Talents as long as they fully disclose that relationship. “Thousand Talents is not a threat [to the United States],” he says. “It's not the specific conduct we are focusing on, it's the failure to disclose it.”

 But there are many NIH grants, ARPA grants and even more which support doctoral students from Asia. Then these students return to their country having costs the US Taxpayer and at the same time creating a competitive advantage for their home country. While US students are drowning in debt, US taxpayers fund competitive threats. Level playing field anyone?