Let's hope Tech is clean but....
China’s Funding of U.S. Researchers Raises Red Flags
Academics don’t always disclose the funding, adding to concerns about national security
Harvard University’s chemistry building. Charles Lieber, a leading scientist at the university, was recently arrested for allegedly concealing more than $2 million in Chinese funding. PHOTO: KATHERINE TAYLOR/REUTERS
By
Aruna Viswanatha and
Kate O’Keeffe
Jan. 30, 2020 7:01 pm ET
When officials at the Texas A&M University System sought to determine how much Chinese government funding its faculty members were receiving, they were astounded at the results—more than 100 were involved with a Chinese talent-recruitment program, even though only five had disclosed their participation.
A plant pathologist at the Texas system, where the median annual salary for such scientists employed by the state is around $130,000, told officials that the researcher had been offered $250,000 in compensation and more than $1 million in seed money to start a lab in China through one of the talent programs. The researcher ultimately rejected the offer, according to the Texas system’s chief research security officer, Kevin Gamache, who led the recent 18-month review that has garnered praise from U.S. officials.
The arrest of a leading Harvard University scientist this week for allegedly concealing more than $2 million in Chinese backing underscored how serious Beijing is about attracting top talent.
Such funding is just the tip of the iceberg, by China’s own account. A decade ago the Chinese government pledged to spend what would amount to more than $2 trillion today to reverse a longstanding brain drain to the developed world in a quest to dominate the technologies of the future.
All of the targeted researchers in the Texas A&M system are working in fields identified by Beijing as priorities for scientific advancement, said Mr. Gamache. “We don’t see the same offers for English majors.”
Beijing has denied attempting any systematic effort to steal U.S. scientific research, and Chinese state media have said the U.S. is using allegations of intellectual-property theft as political tool.
A Wall Street Journal examination of dozens of similar offers involving researchers at the University of Texas’s MD Anderson Cancer Center, Emory University, the University of Kansas, Michigan’s Van Andel Institute, Florida’s Moffitt Cancer Center and elsewhere in recent years shows how the influx of Chinese money has jolted generally accepted views of academic freedom and national security, leaving both the U.S. government and research communities grappling with how to respond.
Harvard scientist Charles Lieber left federal court on Thursday. PHOTO: KATHERINE TAYLOR/REUTERS
Charles Lieber, a pioneer in nanotechnology, allegedly signed a contract with Chinese counterparts under which he would be paid around $50,000 a month, plus another $150,000 a year for personal expenses; he was also promised—and received—more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at the Wuhan University of Technology, according to prosecutors.
He is specifically charged with deliberately lying to U.S. government investigators when asked if he received Chinese talent-plan funding, rather than simply omitting the information on forms. The FBI has historically pursued similar China-related cases only when they allegedly involved stealing trade secrets, more commonly in the corporate sector. But the agency recently began prosecuting people in academia—where much research is intended to be shared publicly—on lesser charges such as false statements or fraud. An attorney for Mr. Lieber declined to comment Thursday.
At the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., a researcher allegedly inked a similar deal to receive around $300,000 in salary, research funds and lab space, according to an internal report dated Jan. 17, 2020, that Moffitt provided to the Journal. He also received $80,000 to offset his purchase of a $200,000 apartment in Tianjin, where he was affiliated with the Tianjin Medical University, the report said.
And at the University of Texas’s MD Anderson Cancer Center, where a federal probe dating back to 2015 prompted broader U.S. interest in Chinese talent programs several years later, investigators for MD Anderson said they discovered that one of the center’s top researchers also had a post as chief scientist at a lab at China’s Qingdao Cancer Institute. Investigators found a Chinese media report saying he received a check for 100 million yuan (around $14 million) from local officials, according to an investigative memo provided by MD Anderson. The researcher, Zhimin Lu, who wasn’t named in the memo, declined to answer questions from the Journal. The memo said he denied receiving the award, but the institute didn’t find his explanation credible.
While accepting foreign funding isn’t illegal, U.S. authorities require researchers to disclose it when applying for U.S. taxpayer-supported grants, saying failure to do so can distort allocations of billions of dollars. It can also result in the “hidden transfers of information, know-how and time,” said Kelvin Droegemeier, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
A November report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations included talent-plan contracts mandating U.S. researchers to grant intellectual property rights to their Chinese counterparts, as well as to keep their contracts confidential and steer clear of China’s “internal affairs.”
In January 2013, according to the criminal complaint, Mr. Lieber’s contact at Wuhan emailed him a five-year agreement to conduct research on a technology over which the U.S. and China are in fierce competition: “Advanced research and development of nanowire-based lithium ion batteries with high performance for electric vehicles.”
At a detention hearing Thursday, Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler ruled that Mr. Lieber could be released and set a $1 million cash bond that he must deliver within five business days. He and his wife also must surrender their passports and not leave Massachusetts pending trial, and Mr. Lieber must avoid contact with the Wuhan university, Peking University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. His travel is restricted to Massachusetts.
U.S. scrutiny of Chinese talent programs has caused friction with many university officials who see unclassified research as inherently borderless and international collaboration as a net positive.
In a December paper examining the history of the Chinese talent plans, a professor emeritus at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, David Zweig, questioned some of the U.S. government’s allegations about the plans. He said “the possible closing down of cooperation in the biomedical field is a global problem—despite the Chinese theft of [intellectual property]—as these collaborations have yielded important findings that have improved human health.”
China’s Funding of U.S. Researchers Raises Red Flags
Academics don’t always disclose the funding, adding to concerns about national security
Harvard University’s chemistry building. Charles Lieber, a leading scientist at the university, was recently arrested for allegedly concealing more than $2 million in Chinese funding. PHOTO: KATHERINE TAYLOR/REUTERS
By
Aruna Viswanatha and
Kate O’Keeffe
Jan. 30, 2020 7:01 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
When officials at the Texas A&M University System sought to determine how much Chinese government funding its faculty members were receiving, they were astounded at the results—more than 100 were involved with a Chinese talent-recruitment program, even though only five had disclosed their participation.
A plant pathologist at the Texas system, where the median annual salary for such scientists employed by the state is around $130,000, told officials that the researcher had been offered $250,000 in compensation and more than $1 million in seed money to start a lab in China through one of the talent programs. The researcher ultimately rejected the offer, according to the Texas system’s chief research security officer, Kevin Gamache, who led the recent 18-month review that has garnered praise from U.S. officials.
The arrest of a leading Harvard University scientist this week for allegedly concealing more than $2 million in Chinese backing underscored how serious Beijing is about attracting top talent.
Such funding is just the tip of the iceberg, by China’s own account. A decade ago the Chinese government pledged to spend what would amount to more than $2 trillion today to reverse a longstanding brain drain to the developed world in a quest to dominate the technologies of the future.
All of the targeted researchers in the Texas A&M system are working in fields identified by Beijing as priorities for scientific advancement, said Mr. Gamache. “We don’t see the same offers for English majors.”
Beijing has denied attempting any systematic effort to steal U.S. scientific research, and Chinese state media have said the U.S. is using allegations of intellectual-property theft as political tool.
A Wall Street Journal examination of dozens of similar offers involving researchers at the University of Texas’s MD Anderson Cancer Center, Emory University, the University of Kansas, Michigan’s Van Andel Institute, Florida’s Moffitt Cancer Center and elsewhere in recent years shows how the influx of Chinese money has jolted generally accepted views of academic freedom and national security, leaving both the U.S. government and research communities grappling with how to respond.
Harvard scientist Charles Lieber left federal court on Thursday. PHOTO: KATHERINE TAYLOR/REUTERS
Charles Lieber, a pioneer in nanotechnology, allegedly signed a contract with Chinese counterparts under which he would be paid around $50,000 a month, plus another $150,000 a year for personal expenses; he was also promised—and received—more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at the Wuhan University of Technology, according to prosecutors.
He is specifically charged with deliberately lying to U.S. government investigators when asked if he received Chinese talent-plan funding, rather than simply omitting the information on forms. The FBI has historically pursued similar China-related cases only when they allegedly involved stealing trade secrets, more commonly in the corporate sector. But the agency recently began prosecuting people in academia—where much research is intended to be shared publicly—on lesser charges such as false statements or fraud. An attorney for Mr. Lieber declined to comment Thursday.
At the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., a researcher allegedly inked a similar deal to receive around $300,000 in salary, research funds and lab space, according to an internal report dated Jan. 17, 2020, that Moffitt provided to the Journal. He also received $80,000 to offset his purchase of a $200,000 apartment in Tianjin, where he was affiliated with the Tianjin Medical University, the report said.
And at the University of Texas’s MD Anderson Cancer Center, where a federal probe dating back to 2015 prompted broader U.S. interest in Chinese talent programs several years later, investigators for MD Anderson said they discovered that one of the center’s top researchers also had a post as chief scientist at a lab at China’s Qingdao Cancer Institute. Investigators found a Chinese media report saying he received a check for 100 million yuan (around $14 million) from local officials, according to an investigative memo provided by MD Anderson. The researcher, Zhimin Lu, who wasn’t named in the memo, declined to answer questions from the Journal. The memo said he denied receiving the award, but the institute didn’t find his explanation credible.
While accepting foreign funding isn’t illegal, U.S. authorities require researchers to disclose it when applying for U.S. taxpayer-supported grants, saying failure to do so can distort allocations of billions of dollars. It can also result in the “hidden transfers of information, know-how and time,” said Kelvin Droegemeier, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
A November report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations included talent-plan contracts mandating U.S. researchers to grant intellectual property rights to their Chinese counterparts, as well as to keep their contracts confidential and steer clear of China’s “internal affairs.”
In January 2013, according to the criminal complaint, Mr. Lieber’s contact at Wuhan emailed him a five-year agreement to conduct research on a technology over which the U.S. and China are in fierce competition: “Advanced research and development of nanowire-based lithium ion batteries with high performance for electric vehicles.”
At a detention hearing Thursday, Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler ruled that Mr. Lieber could be released and set a $1 million cash bond that he must deliver within five business days. He and his wife also must surrender their passports and not leave Massachusetts pending trial, and Mr. Lieber must avoid contact with the Wuhan university, Peking University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. His travel is restricted to Massachusetts.
U.S. scrutiny of Chinese talent programs has caused friction with many university officials who see unclassified research as inherently borderless and international collaboration as a net positive.
In a December paper examining the history of the Chinese talent plans, a professor emeritus at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, David Zweig, questioned some of the U.S. government’s allegations about the plans. He said “the possible closing down of cooperation in the biomedical field is a global problem—despite the Chinese theft of [intellectual property]—as these collaborations have yielded important findings that have improved human health.”
