Thursday, February 10, 2022

February 10, 2022 China and Scientific Funding By Michael Curtis

 

American Thinker

China and Scientific Funding

Chinese military-linked conglomerates and universities are sponsoring high-technology research centers at many universities in the UK. There have been more than 1,000 academic collaborations between British and Chinese academics, a number that has tripled in six years.  The basic issue is that UK scientists and universities have been generating research or cooperating with Chinese researchers, that is sponsored by or is of use to Chinese military bodies.

The facts of academic collaborations between Western, especially British scientists, and Chinese academics and government and commercial bodies are not new.  The UK academic world was warned more than two years ago that hostile state actors were targeting UK universities to steal personal data, research data, and intellectual property, and that these could be valuable for military, commercial, and authoritarian purposes.

In 2019, more than 600 Chinese military scientists, working on technology with military application, were attached to UK universities.  Manchester University for a time had a contract with a Chinese company, Electronics Technology Group, that was used by the Chinese government to produce military aircraft, some used to deal with the Uighur Muslims, a treatment akin to genocide.  Imperial College has worked with the Harbin Institute of Technology, a unit which worked for the PLA. The Henry Jackson Society reported in 2021 that 900 graduates of Chinese universities allegedly linked to the PLA were enrolled in studies at 33 British universities.

Collaboration between China and UK has grown in recent years. British universities have since 2015 accepted 240 million pounds from Chinese institutions for research. Specifically, the Imperial College London has got 44 million, the University of Cambridge 46 million, the University of Oxford 24 million, the University of Manchester 19 million, and University of Edinburgh 13 million. In addition, the universities also receive income from student recruitment and research grants.   One calculation is that about 120,000 Chinese students account for 2 billion pounds in revenue for UK universities:  nine of them depend on Chinese students for more than 20 per cent of their revenue from tuition fees.  Manchester University has more Chinese students than any other in Europe.

It is meaningful that since 2007, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), has sponsored more than 2,500 military scientists and engineers to study abroad. The PLA slogan is “picking flowers to gain expertise and training abroad to make honey.”

Reports, including one by Civitas, a think tank based in London, show that at least 20 UK universities have established relations with 29 militarily linked Chinese universities, as well as to nine weapons suppliers or other military linked companies.  The UK research sponsored by Chinese organizations could have both a military as well as civilian use. The UK research is likely to be of use to Chinese military bodies, and may have helped China build weapons of mass destruction. Cambridge University has ties to a Chinese military installation blacklisted by the U.S. Nottingham University has a large deal with China’s main supplier of military aircraft.

The Chinese companies sponsoring UK research include manufacturers that produce rail guns, fighter engines, nuclear warheads, stealth aircraft, drones, tanks, and ships. There is particular concern in the UK about research in two fields: hypersonic technology at a time when China is developing hypersonic missiles and graphite research regarding material used in armed helicopters. This is occurring in a context when China is probably involved in superfast quantum computing and applications for artificial intelligence.

Four questions arise; one is whether the UK has lost any comparative advantage by opening its doors to Chinese academics and handing over what might be considered secrets. Second, does the Chinese connection impinge on national security?  Can China now be considered a greater threat to British interests and security than is Russia? Third, have the recipients in British universities which have got Chinese money lost their moral bearings? And is the collaboration undermining UK strategic interests if sensitive information is being exported to China?

The research on technology to develop rail guns, weapons that use magnetic fields to fire projectiles, drones, fighter jets, and missiles and other military technology and high-tech aerospace raises the fear is that the joint research between the two countries could be the basis of super weapons for Beijing. Of the total 240 million pounds, 60 million have come from sources sanctioned by the U.S. Of this amount, 40 million came from Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.

There is some awareness of the impact of these Chinese grants and connections. At Oxford university the Wykeham chair of physics was renamed the Teucent-Wykeham in honor of Teucent, a Chinese software computing conglomerate, after it offered a 700,000-pound donation to Oxford. Teucent, founded in 1998, is worth 500 billion pounds and received money and support from China’s ministry of state security, the main intelligence agency, when it was founded. It owns WeChat communications which, like TikTok, censors material that the Chinese Communist party regards as politically sensitive and which keeps tabs on Chinese citizens living abroad. It is taken for granted that Chinese companies pass on information to Chinese security agencies on demand.  


The UK is aware of the issue, as the U.S. has been for some years when in June 2015 it found that hackers linked to China had gained access to sensitive information. The University of Manchester ended its research project with the China Electronics Technology Group after the conservative MP Tom Tugendhet revealed that the technology of that firm was being used against the Uighurs. The license of the China Global Telecommunications Network to broadcast in UK was withdrawn because the firm was controlled by the Chinese Communist party.

In 2020 Boris Johnson, aware that Huawei was linked to the CCP and had gained access to government security, banned its 5G networks and ordered all is existing technology to be stripped from UK telecommunicators networks.

The time for a reassessment of rules for scientific research and funding involving China is long overdue. That reassessment must consider the stated aim of China to equal the U.S. military by 2027, and to enhance its advanced military technology.

Image: reinhold möller 

February 10, 2022 Time to worry: the Biden government is redefining core principles By Andrea Widburg

 

American Thinker

Time to worry: the Biden government is redefining core principles


Two odd little reports appeared in the past couple of days, both of which involve the federal government redefining things that, before the Biden administration, had mostly agreed-upon definitions that were not hostile to ordinary Americans and that recognized American sovereignty. One report concerns a changed terrorism definition from the Department of Homeland Security, while the other redefines the mission of the Department of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The Department of Homeland Security promulgated a new National Terrorism Advisory Systems (“NTAS”) Bulletin. The terrorists are no longer radical student groups seeking to blow up the government (groups such as the Weathermen, which Obama’s mentor, Bill Ayers, founded) or Islamic fundamentalist groups seeking a new caliphate bathed in American blood.

The new terrorist threat is...you. It’s now official government policy that “misinformation”—which means disagreeing with the Biden administration, the media, and tech tyrants—is proto-terrorism. That’s how we end up with this February 7, 2022, NTAS Bulletin (emphasis mine):

The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information (MDM) introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors. These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence. Mass casualty attacks and other acts of targeted violence conducted by lone offenders and small groups acting in furtherance of ideological beliefs and/or personal grievances pose an ongoing threat to the nation. While the conditions underlying the heightened threat landscape have not significantly changed over the last year, the convergence of the following factors has increased the volatility, unpredictability, and complexity of the threat environment: (1) the proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions....

[snip]

The proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions:

  • For example, there is widespread online proliferation of false or misleading narratives regarding unsubstantiated widespread election fraud and COVID-19. Grievances associated with these themes inspired violent extremist attacks during 2021.

As Thomas Lifson wrote yesterday, this "sounds precisely like a prelude to a totalitarian crackdown on political dissent...."

Regarding COVID, as Democrats are finally turning on masks (except for masking students, who are least at risk), we can confidently say that every single bit of “information” that the Biden administration pushed out was, in fact, misinformation: The administration (and its holdovers from the Trump presidency) were wrong about the virus’s origins (or lied about them), about therapeutics, about masks, about lockdowns, and about the vaccines’ efficacy. Everything they said was wrong. But if you doubted or still doubt them, you are a terror threat.

Thomas Lifson adds. As my friend David Kahn emailed:

The Administration claims that its withdrawal from Afghanistan was a “great success“. That would make those who criticize the Presidents withdrawal as an inept disaster the promoters of misleading information who are undermining the government and its institutions and thus terrorist threats.  And the President himself regularly criticizes our government institutions including most recently the United States Senate and its  filibuster rule going so far as to call it a relic of the Jim Crow era. And he has likened members of the Senate to the infamous Bull Connor and other Jim Crow officials. Biden has proclaimed  that the federal elections to be conducted in 2022 will be unreliable and unfair if his proposed election reform act is not enacted. But apparently he believes that when such criticisms are made by private citizens they are terrorist threats.

Likewise, in the year since January 6, we’ve learned that it was anything but an insurrection, and certainly nothing near as bad as the BLM and Antifa riots in 2020. I won’t beat that dead horse, but I urge you to check out this Revolver article.

Image: Stop the mandate protest in St. Paul, August 28, 2021, by Hayley Tschetter (with added text). CC BY-SA 2.0.

Do you feel intimated knowing that the government has effectively announced that, if you point out everything as to which it’s been wrong and is continuing to be wrong, you will be viewed as a potential domestic terrorist? You’re certainly meant to feel that way.

And just yesterday, Townhall’s Spencer Brown caught a significant change to the mission statement for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:


The old version:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services administers the nation’s lawful immigration system, safeguarding its integrity and promise by efficiently and fairly adjudicating requests for immigration benefits while protecting Americans, securing the homeland, and honoring our values.

That’s straightforward enough: America is a nation of laws, some of which govern immigration, and the USCIS is responsible for enforcing those laws fairly and in a way that protects Americans and America.

The new version is much shorter:

USCIS upholds America’s promise as a nation of welcome and possibility with fairness, integrity, and respect for all we serve.

Suddenly, USCIS is unconcerned with the rule of law and unconcerned with protecting Americans. It is, instead, an organization that exists to make life easier for the millions of illegal aliens the Biden administration is encouraging to enter America and then, once they are in America, funding and resettling in districts that willfully refuse to vote for Democrats.

In other words, the Biden administration has stood America on its head: Those who dare to disagree with the administration are potential terrorists—and please, ignore the whole First Amendment “shtick” about the federal government being barred from “abridging the freedom of speech...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” In Biden’s America, the Constitution has grown beyond such petty things as individual liberty.

Meanwhile, even as the government is intimidating ordinary Americans into abandoning their right to protest their government, it’s making it patently clear that its immigration agency exists for the benefit of illegal aliens, not American citizens.

Never before in American history have we had an American government that is a mob-style enforcement agency against citizens and one, moreover, that happily fulfills that role because it so patently hates the citizens over whom it has this power.

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *