Chinese Scientists Feel a Chill Under U.S. Investigation of Higher Ed’s China Ties, a New Survey Shows

The China Initiative, the continuing federal investigation of research ties with China, has led to alarm among many Chinese and Chinese American scientists that they are being racially profiled and watched by the U.S. government.

Those growing apprehensions could chill international academic collaboration and undermine America’s scientific competitiveness, according to a newly released report.

University of Arizona researchers surveyed nearly 2,000 professors, postdocs, and graduate students at more than 80 research-intensive universities between May and July, with the support of the Committee of 100, a group of prominent Chinese Americans. The researchers found a “consistent pattern” of racial profiling among scientists of Chinese descent, more than 40 percent of whom reported feeling profiled by the U.S. government.

By comparison, less than 10 percent of non-Chinese researchers said they believed they had been singled out because of their race.

Half of all Chinese and Chinese American scientists said they felt “considerable fear or anxiety” that they were being “surveilled” by the U.S. government.

“There was a clear and distinct pattern of profiling among Chinese scientists,” said Jenny J. Lee, a professor of educational-policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona, who conducted the research with Xiaojie Li, a Ph.D. student at Arizona.

At a Thursday-evening news conference, Gary Locke, interim president of Bellevue College, in Washington, and previously the first Chinese American ambassador to China, warned of “the other virus, of hate and discrimination.” Zhengyu Huang, president of the Committee of 100, likened the current situation to “researching while Chinese,” where scientists of Chinese descent are singled out for scrutiny based solely on race or heritage.

Lee said she had expected to find heightened concerns among scientists of Chinese descent after the nearly three-year investigation of academic and economic espionage, begun under the Trump administration. But she had not predicted such stark differences between the experiences of Chinese and non-Chinese faculty members. (The report’s authors use “Chinese” as shorthand to refer to students and professors of Chinese descent, regardless of nationality.) Nor had she anticipated that Chinese researchers who are American citizens would feel so vulnerable because of the China Initiative.

In addition, a quarter of scientists who are of Asian but not Chinese descent said they also had experienced racial profiling.

The researchers found that concerns about racial profiling were largely focused on the federal government, not at the university level. Only about 10 percent of Chinese scientists said they had experienced discrimination from their institution or their faculty colleagues.

Perceptions of the China Initiative itself split along racial and ethnic lines — three-quarters of non-Chinese researchers, in fact, agreed that America should be tougher on China to prevent the theft of intellectual property.

Anecdotally, Chinese scientists surveyed said they had purposely not pursued federal funding for projects over fear of increased scrutiny. That decision could lead to smaller research teams, the downsizing of projects, and working with reduced resources.

Nearly four in 10 Chinese academics reported experiencing difficulty in obtaining funding for research projects because of their race, their ethnicity, or their country of origin, compared with 15 percent of non-Chinese researchers. More than a third of Chinese scientists indicated they had experienced professional challenges, such as in tenure and promotion efforts or in career opportunities, because of their background.

Pulling Back From Projects

The current environment is affecting the willingness of scientists of Chinese descent in the United States to maintain research ties in China. A quarter of respondents said they planned to pull back from future projects with individual researchers in China, while a similar share said they would shy away from broader connections with China, such as accepting Chinese research funding, visiting appointments at Chinese universities, or speaking engagements there.

Lee said those who feel they have been racially profiled are more likely to disengage from working with China.

Already, one in five Chinese and Chinese American researchers said they had stepped away from work in China, ending or suspending projects over the past three years. Of the Chinese scientists who had “prematurely or unexpectedly” called off such projects, almost all blamed the China Initiative.

Yet there is widespread agreement about the importance of academic and research ties to China, with large majorities of respondents of both Chinese and non-Chinese descent agreeing that working with scientists in China is important to their field and to their own research. They also expressed alarm at the possibility and the costs of disengagement from China.

Half of Chinese scientists and more than a third of those not of Chinese descent said they had worked on collaborative research that involved China in the past three years.

The China Initiative could also squeeze the talent pipeline into American colleges. Forty percent of the Chinese researchers who were not American citizens said the federal investigation could affect their plans to stay in the United States.

Chinese students count for a significant share of graduate students in certain STEM disciplines. And nine in 10 Chinese students who earn doctorates in science or engineering remain in the United States after graduation, at least for their first job or postdoc, according to the National Science Foundation.

“I have been successful in my career because of the U.S., for which I am grateful,” an astronomy professor, a naturalized American citizen, wrote in a personal response to the survey.

“I want to build a bridge between the U.S. and China so that the two countries can collaborate in science and live in peace,” the professor continued. “But the China Initiative makes me think that I may not belong to the U.S. and motivates me to move back to a position in China at some point.”

Another respondent, a professor of genetics, commented: “I assume all my electronic communications are potentially monitored by the U.S. government. I decided not to collaborate with researchers in China and other foreign countries due to perceived conflict of interests. I even decline outside research consulting activities in the U.S. In summary, [the] China initiative has a great negative impact on my research productivity.”

The Committee of 100 is calling for the end of the China Initiative, but Lee noted that other U.S. government policies, such as tighter limits on visas for some Chinese graduate students and a ban on those who completed their undergraduate degrees at universities believed to have ties to the Chinese military, also affect perceptions of how welcoming the United States is to Chinese students and scholars.

Even if the formal federal investigation winds down, Lee said, concerns about the national-security risks of higher education’s work with China will persist. Both federal agencies and universities must be more transparent about disclosure and conflict-of-interest requirements, and offer clearer guidelines for collaboration with China, she said.

“This isn’t just the story of individuals or groups being treated unfairly, although that’s important,” Lee said. “It also affects our ability to compete globally.”