top of page

#286 Research Security; Stanford Faculty Letter; McCarthyism Today; HUAC & CCP Committee; +

In This Issue #286

·       Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation

·       Stanford Faculty Letter to Congress Opposing Revival of China Initiative

·       McCarthyism: Tracing Roy Cohn to Today's Political Climate

·       House Un-American Activities Committee and Select Committee on CCP

·       News and Activities for the Communities

 

Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation


 

On September 27, 2024, the Baker Institute at Rice University published a policy brief titled "Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation."According to the policy brief, international collaboration is essential for advancing science, innovation, and tackling global challenges like climate change and public health. However, geopolitical tensions, particularly between the U.S. and China, have prompted new U.S. research security policies aimed at protecting intellectual property and federally-funded research from undue foreign influence. These policies, such as the 2021 National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) and the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, focus on preventing espionage and intellectual theft but have also raised concerns about over-securitization, stifling openness in scientific exchange, and discouraging global talent.It is argued that while research security is necessary, the current lack of data and empirical evidence behind these policies risks undermining American scientific leadership and economic competitiveness. The chilling effect on U.S.-China collaborations and the fears expressed by U.S. scientists of Chinese descent highlight the potential for a brain drain and harm to the U.S.’s reputation as a global leader in science.To maintain scientific leadership, experts recommend that U.S. research security policy be grounded in evidence, uphold democratic values such as academic freedom, and avoid discriminatory practices. Standardizing research security across federal agencies, fostering international cooperation, and promoting research on security risks are essential steps for ensuring the protection of U.S. research while maintaining its openness and global competitiveness.

 

In particular, Federal lawmakers should continue building on recent actions by Congress, the White House, and federal agencies to:

 

·       Stop all attempts to reinstate the China Initiative. Research security policy should adhere to the statutory language in the CHIPS and Science Act specifying that implementation should “be carried out in a manner that does not target, stigmatize, or discriminate against individuals on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin.”

·       Standardize research security policy and implementation across federal agencies. OSTP, federal funding agencies, and intelligence and national security agencies all need to establish common, transparent, and publicly-accountable research security practices. These practices should incorporate a due process mechanism and ensure objective evaluation, an appeal process, and consistent application of any corrective measures.

·       Promote “research on research security” to provide an empirical basis for new and existing policy. Data and analysis addressing the nature, scope, and scale of research security threats should inform future decision-making. Research security activities should also be identified, traced, and evaluated for effectiveness.

·       Improve research training for administrators, academic scientists, and industry leaders. Outreach and education about research security, especially in the academic sector, will improve compliance with policy and responsible international collaborations.

·       Develop an international community of practice for research security. Broad international collaboration on research security activities will help establish best practices, effective policy, and the wide adoption of common values of openness, transparency, impartiality, respect, and fairness.

 

Read the Baker Institute's brief: https://bit.ly/3TXf5Ed

 

 

 

Stanford Faculty Letter to Congress Opposing Revival of China Initiative

 

 

On October 8, 2024, a group of over 165 Stanford faculty members sent an open letter to U.S. Congressional leaders to strongly oppose legislation that would reinstate the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) China Initiative.  They specifically oppose H.R. 1398, which would revive the initiative in all but name, and request the removal of language from the House report accompanying H.R. 9026, the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2025” that directs the DOJ to reinstate the initiative.On September 8, 2021, a group of 177 Stanford University faculty members sent an open letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, requesting that he terminate the Department of Justice's "China Initiative."  More than 3,100 faculty members of over 240 institutions from all 50 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico endorsed the Stanford letter or sent their own letters.

  

In February 2022 when the DOJ terminated the China Initiative, there was acknowledgement “that this [China] initiative is not the right approach to meet the threat in the coming years." Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew Olson said, “Instead, the current threats demand a broader approach.” The China Initiative was not the right approach then and it is not the right approach now.The letter emphasizes that while espionage and intellectual property theft are serious concerns, the China Initiative has been harmful to U.S. science and technology, especially affecting Asian American scholars and international students. The faculty members argue that the initiative disproportionately targets academia and discourages the flow of valuable international talent, particularly from China. They cite a National Academy of Sciences report, International Talent Programs in the Changing Global Environment, showing that the U.S. has been losing scientific talent since 2018, a trend accelerated by the China Initiative.The letter calls for a new approach that fosters international collaboration and talent, rather than pushing talented individuals towards rival nations. It concludes by urging Congress to welcome brilliant minds from around the world and maintain the U.S. as a beacon for freedom and opportunity, rather than being driven by fear.

 

"We should strive – consistent with our history and our beliefs – to be the 'shining city upon a hill' that welcomes the brightest, most ambitious and dedicated students, scientists, and engineers from around the world. We should not be driven by fear and inadvertently push these talented people towards our rivals. If there is to be a 'China Initiative', let it be one designed to make clear how much we appreciate the influx of STEM talent from China and our dedication to their success in the United States. And for all, we must insiston the responsible and ethical conduct of research," the letter concludes.On October 8, 2024, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) issued a strong statement in support of the Stanford faculty letter.  Faculty members or senior staff at a US university are invited to endorse the letter to the leadership of the U.S. House and Senate at https://bit.ly/4eXkWBw.  An update will be sent to Congress.Read the Stanford faculty letter: https://bit.ly/4dCVC2P

 

 

 

McCarthyism: Tracing Roy Cohn to Today's Political Climate

 

 

According to Wikipedia, Roy Cohn served as Chief Counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy from 1953 to 1954. Roy Cohn played a major role in McCarthy's anti-Communist hearings. After Joseph Welch, an attorney for the Army, confronted McCarthy during the Army–McCarthy hearings of 1954 with the line, "Have you no sense of decency, sir?", public opinion began to turn against McCarthy, leading to McCarthy's censure by the U.S. Senate, and the eventual end of the era.After resigning from McCarthy's staff, Roy Cohn had a 30-year career as an attorney in New York City. His clients included Donald Trump from 1973 to 1985.According to an audio book titled "Ruthless: How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn's Dark Symbiosis Changed America" read by investigative journalist Marie Brenner, Roy Cohn and Donald Trump first met in 1973 when Donald Trump was still trying to make a name for himself as a real estate developer while fighting federal discrimination charges against his family's business. After their chance meeting at a Manhattan disco, Roy Cohn went to work defending Trump, starting a business and personal association that endured in various forms until Roy Cohn's death in 1986.“You knew when you were in Cohn’s presence you were in the presence of pure evil,” said lawyer Victor A. Kovner, who had known him for years. Roy Cohn’s power derived largely from his ability to scare potential adversaries with hollow threats and spurious lawsuits. And the fee he demanded for his services? Ironclad loyalty.

 

According to Marie Brenner, more than legal representation, Roy Cohn offered Donald Trump a way of seeing the world - and the opportunities for seeking advantage within it - that still inform Donald Trump's approach to politics and governing today.2018/08/21 Marie Brenner: Ruthless: How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn's Dark Symbiosis Changed America (audio book)2017/06/28 Vanity FairHow Donald Trump and Roy Cohn’s Ruthless Symbiosis Changed America

 

The Apprentice Movie


 

 

On October 11, 2024, The Apprentice movie will premiere in theaters.According to BBCABC News (Australian)Entertainment WeeklyNew Yorker, and multiple media reports, The Apprentice is a shrewd and darkly amusing tragicomedy that dramatizes Donald Trump's rise to fame and fortune in the 1970s and 80s. While the movie begins with a disclaimer that many of its events are fictionalized, the former president has threatened to take legal action.In the movie, Donald Trump is first seen as a young man in the early 1970s. He works for the New York real estate company run by his cold and condescending father Fred Trump, knocking on doors and collecting rent from his impoverished tenants, but he dreams of opening a luxury high-rise hotel near Central Station. The only snag is that the company is being sued over its racial profiling of potential renters. "How can I be racist when I've got a black driver?" splutters Fred Trump.Enter Roy Cohn in the movie, a notoriously vicious and unscrupulous lawyer who catches Donald Trump's eye in a swanky members club.  Donald Trump is spellbound by Roy Cohn's rudeness, his contempt for his opponents, and his three rules for success: always attacknever admit to any wrongdoing, and never admit defeat. The fact that he is so open about using blackmail only adds to his lustre in Donald Trump's eyes. Roy Cohn could be the encouraging father figure that Donald Trump has always lacked.

 

Media reports:2024/10/05 ABC News (Australia)Donald Trump didn't want The Apprentice released before the US election. It's coming to cinemas this week2024/09/24 PBS‘All About the Fight’: How Donald Trump Developed His Political Playbook2024/05/22 Yahoo NewsWho Was Roy Cohn and What Was His Relationship With Donald Trump?2023/06/17 NPRTrump has had a lot of lawyers but still longs for his wartime consigliere2020/06/18 Men's HealthYou Can Blame Roy Cohn for Donald Trump’s Political Rise2020/03/05 AllThatsInterestingRoy Cohn, The Man Who Taught Donald Trump Everything He Knows2019/09/19 PoliticoThe Final Lesson Donald Trump Never Learned From Roy Cohn2019/03/12 HistoryRoy Cohn: From ‘Red Scare’ Prosecutor to Donald Trump’s Mentor

 

 

House Un-American Activities Committee and Select Committee on CCP

 

 

According to ChatGPT, both the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have operated in environments marked by national security fears, whether related to communism or China. Both are seen as necessary by some to protect U.S. interests, but they also raise concerns about overreach, civil liberties, and the potential targeting of specific groups. How the Select Committee on CCP operates in the long term will determine whether it follows in the controversial footsteps of HUAC or finds a more balanced approach to addressing national security.These are the key comparisons as identified by ChatGPT: 1. Mandate and Focus on Perceived Threats

 

·       HUAC (1938-1975): Established to investigate alleged disloyalty and subversion by citizens, public employees, and organizations suspected of communist ties. HUAC became a symbol of the broader anti-communist movement during the Cold War, heavily focusing on domestic threats and instilling fear of communist infiltration in American society.

·       Select Committee on CCP (formed 2023): Created to address national security risks posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with a focus on China’s influence on U.S. politics, technology, economy, and its potential espionage activities. Its attention is on China’s global ambitions and their potential impact on U.S. national security.

 

2. Political and Ideological Motivation

·       HUAC: Driven by Cold War fears, HUAC’s activities were motivated by concerns over communism infiltrating American society. It fueled political battles, often targeting individuals based on suspicion rather than solid evidence of subversive activities.

·       Select Committee on CCP: While framed around national security, this committee reflects broader U.S. geopolitical concerns about China’s rise as a global power. It fits into a larger narrative portraying China as a primary economic and political adversary, raising questions about how much of its focus is based on security versus political rivalry.

3. Targeting of Specific Groups

·       HUAC: Its investigations led to scrutiny of specific groups like Hollywood, academia, labor unions, and government employees. Many individuals were blacklisted, losing their reputations and careers, even without formal charges. HUAC’s activities were widely criticized for fueling xenophobia and violating civil liberties.

·       Select Committee on CCP: While not yet reaching the level of persecution seen under HUAC, there are concerns that its focus on China could contribute to racial profiling and discrimination against Chinese Americans and other Asian communities. Critics warn that heightened political rhetoric could stoke anti-Asian sentiment, mirroring the fear and suspicion created by HUAC’s investigations.

4. Impact on Civil Liberties and Democratic Principles

·       HUAC: The committee was widely condemned for disregarding due process, leading to accusations of civil rights violations. Many individuals were subpoenaed, questioned, and blacklisted without sufficient evidence, creating a culture of fear and repression.

·       Select Committee on CCP: In its early activities, there are already concerns that its focus on Chinese influence could infringe upon civil liberties, particularly for Chinese Americans. The potential for increased surveillance, academic restrictions, and suspicion of people based on ethnic or national background echoes the repression seen during HUAC’s operations in the McCarthy era.

5. Public Sentiment and Scapegoating

 

·       HUAC: At its peak, HUAC capitalized on the public’s fear of communism, often scapegoating individuals as part of a larger anti-communist fervor. Many reputations and livelihoods were destroyed due to unfounded accusations.

·       Select Committee on CCP: The committee's formation comes at a time of increasing anti-China sentiment in the U.S., driven by economic competition, national security concerns, and technological rivalry. Critics argue that this environment risks scapegoating individuals and businesses with ties to China, reminiscent of the McCarthy era's unfounded accusations.

6. Legacy and Long-Term Consequences

 

·       HUACThe long-term legacy of HUAC is one of overreach, fearmongering, and suppression of dissent. Its actions had lasting consequences for civil liberties in the U.S., contributing to a culture that discouraged free speech and mistrusted dissenting opinions.

·       Select Committee on CCP: The committee’s long-term impact remains to be seen, but if its actions prioritize security at the expense of openness and collaboration, it could similarly harm U.S. democratic values. There is also concern that its focus on China could strain relations with Chinese Americans and weaken international cooperation, just as HUAC left a divisive legacy in American politics.

 

 

News and Activities for the Communities

 

1. APA Justice Community Calendar


 

 

Upcoming Events:2024/10/10 Cato Surveillance Week2024/10/10 China in the Heartland: Building a Balanced Approach2024/10/11 China and the World Forum2024/10/11 Reverse Brain Drain: A Threat to U.S.Technological Leadership2024/10/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/10/16 Rebuilding Trust in Science2024/10/20 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/10/25-27 Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of the American Studies Network2024/10/26 Common Ground and Banquet2024/10/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/03 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details.

 

 

2. Dr. Mark Xu to Lead IRS Statistics of Income Division


 

 

On October 7, 2024, U.S. Chief Statisitician Dr. Karin A. Orvis aanounced that Dr. Weihuan "Mark" Xu just joined the Internal Revenue Service, as the new Director of Statistics of Income (SOI).  SOI operates with an annual budget of approximately $40 to $47 million. It is recognized as one of the 13 leading federal statistical organizations in the U.S., responsible for gathering, analyzing, and publishing data related to tax returns and financial activities. Dr. Mark Xu is a seasoned Senior Executive with experience leveraging data science, AI, and advanced analytics to drive strategic decision-making and policy formulation. His expertise in economics, statistics, and leadership has yielded transformative results in both federal statistical and program agencies. His experience includes managing large, diverse teams and fostering collaboration and innovation in complex environments. He is a champion of data-driven decision-making, spearheading initiatives using big data, machine learning, and AI to enhance program efficiency and inform policy.Prior to joining IRS, Mark served as Director of the Resource Inventory and Assessment Division at U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).  Mark holds a Ph.D. and MA in Economics from the University of Washington, with advanced training in data science, machine learning, and AI. Mark has received multiple awards, including a USDA Secretary’s Honor Award in 2024. 

 

 

3. USHCA Event Today and Professor Franklin Tao

 

 

At the APA Justice monthly meeting on October 7, 2024, Min Fan, Executive Director of the U.S. Heartland China Association (USHCA), reported that Professor Franklin Tao will return to the University of Kansas (KU) and recognized at "The Heartland - Building a Balanced Approach" Forum in Lawrence, Kansas, on October 10, 2024, starting at 7:00 pm CT.This event, presented by the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics at KU in partnership with USHCA and KU’s Department of Political Science, is supported by the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations and local Chinese American scholars.Join the event in person or online to engage in discussions on building a balanced approach to U.S.-China relations and to show solidarity and support for Professor Tao’s reinstatement at KU: https://bit.ly/3zkTyhT.To learn more about Professor Tao’s story, visit: https://bit.ly/3y8SBsm. A summary of the October 7 APA Justice meeting is being prepared at this time.

 

 

4. Drs. Chen, Hu, Tao, and Xi Honored by 2024 American Courage Award 

   

According to the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) on October 3, 2024, four distinguished Asian American scholars—Drs. Gang ChenAnming HuFranklin Tao, and Xiaoxing Xi—received the prestigious 2024 American Courage Award from Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC. The award celebrates their resilience, leadership, and steadfast commitment to Asian American freedom and civil rights in the face of adversity. Past recipients have included the Honorable Julie A. Su, the Honorable Mazie K. HironoVanita GuptaJapanese American MIS Veterans, and other courageous Americans and immigrants. The first recipient of the American Courage Award was Dr. Chang-Lin Tien in 1997. Dr. Tien was the first Asian American to head a major research university in the U.S., serving as Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Tien was Dr. Chen's PhD advisor. Read the AASF announcement: https://bit.ly/4eSLwfa

 

 

5. APA Justice Newsletter Web Page Moved to New Website


 

 

As part of its continuing migration to a new website under construction, we have moved the Newsletter webpage to https://www.apajusticetaskforce.org/newsletters.  Content of the existing website will remain, but it will no longer be updated. We value your feedback about the new web page. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org.

October 10, 2024

  • Facebook
  • X
  • YouTube
bottom of page