Multiple media reports the China Initiative as unraveling and out of control after cases that were sensationally publicized early on by the government began to be dismissed or acquitted in courts rapidly in a span of several months. September 15, 2021 Table of Contents Overview “Security Initiative’s aim is questioned” “Why Trump’s anti-spy ‘China Initiative’ is unraveling” “Has the ‘China Initiative’ Run Its Course?” “Is China Initiative Out of Control?” “How A Chinese-Spy Hunt At DOJ Went Too Far” Links and References Overview Over a two-day period in July 2021, five similar prosecutions against Chinese researchers were summarily dropped without explanation by the Department of Justice (DOJ). They were suspected to belong to the Chinese military and might be stealing American industrial secrets under the China Initiative, but were not charged for espionage. A week earlier, DOJ dismissed charges, also without explanation, against Qing Wang, a Chinese American researcher in Cleveland, who was accused under the China Initiative of failing to disclose his affiliation with a Chinese university from which he had received funding. Less than two months later in September, a federal judge acquitted Anming Hu, a Chinese Canadian engineering professor in Tennessee, of charges stemming from allegations under the China Initiative that he hid his joint academic appointment in China in obtaining research funding from NASA. Having a mistrial and six cases dismissed within several weeks “is extraordinary,” a former federal prosecutor said. “It really undermines the credibility of the [China] initiative.” These high-profile cases raise the question of whether the China Initiative designed to address a national security threat posed by the Chinese government has strayed, targeting researchers on lesser allegations of fraud without compelling evidence that they pose a danger to the United States. “Security Initiative’s aim is questioned” On September 15, 2021, the Washington Post published on its front page As cases fail, security initiative's aim is questioned . To federal investigators, Qing Wang was an example of China’s growing effort to co-opt scientists in the United States — part of a vast campaign to steal American secrets and technology. But a string of dismissed cases including Wang's has amplified concerns among some lawmakers and activists about whether prosecutors have been overzealous in pursuing researchers of Chinese descent. The issue goes beyond whether the government is bringing prosecutions it can win. Critics say the cases raise the question of whether a program designed to address a national security threat posed by the Chinese government has strayed, targeting researchers on lesser allegations of fraud without compelling evidence that they pose a danger to the United States. In many of the cases, the Justice Department is “using language akin to spycraft, but that’s not substantiated by the charges they are bringing,” said George P. Varghese, a former federal prosecutor in Boston. For the 20 or so academics prosecuted in the past three years and linked to the China Initiative, most charges related to lack of candor — making false statements or failing to disclose ties to Chinese institutions — rather than intent to spy. All but a few of the researchers are of Chinese descent. John Hemann, a former federal prosecutor in San Francisco, worked the flagship China Initiative case: the 2018 indictment of Chinese state-owned Fujian Jinhua. He said the department was successfully prosecuting China-related economic espionage cases long before the China Initiative. But pressure to demonstrate the initiative’s success — to “show statistics,” he said, “has caused a program focused on the Chinese government to morph into a people-of-Chinese-descent initiative,’’ including Chinese-born scientists working in the United States. “Why Trump’s anti-spy ‘China Initiative’ is unraveling” On September 16, 2021, LA Times published Why Trump’s anti-spy ‘China Initiative’ is unraveling . The article covered recently dropped "China Initiative" cases including visiting UCLA researcher Lei Guan and University of Tennessee Professor Anming Hu. Michael German, a former FBI agent who serves as a fellow for the Brennan Center for Justice, said the recent dismissals revealed how weak many of the cases were. “Obviously, the FBI and Justice Department are under pressure to produce indictments against people with a so-called ‘nexus to China’ to match the political rhetoric sensationalizing the espionage threat from the Chinese government,” he said. “Even FBI analysts appear to have felt the investigators’ effort to connect these defendants to the Chinese military was overwrought.” Although much remains unknown about the Trump-era campaign, it appears that a major problem was its decision to focus on Chinese nationals and Chinese Americans working in major U.S. research universities. Not only did that approach fail to turn up persuasive evidence of spying, but the emphasis on going after a small number of individuals for academic fraud seemed too small-scale to make a dent in a purportedly massive problem. Moreover, the FBI’s tactics struck many Asian Americans as heavy-handed and discriminatory. The campaign came at a time when Asian Americans across the country were under attack with hate crimes. Defending the program, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray warned that Beijing, in its effort to overtake the U.S. economy, had resorted to industrial espionage using “non-traditional collectors” such as researchers and graduate students. He told a China Initiative conference in 2020 that the FBI had about 1,000 investigations involving China’s attempt to steal U.S.-based technology. In April 2021, the director testified before Congress that the bureau had about 2,000 open cases of economic espionage that “tie back to the Chinese government,” representing a 1,300% increase over the last few years. But in the nearly three years since the program’s launch, the China Initiative has brought just 12 prosecutions of people at academic institutions and has won convictions of four individuals. In none of those four cases did the government provide evidence of economic espionage or theft of trade secrets or intellectual property. “Has the ‘China Initiative’ Run Its Course?” On September 17, 2021, the Editor-in-Chief of The Diplomat published Has the ‘China Initiative’ Run Its Course ? The comprehensive article raised the question: After a resounding legal defeat, will the Justice Department change stance on the controversial program? The initiative potentially covers a lot of ground, making it hard at times to know what officially counts as part of the "China Initiative." “No one has been able to explain to me how a case gets labeled a China Initiative case,” [Seton Hall University Law Professor Margaret] Lewis said. “…By nature, it’s a bit of an amorphous creature.” “Is China Initiative Out of Control?” On September 25, 2021, the University World News published Professor acquittal - Is China Initiative out of control? Dr. Anming Hu, a University of Tennessee, Knoxville professor, faced federal charges related to his alleged connection to Beijing University of Technology while receiving funding from NASA. He was the first to go to trial under the China Initiative, which aims to prevent economic espionage and technology theft. However, Judge Thomas A Varlan dismissed all charges, criticizing the FBI's weak case. Despite this, Hu faced a lengthy legal ordeal, beginning with an indictment in 2020. The FBI's investigation relied on questionable evidence, including Google Translate translations and a lack of understanding of NASA grant procedures. The prosecution's case crumbled under scrutiny, revealing flaws in the FBI's methods and biases against individuals of Chinese descent. Jurors expressed disbelief in the case's merit, leading to a mistrial. The China Initiative, criticized for targeting individuals based on ethnicity, has faced calls for its end. Concerns about racial profiling and the initiative's effectiveness have prompted scrutiny from scholars, former prosecutors, and lawmakers. Despite the dismissal of charges, Hu's ordeal underscores the need for reform in how such cases are handled and the impact of biased policies on individuals and communities. “How A Chinese-Spy Hunt At DOJ Went Too Far” On September 28, 2021, Law360 published “Overheated”: How a Chinese-Spy Hunt at DOJ Went Too Far . In July 2020, Dr. Chen Song and four other visiting Chinese scientists were arrested under the China Initiative and accused of concealing their military affiliations while applying for visas in the U.S. Their cases were dropped in July 2021. Documents unearthed in the cases show politics and pressure from the top propelling bad cases forward, overwhelming skeptics within the government. Two of the visa defendants spent more than a year in jail, even though their cases were ultimately abandoned. Another was locked up nine months, with his fiancée jailed for two months as a possible witness. Song was one of the lucky ones, spending only four days in jail. According to a Law360 analysis, nearly two dozen academics have been indicted under the China Initiative, including U.S. citizens and longtime residents, and the overwhelming majority have been charged for errors on government paperwork or alleged false statements to investigators. More cases have ended in dismissals than convictions, and many defendants have accused investigators of misconduct. The initiative has led to a significant exodus of Chinese researchers from the U.S., with concerns about persecution driving many to leave. Critics also point out that the focus on Chinese economic espionage overlooks other national security threats, leading to calls for reforms and an internal DOJ investigation into the initiative. Jump to: Overview “Security Initiative’s aim is questioned” “Why Trump’s anti-spy ‘China Initiative’ is unraveling” “Has the ‘China Initiative’ Run Its Course?” “Is China Initiative Out of Control?” “How A Chinese-Spy Hunt At DOJ Went Too Far” Multiple media reports the China Initiative as unraveling and out of control after cases that were sensationally publicized early on by the government began to be dismissed or acquitted in courts rapidly in a span of several months. Previous Next 10. The China Initiative Unraveling and Out of Control

Timeline Visualization of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act Special Thanks to Martin Gold for use of materials from his book: Forbidden Citizens: Chinese Exclusion and the U.S. Congress English version: Chinese version: The first recorded arrival of three Chinese sailors in the U.S. travelled from Canton (now Guangzhou), China on board the ship Pallas to Baltimore, Maryland in August 1785. There is still a neighborhood called Canton in Baltimore today. It was settled and named by the ship's captain. By 1860, the census counted 34,933 Chinese living in California. More than three quarters of them were miners and laborers who first came to the U.S. during the 1848-1855 Gold Rush and then helped built and completed the First Transcontinental Railroad by 1869. Despite their contributions to the American society, these early Chinese arrivals encountered barriers due to their appearance and lifestyle. They were soon deemed incapable of assimilating into American culture and resented as threats to American labor. When economic conditions worsened and unemployment increased in the U.S. in the 1870s, prejudice against Chinese culminated into violence. Various legislations followed, leading to the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which Iowa Congressman John Kasson described as "one of the most vulgar forms of barbarism." Initially set for a period of ten years, the Chinese Exclusions Act was extended for another ten years in 1892 and then became permanent law in 1902 after five additional Acts to extend and tighten the original law. The final Senate vote in 1902 was 76 yeas and one nay. The lone no vote was cast by Massachusetts's Senator George Frisbie Hoar. Extensions of the Chinese Exclusion Act further excluded Japanese, Koreans, and other Asians. Congress banned all Chinese from becoming U.S. citizens from 1882 to 1943, and stopped most Chinese from even entering the country beginning in 1882. These actions were legal because they were made into laws. They were democratically decided by both Democratic and Republican lawmakers. Barred from becoming voters, the Chinese had no political recourse against repeated discrimination. After the repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1943, the immigration quota for Chinese was set at 105 per year. It took another 20 years until the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 allowed more equitable immigration quotas for Asians to move to the U.S. Led by Rep. Judy Chu, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus , the House of Representatives unanimously passed a resolution expressing regret in 2012 for the passage of discriminatory laws against the Chinese in the U.S., including the Chinese Exclusion Act. Earlier in 2011, a similar resolution sponsored by Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown was unanimously agreed to by the Senate. Unfortunately, history about discriminatory exclusion of Chinese Americans and other Asian Americans may still be in writing at this time. Library of Congress Chinese Exclusion Act 1860-2010 Chinese American Populations Census Bureau Chinese Exclusion Act Read the booklet The 1882 Project

Racial Profiling Racial profiling refers to the act of targeting individuals or groups based on their race or ethnicity for law enforcement scrutiny, investigation, or surveillance. Asian Americans have historically been subjected to racial profiling and discrimination, despite being a diverse group with various ethnic backgrounds, cultures, and histories. Court Hearing and A New Movement Emerges This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Lawsuit Against Florida Senate Bill 264 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Texas House Bill 1075 and Senate Bill 552 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. More News Recent developments Issues of focus China Initiative Follow recent news on the China Initiative and its impacted individuals. Politicization of Research Grants Learn about the politicization of the coronavirus research grant funded by the National Institutes of Health. Stereotype An over-generalized belief about a particular category of people Implicit Bias Attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner Social Stigma Disapproval of, or discrimination against, a person based on perceivable social characteristics that serve to distinguish them from other members of a society Prejudice Harm or injury that results or may result from some action or judgment Discrimination The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things Racial Profiling The use of race, ethnicity or national origin as grounds for suspecting someone of having committed an offense Read more about Continuing Developments in racial profiling of Asian Americans here. Profiling of Asian Americans The Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited all immigration of Chinese laborers beginning in 1882. Subsequent amendments expanded the exclusion to all Asians. It was one of the most explicitly discriminatory laws based on race and national origin in U.S. history. The Chinese Exclusion Act and its amendments were not repealed until 1943. More on the Chinese Exclusion Act. During the Second World War, about 120,000 Japanese were interned under Executive Order 9066, about two thirds of them were native-born American citizens. Most of them were uprooted from their homes in the West Coast and sent to relocation centers for suspicion of disloyalty to the United States. In combination with these historical and stereotypical backgrounds, the current state of profiling of Chinese Americans is further entrenched by: Modern technology such as artifical intelligence and robotics is a major area of international competition for human talent. It also allows convenient collection of large amount of data and massive surveillance beyond the traditional boundaries, eroding civil liberties and privacy of all Americans and helping to target Asian Americans. Economic espionage and trade secrets became part of the expanded scope of national security after the 9/11 attacks. Athough no person of Chinese descent is known to have participated in acts of terrorism, Chinese Americans became subjects of surveillance and profiling as economic spies and insider threats. The rapid rise of China as an economic power in the past decades and its ambitious long-term development programs have become a threat to the U.S., both real and perceived. This threat is further promoted actively by the traditional military-industrial complex and the growing security-industrial complex. Engage China, or Confront it? The national security strategy issued in late 2017 officially declared China to be a competitive rival to the U.S. Implementation of the strategy has followed with intensified information campaigns and additional legislations and regulations that also enable the profiling practice, such as the "whole-of-society" approach advocated by FBI Director Christopher Wray and the Department of Justice China Initiative when anti-immigrant rhetoric are also rising. "Modern federal criminal laws have exploded in number and became impossibly broad and vague," according to criminal defense and civil liberties litigator Harvey Silverglate in his book titled "Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent." Without adequate transparency, oversight, and accountability, "prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any innocent individuals, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior." In total or in part, these factors have led innocent Asian Americans to recent persecutions as explicit targets, collateral damage, and scapegoats in the context of national security. Racial profiling is legally and morally wrong. 2. A Growing Pattern Government mistakes in espionage cases are rare. However, prior to Professor Xi's wrongful prosecution against Professor Xi, Sherry Chen, Guiqing Cao and Shuyi Li were also accused of spying for China in two separate cases. Their cases were all dropped within a two-year period. These innocent Chinese American scientists work in the academia, federal government, and private industry. Subsequent to 2015, there have been additional prosecutions of Chinese American scientists that collapsed, such as a former Michigan State University professor and two Tulane University professors. More details here . 3. Failure of Checks and Balances As the pattern of profiling against innocent Chinese American scientists began to emerge and pile up, many began to raise questions to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) whether race, ethnicity and national origin have played a role in their investigations and prosecutions. Those that spoke out include, but are not limited to: 42 members of the U.S. Congress The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Delaware U.S. Senators and Congressman Prominent scientists, engineers and professors Civil rights organizations Despite these and many other appeals being well-documented, the system of checks and balances failed to account for the public concerns. 4. Labels and Misinformation The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) deny that they target Asian Americans based on race, ethnicity or national origin. However, actions such as the use of code names and provocative messages by senior government officials tend to suggest otherwise. On February 13, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified in a Senate hearing that Chinese professors, scientists, students across basically every discipline are "nontraditional collectors" spying for China. According to a media report , FBI and intelligence agencies have urged universities to surveil Chinese students and scholars. The Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats declared in a July 2018 public forum: "Don't send your kids here!", "Don't put your people on our labs!", and "You cannot steal our secrets!" In its publicity campaign on "China: The Risk to Academia ," the FBI highlights the "annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets" as $225 - $600 Billion. As the American Physical Society pointed out , the “$225 - $600 Billion” figure "turns out to be primarily based on a generic GDP multiplier that would apply to any country at any time – it has no specific bearing on current circumstances with China or academia, as the title of the document unfortunately suggests." "Thousand Grains of Sand" by FBI official in 1999 "Fifth Column" during World War II "Communist Sympathizer" during the Red Scare Irresponsible code names have been used historically to stigmatize Asian Americans as "perpetual foreigners ," insinuating that they are not to be distrusted and their loyalty is always questioned, no matter how many generations they have lived in the U.S. Prior to FBI Director Wray coining the term "nontraditional collectors ," another FBI official advanced the "thousand grains of sand " and "mosaic " theories about Chinese in America when Dr. Wen Ho Lee was being persecuted about two decades ago. During World War II, Japanese persons in the West Coast were portrayed as the "fifth column ." Dr. Qian Xuesen and others were labeled "communist sympathizers " during the Red Scare in the 1950s. 5. Shifting Grounds and Double Standards In recent years, the FBI shifted its targets to those associated with China's talent recruitment programs, including the Thousand Talent Program. However, government recruitment program is nothing new. Japan has The World Premier International Center Initiative; the United Kingdom has the Earnest Rutherford Fund; Canada has the Canada 150 Research Chairs Program; Singapore has RIE2020; Israel has I-CORE; and France has the "Make Our Planet Great Again" Initiative. Freedom of movement is a fundamental human right. As long as the rules are followed, it is perfectly legitimate for academics to pursue opportuntities in the talent recruitment programs. In 2015, the former head of the Beijing office for the National Science Foundation (NSF) said that U.S. scientists can access world-class facilities, uniqiue geographic sites, and expertise in a growing number of fields by coolabroating with Chinese colleagues. In additon, as ties are built with Chinese funding agencies, NSF funding can be leveraged in coordinated partnerships on topics that are of interest to both countries. In 2014, the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH) spoke at Fudan University in Shanghai and quoted Louis Pasteur, "Science knows no country because knowledge belongs to humanity," as the topic of his speech. Indeed, cancer knows no country. Coronavirus knows no country. According to the book titled "The Great Influenza," in the height of World War I and the influenze epidemic, a researcher found an effective way to fight the virus. Both the military officials and the leading scientists supported the decision to publish the research results, even if it would help the enemies, the Germans, on the battlefields. 6. "Researching While Chinese" Some say that some Chinese persons did do something wrong. However, it is not the right question to ask. For example, Sandra Bland , an African American woman, was stopped by a state trooper for signaling while making a traffic turn. Was it improper? It certainly was, but nobody should go to jail and died for it. The same can be said for Samuel DuBose for missing a front license plate. Or Philando Castile for a broken tail light. They all died for offenses they would not have had had they not been African Americans. Similarly, the right question we should ask is whether it is okay for the entire group of Chinese professors, scientists, and students being singled out for targeting as suspected non-traditional collectors for China, or Chinese spies. That is racial profiling. That is wrong. Proud to be a Chinese American Xiaoxing Xi I was jogging on the National Mall and along Pennsylvania Avenue this morning. As the sun came out behind the iconic landmarks, my heart welled up with pride of being a Chinese American. I ran by the Washington Monument. It is the ideal that “all men are created equal” the Founding Father fought for that has attracted me and many others to become an American citizen. I passed by the Lincoln Memorial. Abraham Lincoln gave his life to preserve the Union and abolish a system that treated people differently based on their races. Running past the Capitol Steps, my appreciation became so clear that in this country, people’s voice can be heard through a democratic process. I jogged in front of the FBI building. I commend the men and women who devote themselves to the protection of our country. In my case, however, they have used their might against an innocent citizen. What do these all mean to me? We need to get involved in the democratic process. If we see a bad policy, a bad practice, that hurt our country, we need to speak out and let our voice be heard. That we have the right to do so is what this country is so great about. As a proud citizen, I pledge to do my part. 7. Criminalizing Fundamental Research Threatens U.S. Leadership There is no evidence to support the government's crackdown of open scientific exchanges with China as they are mostly on basic research. The national policy governing federally-funded research has been National Security Decision Directive 189 (NSDD-189). Issued by President Ronald Reagan in 1985, it defines fundamental research as basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community. It states that it is the policy of this administration that, to the maximum extent possible, the products of fundamental research remain unrestricted. If national security requires control, then classify the research. Since the principle of freedom to publish and disseminate results is so fundamental to U.S. universities that many of them do not accept funding that restricts their faculty from publishing and disseminating research results. For example, the Princeton University policy says the University will not, as a matter of policy, accept any contracts or grants for the support of classified research. However, in its publicity campaign document, the FBI says, "Even if the technologies and their applications are not currently classified, they could be in the future." The "thousand grains of sand" and "mosaic" theories are widely held by the intelligence community - a collection of unclassified documents would create a classified document. According to these theories, while the Russians would steal the one classified document, the Chinese steals all the unclassified documents and put them together. So Chinese professors, scientists, and students are suspected of stealing secrets anyway, even when they are conducting fundamental research. On November 18, 2019, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations issued a staff report which makes a number of recommendations. Recommendation 11 says, "The administration should consider updating NSDD-189 and implement additional, limited restrictions on U.S. government funded fundamental research... Federal agencies must not only combat illegal transfers of controlled or classified research, but assess whether openly sharing some types of fundamental research is in the nation's interest." If the scientific community does not speak up, the day it can freely publish fundamental research and to openly discuss among colleagues may be numbered. This push for restrictions of open fundamental research reflects a total lack of understanding about what has made America the world leader in science and technology in the first place. In the book titled "Technology and National Security: Maintaining America's Edge," writer and historian Walter Isaacson wrote a chapter on The Source of America's Innovation Edge. He pointed out that the triangular partnership between government, industry, and academia created an ecosystem that helped produce the technological revolution after World War II. Each partner has its unique functions, and universities are where free and open research is conducted. If the free and open environment is lost and turned into national laboratories, American competitiveness in science and technology will be stifled. Former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Deutch also wrote in the same book, "The risk of loss [of technology to China] is minor compared to the losses that will be incurred by restricting inquiry on university campuses." In other words, in the name of protecting America's research integrity, the policies that restrict open research on university campuses are in fact destroying America's leadership in science and technology. The Department of Justice denies that it makes decisions based on race, ethnicity or national origin. Harvard University Chemistry Department Chair Dr. Charles Lieber is cited as an example, but this is precisely what Professor Xi has been warning. Anyone who has academic collaboration with Chinese colleagues can become a target of the FBI. One does not have to be Chinese. According to a U.S. attorney, academic collaborations with China is "by definition conveying sensitive information to the Chinese." Once you are targeted, everything is under the microscope. National Security Decision Directive 189 (NSDD-189) "'Fundamental research' means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons." It is the policy of this Administration that, to the maximum extent possible, the products of fundamental research remain unrestricted. It is also the product of this Administration that, where national security requires control, the mechanism for control of information generated during federally-funded fundamental research in science, technology and engineering at colleges, universities, and laboratories is classification. 8. Balance Between Open Science and Security On December 11, 2019, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released the JASON report on Fundamental Research Security. JASON is an independent group of elite scientists which advises the U.S. government on matters of science and technology. JASON was briefed by representatives of the intelligence community and law enforcement during the study. They had access to all the available classified information In the end, the JASON report says in its findings the scale and scope of the [foreign influence by the Chinese government] remain poorly defined. It recommends that NSF should support reaffirmation of the principles of NSDD-189, which make clear that fundamental research should remain unrestricted to the fullest extent possible. It also says failure to disclose commitments and actual potential conflicts of interest should be investigated and adjudicated by the relevant office of NSF and by universities as presumptive violations of research integrity, with consequences similar to those currently in place for scientific misconduct. Not by the FBI. Not by throwing them into jail. In Professor Xi opinion, the scientific community should rally around the JASON report. It is well balanced, and it provides a blueprint of the proper response for the U.S. government for the perceived threats of the Chinese government to fundamental research. 1. Wrongful Persecution Born in China, Professor Xi was among the first students to attend college after the Cultural Revolution in China. He received his Ph.D. degree in physics from Peking University and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Science, in 1987. After several years of research at the Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, Germany, he came to the U.S. and worked for Bell Communication Research/Rutgers University and University of Maryland before joining the Physics faculty at Penn State University in 1995. He moved to Temple University in 2009. On May 19, 2015, he was informed that he would be appointed permanent Chair of the Physics Department. Two days later on May 21, 2015 when the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus was convening a press conference to express concerns about racial profiling in the case of Sherry Chen, Professor Xi was sensationally arrested in the wee hours of the morning. Media reports the following day quoted the Department of Justice that Professor Xi was a "Chinese spy" selling sensitive information to China. Four charges were subsequently made, all of them based on intercepted emails. Professor Xi and his lawyer refuted point-by-point that the allegations were totally false. In particular, five top experts, including one whose trade secrets were allegedly stolen, examined the emails and provided affidavits to support Professor Xi's defense that he did not share or sell proprietary information to China. In fact, the fundamental research results were readily available in the Internet. Professor Xi and his lawyer raised the question of how publicly available technology can be "stolen" and alleged to be a criminal act. On September 11, 2015, DOJ dropped all charges against Professor Xi without explanation or responding to his questions. However, irreparable damage to his finances, career, reputation and his family had already been made. Profiling Today Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov (1921-1989) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1975 . As the father of the Soviet hydrogen bomb, Sakharov was awarded the Peace Prize for "his opposition to the abuse of power and his work for human rights." Since 2006, the American Physical Society (APS) has awarded the Andrei Sakharov Prize every second year to recipients for "outstanding leadership and/or achievements of scientists in upholding human rights." Professor Xiaoxing Xi (郗小星) of Temple University is a 2020 recipient of the Andrei Sakharov Prize. He is himself a victim of racial profiling . Since the wrongful prosecution against him was dropped in 2015, Professor Xi has been tirelessly speaking up across the nation to stop the injustice of racial profiling, defend openness in university campuses, and protect American competitiveness in science and technology. Professor Xi was scheduled to receive the Andrei Sakharov Prize on March 4, 2020. The event was cancelled due to concerns about the coronavirus. Professor Xi recorded his prepared presentation in a 32-minute video. It provides compelling facts and arguments that cover not only the wrongful prosecution against him, but also the government's abuse of authority at the expense of American competitiveness and leadership by criminalizing fundamental research. This page is dedicated to communicate and expand on Professor Xi's message on racial profiling, which has already infected academia, government, private industry, and other segments of American society. It provides a synopsis of profiling today.

We published a Special Edition of our newsletter to cover the July 18 court hearing on Florida's new discriminatory housing law. July 24, 2023 On July 24, 2023, APA Justice published a Special Edition of its newsletter to cover the July 18 court hearing on the emergency motion for preliminary injunction to block Florida's new discriminatory housing law and a new movement emerging from the protests and rallies against the legislation in front of the courthouse. It covered: July 18, 2023 - A New Movement Emerges Florida State and Local Leadership Meet The Attorneys for The Plaintiffs National and Community Organizations Support and Leadership Color Yellow, Playbooks, and Tracking Hate Federal Level Support and Leadership Read the Special Edition of the APA Justice Newsletter: https://bit.ly/3Y4uGCO We published a Special Edition of our newsletter to cover the July 18 court hearing on Florida's new discriminatory housing law. Previous Next Court Hearing and A New Movement Emerges

60 top scientific organizations are calling for balance between an open scientific environment and economic and national security. September 4, 2019 On September 4, 2019, 60 top science, engineering and international education organizations - representing hundreds of thousands of scientists, engineers and educators around the world - sent an open letter to five top federal officials in charge of science programs, calling for fairer treatment of foreign-born scientists in the face of policies that could put a chill on the participation of foreign nationals in the scientific enterprise. The letter was addressed to Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier , Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House; Dr. France Córdova, Director of the National Science Foundation; Dr. Francis Collins , Director of the National Institute of Health; Dr. Chris Fall, Director of the Office of Science at the Department of Energy; and Dr. Michael Griffin , Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. "Finding the appropriate balance between our nation’s security and an open, collaborative scientific environment requires focus and due diligence," the letter said. "Any response should consider the impact on both the overall scientific enterprise and on individual scientists and its development should include the input of the science and engineering community." Otherwise, "many scientists—both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals—who properly follow codes of conduct, regulations, policies and laws, may inappropriately be harmed in response to the misconduct and illegal actions of others." The co-signers of the letter ask the federal officials to "consider a wide range of stakeholder perspectives as your agencies work together through the new NSTC ( National Science and Technology Council ) Joint Committee on Research Environments to develop policies and procedures that address issues related to international researchers’ participation in the U.S. scientific enterprise, and we would welcome the opportunity to work with you." multisociety-letter-on-foreign-influence_9-4-2019 .pdf Download PDF • 73KB 60 top scientific organizations are calling for balance between an open scientific environment and economic and national security. Previous Next Top Scientific Organizations Call for Fairer Treatment of Foreign-born Scientists

2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. December 27, 2020 The year 2020 was one of unprecedented challenges that saw our nation increasingly divided, unable to control the COVID-19 pandemic that was filled with anti-Asian hate and continuing profiling of hundreds if not thousands of Chinese American scientists under investigations and prosecutions. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. On December 27, 2020, a virtual event was held with Professor Steven Pei as the host to conclude a successful GoFundMe campaign , which was reported by the World Journal under the headline 员工勇救亚裔 华人5天募10万 . During the event, Zach Owen and Bawi Cung took the stage to express their appreciation for the generous donations of more than $121,000 from over 2,700 individuals. President Qiang Gan and Treasurer Lin Li of ACP Foundation Dallas reported the state of the finances and various details of the fundraiser. Other organizers for the fundraiser include OCA Greater Houston (H.C. Chang and Cecil Fong); Reagan Hignojos , friend of the Cung Family; United Chinese Americans (Steven Pei); and APAPA Austin Texas Chapter (C.J. Zhao). Bawi Cung and his two boys, aged 2 & 6, were hate crime victims in Midland, TX on March 14, 2020. The suspect thought the Burmese family was Chinese and spreading the coronavirus and attacked them with a knife. As a bystander, Zach Owen disarmed the suspect bare handedly. Unfortunately, Zach’s right palm also suffered permanent injury and has retained only 40% of his grip strength. With the hope to find a better job in the west Texas oil field, Zach came to Midland from Oklahoma. The injury disqualifies him from many oil field jobs. He has also been treated for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The first $50,000 of donation will still be given to Zach on or before his birthday in mid-January 2021 to pay for his ongoing out-of-pocket medical bills, cover some of the financial deficit incurred due to the reduced working hours during his recovery period, and also help with Zach’s return to a normal life. We need more heroes like Zach Owen. Earlier on June 22, 2020, a coalition of Asian American organizations honored Zach Owen and Bernie Ramirez , a Border Patrol agent who also intervened in the violent anti-Asian stabbing with a special Lily and Vincent Chin Advocacy Award Ceremony . It was followed by the From Vincent Chin to George Floyd Webinar led by Helen Zia, award-winning journalist and community activist, and moderated by Gordon Quan, attorney and former Houston City Council member. On August 10, 2020, Zach Owen testified in the Tri-caucus Congressional Forum on Rise in Anti-Asian Bigotry during the COVID-19 Pandemic ,” which was organized by the Congressional Asian Pacific Americcan Caucus. 2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. Previous Next 2020 Ends With A Positive Story

On January 5, 2021, a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote to President-elect Joe Biden, requesting him to end the China Initiative and take steps to combat racial profiling. Two weeks later, the indictment of MIT Professor Gang Chen ignited the “We Are All Gang Chen” movement. Between September 2020 and June 2021, five organizations partnered to produce a series of five educational webinars to raise nationwide awareness about the China Initiative. January 5, 2021 Table of Contents Overview “We are All Gang Chen” AAJC Delivered 30,000 Signatures to The White House Education Webinar Series to Raise Awareness Partners of the Webinar Series Links and References Overview On January 5, 2021, a group of community organizations, advocacy groups, science associations, and individuals sent a letter to President-elect Joe Biden urging the incoming administration to end the Justice Department’s “China Initiative” and take further steps to combat the pervasive racial bias and targeting of Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists, researchers, and students by the federal government. Among the signatories are people who have been directly impacted by the government’s unjust prosecutions of Asian Americans. The letter, spearheaded by the Asian Americans Advancing Justice affiliation, Brennan Center for Justice, and APA Justice Task Force, denounces the “China Initiative” for discriminatory investigations and prosecutions of Asian Americans and Asian immigrants, particularly those of Chinese descent working in fields of science. Many of the investigations and prosecutions under this initiative target people with any “nexus to China” rather than on evidence of economic espionage as it purports to do, which has revealed a sharp rise in the profiling and targeting of Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists and researchers. Even after not finding any evidence of espionage, federal prosecutors are charging many Asian Americans and Asian immigrants with federal crimes based on administrative errors or minor offenses such as failing to disclose information to universities or research institutions and other activities under the pretext of combating economic espionage. As a result, Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists, researchers, and scholars are ensnared by overzealous prosecutions riddled with racial bias that are ruining careers and leaving lives in shambles. The letter includes a set of recommendations, which first calls for an immediate end to the “China Initiative” and a complete review of all prosecutions and investigations closed prior to prosecution under the initiative. It also urges the incoming administration to review and take measures throughout the Federal Government’s law enforcement, intelligence, and scientific research funding agencies to combat other patterns of racial bias against Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists and federal employees. The letter and list of organizations and individuals that signed on can be found here . “This latest wave of xenophobia against Asian Americans and Asian immigrants follows a long history of Asian Americans and immigrants being stereotyped as “perpetual foreigners,” scapegoated, and profiled as spies disloyal to the United States,” said John C. Yang, Advancing Justice – AAJC’s president and executive director. “Individual cases of wrongful arrests and prosecutions of Asian American scientists and researchers along with racial rhetoric from public officials reveal that racial bias exists and has translated into real harm for the Asian American community.” "Basing criminal investigations on national origin and Chinese ancestry is unconstitutional and a waste of resources," said Glenn Katon, Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus Director of Litigation. "When the government prosecutes scientists and researchers simply so public officials can look tough, no one is made safer. The Biden administration has the chance to protect Asian Americans and Asian immigrants across this country - they should take it." "Racial profiling has proven to be an ineffective, divisive, and counterproductive law enforcement tactic, and yet the Justice Department inexplicably still promotes its use through programs like the ‘China Initiative'," said Brennan Center fellow Michael German, a former FBI agent. "Pressuring all U.S. Attorneys' Offices to initiate 'China Initiative' cases compels racial, ethnic, and national origin profiling, which undermines our security and the rule of law by targeting investigations based on a person's 'nexus to China' rather than evidence of serious wrongdoing." "Foreign-born scientists of Chinese origin have been an integral part of American innovation and global leadership. Our nation can protect our scientific and research security and successfully compete in the global marketplace for international scientific talent, but not by overzealous, xenophobic targeting of top talents that ruins lives and drives them to foreign countries that have been trying to recruit them unsuccessfully," said Professor Steven Pei, a leader for the APA Justice Task Force. “We Are All Gang Chen” On January 20, 2021, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the indictment of renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Professor Gang Chen 陈刚 for failing to disclose contracts, appointments and awards from various entities in the People’s Republic of China to the U.S. Department of Energy. The case stirred controversy from the start, when then-U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling unveiled the charges at a news conference in Boston on the last full day of the Trump administration. “It is not illegal to collaborate with foreign researchers. It’s illegal to lie about it,” Lelling said. “The allegations in the complaint imply that this was not just about greed, but about loyalty to China.” The indictment of Professor Gang Chen galvanized the Asian American and scientific communities and started the “We Are All Gang Chen” movement. Exactly one year later on January 20, 2022, Judge Patti Saris approved the government's motion to dismiss all charges against Professor Chen. Continuing the “We Are Gang Chen” movement, the Asian American Scholar Forum was founded in 2022 as a nonprofit organization to represent a community of Asian Americans and scholars who are united to promote academic belonging, openness, freedom, and equality for all by bringing their unique perspective, expertise, and concerns of Asian American and immigrant scholars directly to courtrooms, newsrooms, universities, federal agencies, the halls of Congress, and the White House. This is a presentation in Professor Chen’s own words on his experience and lessons learned about the absurdity of the wrongful prosecution: 2022 GangChenSlides .pdf Download PDF • 1.59MB AAJC Delivered 30,000 Signatures to The White House On April 9, 2021, Asian American Advancing Justice | AAJC delivered a petition signed by 29,318 people to the White House, urging President Joe Biden to put an end to the racial profiling of Asian Americans and Asian immigrants and end the Justice Department’s “China Initiative.” Education Webinar Series to Raise Awareness From September 2020 to June 2021, five organizations partnered to produce a series of five educational webinars to raise awareness of a growing number of federal investigations and prosecutions targeting Chinese Americans, Chinese immigrants, and Chinese nationals in the U.S. particularly scientists and researchers under the umbrella of the China Initiative. The webinar series examined the ramifications of the "China Initiative" on the civil rights and security of Chinese Americans, Chinese immigrants, and Chinese Nationals working in the U.S., as well as the consequences for the broader American society. 2020/09/30 First Webinar: The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative ” (video 1:00:15) 2020/12/02 Second Webinar: Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists (video 1:13:35) 2021/02/24 Third Webinar: Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present (video 1:16:13) 2021/04/28 Fourth Webinar: Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" (video 1:05:36) 2021/06/23 Fifth Webinar: The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" (video 1:12:52) Partners of the Webinar Series Asian Americans Advancing Justice | Asian American Justice Center (AAJC) advocates for an America which all Americans can benefit equally from, and contribute to, the American dream. Our mission is to advance the civil and human rights for Asian Americans and to build and promote a fair and equitable society for all. Advancing Justice | AAJC is a national 501 (c)(3) nonprofit founded in 1991 in Washington, D.C. The APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem to address racial profiling issues and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian American community. The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is a nonpartisan law and policy institute that works to reform, revitalize – and when necessary, defend – our country's systems of democracy and justice. Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs (APAPA) is a non-profit and non-partisan organization with a diverse membership representing all communities throughout the nation. It strives to inspire, engage, and empower the public about public policy and how to foster future leaders from minority communities to serve at federal, state, and local levels in the government. United Chinese Americans (UCA) has been a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization since 2017. It is a national federation with 12 chapters and over 30 community partners. The UCA is to enrich and empower Chinese American communities through civic participation, political engagement, youth education and development, preservation of heritage and culture, promoting a better understanding between the United States and China, for the well-being of our community, our country, and our world. Jump to: Overview “We are All Gang Chen” AAJC Delivered 30,000 Signatures to The White House Education Webinar Series to Raise Awareness Partners of the Webinar Series On January 5, 2021, a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote to President-elect Joe Biden, requesting him to end the China Initiative and take steps to combat racial profiling. Two weeks later, the indictment of MIT Professor Gang Chen ignited the “We Are All Gang Chen” movement. Between September 2020 and June 2021, five organizations partnered to produce a series of five educational webinars to raise nationwide awareness about the China Initiative. Previous Next 6. Letter to President-Elect Biden to End China Initiative

Xiaofeng Wang 王晓峰 Associate Dean for Research James H. Rudy Professor of Computer Science, Engineering and Informatics Director of Center for Security and Privacy in Informatics, Computing, and Engineering Director of Secure Computing Indiana University Table of Contents Overview Continuing Developments Overview Xiaofeng Wang, a prominent cybersecurity professor at Indiana University Bloomington (IUB), was terminated on March 28, 2025—the same day FBI and Department of Homeland Security agents conducted searches at his homes in Bloomington and Carmel, Indiana. The university has not publicly disclosed the reasons for his dismissal. Professor Wang's wife, Nianli Ma—a library systems analyst at the university—was also terminated on March 24, 2025. The American Association of University Professors' Bloomington chapter has criticized the university's handling of Wang's termination, asserting that it violated due process and university policies. The specific reasons behind the federal investigation remain undisclosed, and the search warrants have been sealed. Efforts have been made to unseal these documents to gain clarity on the situation. Professor Wang is reportedly represented by Attorneys Jason Covert and Jackie Bennett Jr. of Taft Law . References and Links 2025/04/10 Indiana Daily Student: Nianli Ma terminated 4 days before FBI searched her and Xiaofeng Wang’s homes 2025/04/03 The Herald-Times: IU professor Xiaofeng Wang investigated for academic misconduct before FBI search 2025/04/02 Indiana Public Media: Lawyers: Fired cybersecurity expert and wife safe and not charged with a crime 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: IU computer science faculty condemn Xiaofeng Wang’s termination in letter 2025/04/02 WIRED: Cybersecurity Professor Faced China-Funding Inquiry Before Disappearing, Sources Say 2025/04/02 South China Morning Post: Exclusive | US cyber expert Wang Xiaofeng ‘is safe’ after FBI raids, source says 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: IU professor and library analyst face no pending criminal charges, lawyers say 2025/04/02 Reuters: Cybersecurity professor targeted by FBI has not been detained, lawyer says 2025/04/01 South China Morning Post: US cyber expert Wang Xiaofeng took Singapore job before FBI raids: university letter 2025/04/01 Indiana Public Media: Fired prof accused of research misconduct, FBI involvement unclear 2025/03/31 CNBC: Indiana U. fired cybersecurity professor XiaoFeng Wang on day FBI searched his homes: Union 2025/03/31 South China Morning Post: China Initiative 2.0? Raids on scientist Wang Xiaofeng revive spectre from first Trump era 2025/03/31 Indiana Daily Student: Faculty organization alleges IU violated policy in terminating Xiaofeng Wang 2025/03/31 Fox-59: IU faculty protests firing of professor in FBI probe 2025/03/31 WTHR: I U professor allegedly fired after FBI raids on homes in Carmel and Bloomington 2025/03/31 WIRED: Cybersecurity Professor Mysteriously Disappears as FBI Raids His Homes 2025/03/30 ARS Technica: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado 2025/03/30 Indiana Public Media: FBI won’t say why agents searched homes of IU cybersecurity expert 2025/03/29 MSN: Professor Abruptly Fired Amid FBI Raid 2025/03/28 WTHR: FBI seizes boxes of evidence after searching Carmel, Bloomington homes Return to Table of Contents Continuing Developments On April 12, 2025, the Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA) issued a public statement regarding the case of Professor Wang, condemning his termination by IU and raising serious concerns about the erosion of due process, threats to academic freedom, and the ongoing pattern of racial profiling targeting Chinese American scientists. FAPA also sent an open letter to IU President Pamela Whitten. On April 1, 2025, Stanford University cybersecurity scholar Riana Pfefferkorn filed a motion Tuesday to unseal the warrants used to execute searches of IU professor Xiaofeng Wang and Nianli Ma’s homes last week. She filed the motion in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. On April 17, 2025, John E. Childress, the acting U.S. attorney of the Southern District of Indiana argued the search warrants used in the FBI searches of Xiaofeng Wang and Nianli Ma’s homes March 28 should remain sealed in response to the motion to release the warrants. On April 14, 2024, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) hosted a State of Play Town Hall, in which Nianli Ma, wife of Professor Xiaoxeng Wang spoke about her family situation. AASF and a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote a letter to Rahul Shrivastav, Provost of Indiana University (IU) and requested reinstament of Professor Wang. On April 14, 2025, a GoFundMe campaign for Professor Wang was started by his son, Luke Wang, at https://bit.ly/3E70Vfm . Nianli Ma Professor Wang termination reportedly involved an undisclosed research grant from China in 2017-2018. On April 17, 2025, Day of Action for Higher Ed, IU computer science chair Yuzhen Ye said Professor Wang was not even aware of the grant when university officials asked him about it. “So apparently a researcher in China applied for this grant without his knowledge," she said "So (Wang) explained and also he provided a supporting documentation to IU. I truly believe this really could have unfolded in a very different way if IU administration had chosen to trust its own faculty or give them a fair chance to respond,” Professor Ye said. References and Links Southern District of Indiana: In Re: Motion to Uunseal Search Warrants (1:25-mc-00022) 2025/04/18 Herald-Times: Wife, son of cybersecurity professor Xiaofeng Wang make first comments since FBI raid 2025/04/17 Indiana Daily Student: U.S. attorney argues to keep search warrants for Xiaofeng Wang’s home searches sealed 2025/04/17 Indiana Public Media: IU department chair says Wang didn't know about undisclosed Chinese research grant 2025/04/17 Indian Public Media: Protest groups at IU unite for National Day of Action on higher education 2025/04/16 Guardian: The mysterious firing of a Chinese professor has Asian students on edge: ‘Brings chills to our spines’ 2025/04/15 South China Morning Post: ‘It hurts deeply’: Nianli Ma, wife of cyber expert Xiaofeng Wang, speaks up over FBI raids 2025/04/14 WIRED: A Cybersecurity Professor Disappeared Amid an FBI Search. His Family Is ‘Determined to Fight’ 2025/04/12 FAPA: Open Letter to Pamela Whitten, President, Indiana University 2025/04/12 FAPA: Public Statement on the Case of Dr. Xiaofeng Wang 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: Stanford scholar files motion to unseal warrants used to search homes of Xiaofeng Wang 2025/03/31 AAUP IU Bloomington Chapter: Open Letter to Rahul Shrivastav, Provost, Indiana University Return to Table of Contents Previous Item Next Item

On June 17, 2021, APA Justice sent a letter urging the Biden-Harris Administration to respond to the standing FOIA requests and publicize the justification for the continuation of the "China Initiative." June 17, 2021 On June 17, 2021, APA Justice sent a letter to Erika Moritsugu, Deputy Assistant to the President and Asian American and Pacific Islander Senior Liaison at the White House, urging the Biden-Harris Administration to respond to the standing Congressional and Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests and provide full data and information publicly to justify the continuation of the "China Initiative" and related racial profiling policies and practices. In summary, without further delay, we respectfully request the Biden-Harris administration to: Release the data and information requested by Reps. Jamie Raskin and Judy Chu and Senator Roger Wicker for Congressional oversight and the public. Publish the 2017-2020 opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice as it has done annually since 1977. Release the data and information requested by Advancing Justice | AAJC, American Civil Liberties Union, and the Cato Institute under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). letter2moritsugu_20210618 .pdf Download PDF • 167KB On June 17, 2021, APA Justice sent a letter urging the Biden-Harris Administration to respond to the standing FOIA requests and publicize the justification for the continuation of the "China Initiative." Previous Next Letter to The White House Calling for Response to Inquiries

Davis Lu Docket ID: 1:21-cr-00226 District Court, N.D. Ohio Date filed: Apr 1, 2021 On April 14, 2021, the Department of Justice announced the indictment of Davis Lu, 51, of Houston, Texas, with one count of damaging protected computers. The Defendant allegedly used his position as a software developer to execute malicious code on his employer's computer servers. Relatively modest losses of more than $5,000 resulted from the incident. Previous Item Next Item

United Chinese Americans (UCA) Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists as Collateral Damage in the Crossfire Between the United States and China Due to Deteriorating Relations April 25, 2019 On April 25, 2019, the United Chinese Americans (UCA) , a nationwide nonprofit and nonpartisan federation and a community civic movement, released a statement to raise concerns for Chinese American scientists as collateral damage in the crossfire between the United States and China due to deteriorating relations, including five appeals to address the current situartion. It was in response to the first wave of an aniticpated crack down targeting primarily Chinese American scientists at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. See links and reports about the MD Anderson story here. Link to full statement in English We call on the U.S. higher education and scientific communities to continue to uphold and strengthen scientific collaborations around the world so they may continue to benefit all mankind. We salute the University of California at Berkeley, Stanford University, the University of Michigan and the University of California at Davis for their efforts to uphold these principles and ideals as well as for their civil rights concerns for their faculty members and students, and call on more institutions to follow their example. We call on Chinese American scientists to continue to carry on the indispensable role they have played in maintaining America’s lead position in scientific research and global competitiveness. To this end, we fully endorse the strengthening of compliance efforts and ethical standards guiding scientific research and collaboration. We call on Chinese American scientists—indeed all scientists—to adhere strictly to all applicable laws, regulations and practices, and to cooperate in reporting any breaches to appropriate authorities. We call on Chinese American scientists – indeed, all Chinese Americans – to continue to strengthen U.S.-China people-to-people relations through scientific exchanges and educational efforts rather than retreating. An adversarial U.S.-China relationship is harmful to Chinese Americans, to the United States and China, and to the future of the world. Chinese Americans have a unique role to play as communicators, bridge builders and messengers of peace between the two peoples. We call on the Chinese government to earnestly protect U.S. intellectual property rights, as American scientists participate in its talent programs and other exchanges, and vigorously strengthen the standardization and transparency of those programs. The Chinese government should also improve its supervision and management of such programs, including sub-national ones, toughen two-way compliance requirements and enhance training to reduce or eliminate doubts and concerns other countries may have about such programs. Finally, we call on U.S. law enforcement agencies to strengthen internal training and safeguards to reduce implicit bias and discrimination, to enhance communication with Chinese American communities and to ensure that the freedom and civil rights of all Chinese Americans are rigorously protected. United Chinese Americans (UCA) Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists as Collateral Damage in the Crossfire Between the United States and China Due to Deteriorating Relations Previous Next UCA Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists

Wuyuan Lu 陆五元 Professor, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Fudan University, Former Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland Table of Contents Overview 2012 Institute of Human Virology Annual Report Links and References Overview According to Science on March 23, 2023, for decades, Chinese-born U.S. faculty members like Wuyuan Lu were celebrated for fostering collaborations with colleagues in China. These partnerships were viewed as enriching the scientific community, and universities proudly cited the benefits of their ties to the rising global power. But in late 2018, the atmosphere shifted dramatically when institutions began receiving emails from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), asking them to investigate whether their faculty had violated NIH policies by allegedly failing to disclose affiliations with Chinese institutions. This marked the beginning of a covert, wide-reaching investigation that would result in 103 scientists—many of them tenured faculty—losing their jobs within four years. [By June 2024, the number has increased to 112.] Dr. Lu, a tenured professor at the University of Maryland’s Institute of Human Virology (IHV), was one of those caught in the crosshairs. In December 2018, he received an urgent email from a senior university research administrator, Dennis Paffrath, who cited concerns raised by the NIH about Dr. Lu's alleged failure to disclose outside research support and affiliations with Chinese universities. The NIH letter pointed to Dr. Lu’s connections with Xi’an Jiaotong University and Fudan University, alleging that his NIH-funded research overlapped with work being conducted in China. Confident that this was a misunderstanding, Dr. Lu responded swiftly. He explained that his collaborations in China were purely academic and that NIH funds were never used for work conducted overseas. He highlighted the intellectual contributions of Chinese students to his NIH-funded research at IHV, stating that the university had not only approved these partnerships but had publicly celebrated them. However, Dr. Lu's reassurances were met with silence for 15 months. When NIH finally responded, it demanded more documentation, asking for detailed descriptions of his research and even English and Chinese copies of contracts he had signed with Chinese institutions. Despite his efforts to comply, NIH remained unsatisfied. Lu felt the pressure mounting. Frustrated by the process and what he perceived as an unjustified witch hunt, Dr. Lu reached his breaking point. In August 2020, after years of uncertainty, he resigned from his tenured position at the University of Maryland. He relocated to China, where he now teaches at Fudan’s medical school in Shanghai. Looking back, Dr. Lu describes the NIH as acting like a “bully.” He felt that the investigation was a form of racial profiling, a symptom of the larger campaign to counter Chinese espionage, despite little evidence of wrongdoing. While the university never explicitly blamed him, Dr. Lu saw them as simply the middleman, caught between NIH's demands and their faculty. The once-celebrated scientist now viewed NIH’s actions as part of a larger trend of targeting Chinese-born academics, reflecting a dramatic shift in the U.S. scientific landscape, where collaboration with China had gone from a prized asset to a perceived liability. 2012 Institute of Human Virology Annual Report The 2012 University of Maryland Institute of Human Virology annual report highlighted Dr. Wuyuan Lu’s structural biology research associated with China. According to the report, “Dr. Wuyuan Lu has recently been tapped by Xi’an Jiaotong University (XJTU)—a prestigious academic institution in China—to help build a center for translational medicine in the ancient city of Xi’an as an extension of his ongoing biomedical research at IHV. The research center is affiliated with the School of Life Sciences and the Frontier Institute of Science and Technology of XJTU, and forms a strategic alliance with the University’s First Affiliated Hospital—the largest hospital in northwest China. The core mission of the center is to support biomedical research aimed at translating basic science discoveries into improved human health in the areas of cancer and infectious disease. “Dr. Lu regularly travels to Xi’an for strategic planning consultation that entails the building of the infrastructure of the center, recruitment of its principal investigators, development of curricula for graduate education, and establishment of a multidisciplinary research program. Discussions are also underway about how to launch a platform in Xi’an to foster close collaborations in basic and clinical research on HIV between the Institute of Human Virology and XJTU. Dr. Lu hopes that his stint in Xi’an will ultimately lead to frequent exchanges of basic scientists, clinicians and graduate students, sponsorship of joint research projects by the U.S. and China, and a greater role for the IHV in leading the global fight against HIV/AIDS. “The major goals of IHV’s research in the Laboratory of Chemical Protein Engineering (Lu laboratory) include deciphering the molecular basis of how proteins function, elucidating the structure and function relationships for and mechanisms of action of antimicrobial peptides, and developing novel antitumor and antiviral peptides for the treatment of cancer and infectious disease. “Structural biology has grown rapidly at IHV, including international expansion of Lu’s program…” Links and References University of Maryland, Baltimore County: Wuyuan Lu 2023/03/23 Science: Pall of Suspicion 2012 University of Maryland: Institute of Human Virology annual report Previous Item Next Item