‘In the End, You’re Treated Like a Spy,’ Says MIT Scientist

I think what happens is more funding comes from the private sector. It's just where the money and momentum are. MIT feels more "industry" oriented every term. That old spirit of intellectual tinkering for its own sake seems to be fading away.

Of course, this much has been suspected since the initial indictment (from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/us/mit-scientist-charges.... )

> There were two counts of wire fraud related to disclosure. In 2017, prosecutors said, when applying for a $2.7 million grant from the Energy Department, Dr. Chen had failed to disclose five affiliations — he served as a “review expert” for China’s National Science Foundation and a “fourth overseas expert consultant” to the Chinese government, for instance. Then, in a progress report in 2019, he failed to list those and three new Chinese affiliations, including one that pledged to pay him $355,715, the indictment says.

> A third and fourth charge were more straightforward: Dr. Chen had failed in 2018 tax filings, the indictment says, to declare a Chinese bank account containing more than $10,000, as required by law.

> [the prosecutor] acknowledged that Dr. Chen was not accused of passing any sensitive information to China

Serving as a review expert? A consultant? Not reporting a Chinese bank account in his taxes? The prosecutor went so far as to paint him as loyal to China based on these! From the above article:

> At a news conference that morning, [the prosecutor] said he believed that Dr. Chen, 56, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen two decades ago, had remained loyal to the country of his birth.

> “The allegations of the complaint imply that this was not just about greed, but about loyalty to China,” he said.

This was a case of guilt by association. Dr Chen did nothing wrong but by god, he’s a Chinese immigrant with a Chinese bank account, and scientific colleagues who are Chinese, so he must be a Chinese spy

Don't be coy, you know exactly what I mean. If you get away with, for example, sexual crimes like Cosby due to legal technicalities, it doesn't mean you aren't guilty or weren't malicious.

The NYT piece tries to pretend that Chen was not doing anything at all worth scrutinizing. He clearly was, just in a way different than the initial charges cover - mandatory disclosure.

>What you are describing is guilt by association with China

No, what I'm describing is secretive collaboration with an adversarial government on research funded by the US federal government for the express purpose of advancing the interests of that adversarial government, which is exactly what happened. Read the quotes from his communications in the criminal complaint.

Like I said, time will tell if further charges are brought.

Then he shouldn't be doing research funded by DoD and DARPA, and certainly shouldn't be sharing it with the CCP. You've literally made my point for me.

>Dr Chen’s work is classified or military

DoD and DARPA research are military in nature by definition. Most DoE research, along with the former two, are ITAR restricted as well.

>If I study forestry and collaborate with the Canadian government, am I betraying the United States by helping a competing economic power get ahead in forestry?

Massive false equivalence between China and Canada. China is not merely a "competing economic power". It is not up to Chen to decide who is an approved cooperative partner based on his personal feelings.

>Not everyone agrees with this.

You can disagree with an objective fact all you want, it doesn't make it any less of an objective fact. The CCP is evil and malicious.

Perhaps it should be.