The Paper's chief reporter Liu Dong
One day in April 2018, Hu Anming, a Chinese scholar at the University of Tennessee, unexpectedly received a "visit" from FBI agent Kujtim Sadiku.
Hu Anming, 52, is a well-known nanotechnology expert. His research subjects were special materials that were 1,000 times smaller in width than a human hair. The technology he developed could help NASA send samples taken from Mars back to Earth.
Sadikku asked Mr. Hu if he was involved in one of China's top talent programs. "You're so smart, you should be in a talent program like this," he said.
"I'm not that smart." Hu Anming replied that he had not participated in the talent program. But he acknowledges that chinese universities do invite him to give lectures before the summer vacation, and that he is preparing to go to China for an academic conference, all of which is perfectly normal in academia.
"Go to [the upcoming conference in China]." Sadikku took a sharp turn, trying to convince Juanmin to "do something" for them, "When you come back, come and see me and tell me who is with you and what they asked you to do." ”
Juanmin refused Sadiku's request.
Twenty-two months later, Sadikku reappeared— this time to arrest Juanmin. On February 27, 2020, the FBI claimed that Mr. Hu deliberately concealed his ties to Chinese universities, deceived NASA, and deceived the U.S. government, filing six charges against him on two counts. If only one of the charges is established, he will be sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Until the moment he was arrested, Hu Anming did not know what he had done wrong. Nor did he realize that the F.B.I. had been spying on his oldest son, who was still studying at college, for nearly two years. Whether he goes to school, to the store, or to the trash can in front of his house, someone is paying close attention.
What Hu would not have imagined was that 14 months later, because of his reluctance to admit guilt, his case became the first case of the U.S. Justice Department's China Initiative to officially enter a grand jury trial. Not only will the outcome of the trial have a profound impact on this controversial plan, but it will also give a glimmer of hope — or a deeper despair — to many troubled Chinese scholars like him.
Hu Anming's wife, Ivy Yang, spoke at a news conference about her husband.
under arrest
Born in China, Hu Anming went to Canada for further study in his early years and received two doctorates. As a recognized expert in the field of nanomaterials technology, he has worked in Europe and Canada. In 2013, Hu joined the Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Biomedical Engineering at the University of Tennessee, and was promoted to associate professor (tenured) in 2019.
For the scientist, who had great prospects, a sudden nightmare began on February 27, 2020.
That afternoon, Mr. Hu's wife, Ivy Yang, had just finished work and was getting home when she suddenly received a call from her eldest son telling her that her father had been arrested by the FBI. The eldest son was a freshman at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville (UTK), where his father worked. "At that moment my mind went blank, and the only question I had was what was going on?" She said.
Juan ming devoted most of his life to scientific research, coming to the United States to pursue his dreams. His arrest and indictment immediately plunged his family into chaos. After witnessing what happened to his father, the eldest son was forced to give up his studies and dreams in the United States and return to Canada. The younger son, who is still in high school, is often disturbed by nightmares, unable to concentrate at school, and starts skipping class. As for her five-year-old daughter, she often asks her mom when she'll see her dad again.
"I feel heartbroken for my children and it will take long-term toll on them. How do I explain all this to them? In an open letter raising money for her husband's lawsuit, Ivy Young described the difficult situation she and her family experienced at the time.
She also revealed that the husband told law enforcement officers at the moment of his arrest that they had to notify the university immediately because a hundred students were waiting for his exam that day. "He is willing to do his best to help his students." Ivy Young said. "Ironically, after his arrest, the school 'abandoned' him."
The darkest day of Mr. Hu's life was not when he was in jail, but when he was arrested by the F.B.I., his school immediately suspended him without pay. Eight months later, UTK announced the termination of his tenured teaching position and fired him. Just a month before his arrest, the department praised him for his international cooperation.
As the first case of the U.S. Department of Justice's China Initiative to officially enter the grand jury trial, this case has received widespread attention from all walks of life.
On November 1, 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI announced the launch of the China Action Plan to investigate and prosecute companies and individuals suspected of engaging in so-called "trade secret theft" and "economic espionage." It was the first action plan in U.S. history to be named after a country.
After the program was launched, many Chinese (Chinese citizens, Chinese Americans, non-Chinese Americans) scholars and researchers working and studying at American universities and research institutes became targets of the program, and were subject to federal charges and even criminal charges and arrests. However, the vast majority of the charges have nothing to do with the crime of espionage, but more on the grounds of "concealing ties related to China" and other crimes of telecommunications fraud and false statements.
Previously, many Chinese scientists and researchers would choose to confess guilt for various considerations after being targeted arrest and prosecution by the US Department of Justice, but Hu Anming refused to admit guilt and chose to confront the US federal prosecutor in court.
According to the disclosure of trial records, the FBI's investigation into Hu Anming was launched as early as 3 years ago.
In March 2018, FBI agent Sadikku said he had received "news" that Mr. Hu might have been a "spy" for a top talent program in China. When he used Google to search for information about Juanming, he used Google Translate to read two Chinese press releases about Himming. According to the press release, Mr. Hu was awarded a short-term contract in 2012 to Chinese mentor students at a Chinese university and will host a speaking event in China.
In fact, the two translations that Sadikku said only show Juanmin's academic and research success. He was inducted into a short-term talent program in 2012, teaching students and researchers at a Chinese university annually and being invited to speak at an academic conference in China.
After seeing the two "translated" documents, Sadikku decided to formally launch an investigation into Juanmin's so-called "economic espionage" and named the investigation "Operation Chelsea Dagger".
A month later, after confronting Juanming and getting him to deny his participation in China's top talent program, Sadikku still decided to start a squad of 6-7 agents to conduct a surveillance and follow-up investigation of Juanming and his eldest son who studied at the university for more than a year and a half. These investigations included following them out and looking for "evidence" in the trash can in front of their homes, and instructing customs to check Mr. Hu's cell phone, computer, and hard drive at the airport when Mr. Hu traveled to Japan for an international conference in November 2018.
Between June and September 2019, Sadikku met with UTK's school leadership three times and showed them multiple "material-rich" slides: false accusations that Hu Anming may have been a "Chinese spy." However, they did not provide any evidence that could charge Hu Anming with economic espionage or other serious criminal charges.
In an interview with www.thepaper.cn, Mr. Hu's lawyer, Phil Lomonaco, said that after two years of investigation, sadikku dropped espionage charges against Juanmin and began to construct new charges, eventually finding "clues" in the NASA project fund that Juanming applied for — arresting Mr. Hu on charges of telecommunications fraud and misrepresentation.
After his arrest, Hu Anming spent nearly a month in prison. After an application by a lawyer, he was allowed to be placed under house arrest at home. "This is the first 'miracle' in this case," Romanak said. "If we're going to be in prison ready for U.S. government prosecution, we'll have to face each other in front of bulletproof glass — only a gap that can only fit three pieces of paper at a time." I don't know if we can do it. ”
In Juanming's home, Romanak and Juanming built a "war room": a whole wall of nearly 3 meters and a ping-pong table as a workbench. The walls are plastered with all sorts of case-related materials; computers, printers, and the Internet have strung together a large number of documents and evidence; if Juanming had to stay in prison, it was hard to imagine how this complex case would proceed.
Despite the best preparations, what Neither Hu Anming nor the lawyer expected was that the dramatic scene that took place in the courtroom shocked everyone.
stalemate
The first hearing in Juanming's case took place on June 7, 2021, at Knoxville District Court, and lasted two weeks.
Fourteen months ago, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of Chinese scientist Hu Anming, and federal prosecutors charged Mr. Hu with two felonies: wire fraud and false statement, each of which included three specific charges, the main content of which was that Mr. Hu did not declare to the University of Tennessee and NASA to work part-time at a university in China, and used NASA funds to cooperate with Chinese universities, violating a law passed by the U.S. federal government in 2011.
Federal prosecutors said at trial that none of Mr. Juanming's reports to the university from 2013 to 2019 disclosed any outside employment, and that the University of Tennessee relied on those reports to assure NASA that its funding of Mr. Juanming's research projects would not violate federal law.
In court, Mr. Hu and his lawyer pleaded guilty to two charges against the F.B.I.:
Hu Said the University of Tennessee has two main reporting channels for its relationship with Chinese universities, the first being the annual faculty activity report. He reports annually to the University of Tennessee on his collaborations with Chinese universities, including published articles, conferences he attends, and students he leads.
At the same time, Hu Anming invited Chinese college students to the University of Tennessee for exchange visits, and in the introductory materials he sent to the head of the department, he detailed the resumes of all the students, their relationship with Juan Ming, and the sources of funds for the students to come to the United States. Eventually, the Chair of the Department of Engineering at the University of Tennessee sent an invitation letter to the University of China.
The second is the Outside Interests disclosure form. Mr. Hu said the University of Tennessee Faculty Handbook requires employees to declare off-campus employment with a one-time income of $10,000 (about 65,000 yuan) or more than 20 percent of the university's total work. His contract with a Chinese university was only based on the time he actually returned to the university during the two months of the summer to attend conferences or lectures, and did not meet the requirements of the University of Tennessee, so he did not fill it out.
Hu stressed that the University of Tennessee's engineering department has always been aware of his relationship with the Chinese university and has no doubts about the forms he submits each year.
Allegations about NASA's project's cooperation with China. Mr. Hu said that as a research professor, seeking funding in the United States is one of his main jobs. In the previous cooperation between Hu Anming and the American Nature Foundation (NSF), Hu Anming was asked to fill out the cooperation relationship with all departments and institutions, and Hu Anming also carefully filled in the cooperation relationship with the Chinese university, the cooperation project and the students he led.
However, when Juanming applied for NASA's project, he was not asked to fill in any history of cooperation. And Hu Anming once mentioned his relationship with Chinese universities to the NASA project leader, and said that he could contact and provide related equipment, but the NASA project leader refused. He has since stopped associating NASA's programs with Chinese universities, and has not had Chinese visiting students join the NASA program team.
Mr. Hu said U.S. federal law prohibits NASA from using funds for projects conducted by Chinese officials or companies, but nasa does not explicitly prohibit scientists who have previously worked with Chinese universities from applying for NASA funding. What's more, NASA-funded expenses have always been under the name of the University of Tennessee, not in Juanmin's personal name. So why did he use NASA-funded fees to work with China?
Hu's testimony and the evidence presented by his lawyers in court show that Mr. Hu has submitted numerous reports to the University of Tennessee, listing his collaborations with Chinese researchers, and his research papers clearly outline his relationships with the University of Tennessee and the University of China.
The University of Tennessee provost John Zomchick also testified that he personally reviewed what Mr. Hu had previously submitted during tenure reviews, and several of the letters of recommendation cited Mr. Juanming's collaborations with Chinese students and researchers and mentioned his ties to Chinese universities.
What is truly shocking and disturbing, however, is that throughout the trial the prosecution made public the details of the investigations by U.S. law enforcement agencies in this case and several other similar cases.
The principal investigator in the case, FBI agent Sadiku, admitted at trial to a series of alleged abuses of power against Hu Anming, including: false accusations that Hu Anming was a "Chinese spy", suggesting that Hu Anming was a "special agent" in China when meeting with Mr. Hu Anming; using false information to put Hu Anming on the federal no-fly list, prompting customs officers to confiscate Hu Anming's computer and telephone; spreading information in the international research community that Hu Anming was a "harmful person"; using false information, A team of agents was sent to spy on Juan Ming and his son, who was in his first year of college, for nearly two years; using disinformation to pressure Him to act as a spy for the U.S. government.
According to court testimony, Sadikku admitted at trial that after launching a "national security" investigation into Mr. Juanmin that lasted more than three years, no evidence had been found that Mr. Juanming was or had been a spy. He does not consider Hu Anming to be a Chinese spy.
But on this point, Sadikku never clarified it to the University of Tennessee. Earlier, he had told the University of Tennessee that it was investigating The possibility that Mr. Hu was a Chinese spy. After the FBI arrested Juanming, the University of Tennessee fired him.
Juanming's lawyer, Romonake, specifically pointed to a detail: The indictment accuses Juanmin of "defrauding" one of NASA's funds in 2018, after the University of Tennessee learned that the FBI had begun to pay attention to Juanming. But when asked by the FBI what to do, the University of Tennessee official in charge of the funding application, the investigator in charge of the case replied, "It goes as usual, because after the ongoing investigation is over, there may not be charges filed, and we don't want to hinder the research." ”
Romanak believes that this is equivalent to setting a trap for Juanming to "fishing law enforcement".
On June 16, after a two-day jury decision after the trial ended, the 12-person jury struggled to reach a unanimous conclusion, and the case ended in a "mistrial", meaning that the US Department of Justice failed to convict Juanming. The next possibility is that the Justice Department will either dismiss the case, file a retrial, or a judge acquitted the defendant.
Wendy Chandler, one of the jurors involved in the trial, described it as "the most ridiculous case" in an interview with The Intercept. Chandler said she believed after learning about the case that the FBI's investigation was not motivated by a quest for justice, but by ambitions to convict. "I only saw a series of specious errors, a lack of support for the University of Tennessee (for Juanming), and relentless ambitions on the FBI side."
However, despite the trial exposing these shocking abuses, the US Department of Justice did not "stop" on this.
Hu Anding and his lawyer entered the courthouse
innocent
On the day of the trial, Mr. Hu returned home accompanied by his family and lawyers, but he was not truly free.
For more than a year after his arrest, Mr. Hu remained under house arrest. No income, no freedom of movement, not even a walk on the garden and balcony of one's own home. It wasn't until February 2021, with the help of a lawyer and his family's demands on his basic human rights, that the judge allowed him to go out to church for a short time every Sunday morning to worship and see a doctor.
Separation from his family also severely affected Juanming's mental health, and he became extremely depressed, with problems with both sleep and diet. He often questioned whether moving from Canada to the United States to pursue his dream of science was a wrong decision.
But despite all this, Juanming still used his time at home to write and edit a professional book on laser manufacturing.
On July 23, the U.S. Department of Justice dropped five cases of Chinese scholars suspected of "fraud" and concealment of ties with China in one day. These cases, along with The Hu Anming case, are listed under the U.S. Department of Justice's official website, the China Action Plan. Lomonak told The Paper that he expects the judge to deliver a verdict of acquittal.
Surprisingly, in the absence of any new evidence, the U.S. Department of Justice did not "dismiss Juanming's case, but filed a motion for a "retrial" in the District Federal Court on July 30. Shocked, Romanak then resubmitted the "acquittal" motion.
The Justice Department's decision has provoked widespread outrage among U.S. lawmakers, academics, Asian-American groups, and civil society. A number of individuals and organizations sent a joint letter to Judge Thomas A. Varlan calling for the case to be dismissed and Juanmin acquitted.
"The course of this trial shows the problems of the U.S. Department of Justice." Cai Jinliang, chairman of the Board of Governors of the Chinese American Federation (UCA), said, "This trial is actually a trial of the federal government's China Action Plan, which must fully investigate all the disturbing issues found by its own law enforcement agencies throughout the trial." ”
On 9 September, Judge Thomas Varan issued a memorandum of opinion and order and acquitted Professor Juan Ming, stating that prosecutors had not provided evidence to support their allegations.
On page 42 of his 52-page acquittal, Judge Varan wrote: "The Government has failed to provide sufficient evidence to enable any reasonable jury to conclude, on the basis of such evidence, without reasonable doubt, that the defendant had specific intent to commit a crime." Even if all the evidence were to be viewed in the best interests of the government, no rational jury would conclude that the defendants did not disclose their links to Chinese universities in order to deceive NASA funding. ”
Judge Varan noted that FBI agents began an investigation into Mr. Hu in 2018 on suspicion of economic espionage and covert involvement in China's top talent program, which was ultimately found to be baseless. Still, the investigation continued until it finally landed on the issue of NASA funding restrictions.
The judge found Hu Anming innocent on two grounds: first, there was insufficient evidence that he intentionally deceived NASA; second, even assuming that Mr. Hu intended to conceal his ties to Chinese universities, there was no evidence that he intended to harm NASA and therefore could not constitute fraud. In the absence of evidence that Juanmin deceived NASA, the three allegations of false statements are also even less supported by evidence.
Varan further noted that in this case the FBI "acknowledges that there is no extensive experience or knowledge of the grant process or the University's conflict of interest policy with government agencies, nor is it familiar with the way the University engages with government agencies and the purpose of sponsoring research programs."
When Lomonak received the judge's verdict, he immediately called Juanmin. "I told him, hey, you're a free man, and he couldn't believe it and asked me if I was joking?"
"Then he cried, he cried with joy." Romanak said.
Mr. Hu is the first Chinese scholar to appear in a jury trial and acquitted since the Justice Department launched the China Initiative in 2018. The outcome of his acquittal will also have a huge impact on the cases that will be tried later.
Zhu Keliang, a veteran criminal defense lawyer in the United States, told the surging news that as the first case of the "China Action Plan", the US Department of Justice can be described as a fiasco this time. In addition to losing "morale", there is at least one important significance – the judge's decision has a special significance and relevance in similar cases.
The judge's decision in this case gave a relatively high definition of the crime of wire fraud: the judge said that the defendant must have deceived the U.S. government and wanted to profit from it in order to be convicted. This definition is advantageous for many Chinese scholars. Zhu Keliang said.
In addition, Zhu Keliang pointed out that the judge also carefully described the failure of the University of Tennessee to provide clear guidance and training to professors in terms of restrictions on cooperation with Chinese institutions in the judgment, which also explains why Juanming did not fully disclose his relationship with Chinese universities. This problem is common in almost all universities in the United States. After this case, it will be used as a reason to oppose similar accusations against scholars.
In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice has mobilized significant resources under the China Action Plan to investigate Chinese scholars, arresting many Chinese scholars in the name of arresting "Chinese spies," but in the end they were only prosecuted on charges of unrelated espionage charges, such as wire fraud and misrepresentation. The defeat in The Juan-Min case will make it more difficult for the Justice Department to make similar allegations against other scholars.
Wyn Hornbuckle, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice, said in an email with The Paper: "While we are disappointed by the outcome, we respect the court's decision. ”
Romonak told The Paper that the last email he received from the Justice Department showed that they were still trying to figure out options for appeal, "I don't think they have that option." The prosecutor cannot appeal the acquittal, so the verdict marks the end of the case. He said.
On September 10, the president of UTK said in a letter sent to the school's faculty and staff, "The school has communicated with Juan Ming that if he can confirm that he obtains a visa permission to work in the United States next year, the administrative dismissal will be revoked and his professorship will be reinstated." ”
At this point, the U.S. Department of Justice's accusation against Juanming ended in failure. After at least four years of investigation and trial, Hu Anming, a nanotechnology expert, was acquitted, but his career, health, family and psychology were greatly harmed.
Mr. Hu's plight reflects the widespread injustice experienced by Chinese Americans. U.S. Congressman of Chinese Descent Ted W. Lieu called out to the U.S. Department of Justice on his personal social media account: "You (you) should apologize to Professor Juan Ming, stop discriminating against Asians, and investigate your own prosecutors for alleged racial profiling." If the surname Hu was Smith, you would not have brought this case. ”
FBI Director Christopher M. Speaking at a hearing on Capitol Hill, A. Ray said the bureau launches a new investigation into China every 10 hours.
Red Panic?
Although the Case of Juan Minh has come to an end, the greater attention and controversy surrounding the case is far from over.
On September 13, four days after the judge's acquittal, The Romonac, Juanming, and many people from all walks of life who have been following the case held a webinar.
Mr. and Mrs. Hu Anming expressed their gratitude to the people they cared for, supported and helped during these difficult days.
"Although our lives have changed forever and we are uncertain what the future holds, we will always be grateful for the selfless actions of those who believe in and support us throughout this process." Hu Anming's wife, Ivy Yang, said.
Juanming responded with brief comments. "I've had a hard time finding the right words to express how I feel at this point, and there are no words that can express a deep gratitude for so many people for what they have done for me. Those scars and painful memories are still in my heart. He said.
In an email replying to The Paper, Mr. Hu said that for personal reasons, he would prefer to remain silent for the time being and let his lawyers express their opinions.
The Hu and Ming case has once again drawn attention to the controversial investigation into the China Action Plan. In fact, before the Trump administration formally proposed the plan in November 2018, there had been a number of unjust "espionage allegations" against Chinese scholars in the United States. The parties in these cases were often eventually found innocent.
Although the China Action Plan has been described as an effort to eradicate espionage, from the beginning, Chinese academic researchers appeared to be one of the main targets of the China Action Plan, and the actual allegations in the cases related to them were largely unrelated to the theft of trade secrets. Instead, most of the allegations include a failure to disclose ties to Chinese institutions or universities, misrepresentations to government authorities, and tax and visa fraud.
Margaret K. Lewis, a law professor at Seton Hall University who has long followed the China Action Plan, told The Paper, "In Mr. Hu's case, what is shocking is that the trial revealed that the FBI's chief investigator seems to lack the necessary understanding of the funding application report, the compliance process, and the nature of China's different talent programs." ”
More critics say the name of the "China Action Plan" is the problem in itself. The cases raise the question: Has a project aimed at dealing with China gone off track? The program prominently targets Chinese researchers without convincing evidence that they pose a threat to the United States.
"How many Chinese scientists will federal prosecutors have to prosecute before they realize their problems." How many More Chinese Scientists Will Federal Prosecutors Wrongly Prosecute Before the Justice Department stops the China Action Plan, destroying their careers and families? This is tantamount to a replica of McCarthyism in American academia in the 21st century. Haipei Xue, president of the Chinese American Federation (UCA), said.
History is always repeating itself. More than half a century ago, another famous Chinese scientist in the United States, Qian Xuesen, who was also involved in aerospace-related research, was also suspected because of his origins and race. In 1955, after Qian Xuesen was placed under house arrest for five years, then-U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower decided to deport him back to China. The scientist left by boat with his wife and two U.S.-born children. At the time, he told reporters waiting there that he would never set foot on U.S. soil again. He later became the father of China's missile and space programs.
A recent study released by the Committee of 100, a prominent Chinese organization in the United States, found that through an analysis of all relevant cases between 1996 and 2020, Chinese are more likely than other ethnic groups to face allegations of "espionage" under the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) — although they are more likely to be wrongly accused, they will be subject to relatively harsher imprisonment and punishment.
The report notes that overzealous efforts to combat "Chinese spies" are undermining the lives of ordinary Asian-Americans. Moreover, by over-exaggerating the espionage of Asian-Americans, the Justice Department may have fueled stereotypes that Asian-Americans were not "loyal," bringing greater discrimination and prejudice to the ethnic group.
An important question is, where will the China Action Plan go after Hu Anming's case?
"Even if the U.S. Department of Justice terminates the China Action Plan tomorrow, it will not end prosecutions for economic espionage, wire fraud, misrepresentation, and many other crimes." The call to end the China Action Plan is to show that the U.S. government has taken a crucial first step towards no longer classifying people as part of the 'China threat.' How to address bias in the criminal justice system is a much longer project that cannot be accomplished by changing the name alone. Margaret K. Lewis told The Paper.
Merrick Garland, the new attorney general of the Biden administration, told Bloomberg a few days ago that the Justice Department respects the rights of Chinese in the United States while responding to Chinese espionage. But there is no clear indication that the China Action Plan will come to an end in Biden's tenure.
In academia, many people of insight worry that if the China Action Plan continues, it may reduce international research cooperation, weaken academic freedom, and hinder the work of scientists. In fact, this has already happened.
Since 2018, the Justice Department has filed more and more lawsuits against researchers. At the National Institutes of Health alone, 85 scientists have been forced to resign, retire or be fired as a result of internal investigations. According to official state department data, in the second half of 2020 alone, more than 2,000 Chinese researchers left the United States, about half of whom were revoked by the United States.
On Sept. 8, 177 faculty members from more than 40 faculties at Stanford University sent an open letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland asking him to terminate the Justice Department's China Action Plan. Signatories include former Energy Minister Steven Chu and seven other Nobel laureates.
Since its launch in 2018, the China Action Plan has "seriously deviated from its stated mission," undermined U.S. research and technological competitiveness, and fueled bias, raising concerns about racial and nationality discrimination, the letter said. ”
The scientists who signed the joint letter pointed out that the biggest impact of the China Action Plan is not in them, but in their young colleagues and graduate students. As senior scholars, they have established their own careers and families in the United States. (Although it has been proven that it could be destroyed at any time) the lesser-known academics are reconsidering their future in the United States, considering whether to go to countries that will not attract "spy suspicion" because of their place of birth.
This effect is already happening. As the largest source of international students in the United States, a new generation of Chinese students is increasingly considering whether to make the United States a preferred destination. Their departure will deal a huge blow to the American talent pipeline.
According to the American Higher Education Association, there are 41,000 master's students, 36,000 doctoral students, and 38,000 people who have served as postdoctoral or visiting scholars in STEM (the acronym for science science, technology technology, engineering, and mathematics mathematics) fields are Chinese citizens. Chinese students make up a third of the total number of international graduate students in the United States. Many of these students end up staying in the United States, where they are not only one of the key sources of talent for academia, but also for private sector research labs and high-tech startups.
A famous speech by former U.S. President Ronald Reagan may best sum up this concern: "We create the future, and the world follows us into tomorrow." With every wave of new immigrants coming to this land of opportunities, we are an eternally young nation, forever bursting with vitality and new ideas, always at the forefront, always leading the world to the next frontier. This quality is essential to the future of our country. If we close the door on the 'new Americans,' our leadership in the world will soon be lost. ”
Editor-in-Charge: Zhang Wuwei
Proofreader: Ding Xiao