University engagement with China: An MIT approach

To the members of the MIT community,

Last year President Reif asked the two of us to convene a group of MIT experts on U.S.-China relations to advise on how MIT should approach engagement with China in the coming years. We are sharing here the final draft of our report on this important subject, for comment and consideration by the MIT community.

The purpose of this report

The report charts a path for MIT to conduct academic interactions and collaborations with individuals and organizations in China in ways that uphold the core values of the Institute. We have considered how and when to engage in such interactions so they will advance knowledge and the needs of our nation and the world – without violating principles that are core to our community, without endangering human rights, and without damaging U.S. interests in security or the economy. We hope that our findings will be useful for other universities too.

MIT’s relationships with China stretch back almost to our founding. Students, scholars, and faculty of Chinese origin have made and continue to make tremendously valuable contributions to the life and work of the MIT community. Now, however, the outlook for academic research collaborations and flows of students and scholars between the U.S. and China is uncertain. The reasons include the harsher political climate in China, the intensifying geopolitical and strategic rivalry between China and the United States, and concerns over attempts by Chinese interests to gain advantage over the United States by exploiting American university research. The challenge for MIT and other U.S. universities is how to respond to these trends while preserving open scientific research, open intellectual exchange, the free flow of ideas and people, and the commitments of these universities to prevent bias and prejudice based on nationality or race.

The value of continued academic engagement

In important fields of research and education, MIT, the nation, and the world would be better off with more, rather than less, collaboration with China. We believe that MIT has an institutional responsibility to help preserve the space for academic relations between the two countries by protecting the freedom of individual MIT scholars to pursue academic opportunities, while helping to identify and support opportunities that are consistent with our values and principles. MIT must be able to continue admitting the best and most promising students in all disciplines from around the world, including from China. Ensuring the greatest possible access for individuals of great ability, regardless of nationality, is the strategy that will allow MIT to produce the highest benefits for our country and for people everywhere. Moreover, continued engagement will provide vital opportunities for MIT students to learn about China’s society, history, culture, language, politics, economic development, and science, and to develop practical, hands-on knowledge of Chinese business practices and innovation capabilities.

Guidance for managing risks

At the same time, engagement with Chinese partners and institutions brings risks, and new approaches to managing these risks are needed. Our report affirms several established MIT principles and lines that should not be crossed in any of the Institute’s international engagements. It provides specific guidance to principal investigators, to administrative staff, and to others who are actively involved in or considering China-related activities and programs. And it suggests ways in which the Institute’s existing risk management processes should be strengthened.

The need for coherent federal policies

While most of the report’s recommendations are directed towards MIT itself, it is also clear that changes in federal policies and practices are necessary. The absence of clear, coherent, consistent federal policy guidance regarding research and education interactions with China is disrupting academic decision-making and has harmed the U.S. scientific enterprise. Closer to home, members of the MIT community have been directly harmed by ill-judged government actions. A comprehensive government policy framework addressing immigration, research security, and research collaboration is urgently needed.

But federal policies cannot be a substitute for principled action at the university level. MIT and other universities must draw on their deep knowledge of educational and research practices to develop practical approaches of their own. Our report proposes a broad approach for MIT on this subject.

Please submit your comments to chinareport@mit.edu by October 19. We will then forward the report, along with a summary of the comments we receive, to President Reif for his review.

Sincerely,

Richard K. Lester, Associate Provost

Lily L. Tsai, Chair of the Faculty