• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Haggis said:
US study visa holders MUST leave within 60 days of the end of their studies. They are considered temporary residents.
Click to expand...
I'm referring to people who make a subsequent choice to apply for immigration.

The ultimate resource is human intellect. Countries with large populations (eg. China, India) have more of it. If they're turning out millions more university graduates per year (each), the only way to compete is to attract the best talent to immigrate. If the US wants to remain dominant, it must not only educate foreigners, but convince them to stay (or return).
 
Brad Sallows said:
I'm referring to people who make a subsequent choice to apply for immigration.

The ultimate resource is human intellect. Countries with large populations (eg. China, India) have more of it. If they're turning out millions more university graduates per year (each), the only way to compete is to attract the best talent to immigrate. If the US wants to remain dominant, it must not only educate foreigners, but convince them to stay (or return).
Click to expand...
Problem is that there are related national security and economic integrity issues that distort the market. It’a no secret that foreign students have been implicated in state-backed intellectual property and research theft. Our very openness to attracting human capital - and don’t get me wrong; economically you’re right about that in and of itself if it’s set aside on its own - also brings with it very serious vulnerabilities. We need to figure out how to balance those things. Attracting smarter innovators and researchers doesn’t confer much advantage to us if the work they’re paid for here goes right out the door to help a foreign adversary. And there’s lots of that. It’s baked right in to things like China’s Thousand Talents Program.
 
Most people don't really want to risk liberty to spy on behalf of a government, particularly if their prior inclination is to build a better mousetrap. There are risks/costs, but the benefits are huge.
 
Brad Sallows said:
Most people don't really want to risk liberty to spy on behalf of a government, particularly if their prior inclination is to build a better mousetrap. There are risks/costs, but the benefits are huge.
Click to expand...
It’s a lot less simple and a lot more pernicious than that. I’m not talking about the MechEng student doing their co-op placement at Acme Mousetrap Co. Not all sectors are of much interest.

If a sector is of interest, and Chinese students are academically placed in that sector (or potentially could be), they can be quite vulnerable to direct and indirect leverage. The same tools used to try to rein in dissidents can be used to exploit people positioned to bring material advantage.

Some publicly available surface-scratching is mentioned here when Vigneault spoke on it a couple years ago. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/csis-director-five-eyes-research-1.6998874

I’m sure the redacted version of either an NSICOP or a PIFI report covered it in the last few years, I just don’t have it at hand. I’ll try to remember to loop back. There has been at least a bit of a curtain pulled back on this stuff in the public domain over the last six years or so.

As I’ve said, a very considered and balanced approach is needed.
 
brihard said:
It’s a lot less simple and a lot more pernicious than that. I’m not talking about the MechEng student doing their co-op placement at Acme Mousetrap Co. Not all sectors are of much interest.

If a sector is of interest, and Chinese students are academically placed in that sector (or potentially could be), they can be quite vulnerable to direct and indirect leverage. The same tools used to try to rein in dissidents can be used to exploit people positioned to bring material advantage.

Some publicly available surface-scratching is mentioned here when Vigneault spoke on it a couple years ago. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/csis-director-five-eyes-research-1.6998874

I’m sure the redacted version of either an NSICOP or a PIFI report covered it in the last few years, I just don’t have it at hand. I’ll try to remember to loop back. There has been at least a bit of a curtain pulled back on this stuff in the public domain over the last six years or so.

As I’ve said, a very considered and balanced approach is needed.
Click to expand...

And, of course, The West 'spies back' at them too...
 
daftandbarmy said:
And, of course, The West 'spies back' at them too...
Click to expand...
True, but we don't flood China or India with tens of thousands of students, have the mechanism to monitor them and have the practical ability to threaten to 'disappear' their relatives if they don't cooperate with the State.

According to this, Chinese post secondary institutions have a student population of about 38.3 million and, of that, 255.720 were international; less than 1%. A link showed roughly 35,000 were from "the Americas". A number of sources said US students in China was around 800. The US reported 277,398 students from China alone in 2023/4. International students in total make up about 6% of US post-secondary students.
 
Isn't the "linked to the CCP" criteria a bit broad? Thought Party membership was somewhat the done thing for the ambitious or connected, i.e., the sort of person who'd also be inclined to study abroad if it offered better outcomes than domestic ed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top