
Harvard scientist is arrested, accused of lying about ties to China - georgecmu
https://www.npr.org/2020/01/28/800442646/acclaimed-harvard-scientist-is-arrested-accused-of-lying-about-ties-to-china
======
duxup
>These grants require the disclosure of significant foreign financial
conflicts of interest, including financial support from foreign governments or
foreign entities

Meanwhile:

>paid up to $50,000 a month, in addition to $150,000 per year

Seems pretty straightforward.

He must be a smart guy, I wonder how he thought he would get away with it?

Even if he could hide the money run of the mill espionage could find it.

He was supposed to do research at Wuhan University and even file for parents
for and sort of promote that school. Hard to imagine nobody would notice that.

I wonder if he kept taking the money after he told investigators that he
wasn't a part of the program? He had to suspect they were on to him?

~~~
datashow
I guess the story is that when he started in 2012 he thought nobody cares.
Actually he got it right at that time. Although it was violation of government
rules, nobody really cared at that time.

He could not predict the change of direction of the U.S. foreign policy. China
is taking place of Russia as the No. 1 threat. How could he predict this in
2012?

BTW, I am curious to know did he pay tax for those income? If not, that will
be another very serious problem.

~~~
mrits
The president of the US in 2012 made fun of his opposition for calling Russia
a serious national security threat.

~~~
unishark
It is bizarre how for so many that history just never happened. Not just the
president but the press. At least the president was something of a man of
"nuance", always trying to take positions somewhere in the middle. Though I do
recall it was a somewhat awkward process as he came around to making
increasingly stronger stands against his successor.

Of course the press (not to mention twitter mob) just toggled from the extreme
on one side to the other.

------
ktln2
Lieber requested that half of his money be deposited into a Chinese bank
account and other half be paid to him in cash when he next visit WUT.
[https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1222217996959199234?s=2...](https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1222217996959199234?s=20)

~~~
angry_octet
Amazing evidence that he knew it was illicit. Quite ironic too, considering
how many Chinese are trying to get money out of China.

If he had started a company on the side (legal) then the Chinese could have
bought it (legal) for a fortune. Lesson is, get legal advice!

~~~
kaybe
Have you tried getting money transfered internationally? At my level of
understanding I can find many legit reasons for this course of action.

~~~
angry_octet
He could have asked them to deposit it into his US bank account, it really
isn't that hard to do a wire transfer. It doesn't make sense to pay $30 in
fees when you are only sending $500, but for $50k its a blip.

For Chinese citizens it isn't easy, but for govt and institutions it is.

------
LatteLazy
10 years ago I was in academia. We were actively encouraged, even required, to
find outside funding. Government would look at a bid for 1m and say "find 500k
from someone else and we will match it". It was good practice.

Who were the people providing all that finding? The Chinese mostly.

Now we're in the middle of "sino-panic" and suddenly every cent (Renminbi?) is
suspect.

I am happy to admit this guy was dishonest and deserves what he gets. But I
worry this is the "thin end of the wedge". National security laws are
draconian by design and aiming them at researchers continuing policies that
were previously supported is both unfair and counterproductive.

To me, the whole China "thing" seems like a political witch hunt to avoid
talking about real issues (impeachment, the 2020 elections, automation, the
fact we have no idea what to do with all the people we can't find jobs for).

The weird claims about Huawei infrastructure falls into the same boat: picking
a (cold) war to distract from other issues.

Beware where this goes.

~~~
lordlimecat
We can focus on "real issues" while also recognizing the active espionage and
cyber-warfare being conducted by the Chinese. Healthcare is a huge priority
for them and it is not hard to find cases of them setting up state security
agents as professors to induce masters and phd candidates to perform spying
while working at e.g. NIH.

China's reputation for business and state espionage is not some racist or
xenophobic trend; it comes from years of them performing said espionage.

~~~
LatteLazy
Can you link me to that case? It sounds very interesting but my Googlefu is
weak...

~~~
Rebelgecko
Not specifically the NIH, but someone was recently arrested trying to take
work from a hospital's cancer research lab back to China:
[https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/12/30/chinese-
medical...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/12/30/chinese-medical-
student-accused-trying-smuggle-cancer-research-material-out-
boston/24LsrDLdJJkbvZ0do3F9HO/story.html) The article mentions that the NIH
has 180+ active investigations, although it sounds like those are based more
on funding sources than straight-up espionage

------
amacbride
“In an affidavit unsealed Tuesday, FBI Special Agent Robert Plumb said Lieber,
who led a Harvard research group focusing on nanoscience, had established a
research lab at the Wuhan university — apparently unbeknownst to Harvard.”

This is pretty egregious, and it baffles me that he thought it would go
undetected (or that his home institution wouldn’t object.)

~~~
Aperocky
He's wrong to not report conflict of interest on national defense funding, but
how is establishing a lab elsewhere alone egregious?

Private research institutes, like corporations, don't own people who work for
them.

~~~
knzhou
I completely agree with you: collaboration is no crime in science. Obviously,
we will both be downvoted to invisibility, because this site's users are
fervent nationalists, not scientists.

~~~
datashow
You are a scientist? Maybe you never worked in a university as a full time
employee?

Faculty are required to report outside jobs, see:
[https://provost.harvard.edu/statement-outside-activities-
hol...](https://provost.harvard.edu/statement-outside-activities-holders-
academic-appointments)

Do you know when you accept big grant you also must follow similar rules?

Yes, you can collaborate in science, but you do not live in a vacuum,
scientists also need to follow the rules of a society.

~~~
matz1
The rules itself is egrigeous, that's why there is an incentive for lying in
the first place.

If the goal is for science, there shouldn't be restriction on working with
other country in order to accept grant.

------
rasengan0
Some context:

Original charge: [https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/harvard-university-
profes...](https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/harvard-university-professor-
and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china)

This one is safe at home: [https://www.masslive.com/boston/2020/01/chinese-
peoples-libe...](https://www.masslive.com/boston/2020/01/chinese-peoples-
liberation-army-lieutenant-yanqing-ye-assessed-us-military-websites-
researched-professors-while-studying-at-boston-university-federal-authorities-
say.html)

------
knzhou
Of course the guy should have disclosed everything to his funding sources, but
from a scientist's viewpoint, the shock and outrage is confusing. Prominent
scientists travel between institutions all the time, managing multiple groups
-- it is common to see, on a senior professor's CV, appointments at 5
different institutes in 3 different countries (say, America, India, and
Germany). That's a fundamental part of doing science. I benefit from it, and I
pay it back by making all the notes and papers I produce freely available.

If the moral principle here is that countries shouldn't try to draw scientific
talent from other countries, well, the United States is by far the greatest
perpetrator of brain drain in the world. A lot of countries have been sucked
dry by it, including China itself in the past!

If people are actually this worried about scientific knowledge crossing
national borders, it won't stop with Prof. Lieber. They'll continue by banning
textbook exports, taking down lecture videos, and raiding the Wikipedia
servers. While they're at it, they can put up a Great Firewall of their own.
That's the only direction I see this going.

~~~
mturmon
Note:

> criminally charged with making "false, fictitious and fraudulent
> statements"...

> In interviews with Defense Department investigators in 2018 and 2019, Lieber
> said that while he had heard of the Thousand Talents Plan, he had never been
> asked to be part of it...

The charge is not promiscuous collaboration, it's lying about it when asked.

If he indeed lied to DoD investigators _following up on a possible conflict of
interest_ , that would be a huge problem, on top of (we could guess) an
original failure to disclose.

~~~
knzhou
As I said, he should have been clear with his funding sources. But that's not
where the outrage in this thread is coming from -- everybody here is pissed
off at the very idea of scientific collaboration crossing national borders.
There are comparisons being drawn between doing science and waging war. This
is saddening.

~~~
mturmon
On balance, your comment did gloss over the "taking money from two sources"
issue, which is the point of the arrest.

If you wanted to have a conversation about maintaining scientific
collaboration in the midst of great power competition, this seems like the
wrong case to build off of.

Finally, I do agree that conversations about China on HN often do go south due
to US nationalism.

~~~
knzhou
No, my point is that it is extremely common to take money from two sources, or
even more! Nobody batted an eye at this, and in fact even today nobody bats an
eye, unless one of the sources is in China. In that case it becomes "luring
talent" and "IP theft", with all the trappings of selectively applied moral
principle.

 _Real_ IP theft would look like, say, abducting thousands of German
scientists at gunpoint [0], not giving scientists grants to set up labs.

0:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip)

~~~
mturmon
OK, I realize in using the shorthand "take money from two sources", I have
clouded the issue. Sorry about that.

As always, the actual issue is the failure to _disclose_ the possible CoI --
as in the present case.

It sucks, BTW. Turns out the guy was the PhD advisor of my neighbor up the
street.

~~~
knzhou
I don't disagree with this, but what I don't understand is the nationalist
outrage.

Suppose a professor slacked off on their job by taking a long vacation in
France. That would be wrong and deserving of punishment -- but it wouldn't
have set off panic over him "selling out" the country. Yet that is what is
happening.

~~~
bdcravens
I don't think it's "nationalist outrage". The outrage is over violating the
rules, as many developers and scientists on HN have done work for the
government, and followed the rules. I believe you are seeing a connection
(given US government and US commenters) that simply isn't there. Correlation
doesn't equal causation; that's a first rule of science.

~~~
auggierose
Sometimes correlation implies causation though:
[https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B077YGFJ8N/ref=dp-kindle-
redirec...](https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B077YGFJ8N/ref=dp-kindle-
redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1)

------
jorblumesea
So the facts of the case are...

* Famous professor accepted money from China, then lied to authorities

* Famous professor also had DoD contracts which prohibit such connections without disclosure

* China is known for its IP transfer, strategic threats to both US power and democracy, and use of non-traditional intelligence sources, which is why such regulations about disclosure are required

Seems pretty reasonable. I'd imagine any government would want to know who
they're working with before cutting them a check. If someone at AWS was
moonlighting for Google Cloud, no one would bat an eye if they were fired,
taken to court, and sued for everything they were worth.

~~~
gdy
How is China a strategic threat to 'democracy'? China isn't supporting 'color
revolutions' of its own kind.

~~~
Brave-Steak
You must be willfully ignorant if you don't see all of China's work to
influence Western countries in ways that are favourable to China, despite
their despicable track record in ... I don't know, lots of things regarding
human rights and individual freedoms.

And yeah, yeah. The US isn't perfect either, but I'm not afraid of the US
using their influence to take away or undermine democracy in Germany.

~~~
thiagoharry
Not in Germany, but in Africa, Latin America end Middle East, US has a history
of undermining democracy.

------
kermittd
Eric Weinstein on the matter -
[https://twitter.com/ericrweinstein/status/122230320107390976...](https://twitter.com/ericrweinstein/status/1222303201073909760?s=21)

~~~
refurb
Underpay? Top researchers at places like Harvard do very well from what I
understand, especially if they consult on the side or sit on boards.

We’re talking several hundred thousand.

That’s not enough?

~~~
cat199
the comment says 'underpay ... relative to say Investment Bankers, VCs or mgmt
consultants.'

the point as I see it is that if scientists are of strategic importance, they
should be compensated accordingly to prevent the risk of bribery/defection -
the same reason companies justify high pay to these other jobs to 'retain
their talent'.

~~~
chasd00
isn't it well known that you make less money in academia than in business? The
trade off is job security.

I'm sure he could go lead a lab at Exxon for millions but the moment he
doesn't deliver he's fired.

------
mbreese
A similar situation recently led to the firing of the leadership at Moffitt
Cancer Center in Florida too.

[https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2019/12/18/moffitt-
canc...](https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2019/12/18/moffitt-cancer-
center-shakeup-ceo-and-others-resign-over-china-ties/)

------
m0zg
I remember just a few weeks ago there was a story on HN of a Russian scientist
working on a government project "sharing" some research on hypersonic weapons
with a NATO affiliated university somewhere in Europe. In the thread there I
said a US scientist would get his ass thrown in jail in the US under the
circumstances, which was downvoted.

It will be interesting to study the difference between that case and this one.
So far the tone I'm seeing here is markedly different, and most people seem to
be justifying the position of the DOJ.

~~~
unishark
Based on your description it sounds pretty different. In this case the
professor is charged with lying to get funding.

------
gumby
OK it does look like he commuted an actual crime (perjury/false affidavit).

But more broadly: how is humanity helped by not spreading around the knowledge
of basic science and the interconnection between scientists? This is all
relating to work that will be published in journals after all.

~~~
koheripbal
This guy was conducting DoD funded research, and then replicating that work
secretly in a lab in China.

Literally espionage.

~~~
gumby
> This guy was conducting DoD funded research, and then replicating that work
> secretly in a lab in China. Literally espionage.

I did not see the FBI alleging this publicly. It is not in their affidavit. He
did lie on his forms _to_ the DoD and that is legitimately a (non-espionage)
crime.

DoD funding does not in itself make something a national secret. I did plenty
of work funded by DARPA in my youth (during the cold war!) all of which could
be publicly talked about and no classification or really any constraints were
involved. I did later do cryptographic work but that was controlled by the
Department of Commerce and was certainly more constrained than anything I
worked on paid for by DoD.

I don't know Harvard's policy but at MIT since problems in the 60s, all
classified work is supposed to be segregated into separate MIT-affiliated
operations like Lincoln Labs, MITRE, Draper etc. It looked like distribution
his work was controlled at most by the publishing cartel of Elsevier et al.

------
neya
I was just watching this documentary the other day and I am actually not
surprised. For anyone interested in this topic, should really have a look at
this documentary:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdR-I35Ladk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdR-I35Ladk)

------
say_it_as_it_is
the usual guilty until proven innocent..

------
paulsimon99
Research shouldn’t be limited by politicians

------
dfee
As an alternative to the only other comment here, dressing this up as
xenophobia:

> The arrangement between Lieber and the Chinese institution spanned
> "significant" periods of time between at least 2012 and 2017, according to
> the affidavit. It says the deal called for Lieber to be paid up to $50,000 a
> month, in addition to $150,000 per year "for living and personal expenses."

> "Lieber was also awarded more than $1.5 million by WUT and the Chinese
> government to establish a research lab and conduct research at WUT," the
> document states.

> For a large part of the time frame in question, Lieber was also the
> principal investigator on at least six U.S. Defense Department research
> grants, with a cumulative value of more than $8 million, according to the
> affidavit. It also says he was the principal investigator on more than $10
> million in grants funded by the National Institutes of Health.

------
cletus
I consider it only a matter of time where the US will take the view that
employing anyone born in mainland China, regardless of whether or not they're
a US citizen, to be a security risk not worth taking for anything that
requires security clearance or is otherwise sensitive or of national interest.

~~~
joe_the_user
Well that is an interesting take. You might take a look at the Charles W.
Lieber's photo and bio. He appears to be a white American. The wikipedia page
doesn't say he wasn't born in China but still.

It seems like Lieber took his actions for money. If you are going to look at
everyone potentially willing to sell out for money, you'll be doing a lot of
looking.

------
WiPo
It must be one of his Chinese graduate students who went back to work as a
faculty in Wuhan and made him that offer. Not surprised at all and actually
this kind of bribery has been practiced at lot among Chinese American
faculties. But IMO it’s not a severe national security issue though as most
Nanotechnology paper are just BS and being published purely for the sake of
fundings from NSF. So it’s really unwise to lie on that matter.

------
jashephe
The conspiracy theorist in me can't help but wonder if "leaking" forged
documents of this nature could be an effective way for China or another
foreign government to sabotage the leaders of the American research
enterprise.

Of course, my inner cynic is leaning pretty heavily towards Occam's razor for
this one.

~~~
arcticfox
That would be pretty straightforward to dismiss with full transparency by the
alleged perpetrator. There's definitely going to be corroborating evidence.

~~~
jashephe
Oh, absolutely. I guess I was wondering if accusations alone would serve to
substantially inconvenience or embitter individual scientists, or decrease
public trust in academic research and academicians in general. Not trying to
suggest that this case specifically is some foreign plot.

------
tehjoker
Last time, I said this was corporate fears of losing money dressed up as
xenophobia and got pushback. Now the spooks are just stating it outright.

Chinese and American scientists have more in common with each other than we do
with the elites that run the government and corporations to the detriment of
the population.

We should loudly denounce the government interfering with free scientific
exchange and funding. Science isn't a competition; it's meant to benefit all
of us regardless of nationality.

Edit: Last time they were messing with a researcher that was working on cancer
treatments. They were worried he'd "steal" cancer treatments and give them to
Chinese people! The nerve!

~~~
baseballdork
I don't get this sentiment at all. China is notorious for stealing IP, they're
a major military player (threat), and this professor lied about his ties to
China and still worked on DoD funded projects. The government reaction seems
pretty reasonable.

~~~
blackrock
What exactly is the Chinese “threat” here?

Are they going to send a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier loaded with soldiers
to invade the shores of Seattle and Los Angeles? And then claim the mainland
United States as their own property?

~~~
baseballdork
That's a straw man, I never said they're an invasion threat. They're a threat
to US military superiority.

~~~
FpUser
Well power has to be balanced. Otherwise one with the biggest club might get
wrong ideas.

~~~
sdinsn
Currently, China is the one with the wrong ideas. That's why we need to oppose
them every step of the way.

