世界说 09-05
哥大校长抗议FBI监视外国学生 公开信全文翻译来了



是的,FBI 的确在劝说美国高校的教职工们,对自己学校的中国留学生和中国学者们进行监视。

早在去年,美国就曾有报道称 FBI 官员访问了美国大学联盟中的超过 10 所高校,建议这些学校的教职工们对自己校园中与部分中国研究机构和中国企业有联系的学生和学者进行监视,与此同时,FBI 官员还希望这些高校能够密切关注 " 可能用于国防领域的 "、有中国人参加的研究项目的进展。

尽管 FBI 仅将这一行动描述为 " 我们就国家安全事务而持续进行的接触的一部分 "(part of our ongoing engagement on national security matters),对于遭遇问询的高校来说,事情并非如此。今年 6 月,印第安纳大学副校长弗雷德 · 凯特向媒体透露," 这不仅仅是搜寻可疑行为的问题——它实际上针对的是一些特定的国家,以及来自那些国家的人 "。

8 月 29 日和 9 月 4 日,哥伦比亚大学校长伯灵格(Lee Bollinger)在《华盛顿邮报》与哥伦比亚大学官方网站上两次发表公开信,对 FBI 说 " 不 "。


原标题:No, I won ’ t start spying on my foreign-born students






然而,在校园里进行的研究,只有一小部分属于 " 机密 "。事实上,学术研究的目的本就是共享,也就是将学术成果发布到公共领域,以推动人类进步。突破性的医学发现、使世界各地几百万人免于饥饿的农业创新、互联网、人工智能,这些成果都来自公开的、基于大学的研究。

因此,外国人无须跨越大半个地球 " 渗透 " 进我们这些优秀的大学,来获取我们最新的发现,除了一些极其重要的学术发现之外,通过搜索引擎,他们完全可以在舒适的办公室或者宿舍,细读同行评议的学术期刊。或者,他们也可以访问美国专利商标局的网站,了解专利保护申请提供的创新成果的详细信息。

因此,作为一个花了 50 年时间倡导言论和集会自由的人,当得知我们大学的教职工,或许还有学生,竟然被要求去监控外国学生和同事的行为时,我感到极度忧虑。这与我们的初心背道而驰。


换句话说,美国的大学模式是一种战略优势,而不是对美国竞争力的阻碍。我们的行政人员、教授和研究人员不是,也不应该成为美国执法部门的触手。具有讽刺意味的是,在我看来,我们在 FBI 眼中最薄弱的一环,恰恰是我们最大的优势。

在我担任校长的哥伦比亚大学,有来自 150 多个国家的成千上万的学生和教师。作为主流研究型大学的管理者,我们不能肆意限制学术自由。大学文化与系统审查并不兼容,这或许可以解释,为什么即使是到访我们校园的执法官员,也只是告诉我们应该保持警惕,却很少提供规范性指导。

海外竞争对手盗用知识产权确实是一个严重的问题。但对外国学者进行监视是个错误的解决方案。在我看来,如果执法机构有某些合法关切,那么他们应该识别并监控那些基于真正的威胁而被他们锁定的 " 可疑人员 ",而不是担心整个国家的人。




The FBI has stepped up its scrutiny of research practices at college and university campuses — including mine.

Law enforcement and intelligence agencies determined to thwart the illegal transfer of intellectual property to foreign rivals are encouraging U.S. academics and administrators to develop more robust protocols for monitoring foreign-born students and visiting scholars — particularly if they are ethnically Chinese.

With students returning to campus, these policing attempts thrust economic and political concerns into fierce conflict with First Amendment freedoms.

To be sure, government-funded academic research in such national security realms as cybersecurity and bioterrorism is justifiably sensitive. Likewise, academic research conducted in collaboration with U.S. companies — a principal target of most unlawful technology transfers — leads to commercial innovations that warrant protections. Universities have an obligation to comply with existing security protocols, identify sensible ways to bolster them, and cooperate fully with law enforcement authorities and corporate research partners if clear acts of espionage are suspected. To the extent we are falling short in any of these areas — and yes, there have been isolated incidents of academics sharing sensitive intellectual property with foreign governments — we can and must do better.

At the same time, however, only a fraction of the research conducted on campus is "secret." Indeed, the reality is just the opposite. Academic research is intended to be shared — released into the public domain to advance human progress. Groundbreaking medical discoveries, agricultural innovations credited with saving billions of people worldwide from starvation, the Internet, artificial intelligence: All are the result of publicly available, university-based research.

Consequently, a foreign national need not fly halfway around the world to "infiltrate" our great universities and learn about our latest insights and findings: With some notable exceptions, she can type words into a search engine and peruse peer-reviewed academic journals from the comfort of an office or dorm room overseas. Or, similarly, she can visit the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ’ s website, where applications for patent protection provide detailed descriptions of recent innovations.

And so, most worrisome to me, as someone who has spent five decades advocating freedom of expression and assembly, is the notion that university personnel — and perhaps students themselves — should be asked to monitor the movements of foreign-born students and colleagues. This is antithetical to who we are.

The mission of a university is to foster an open atmosphere conducive to speculation, experimentation and creation. American higher education is the envy of the world not in spite of, but because of, its unrivaled commitment to openness and diversity. Attracting — and welcoming — the brightest minds in the world, regardless of nationality or country of origin, is what we ’ re all about.

To put it another way, the U.S. university model is a strategic advantage, not a hindrance to American competitiveness. Our administrators, professors and research scholars are not, and should not become, an arm of U.S. law enforcement. Ironically, what the FBI apparently considers our great vulnerability is, in my view, our greatest strength.

At Columbia University, where I am president, thousands of students and faculty represent more than 150 countries. We stewards of major research universities couldn ’ t contain intellectual freedom even if we wanted to. The incompatibility of university culture with systematic scrutiny may explain why even law enforcement officials who have visited our campus have offered little prescriptive guidance, instead offering that we should be vigilant.

The unauthorized use of intellectual property by overseas competitors is a serious problem. But the surveillance of foreign-born scholars in this country is the wrong solution. If law enforcement agencies have legitimate concerns, it seems to me that they should identify and monitor those they designate as "suspicious people" based on real threats, not broad worries about entire nationalities.

A more effective approach — advocated by many of my colleagues in higher education as well as the bipartisan Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property — is to expand the number of green cards awarded to foreign-born graduates of our great colleges and universities. Many of these international scholars, especially in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, would, if permitted, prefer to remain in the United States and work for U.S.-based companies after graduation, where they could also contribute to the United States ’ economic growth and prosperity. But under the present rules, when their academic studies are completed, we make it difficult for them to stay. They return to their countries with the extraordinary knowledge they acquired here, which can inform future commercial strategies deployed against U.S. competitors.

The mandate of our colleges and universities is to pursue open, robust inquiry across a wide range of topics. Our institutions of higher learning should do more — not less — of what made the United States the most innovative nation in the history of the world.

翻译:金书沁 朱凯





12 我来说两句…
打开 ZAKER 参与讨论