The possible lapse comes after U.S. Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., led a congressional group warning the U.S. State Department in July 2023 to beware of cooperation with China. This group recommended to let the agreement expire without renewal, claiming China has gained a military advantage through its scientific and technological ties with the U.S.

The State Department has dragged its feet on renewing the agreement, only requesting an extension at the last moment to “amend and strengthen” the agreement.

The U.S. is an active international research collaborator, and since 2011 China has been its top scientific partner, displacing the United Kingdom, which had been the U.S.‘s most frequent collaborator for decades. China’s domestic research and development spending is closing in on parity with that of the United States. Its scholastic output is growing in both number and quality. According to recent studies, China’s science is becoming increasingly creative, breaking new ground.

As a policy analyst and public affairs professor, I research international collaboration in science and technology and its implications for public policy. Relations between countries are often enhanced by negotiating and signing agreements, and this agreement is no different. The U.S.’s science and technology agreement with China successfully built joint research projects and shared research centers between the two nations.

U.S. scientists can typically work with foreign counterparts without a political agreement. Most aren’t even aware of diplomatic agreements, which are signed long after researchers have worked together. But this is not the case with China, where the 1979 agreement became a prerequisite for and the initiator of cooperation.

A 40-year diplomatic investment

The U.S.-China science and technology agreement was part of a historic opening of relations between the two countries, following decades of antagonism and estrangement. U.S. President Richard Nixon set in motion the process of normalizing relations with China in the early 1970s. President Jimmy Carter continued to seek an improved relationship with China.

China had announced reforms, modernizations and a global opening after an intense period of isolation from the time of the Cultural Revolution from the late 1950s until the early 1970s. Among its “four modernizations” was science and technology, in addition to agriculture, defense and industry.

While China is historically known for inventing gunpowder, paper and the compass, China was not a scientific power in the 1970s. American and Chinese diplomats viewed science as a low-conflict activity, comparable to cultural exchange. They figured starting with a nonthreatening scientific agreement could pave the way for later discussions on more politically sensitive issues.

On July 28, 1979, Carter and Chinese Premier Deng Xiaoping signed an “umbrella agreement” that contained a general statement of intent to cooperate in science and technology, with specifics to be worked out later.

In the years that followed, China’s economy flourished, as did its scientific output. As China’s economy expanded, so did its investment in domestic research and development. This all boosted China’s ability to collaborate in science – aiding their own economy.

Early collaboration under the 1979 umbrella agreement was mostly symbolic and based upon information exchange, but substantive collaborations grew over time.

A major early achievement came when the two countries published research showing mothers could ingest folic acid to prevent birth defects like spina bifida in developing embryos. Other successful partnerships developed renewable energy, rapid diagnostic tests for the SARS virus and a solar-driven method for producing hydrogen fuel.

Joint projects then began to emerge independent of government agreements or aid. Researchers linked up around common interests – this is how nation-to-nation scientific collaboration thrives.

Many of these projects were initiated by Chinese Americans or Chinese nationals working in the United States who cooperated with researchers back home. In the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, these strong ties led to rapid, increased Chinese-U.S. cooperation in response to the crisis.

Time of conflict

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, scientific collaboration between the two countries increased dramatically – joint research projects expanded, visiting students in science and engineering skyrocketed in number and collaborative publications received more recognition.

As China’s economy and technological success grew, however, U.S. government agencies and Congress began to scrutinize the agreement and its output. Chinese know-how began to build military strength and, with China’s military and political influence growing, they worried about intellectual property theft, trade secret violations and national security vulnerabilities coming from connections with the U.S.

Recent U.S. legislation, such as the CHIPS and Science Act, is a direct response to China’s stunning expansion. Through the CHIPS and Science Act, the U.S. will boost its semiconductor industry, seen as the platform for building future industries, while seeking to limit China’s access to advances in AI and electronics.

A victim of success?

Some politicians believe this bilateral science and technology agreement, negotiated in the 1970s as the least contentious form of cooperation – and one renewed many times – may now threaten the United States’ dominance in science and technology. As political and military tensions grow, both countries are wary of renewal of the agreement, even as China has signed similar agreements with over 100 nations.

The United States is stuck in a world that no longer exists – one where it dominates science and technology. China now leads the world in research publications recognized as high quality work, and it produces many more engineers than the U.S. By all measures, China’s research spending is soaring.

Even if the recent extension results in a renegotiated agreement, the U.S. has signaled to China a reluctance to cooperate. Since 2018, joint publications have dropped in number. Chinese researchers are less willing to come to the U.S. Meanwhile, Chinese researchers who are in the U.S. are increasingly likely to return home taking valuable knowledge with them.

The U.S. risks being cut off from top know-how as China forges ahead. Perhaps looking at science as a globally shared resource could help both parties craft a truly “win-win” agreement.

Source: The Conversation

The post The US and China may be ending an agreement on science and technology cooperation appeared first on Policy Print.

Professor Dame Juliet Gerrard has quietly released a new report which examines the context within which gangs exist in New Zealand.

It was requested last year by former prime minister Jacinda Ardern, “to support a policy agenda to reduce gang harm in our communities”.

The government has long been under pressure to control gang crime, with opposition parties accusing Labour of being soft on crime.

The report concludes there is no quick way of reducing gang harm.

Reducing harm, the report said, would require tackling the underlying and unsolved societal issues, including inequity, intergenerational trauma, housing and family violence.

“All of which serve to narrow the choices of those in our society who experience complex and inter-connected stressors,” it said.

While the report makes no specific recommendations, it does suggest introducing policies on family harm, youth offending and drug harm reduction.

The report said a public health approach “does not come at the expense of enforcement” but stressed “we can’t and won’t arrest ourselves out of the “gang problem”.

Legislative and police efforts to address gangs might deliver immediate outcomes, the report said, but longer-term interventions would be required to “build the society that we want in the long term.”

Enforcement serves a purpose but is not the only solution, it added.

“The evidence indicates that interventions such as ‘scared-straight’ or boot camp approaches are ineffective. And a ‘zero tolerance’ style of policing builds distrust in the communities that police are tasked to serve.

“It creates alienation and dislocation from communities and risks fuelling gang membership and increasing gang dislocation and isolation.

“We know that targeted enforcement efforts run the risk of strengthening internal gang cohesion, reinforcing anti‐social attitudes, and simply displacing offending elsewhere rather than addressing the problem at its root,” the report said.

The report suggested greater focus on prevention – which could include targeted programmes or poverty reduction and increased access to healthcare – to limit the number of young people joining gangs.

It said a young person having strong ties with their family, school and community would also reduce the chance of them being involved in a gang.

Investment to ensure young people “enjoy” those strong ties “offers the most hope of diminishing gang harm in the long term.”

The report said preventing young people from joining gangs was likely more cost effective than trying to facilitate disengagement.

Political parties respond

Minister of Police Ginny Andersen said the government welcomed the report.

“It identifies that there are no quick fixes when it comes to gangs and the underlying social issues that drive gang membership and activity.”

Andersen said government action was focused on both stopping the harm that gangs do as well as well as creating opportunities to ensure people do not enter gangs in the first place.

“Our investments have seen nearly 700 additional police working on, and an additional $94 million invested in, tackling gangs and organised crime.

“This is showing results with nearly 40,000 charges laid and over 400 firearms seized through Operation Cobalt.”

The National Party doubled down on its tough-on-gangs rhetoric, its police spokesperson Mark Mitchell saying he disagreed with the report.

“I would call on the gang leaders to stand up and recognise the fact that the gang culture has a very negative effect on not only the communities that they’re in but their own members, their families and their children. “

David Seymour Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver

ACT Party leader David Seymour dismissed the report as little more than a doorstop – of no comfort to victims.

“They’re attempting to claim that if only the authorities are nice to gangs and treat them as friends they’ll start being nice back.

“Thankfully for them Labour has subjected New Zealanders to a real world experiment. They don’t improve their behaviour, in fact they get worse.”

The Green Party’s justice spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman said successive governments had stoked fear over gangs for votes.

“People are very naturally fearful of crime, in particular violent crime, and it’s always easier to tell them it’s a simple solution. The tough on crime rhetoric has been that simple solution.”

Ghahraman added it would take political willpower to adopt an approach that actually works.

“When will the politicians have the courage and the integrity to say to the public, actually we have the solutions, they’re a bit more complicated and you know what they take to resource.”

‘This isn’t an either or situation’

Dame Juliet told Morning Report a focus on prevention would accompany police action on criminal offending.

“We definitely need to tackle organised crime – the question is which specific legislation you might use to do that,” she said.

History suggested using existing laws was more effective rather than gang-specific laws. A zero-tolerance approach risked fuelling gang membership in the long term.

“A focus on criminal offending rather than the jackets they are wearing is thought to be more successful by lots of experts.”

Gangs were a global issue but New Zealand was unusual with gang members often family members as well. For children born into a gang or the mother of a child getting out of that environment could be hard but there were interventions to get in early to break that cycle.

“Understanding those family dynamics can guide some successful interventions to support people to make better choices than joining a gang.

“If you think about a child excluded from school, and is on a path to joining a gang, wrapping round interventions with that young person to support them into making better choices, open up more possibilities than they’re seeing in their present life, is something that can accompany the police-type approaches.

“This isn’t an either or situation – these are to accompany short-term law enforcement approaches that focus on criminal offending itself.”

Source: RNZ News

The post New Zealand Can’t Arrest Its Way Out of the Gang Problem, Science Chief Warns appeared first on Policy Print.

Report informs citing the Belarusian media that the bill has been posted on the National Legal Internet Portal.

From what date this agreement ceases to operate is not specified.

“To recognize as invalid the Law of the Republic of Belarus dated December 2, 2010 No. 203-З ‘On ratification of the agreement between the government of the Republic of Belarus and the government of the French Republic on cooperation in the field of culture, education, science and technology, mass media’ from the moment the agreement is terminated,” the document notes.

The agreement was signed in Paris in January 2010. It provided for close cooperation in the field of education, when Belarusian students studied French with the use of modern methods and could receive education in France, while French students could, in turn, come to Belarus to study.

The post Belarus To Terminate Cooperation With France in Culture, Education, Science appeared first on Policy Print.