I've been so stressed and overwhelmed all week I hadn't noticed my research on military-civil fusion (from an essay in @Strategy_Bridge) was quoted in this piece by @ewong and @julianbarnes yesterday. I wanted to share a few thoughts on this latest policy. nytimes.com/2020/05/28/us/…
By way of disclosure and/or background, I am among those who has argued for some time that the U.S. government should undertake targeted countermeasures in response to the threat of tech transfer that PRC plans and practices have presented for years. cnas.org/publications/c…
By "targeted," I mean precise and careful, responding to an accurate understanding of the near-term threat and long-term challenge, rather than ill-informed or indiscriminate, and ideally avoiding overreach or collateral damage to U.S. values and competitiveness in the process.
I recognize policy tends to be, at best, a blunt instrument that can have crude effects in ways that are inherently imperfect and suboptimal. Arguably, that tendency reinforces the importance of care and caution in any policy measure.
As an initial reaction, I'd tend to agree, or at least don't disagree, with the purpose and intention of this policy proclamation released today by the Trump administration. I'll explain a few reasons why, but also elaborate on why I have serious concerns. whitehouse.gov/presidential-a…
There have been incidents when PLA officers who concealed their ongoing military service and affiliation were tasked to support ongoing military research, as in this recent incident. justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/har…
Even without indicators of outright wrongdoing, when the PLA can leverage scientists with expertise and experience in American universities and laboratories, that talent can support Chinese military research projects. There have been deliberate attempts to pursue such recruitment
As @ASPI_ICPC research by @alexjoske has highlighted, NUDT has sent sizable numbers of scientists overseas, including to the U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, and Germany, among others. aspi.org.au/report/picking…
Previously, there were gaps in U.S. policy to exercise scrutiny and oversight in the visa process. This new measure is an attempt to redress that, which is reasonable if undertaken based on linkage to or affiliation with the PLA, (or any foreign military of a competitor, I'd add)
But the drafting of this "proclamation" is clumsy and contradictory in ways that may prove counterproductive, including with regard to the importance of coordinating with allies, especially in the current, fraught environment.
I'd take issue with this statement, which is not untrue but implies a generalized suspicion that is unreasonable: "The PRC authorities use some Chinese students, mostly post‑graduate students and post-doctorate researchers, to operate as non-traditional collectors" of IP.
It is reasonable to say that students with a past affiliation or association with the PLA may present risk or cause for concern given the PLA's track record of targeted recruitment, but the way this policy frames and defines the issue is fairly vague and rather questionable.
This phrasing is expansive enough to leave much leeway for interpretation, and the implementation will depend upon the capacity to evaluate these factors, including what constitutes "an entity in the PRC that implements or supports the PRC’s “military-civil fusion strategy.” 
That question is hardly straightforward, especially in a moment when the political economy of military-civil fusion is evolving and the boundaries are blurring, such that there's no clear answer, but rather a matter of degree.
And this definition of "military-civil fusion” is awkward and misrepresents the actual strategy, which primarily concentrates on integrating military and commercial research and technological development. Tech transfer is related but not explicitly an element of that strategy.
Beyond the specifics of the policy proclamation, there's also the political environment within which it is being released, against the backdrop of hostility and generalized suspicion against Chinese students, which has raised serious concerns of racial profiling and prejudice.
So, I'd worry this policy may have adverse effects, especially to the extent it may be tainted by and conflated with recent measures and proposals that espouse undue hostility, and depending upon whether its actual implementation is fair and reasonable or unduly indiscriminate.
