Your current location:Home > Latest news text

魔法禁书目录

Proposed US rule barring China science collaboration sparks outcry from US scientists_我的网站

纸牌屋第二季

一 | 开国上将韩先楚，外号“旋风司令”，打仗快、狠、准。可他在1965年做的一件事，比战场上的冲锋更让人佩服。那年夏天，韩先楚回到湖北红安老家。红安是有名的将军县，可将军回来看到的不是风光，而是问题。

China US Photo:VCGAmerican scientists have voiced opposition to a proposed rule which seeks to ban federal funding for US science collaboration with China, saying that it would instead hurt US interest, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday. Chinese experts also warned that the slew of US restrictions on China-US scientific cooperation is unlikely to deal a fatal blow to China's scientific development, but could instead backfire on the US.
The proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rule, set to take effect in December, would mark one of the biggest overhauls of US science funding in decades, giving political appointees greater authority over grant awards previously guided by scientific peer review and requiring that they "advance the President's policy priorities," according to the Washington Post.
It would also effectively expand the 2011 Wolf Amendment, which bars scientists from using NASA funding for bilateral collaborations with China, to all federal agencies and scientists receiving federal funds, marking the largest break in US-China scientific engagement in decades, the US media outlet reported.
So far, the proposed rule has garnered nearly half a million public comments, many from scientists and leading US science bodies. A Washington Post analysis of 50,000 of those comments found that around 88 percent were negative.
The rule, initially set to take effect in October, was pushed back to December after a bipartisan stopgap funding bill temporarily halted its adoption. Unlike the Wolf Amendment, the rule does not require congressional approval to take effect.
"I do think there are still members of Congress who think we have a monopoly on knowledge. They think we're still in the Cold War Soviet era ... where we were ahead in most areas of science and technology. That is not the case with China. We are no longer the leader in many areas of science," said Tobin Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the Association for American Universities, which advocates on behalf of leading US research universities, per the Washington Post.
Scientists warn that the rule risks subjecting long-term scientific research to four-year political cycles. "We will not succeed if with every new administration we are ping-ponging back and forth about priorities," the American Association for the Advancement of Science said in a blistering comment, urging the administration to withdraw the rule. "Fast-tracking such profound changes ... hands an easy victory to nations like China," it said, the Washington Post reported.
This reflects a fundamental divide between the US government and the scientific community over how science should develop, Wang Yiwei, a professor at Renmin University of China's School of International Studies, told the Global Times. He noted that politicians tend to believe that suppressing China as a competitor would allow the US to preserve its market dominance and technological edge.
Scientists, however, tend to follow a different logic, as scientific progress depends on openness, exchanges and collaboration. If science and technology are driven solely by competition and private capital, with the ultimate goal of maintaining technological monopolies, this could create greater risks and ultimately undermine US interests as well, Wang said.
The proposed rule change is the latest salvo in a broader battle in Washington over how to respond to China's rise as a scientific superpower. In July, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) also moved to ban collaborations between scientist it funds and many Chinese research institutions and their employees, according to Science magazine.
Liu Shaoshan, director of the Center for Embodied AI at the Shenzhen Institute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics for Society and a former US-based researcher, told the Global Times in a previous interview that the NSF's new proposed rules created a "talent wall," arguing that restrictions based on nationality, institutional affiliation, and research partnerships could reduce the global talent pool available to the US, weaken its ability to attract leading scientists, and slow scientific innovation.
Liu also said scientific advancement relies not only on discovery but also on the exchange, validation, and dissemination of knowledge.
Wang also said China has built significant strengths through its vast pool of scientists and engineers, complete industrial chains and massive application scenarios, while increasingly moving from application-oriented innovation toward original research. Against this backdrop, US technological blockades and restrictions on cooperation are unlikely to halt China's progress, but could instead isolate American scientists from China's latest research and collaboration opportunities. Such an approach could also prevent the two countries from leveraging their respective strengths and ultimately undermine US competitiveness, Wang said.
。他走进一个公社，发现干部名单密密麻麻，数了数，竟然有好几十人。

二 | 一个公社才多少人口？这么多干部，平时都干什么？韩先楚当场就坐不住了，把公社领导叫来，说得很直白：“干部太多了，要精简。”公社领导问减到多少合适，韩先楚回了一句：“精简到老百姓不叫苦为止。” 这句话很朴素，却说到了根子上。

三 | 干部多，开销就大，开销大，负担就压在老百姓头上。韩先楚虽然是带兵的人，可算这笔账比谁都清楚。但让韩先楚没想到的是，他说完以后，下面一点动静都没有。后来他到江西上高县视察部队，顺便了解地方情况，发现干部数量同样惊人。他多次向有关方面反映，都石沉大海。韩先楚脾气上来了，干脆直接给毛主席写了一封信，把看到的情况一五一十说了。信里没有拐弯抹角，核心就一条：地方干部队伍太庞大，老百姓负担太重，必须精简。毛主席收到信后，没有当成一般的群众来信处理。他安排人去湖南湘潭调查，结果发现，一个县城竟然有900多名干部。这个数字让毛主席很意外。按照当时的实际需要，一个县百把人足够办事，多出来的都是老百姓在养。

四 | 后来毛主席到杭州，听华东局汇报工作。汇报开始前，他突然提起了韩先楚的来信，说：“韩先楚是个实事求是的人，他对我帮助很大。

五 | ” 这句话让在场的人一时摸不着头脑。等毛主席把信的内容一说，大家才明白，这是要借这件事敲打地方。毛主席当场提出要求：必须立即开展精简干部工作，而且要快。这不是第一次提精简。

六 | 早在抗战时期，边区政府就推行过精兵简政，目的就是节省民力、提高效率。到了1965年，这个问题再次摆上桌面，说明机构臃肿不是一时现象，需要反复纠治。韩先楚这封信，得罪人吗？肯定得罪。精简干部，就是动一部分人的饭碗。

七 | 他完全可以选择不说，反正他是军事干部，地方的事与他关系不大。但他没有装看不见。他回乡看到的问题，就是老百姓天天面对的问题。一个将军，能替种田的人算账，这比打一场胜仗更有意义。毛主席对韩先楚的评价，也说明高层需要听真话。韩先楚不说漂亮话，只讲实际情况。这种作风，在今天依然重要。干部队伍不在于人多，而在于能不能办事、办多少事。如果一堆人坐在机关里，问题却没人解决，那精简就是应该的。韩先楚从战场到地方，始终没变的是那股实在劲儿。他看到问题不绕弯，写信不粉饰，这正是“实事求是”四个字的具体体现。这样的将军，值得后人记住。