This new @CFR_org "Expert Take" on student exchanges with China is so flawed I had to read it twice to find something nice to say. Here goes: At least the authors acknowledge that American students who travel to China need protection, and that the CCP should immediately release detained academics such as Min Zin and Youlin Chen. Small mercies. Beyond these pro forma nods to reality, the piece's omission of China-side context speaks volumes: --The authors effectively support the CCP's "50,000 in 5 years" drive to recruit US students without once mentioning it. Announced by Xi Jinping in 2023, this initiative has reportedly already reached its target but continues because its architects believe it provides such upside to the CCP. --Similarly, in 1,100-plus words, the authors manage not a single mention of the united front apparatus, which plays a critical role fronting for Chinese intelligence and conducting political warfare on the PRC side of educational exchanges. They do not mention the CCP emphasis on leveraging foreign students to advance propaganda and economic goals, including attracting other countries' capital and technology while encouraging their governments' complacency. --Finally, they find no occasion to mention the CCP's surveillance and transnational repression of Chinese students inside the United States, a growing threat not only to these students but also to US sovereignty. In fairness, the authors have to leave out these inconvenient details so they can advance their completely backward proposal. At a time when the CCP is energetically recruiting (or luring) American students in order to strengthen its position vis-a-vis the United States, the authors do NOT suggest cutting off these flows. Rather, they argue that President Trump should negotiate with General Secretary Xi to secure "implicit assurances" not to detain or surveil US students in China so that we can send even more students. As if today's CCP intelligence state, which is all too active even on US soil, might be willing to "insulate from competitive dynamics" programs on their own soil that allow them to surveil and shape some of the Americans they're most interested in surveilling and shaping. This is as shrewd as telling the car salesman that there's no other car for you than the one you test drove, the only thing it's missing is an extended warranty, and you feel like you've known him forever. Just astonishingly counter-strategic from a US perspective - but helpful to the CCP. Sadly, it's typical of the arguments that have gotten the United States to the place where we find ourselves, having ceded so many of our advantages to the CCP through compliant engagement over decades. In this case, compliant engagement includes hand-waving about "understanding" (citing the example of a scholar who visited, and left, China before the CCP took over as evidence for the need to be on the ground in 2026) and regurgitating CCP slogans such as "people-to-people diplomacy." All while avoiding the aforementioned grubby and impolite - but stubborn! - facts essential to even a basic understanding of the situation. It's not as if the authors don't know any better. One of them moderated a CFR event last year where the speaker said: "And then there’s research in China by Americans. It’s very difficult. First of all, we only have 900 American students in the whole country right now. Being a student in China is not easy. Being a scholar trying to do research, the kind I’ve had to do, I’ve been a resident fellow in six different Chinese Academy of Social Sciences institutes in my career—six, more than any other foreigner I’m aware of. Well, that’s not possible today. You can’t go be a resident fellow in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, or any other place. And much less do interviews, archival research, libraries, field work. Just basic scholarly research. Can’t do it. That’s what I mean. Xi Jinping has securitized scholarship, amongst other things..." The other co-author - unsurprisingly - runs a non-profit that has for many years worked directly with CCP united front bodies, and lists a united front official as an advisor on its website. So... I will stand by for the inevitable exasperated sighs and ad feminam insults that seem to substitute for intelligent debate on this subject by defenders of the status quo. Cheers!

This RAND study, entitled “Building the Knowledge and Skills the U.S. Air Force Needs for Strategic Competition with China,” was published in April 2026. It may be relevant. It’s worth noting that RAND’s Project Air Force has supported the Air Force for decades. A couple of years ago, RAND brought onboard one of CASI’s star analysts, who served concurrently as Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Here’s a notable excerpt from the RAND study: “Although CASI plays a central role in advancing understanding of China’s aerospace capabilities and has contributed valuable research and PME content, challenges limit its effectiveness. CASI has succeeded in producing high-quality analysis and educating segments of the PME community; however, its broader impact is hindered by limited visibility, resourcing, and integration with career pathways. Without deliberate efforts to increase awareness and embed CASI outputs into USAF talent management systems, its contributions risk being underutilized.” rand.org/pubs/research_repor…

The US Air Force is shutting down CASI (China Aerospace Studies Institute), its dedicated open-source think tank on China's military aerospace forces. CASI has been one of the most prolific public sources of PLA research in the US; publishing hundreds of studies, running officer courses, and supporting wargames. The PLA-studies community is calling it "devastating" and "a massive own-goal."

This is a very bad move! It sends a signal to Beijing that the US isn’t really serious about deterring Beijing. “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War

One of my big takeaways from this whole experience is that you should avoid cancer if you can manage it. It is not nearly as fun as everybody says.

Literally not the point of the JWE. You’re being salty for no reason and it’s coming across as uselessly petty. You don’t have to score partisan political points. You can just enjoy it. You’re allowed.