Harvard University allegedly failed to adequately safeguard research collaborations with Chinese institutions, including universities tied to Beijing’s military and defense-industrial base, according to a report from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Researchers affiliated with Harvard co-authored more than 140 publications with researchers from a group of Chinese universities identified by U.S. officials as central to China’s defense research and military modernization efforts, the report states.
The "Seven Sons of National Defense" are a group of Chinese universities that U.S. officials have flagged as crucial to Beijing's military and technological advancement. The House committee argues that Harvard’s approach to research security created opportunities for collaborations that could bolster China's technological and military capabilities.
Among the collaborations highlighted is a 2023 paper on bio-inspired soft robots for deep-sea exploration co-authored by a Harvard-affiliated researcher and a researcher from Beihang University, also known as Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Beihang has been on the U.S. Commerce Department’s Entity List since 2001. The committee report contends that the work examined in the paper has potential military applications, such as underwater detection, despite Harvard’s research-compliance office characterizing the project as nonmilitary.
Additionally, Harvard researchers co-authored a 2023 paper with a researcher at China’s National University of Defense Technology, an institution also on a U.S. restricted list. This study involved magnetic materials and acknowledged partial support from the U.S. Army Research Office.
The committee's review of publications across various disciplines indicated that engineering accounted for the largest share of Harvard-affiliated research involving "Seven Sons" institutions. Committee chairman Rep. John Moolenaar stated that Harvard has made significant errors and must implement reforms to prevent CCP influence and prioritize secure American research.
The report also examines Harvard’s executive education program with China’s National Healthcare Security Administration. According to the report, attendance and registration records indicated that officials affiliated with the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC), sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2020 for human rights abuses, were listed in connection with some sessions. While it remains unclear if XPCC officials attended all programs, the report alleges Harvard had advance participant information for a 2020 online session that included XPCC-affiliated officials and did not take further action.
Harvard professor Winnie Yip, who helped organize the executive education program, reportedly told investigators she was unaware that XPCC was a sanctioned entity and had not received sanctions compliance training.
The committee's findings suggest that Harvard's research-security practices focused too narrowly on technical legal compliance, neglecting broader national security risks associated with work involving Chinese military-linked institutions. The report cites testimony from Harvard research official John H. Shaw, who stated the university evaluates collaborations case by case and does not prohibit all work with robotics or Chinese institutions. The committee criticized this approach, arguing that research with entities involved in China's military-civil fusion system can have military applications even if unclassified and intended for publication.
The report raises questions about Harvard Global Research and Support Services, an affiliated nonprofit that can accept awards when Harvard cannot directly accept sponsor terms. The committee alleges this entity could be used to circumvent federal foreign-gift reporting requirements.
Recommendations from the report include prohibiting research relationships with entities on U.S. government restricted or sanctioned lists, centralizing research-security oversight at Harvard, and strengthening foreign-funding disclosure requirements for universities.
Harvard received over $600 million from China under the federal Section 117 foreign-gift disclosure system, more than any other American university, according to an Education Department dashboard cited in the report. The committee argues these financial ties necessitate strict oversight of research partnerships and foreign-funding disclosures.
Legislation has been proposed that would strip federal intelligence-related funding from colleges maintaining ties to Chinese Communist Party-linked groups, aimed at protecting sensitive U.S. research and national security.