More than 100 academics connected to British universities have found themselves at the center of an unusual national-security warning after MI5 said research they contributed to was ultimately funded through an organization closely tied to China’s intelligence service.
For some of those researchers, the most unsettling part may be that they did not know who was behind the money.
Britain’s domestic intelligence agency said on Sept. 30 that academics working in fields including artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and covert communications had contributed to projects funded by the China General Technology Research Institute (CGTRI). MI5 said the organization has “very strong ties” to China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), the country’s civilian intelligence agency.
MI5 acknowledged that some researchers may have participated without knowing CGTRI was ultimately financing the work. Its official notice states that “in some cases, academics may not be aware” that the institute was funding the Chinese research projects to which they were contributing.
The warning now leaves universities and individual researchers confronting difficult questions about how international academic partnerships are funded — and how far researchers are expected to investigate the institutions several layers behind a grant or collaborative project.
For the best of our weekly content！
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Check your email to complete sign up
Researchers may have acted in good faith
MI5 said CGTRI’s role went beyond ordinary academic sponsorship.
“MI5 has identified that the primary purpose of CGTRI is to fund academic research that directly improves MSS technical capability for espionage,” the agency said, according to Reuters.
The projects included research into AI, cybersecurity, covert communications systems and steganography, a method of concealing information inside other messages or files. MI5 said the work supported MSS espionage capabilities and therefore posed a threat to British national security.
But the agency also drew a distinction between the alleged purpose of the funding network and the intentions of the academics who participated.
MI5 said many universities and researchers may have dealt with CGTRI “in good faith” because its links to the Ministry of State Security had been obscured. The agency is now advising academics to determine the “ultimate funding source” behind future collaborations involving Chinese institutions.
Professor Peter Mathieson, vice-chancellor of the University of Edinburgh and Universities UK’s lead on international security, similarly said researchers should not automatically be viewed as having knowingly assisted Chinese intelligence.
“There’s no reason why anyone should have realized that,” Mathieson told The Guardian, referring to CGTRI’s alleged connection to Beijing’s security services.
University leaders told the newspaper that individual academics participating in projects involving other universities or third parties may not necessarily know where the original funding originated.
The Guardian also reported that MI5 believes Chinese intelligence gained access to cutting-edge British research involving the scraping of social-media data. Some British-based academics were reportedly given Chinese awards or honors in addition to research funding.
A line has now been drawn
Whatever researchers knew previously, MI5 has made clear that the situation has changed.
The agency urged British universities to “immediately review” current or planned collaborations involving CGTRI and warned institutions and researchers to familiarize themselves with the UK’s National Security Act 2023. It also advised anyone considering continued involvement with CGTRI-funded research to obtain independent legal advice.
According to Reuters, MI5 said continued cooperation could now expose researchers to prosecution under legislation designed to combat foreign espionage and hostile-state activity.
That distinction — between past participation and future involvement — is significant. Mathieson said MI5 was effectively drawing a new boundary for the academic community.
“Now that they have said it, we have to sit up and take notice,” he told The Guardian. “It’s very much a forward-looking directive.”
UK Security Minister Dan Jarvis has since written to university leaders across Britain urging them to end relationships with CGTRI.
“This alert exposes attempts by Chinese intelligence to covertly benefit from the expertise and research of our academics,” Jarvis said, according to Reuters.
He added that international partnerships remain important to British universities, but said the government would take “robust action” against national-security threats.
Universities confront the risks of global research
The case highlights a vulnerability created by the increasingly international nature of scientific research.
Researchers routinely collaborate across universities, countries and funding bodies, and the person carrying out the research may be several steps removed from the organization ultimately supplying the money. In this case, MI5 says that separation allowed an organization linked to Chinese intelligence to benefit from British expertise while some participants remained unaware of the connection.
Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, said institutions have made significant investments in due diligence, risk assessment and research security while trying to preserve international cooperation that supports scientific innovation.
The Chinese Embassy in London rejected MI5’s allegations, calling them “imaginary and purely fabricated.”
“Exchanges and collaboration between UK universities and China have always been conducted on a voluntary basis and in compliance with laws and regulations,” an embassy spokesperson said, according to The Guardian. The embassy described the partnerships as mutually beneficial.
MI5’s decision to issue the alert publicly was itself unusual. The agency said it was the first time it had independently published an espionage alert directly to the public.
Original article
Comments