On May 29th, the IEEE (International Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Communications Branch banned Huawei employees from serving as reviewers of their academic journals. It caused an uproar in academic circles and industry, and “reviewed the door” The fierce opposition of domestic scientists and academic organizations, Zhang Haixia, a professor at Peking University, the China Computer Society, and China's top ten professional societies all protested.
After five days of fermentation, the incident made positive progress and the ban was suspended. However, the ban from ecological supply chains, markets, and standards organizations is still hanging on Huawei. The huge risks that are exposed are not to be ignored by the Chinese scientific community. The international academic communities and academic platforms closely related to domestic researchers are still subject to US law.
On June 5th, the China Computer Society Youth Computer Technology Forum was held in Beijing. Many experts focused on “the IEEE adheres to the laws of the United States, and how to do research and development in China”. Huawei's ban is based on technical threats in related fields. So in the field of science, if basic research is also detained with a "threat theory" hat, or even "card neck", how should the academic community face it?
“Whether it is an IEEE event or a previous open source license, it seems that the regulation is unreasonable, but from another perspective it is in accordance with US law. Bao Yungang, a researcher at the Institute of Computing Technology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said that international academic organizations and world open source projects should follow international law, which can circumvent the regulation of an international organization by a certain country.
Huawei is listed in the “Entity List”, but the review of the paper is in principle a technical exchange activity. Should it be included in the list in a gray area? Bao Yungang explained that the reason why the academic community is strongly opposed is because it “seriously violates academic practice”, the IEEE’s practice shows that it considers the review of the paper as a service to members, which makes sense in legal terms. But it doesn't make sense in academia.
In this regard, Xiong Dingzhong, the chief partner of Qing Law Law Firm, expressed the same view. He bluntly said, "The regulation is unreasonable, but it is procedurally in line with US law." The procedures for regulatory decisions are self-consistent within the framework of the US law. If you do not challenge the correctness of the entity's judgment of this decision, it is difficult to say that there is a problem. The US entity must comply with the decision before it is overturned.
In the face of possible dilemmas, some people suggested at the scene "We don't stretch our necks, and we are not at risk of ‘ card & rsquo;". In this regard, Bao Yungang believes that domestic academic circles need to participate in international academic exchanges. Researchers from all over the world have created a large number of advanced ideas and technologies, and each can learn and integrate to develop. The rapid development of relevant domestic academic research at the beginning of this century relies to a large extent on the purchase of papers from IEEE and ACM digital libraries, helping domestic scholars to access global knowledge faster and more easily.
“Using the knowledge of the academic community to supplement yourself and maintain technological leadership is an inevitable choice. ” Han Yinhe, a researcher at the Institute of Computing Technology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, also said.
So, will the development of domestic academic organizations increase the right to speak? Xu Jianjun, CEO of Beijing Caizhi Technology Co., Ltd. believes that developing an academic community as much as possible will become an important foundation, even “chips”.
Han Yinhe said, “Yes, but not the most important. "He said that after the incident, if we still need an IEEE-like organization, we will participate in depth according to the established rules and be aware of the rules of the IEEE; if not, we can develop ourselves." Academic organization. ”
Bao Yungang stressed that in the face of the “review of the manuscript”, the Chinese scientific and technological community should be more open, confident and self-reliant. Only by opening up can we be respected by the whole world. China can take the initiative to build a more open international organization. It is necessary to believe in self-judgment and reward those who do things practically, to overcome difficulties, to fill shortcomings, and to break the "card neck".
(Technology Daily, Beijing, June 5th)