I wanted to make a quick update about Professor Xiafeng Wang from Indiana University. For overview details, see posts below. The latest chapter IU of the Faculty Organization (the American Association of University Professors) sent a message to the university that challenges the end of Professor Wang. You can see that message here. The message itself is our best evidence so far that Wang was actually launched by the university. The university itself did not confirm this or publicly commented. At least it does not seem to be in contact with Wang. So we have no confirmation or anyone who talks about him.
It is important to note that all of this reveals in the context of people who have a few information about what is happening. Professor Wang seems to be the goal of a federal investigation of some kind. The context indicates something related to spy of some kind. But again, we don’t know that. We simply know that Wang is at the forefront of research on the central technologies for high -end industry and national security (computer science, encryption, artificial intelligence). The federal government is being investigated. The AAUP message claims that Wang, a tenant professor, was launched with no internal legal procedures. The argument of the local separation is that although this investigation or condemnation may eventually deserve such an end, legal procedures are still important. As they say, this is especially in the current political climate in the United States
I would like to back down and note some background and challenges to report like this. The United States and China are two global powers at the forefront of the competition of technology, defense and great power. They both invest huge resources in spying and spying. A large quantity of China’s spy and its employment in the United States focuses on Chinese and Chinese citizens. It is equally true that over the past quarter, there was ethnic stereotypes for Chinese and Chinese citizens and there was a frequent panic in which they were investigated and their lives were disrupted or worse than evidence. Both these two are true and very difficult to know, without much evidence, whether this is part of those stories.
I have tried the best I can provide context networks. Both are real. This deficiency in information is especially true for me because I have never heard of Wang until the end of this week. But I was in contact with a number of people who know him, work, ministry, or the wider field – in a number of four cases – and they are in the dark on an equal footing.
The only point that I wanted to clarify is that every sign that we get here indicates an investigation into the public space to combat spy. This does not mean that the accusation or investigation is necessarily valid. We know that this is true through the “innocent” sense of guilt. “But this is particularly the case in the current American political environment.
The federal audit of Chinese American scientists and Chinese citizens rose greatly in the last part of the first Trump administration. So this is part of the Trump administration campaign bigger or something that would happen under the Harris administration, we do not know. I heard one story indicating that this entire investigation has exceeded what I call near a written error, or basically a technical violation that Wang was not responsible for. In fact, it is just rumors among people in this field who may not know or do not know what the FBI is looking at.
What is related to everything is that anything is possible here. The fact that the Trump administration is full of people with extreme charity in relation to the Republic of the Republic and who are not indifferent to civil freedoms and even the investigations that caused properly to add only to the general climate of “Who knows?”
The only thing that seems likely to be linked to the university’s response. We do not know the full background. What we know is that the university’s actions here either began or were announced at least within its department on March 14. Putting someone on vacation during the investigation is natural. But the university has exceeded the usual, as it lowered the public pages, and it seems that it was shot when the FBI appeared in its homes on Friday. It is imagined that either very strong evidence or cover violations of a really exceptional nature they felt they had no choice. But what seems more likely is that in the current political climate, they do not want to do anything in any way feel that they are fighting a battle with the Trump administration. So they acted as they have here.