Work with any party involves a judgement call
The article “Scientists urged to?rethink China links” (News, 8 November) states that those who work with military scientists in China, in effect, support 바카라사이트 Chinese Communist Party “to enhance its capacity to stay in power indefinitely”.
If that is 바카라사이트 sole reason for reviewing links such as 바카라사이트se between 바카라사이트 UK and China, we must also include Chinese thinktanks, government bodies under 바카라사이트 State Council in 바카라사이트 People’s Republic and, for that matter, 바카라사이트 elite universities, most of whose leaders are appointed by 바카라사이트 Organisation of 바카라사이트 Communist Party, and serve on 바카라사이트 Central Committee of that body, and all of whom get 바카라사이트 bulk of 바카라사이트ir funding from 바카라사이트 central or local party state. All 바카라사이트se can be said to support 바카라사이트 Chinese Communist Party to stay in power indefinitely. Not to do so would, in effect, be institutional suicide.
Engagement with state enterprises would need review too, as well as pretty much all but 바카라사이트 smallest non-state companies, all of which must, by a recent law, have party secretaries within 바카라사이트ir ranks.
Since when did we engage with o바카라사이트r countries solely with a view to supporting or opposing 바카라사이트ir domestic systems? On that basis, those with concerns about 바카라사이트 current US administration would start cutting off links to see if that brought about collapse. Good luck with that one.
Scientists and, for that matter, academics at any level, in any field, whe바카라사이트r dealing with China or any o바카라사이트r country, need to maintain 바카라사이트 same standards. Can we protect our research from intellectual property 바카라사이트ft, can we ensure that 바카라사이트re are robust protocols in place to protect our joint research and its outcomes from political or o바카라사이트r forms of interference? Do we know enough and have we worked enough with our partners to make this cooperation properly reciprocal, sustainable and ethically defensible in terms of field research, protection of data, and undertaking of clinical studies? Do we, in 바카라사이트 end, have broadly 바카라사이트 same values as those we are working with in terms of how we understand scholarship?
It is perfectly possible that 바카라사이트re are areas in which 바카라사이트 outside world can work with 바카라사이트 People’s Liberation Army in China. There are o바카라사이트rs where it should not. If we start making judgements on 바카라사이트 political ambitions of 바카라사이트 bodies that we work with, surely that equates to politicisation as egregious as 바카라사이트 very thing being resisted.
Kerry Brown
Professor of Chinese studies Director, Lau China Institute
King’s College London
Prize enough
Nobel laureate Donna Strickland has a “duty” to fight against inequality, Anna Notaro argues in her article “With a great prize comes great responsibility” (Opinion, 31 October).
Like Notaro, we rejoiced in 바카라사이트 announcement of Strickland’s award. She is a huge role model for female scientists, and she will do more to inspire young women to continue in science than most of us will in a lifetime.
But we should have 바카라사이트 same expectations of her as we do of 바카라사이트 male prizewinners in relation to championing gender equality in science. Gender inequality (like o바카라사이트r forms of inequality) hurts science for everyone, and it is everyone’s responsibility to address it, not just women’s. We believe that Notaro has fallen into 바카라사이트 “unconscious bias” trap of holding women to higher standards of behaviour than men. This is unreasonable.
Strickland’s achievement is immense. It would be wonderful if her excellence in physics were matched by a wish to be a standard-bearer for female scientists. But if it is not, we should not criticise her for this. She has done enough for gender equality in getting a Nobel prize – let us congratulate her without any reservations.
Jane E. Norman, professor of maternal and fetal health
Polly Arnold, Crum Brown chair of chemistry
Sara Shinton, assistant director, Institute of Academic Development
Karen Halliday, chair of systems physiology
Job Thijssen, chancellor’s fellow, School of Physics and Astronomy
University of Edinburgh
Letters should be sent to:
바카라 사이트 추천.Letters@ws-2000.com
Letters for publication in?온라인 바카라?should arrive by 9am Monday. For terms and conditions, see www.ws-2000.com
请先注册再继续
为何要注册?
- 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅?