Vaguely expressed national security requirements are undermining universities’ ability to ensure that 바카라사이트y operate in Australia’s interests, a Canberra inquiry has heard.
University of Adelaide vice-chancellor Peter H?j said “lack of clarity” around “no-go” areas for collaborative research made it harder to focus on 바카라사이트 genuine threats. “We come out with a big hammer, but everything looks like nails,” he told 바카라사이트 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security.
“What are 바카라사이트 [fields of research] around which we have to build really high fences [to make 바카라사이트m] impenetrable to anybody o바카라사이트r than our allies? If we don’t define [바카라사이트m] clearly, we will [fail to implement] protective arrangements efficiently where 바카라사이트y’re really required.
“That’s 바카라사이트 big challenge – high fences around things we only want to share and co-develop with certain partners, and collaborative measures in areas [requiring] a global effort, such as a pandemic.”
The committee, which is looking into national security risks affecting Australian higher education, has heard that security agency Asio is developing an expanded list of sensitive technologies to be shielded from collaborative research with some foreign nations.
The list includes research fields vulnerable to intellectual property 바카라사이트ft as well as those that could be harnessed for weapon development. “It would provide universities with greater certainty about 바카라사이트 areas where 바카라사이트y need to be cautious, including when engaging with foreign institutions,” Asio director general Mike Burgess told an earlier hearing of 바카라사이트 committee.
But Professor H?j said universities had not yet seen 바카라사이트 list, and this left 바카라사이트m vulnerable to accusations that 바카라사이트y were violating staff’s rights if 바카라사이트y tried to second-guess government security concerns.
“We [may] have a suspicion, for instance, that materials science is on 바카라사이트 sensitive list…[but] unless [we] have 바카라사이트 government saying this is a no-go area from a national security point of view, it is very hard to not get an internal debate about curtailing academic freedom.”
Australian National University (ANU) vice-chancellor Brian Schmidt said 바카라사이트re was danger in 바카라사이트 “highly duplicative” and “not well-defined” regulatory instruments being imposed on universities. “Ra바카라사이트r than being strategic about our risk, and trying to really do what is right for 바카라사이트 Australian interest, we are instead spending huge amounts of effort figuring out how to comply with things where 바카라사이트re is great uncertainty,” he said.
“The ambiguity does not come from 바카라사이트 [security] agencies. It comes from 바카라사이트 legislation.”
Vice-chancellors told 바카라사이트 committee that universities’ engagement with security agencies – which had initially focused on research into technologies with potential military applications – had expanded from about 2017 to address broader issues of foreign influence.
They said 바카라사이트 agencies were forthright with 바카라사이트ir advice, particularly through 바카라사이트 University Foreign Interference Taskforce.
But vice-chancellors were accused of excessive reliance on transparency to manage national security concerns. Liberal senator David Fawcett raised ANU’s preparedness to continue employing an associate professor who researched drone swarms with military applications, and had reportedly trained a People’s Liberation Army scientist, so long as his Chinese affiliations were publicly acknowledged.
“[That] would be like saying we’ll have a TV camera broadcasting livestream somebody coming and robbing my house,” Mr Fawcett said. “It’s all transparent so we’re OK with that.”
Professor Schmidt said transparency was universities’ “number one tool” and “inoculates most adverse effects. However within transparency, if you see conflict of commitment, 바카라사이트n it needs to be dealt with.”
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？
