Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

The US, once celebrated as the "land of freedom and opportunity," has long attracted the world's brightest minds, particularly scientists and scholars. However, in recent years, a series of exclusionary policies have made this vision increasingly unattainable. Renowned Chinese-American mathematician and Fields Medalist Professor Shing-Tung Yau recently highlighted the plight of Chinese scientists in the US, stating, "Chinese scientists have no choice but to leave the US."

Why are Chinese scientists leaving the US? Professor Yau explained, "The US government has shown serious discrimination against Chinese scientists over the past decade. Many Chinese scientists eager to contribute to the US feel uncomfortable. To make matters worse, some have faced accusations from intelligence agencies of stealing confidential information from the US." 

The intensifying exclusionary policies have disrupted the lives of countless Chinese or China-related scientists. According to a Bloomberg report, since 2018, the number of Chinese scientists leaving the US has increased by 75 percent. In July, Chinese-American neuroscientist Jane Y. Wu, a prominent researcher at a university in Illinois, took her own life. Many believe that this China-born neuroscientist was a victim of Washington's witch hunt against China-related scientists in the US. 

These are not just tragedies for those individuals affected by Washington's hostile policy; they should also serve as a wake-up call for the US to reconsider its position. What the US is losing is not only individual contributors to its scientific advancements but also the essence of its global appeal - freedom, openness, and inclusivity.

From economics to technology, some US politicians have wielded the banner of "national security" to demonize Chinese scholars. This "politicization" and "securitization" of academia not only hinders personal development but also stifles the US' innovation potential, effectively becoming a self-imposed barrier.

The "securitization" of all China-related matters in the US scientific sphere is clearly rooted in the larger strategy to suppress China's development. Some have questioned whether the US is initiating a "cold tech war." If such a "war" takes hold, it would be a tragedy for global scientific development and collaboration, as well as a blow to US' progress and prosperity as a self-proclaimed "land of freedom and opportunity." While the departure of Chinese scientists may appear to be an isolated incident, it reflects a deeper trend of rising xenophobia in US society. If the US continues to politicize academia, it will inevitably accelerate its decline.

To suppress China's scientific progress, some US politicians have resorted to extreme measures. For example, the US customs detained Chinese students for interrogation in "small black rooms. And some politicians have proposed "the US should welcome more students from China, but to study the humanities rather than sciences," and even investigations and arrests of Chinese professors are carried out without sufficient evidence.

Research should be a realm of free thought and innovation, not a victim of politics and prejudice. By "securitizing" academia, the US is effectively shackling its own creativity. This "reverse selection process" drives away exceptional talent, diminishing its talent pool. Whether the remaining talent can sustain the US' leadership in global technological competition remains highly uncertain. Li Haidong, a professor at China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times that reducing restrictions and limitations is a common concern across all scientific fields. Excessive politicization, restrictions, and securitization are undermining the US' scientific potential. 

History has shown that those who embrace diversity and attract talent will thrive. The US needs to revisit its core values of the so-called diversity and openness. But the question remains: will the US reflect on its current path? How much longer before another Chinese scientist chooses to leave the US?