Study Unveils Toronto Universities’ Risky Partnerships With China on AI, High-Tech Weaponry

Members of the People's Liberation Army band file out after the closing session of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, outside The Great Hall of People in Beijing, China, on Oct. 22, 2022. Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

A recent study reveals hundreds of publications from Toronto universities collaborating with Chinese academic institutions linked to the military on sensitive research. A former intelligence officer said the ongoing partnerships signal an incentive gap in curbing such practices.

The study, released in October by the Frontier Assessments Unit (FAU), identified a total of 371 publications from collaborations between Canadian universities and seven Chinese academies known as the “Seven Sons of National Defence” due to their strong affiliations with the People’s Liberation Army, the primary military force of communist China.

It noted that while collaborations with these Chinese military institutions may yield technological advancements, they also pose substantial security risks to Canadian institutions and national security as a whole. These concerns include potential intellectual property theft, the “dual-use” implications of transferring civilian technology for military purposes, and risks to reputation and academic independence.

LJ Eads, a former U.S. Air Force intelligence officer and co-author of the study, said there is increasing awareness in Canada and the United States about the necessity to disassociate from China.

“Everything that we’re talking about is this whole era of the great power competition. How do we start to disconnect [with China] where there’s dual-use technology implications or military technology implications?” Mr. Eads told The Epoch Times.

His remark echoes recent warnings from Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Director David Vigneault. During a rare public appearance last month with his fellow Five Eyes chiefs, Mr. Vigneault noted that Beijing has placed great emphasis on developing military-civil fusion as part of an aggressive national strategy to achieve the most technologically advanced military in the world.

“Everything that they’re doing in our universities and in new technology, it’s going back into a system very organized to create dual-use applications for the military,” he said.

The FAU highlights the extensive involvement of the University of Toronto, mentioned nearly 400 times in the study, in research collaborations with Chinese military institutions. The Toronto Metropolitan University, formerly known as Ryerson University, is also deeply engaged in similar collaborations, according to the study.

The Epoch Times reached out to both the University of Toronto and the Toronto Metropolitan University for comment, but didn’t hear back by press time.

The FAU report is co-authored by Ryan Clarke, a multi-domain strategic intelligence veteran, and Hans Ulrich Käser, a former intelligence officer who has served in combined North Atlantic Treaty Organization missions. This study was first reported by the Substack newsletter The Bureau.

‘Band-Aid Fix’

Earlier this year, the federal government introduced stricter policies regarding funding for research involving foreign entities. It was announced that Canada’s federal research granting councils would decline funding for projects associated with institutions that have ties to foreign governments, posing a national security risk.

This follows a January report by The Globe and Mail revealing research collaborations between around 50 Canadian universities and a Chinese military institution, focusing on advanced and sensitive technologies, including those related to guided missiles and eavesdropping.

Additionally, on July 12, the federal cabinet introduced the new National Security Guidelines for Research Partnership with foreign institutions, aiming to enhance protection against foreign interference, espionage, and theft. The guideline listed research areas considered sensitive or with dual-use implications. These areas include advanced weapons, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum science, among others.

However, the FAU study, which compiled Canadian research publications from August 2019 to August 2023, indicates persistent research collaborations in these areas between Canadian and Chinese institutions.

Mr. Eads also characterized these measures introduced by the Canadian government as a “band-aid fix,” emphasizing the absence of financial or penalty incentives for Canadian researchers to cease partnerships with China.

“[If] you can’t receive Canadian funding, well, the university will still pay you. You just can’t work on Canadian research programs. You can work on Chinese research programs and still work for the university,” he said.

Talent Recruitment

Beijing’s global talent recruitment efforts are another key factor contributing to the ongoing collaboration between Canadian and Chinese institutions, said Mr. Eads. China’s extensive talent recruitment programs have raised increasing concerns from the U.S. government, with the FBI warning about their potential incentives for “stealing trade secrets, breaking export control laws, or violating conflict-of-interest policies.”

Mr. Eads highlighted a report from the Washington Times unveiling a talent recruitment program named “Kunpeng Action Plan,” recently initiated by the Eastern Institute for Advanced Study. This plan, described on its Chinese website as the precursor to the planned Eastern Institute of Technology (EIT) in Ningbo, China, aims to attract top-tier scientific experts from around the world, including Australia. The focus is on esteemed scholars who have received prestigious awards such as the Nobel Prize and Fields Medal.

Mr. Eads said that by providing “outrageous” financial incentives to attract international talent, China is pursuing a long-term geopolitical strategy. In contrast, authorities in Canada and the United States are more focused on short-term military build-up, which he believes could lead to the West falling behind in the future.

“They’re thinking the long game in talent recruitment and future wars and future dominance. We’re thinking the six-month plan: this is how many fighters we need, the defence enterprise needs this much funding. We don’t think about talent and expertise like China’s doing right now,” he said.

“I think talent in the near future, and these experts, is going to be more critical than a new [next-generation fighter]. And if you were to say that to the Pentagon right now, I think there would be massive disagreements because we’re still in this era of missiles, bombs, and fighters rather than [embracing] this idea of strategic hybrid warfare, where talent and expertise are big factors in that.”