New Study Reveals Nearly $1 Billion in US Government Funding to Research Involving Chinese Defense Labs

Understanding the New Study on US Funding Flows

A groundbreaking report released on February 19, 2026, by the Center for Research Security & Integrity (CRSI), a Virginia-based nonprofit, has quantified the extent of US government funding supporting research collaborations with Chinese national defense laboratories. The study identifies $943.5 million in federal grants from 2019 to 2025 that fueled projects involving these labs, marking the first time such a precise dollar figure has been attached to these partnerships. 13 42 This revelation builds on prior investigations, highlighting persistent gaps in oversight despite heightened scrutiny on US-China academic ties.

National defense laboratories in China, officially designated by the People's Republic of China (PRC) government, conduct research directly supporting the People's Liberation Army (PLA). These entities often partner with US universities through co-authored publications and shared grants, inadvertently channeling taxpayer dollars into potentially adversarial advancements. The report analyzed thousands of publications and grant acknowledgments, revealing collaborations across fields like artificial intelligence (AI), optics, and materials science—areas with clear dual-use military applications.

Funding Agencies and Scale of Involvement

The implicated funding primarily stems from major US agencies: the Department of Defense (DOD) via offices like the Office of Naval Research (ONR), Army Research Office (ARO), and Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR); National Institutes of Health (NIH); National Science Foundation (NSF); and even NASA in some cases. A September 2025 House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) report documented over $2.5 billion in DOD grants linked to 1,400+ publications from 2023-2025, with 800+ involving direct Chinese defense ties. 44

• DOD: Largest contributor, funding swarm intelligence and nanoscale optics projects.
• NIH and NSF: Supported AI surveillance research at labs like the Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Research Institute (SAIRI).
• Total collaborations: Hundreds of US-led projects with indirect benefits to Chinese military R&D.

This scale underscores how routine grant approvals at American universities have enabled these flows, often without rigorous foreign entity vetting.

Prominent US Universities in the Spotlight

Elite US institutions have been central to these collaborations. The University of Texas, Arizona State University, and City University of New York (CUNY) appear in high-profile DOD-funded papers with Chinese defense partners. Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), MIT, Stanford, Johns Hopkins University (JHU), and UC Berkeley have ties to SAIRI and Zhejiang Lab through NSF and ONR grants. 43 Carnegie Science, affiliated with academic networks, hosted a nuclear expert with dual roles at Chinese state labs.

These partnerships often arise from international co-authorships, where US principal investigators (PIs) acknowledge federal support in publications shared with Chinese counterparts. For higher education leaders, this raises compliance issues under federal disclosure rules like the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Chinese Defense Labs at the Center

Key PRC national defense labs include Beihang University (one of the 'Seven Sons of National Defense'), Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Sun Yat-sen University, Wuhan University of Technology—all co-administered by China's State Administration of Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND). The China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT), producer of hypersonic missiles, featured in Air Force-funded optics research. SAIRI and Zhejiang Lab, linked to surveillance and PLA institutes, benefited from NIH/NSF funds via US university proxies. 44

These labs are on US blacklists like the Commerce Entity List yet access US knowledge through academic channels, exploiting gaps in grant restrictions that target procurement, not research sharing.

Case Studies: Real-World Examples

1. Swarm Decision-Making (ONR/ARO/NASA-funded): University of Texas and Arizona State University co-authored with Beihang and Shanghai Jiao Tong on AI for uncertain environments—directly applicable to drone swarms and cyber defense.
2. Nanoscale Optics (AFOSR): CUNY researchers with Huazhong UST, Sun Yat-sen, Wuhan UT, and CALT on devices for military optics.
3. AI Surveillance (NSF/NIH): MIT/Stanford/JHU/Berkeley papers with SAIRI on phase-shifting and tracking tech for biometrics and policing.

These cases illustrate how US federal dollars advance PLA capabilities via open publications. 43

Photo by David Trinks on Unsplash

National Security and Ethical Concerns

Critics argue these collaborations risk technology transfer in dual-use fields: AI for autonomous weapons, optics for missiles, nuclear tech. A December 2025 congressional report highlighted DOE-funded nuclear research exploited by PLA-linked unis. For US higher ed, this threatens grant eligibility, researcher visas, and institutional reputations amid NDAA Section 1286 restrictions on military-linked entities.

Stakeholders like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies warn of 'elite capture,' where top unis prioritize funding over scrutiny.

University Perspectives and Challenges

US universities defend international collaboration as essential for scientific progress, citing peer-reviewed vetting. However, compliance burdens grow: mandatory disclosures, export controls. Administrators at Texas and Arizona State face congressional inquiries, prompting internal reviews. Faculty worry about career impacts, with some self-censoring China ties to secure DOD/NIH grants.

Link to resources for navigating these: Explore academic CV tips amid scrutiny or check professor ratings for collaboration insights.

Policy Gaps and Government Responses

Current rules blacklist entities for sales but not grants. The House Select Committee urges DOD/NIH/NSF to screen collaborators against 1260H/ Entity Lists. Biden-era policies lagged; Trump 2.0 proposals include stricter vetting. Universities must now certify no risky ties for federal funds.

Expert Views and Broader Implications

Jeffrey Stoff, CRSI founder, states: 'Policies have failed; US must draw red lines.' Academics like MIT's Graham Webster advocate 'principled engagement' with transparency. For higher ed, this erodes trust in federal funding, pushes diversification to allies (EU, India), and heightens IP theft fears.

Solutions: Safeguarding Academic Research

• Enhanced vetting: AI tools scan co-authors pre-grant.
• Disclosure mandates: Real-time partner tracking.
• Alternatives: Boost domestic funding, ally collaborations.
• Training: Ethics modules for PIs on risks.

Institutions like Stanford now audit partnerships. Visit research jobs compliant with new rules.

Photo by Roman Kraft on Unsplash

Future Outlook for US Higher Education

As tensions rise, US universities face a pivot: balance openness with security. Reforms could cut risky funding by 50%, per CRSI estimates, but stifle innovation if overzealous. Positive: Spurs self-reliance, ethical AI focus. Track developments via higher ed news. For careers, see higher ed jobs, rate my professor, career advice.