WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY
In the past in spite of continuing efforts on the part of faculty, staff, and students it has really been hard to expose the crime and corruption ongoing under recent administrations at the University of Michigan. But, things may be changing because of the evolution of civilization...the Internet, the Tea Party, the Liberty Forum, etc, the election of idealistic public officials with integrity, and websites like www.disputethis.org www.lawlessamerica.com www.powercorruptsagain.com www.wademultimedia.com etc. Traditional media outlets have been a complete failure....both the liberal and conservative darlings. The government at all levels has been apathetic, protecting those which provide the support for the two political parties, especially academe, which is frequently seen as liberal, which continually lobbies for higher appropriations. Law enforcement agencies at all levels know about academic mobsters. Yes, we in academe have jumped through all of the hoops and spent a small fortune engaging in a losing battle of economic warfare in a legal system sympathetic to university administrations. No more! The mechanisms of political influence are rapidly changing!
The University of Michigan is a totally corrupt organization, a RICO, with no oversight or controls. Seven of the eight Regents are attorneys and the eighth is married to one. These law firms have clients with business interests to be promoted. Not one Regent is an educator. The UM Administrators main concern seems to be growing the endowment while increasing their own salaries. The function of the Campus Cops seems to be acting as a Gestapo to suppress dissent among the few remaining ethical faculty, staff, and students. At the UM 2,600 free football tickets are given out for each home game to buy influence. Who is invited to a tailgate party or a post game reception and gets to sit in the comfort of a skybox? It is certainly not the faculty, staff, and students.
The citizens, taxpayers, and voters who are financially supporting such dens of iniquity are absolutely furious about the misuse of their tax revenues, and they are not going to take it any more. Hence, two of us here at UM are trying an alternate route as described below. The initial emphasis has been put on the national security issue as these crimes are currently bringing America down, and elected officials would want to insure our national survival. However, the general moral rot demanded and accepted in academe made this particular situation possible. The creation of the documentary was made possible through the idealism of two individuals met via nontraditional political parties. If this ones flies we will then do one that features individuals beaten by Campus Cops, individuals plagiarized by administrative officials, women raped by star athletes who were not prosecuted, those knowledgeable of individuals using UM computers to engage in prostitution but not prosecuted, etc. Thanks, the hour is late. Your interest is appreciated.
Following is the material used to generate the script for the forthcoming Public Television documentary program. The title is "Chinagate II....Espionage, Sabotage, and Treason at the University of Michigan". The trailer is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZxFhRRB16A
This was also nearly identical to my Regental presentation at the October Board meeting. The summary is "A high quality, eight segment, 146 minute documentary has been produced exposing the transfer of massive amounts of American military and industrial technology and know how to the Peoples' Republic of China by corrupt and/or greedy American elites, business executives, and government officials. At present no attempts have been made to diminish this hemorrhaging of our national treasures to a likely adversary by the authorities. Significant economic and military damage has been inflicted upon our nation. A Biafra like nation of 1970 has been transformed into an incipient Super Power via our largess at the cost of America teetering on the brink of failure with a quickly vanishing opportunity for corrections. Americans need to be informed of the pending disaster and demand action from their Federal government".
The ten minute trailer is currently available for viewing by invitation, while an initial public screening of the entire documentary is proposed for a date in May, perhaps May Day, a significant PRC holiday would be appropriate as we now have many "Panda Huggers" in both Michigan and America, at a venue of historic significance such as the Fox Theatre, Michigan Theatre, etc, if it could be arranged. Concerned, respected, and knowledgeable individuals would be invited to deliver a few remarks and lead a brief post screening discussion.
PREFACE
During the morning of Friday, 16 August 1991, in a pleasant neighborhood near downtown Moscow, I sat at a conference table in the headquarters building of the Soviet Air Force with fellow members of a USAF delegation led by General John Jaquish, SAFAQ, as we met with the Commander in Chief of the Soviet Air Force, Yevgeni Shaposhnikov, and his staff. On the agenda was future US/Soviet aviation cooperation. At the beginning of this discussion pleasantries were exchanged and Gen Jaquish presented to Gen Shaposhnikov a substantial model of the recently initiated new US stealth fighter aircraft, the Lockheed-Martin F-22, Raptor. Gen Shaposhnikov expressed his heart felt gratitude for such a gift and noted that "I am unable to provide such equipment to my troops as well as similar items which you recently employed in your victorious campaign of the Gulf War. You deny us the technology and know how in order to create such". On the evening of the following day, Saturday, at his Crimean vacation dacha Mikhail Gorbachev was placed under house arrest by a group of hard line Communist dissidents, the Gang of Eight, and the demise of the Soviet Union had begun. Scholars who have analyzed the collapse of the Soviet Union note that the denial of critical information played a large role.
Since 11 January 2011 the media has devoted great coverage to the Chinese unveiling and first flight at Chengdu, one of their aviation centers located in central China, of their new fifth generation stealth fighter aircraft with an appearance similar to a large F-22 with canards. The New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/world/asia/06china.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 summarizes some of the relevant information.
The Peoples' Republic of China arose from a civil war in 1948 and then suffered through two more similar events...The Great Leap Forward, 1958-1961, and the Cultural Revolution, 1965-1968, which left the nation with a third world economic and military situation. In order to correct the deficiencies and to achieve the great power status deserving for such a large population, technology and know how had to be acquired by any and all means necessary and possible, and what better way could be found than a reliance on the Diaspora and the foreign education of Chinese "students" in humanitarian subject matters? For financial reasons American universities were only too happy to grant admission further noting that the best and the brightest and now educated Chinese would remain in the US thus contributing to our own well being. However, what was instituted instead was the greatest transfer of technology and know how ever in the history of civilization, an excellent example of the Law of Unintended Consequences. Information technology has now revolutionized the transfer of information as well as its accessibility, both authorized and unauthorized. Among American government officials currently there is total awareness of the transfer of the lifeblood of America's economic and military security, but the activities of the American industrial and academic elite frequently with government support only continue to exacerbate the hemorrhaging. The Peoples' Republic of China has been able to accomplish what the Soviet Union was never able to do...steal the technology and know how components from America required in order to rise Phoenix like from their own ashes. It is imperative immediately for Americans to seriously address the issues of their own welfare and security or face the same situation confronting the Chinese at the end of their Cultural Revolution.
The current attitude of elected officials concerning national security and our survival is quite perplexing and contradictory. The behavior and activities currently exhibited by the Peoples' Republic of China would not have been tolerated at all on the part of the Soviets during the Cold War in which I was a participant and during which I was trained. The Rosenbergs were spies at the Los Alamos Laboratory and executed, but 1,000's of Chinese and their sympathizers are not. Khrushchev and Brezhnev were never invited to the White House for a state dinner as was Hu Jintau on 19 January 2011. When the Russians invaded Georgia strong diplomatic protests were presented to Moscow, but there is only silence when Tibetans and Uighurs are murdered in their streets. A super sales job has been done by the Peoples' Republic of China in Washington to promote China the panda bear, not China the dragon. America's political and commercial elite have created Frankenstein. Five years ago when revelations were made to the Federal authorities concerning information about Chinese espionage/sabotage in academe it really was expected that the same encouragement would have received as that for the outing of Soviets spies during the Cold War. Instead there has been at best a lukewarm reception, while Mary Sue Coleman and her Regents continue to be financially rewarded for undermining America, while the whistle blowers are trashed.
The Peoples' Republic of China now is well aware of these national security efforts, and no doubt I am PNG. In 1997 my wife and I spent forty days on the mainland. I last tried to go to China in October 2006 to attend the Air Show in Zhuhai in order to look for stolen technology, and I was given a visa. However, thirty six hours before departure I was dragged from my UM office in handcuffs under arrest without a warrant by a Campus Cop who informed me that "We do not want you going to China"!, and I was threatened with overnight jail with no access to required medicines. As many travel details remained to be addressed, and over a day had been lost to attend to these, Mary Sue Coleman had surely squashed any data gathering efforts.
Tragically, in this time of battle for our nation's survival, we are surrounded by cowards, Quislings, and traitors.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN DESTROYS AMERICA
1. Bios
Bill was a participant in the Cold War and is a UM grad and retired faculty.
Doug is retired faculty and accurate observer of UM corruption.
2. History of UM/China Entanglements
1880 James Angell, UM President, is appointed envoy to China.
1979 Jimmy Carter and Frank Press send Chinese faculty members to American universities including UM Aerospace Engineering Department.
1979 Wei Shyy arrives as a graduate student in this Department.
1987 Prof S M Wu is hired by the UM College of Engineering to establish its manufacturing program. MI, The Arsenal of Democracy, is the Ft Knox of technology. Is there any better place for the motherland
to steal?
1995 Governor John Engler meets with a high ranking Chinese government official, Wu Yi. After his governorship he heads the NAM.
1997, 1999 UM signs first cooperation agreements with Chinese universities.
2005, 2010 Mary Sue Coleman with large administrative delegations visit China in order to sign extensive agreements of cooperation, including the granting of UM degrees.
2005 Wei Shyy is appointed Chair, Aerospace Engineering, a dual use technology, because he is Chinese.
2010 Wei Shyy defects to China taking with him 30 years of experience in US aerospace technology, thus having been a perfect sleeper agent.
2010 Mary Sue Coleman hosts for nearly a month a delegation of nearly three dozen Chinese university presidents for a leadership congress.
2010 The UM Board of Regents is informed of the espionage, sabotage, and treason occurring at the UM resulting from the US/Chinese interactions on the UM campuses here and in China.
3. China Is a Commercial and Military Threat for America
a. For approximately five thousand years on occasion the Chinese have moved militarily westward across the Eurasian land mass threatening other civilizations.
b. At the beginning of the Cold War and during the Korean Conflict they were allied with the Soviet Union until dumped and became beneficiaries of the Nixon/Kissinger strategy.
c. There are numerous authoritative publications documenting this matter such as:
US Representative Christopher Cox, et al, US National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the PRC,
US China Economic and Security Review Commission Annual Report to Congress,
US DOD Annual Report to Congress of Chinese Military Power,
Federal Bureau of Investigation Newsletters published by the various field offices,
Wade Multimedia LLC, video "Taking It Back" and podcast "America In Decline" www.vincewadeusa.com
4. The Peoples' Republic of China Ignores the Moral and Ethical Standards and International Laws Accepted by the Civilized World
a. 70 million Chinese citizens were killed by their own government since the establishment of the current regime in 1948.
b. Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 with several thousand killed.
c. Continuing contemporary Tibetan and Uighir massacres of non-Han minorities.
d. 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and wife imprisoned and arrested.
e. Global computer hacking including among other victims Google with Jiao Tong University complicit.
f. Production, distribution, and sale worldwide of fraudulent and dangerous products.
g. Slaughter until likely extinction of the world's shark, tiger, and elephant populations, inappropriate treatment of other primate species, and the likely destruction of the Serengeti wildlife preserve.
5. The University of Michigan Ignores the Moral and Ethical Standards and Federal and State Laws Accepted by Academe
a. Proposals, grants, and funding are routinely stolen from their originators....Zorza, Phinney, Anderson, Kauffman, etc, etc
b. Laws, regulations, and accounting procedures are continually violated....Open Meetings Act, FOIA, MCL.370.1511, Standard Practice Guide, etc, etc
c. The DPS with cocaine snorting personnel and a currently allegedly accused and on leave Executive Director is used as a tool of terror by making arrests.... Wilkerson, Borisov, McHugh, Kauffman, Rabhi,
Anderson,Matlock,etc, etc. Their Gestapo like behavior is particularly well documented for the Borisov case and is detailed in the following Michigan Daily articles
http://www.michigandaily.com/content/faculty-hearing-committee
http://www.michigandaily.com/content/daily-university-misconduct
http://www.michigandaily.com/content/viewpoint-exploiting-campus-violence
d. The County Prosecutor's office is complicit filing false criminal charges... Matlock, Wilkerson, Borisov, Rabhi, Anderson, McHugh, etc, etc,
e. UM Administrators have had previous positions of employment where the application of extreme violence is commonplace... Phoenix Program, DEA, etc, etc
f. Courses offering American students education in national defense technology were made unavailable by Wei Shyy ethnic Chinese Department Chair... Energetic Materials; Explosions, Explosives, Propellants,
and Pyrotechnics, Gas Turbines, Rockets, and Internal Combustion Engines
g. The General Counsel's Office is reported to have communicated with Federal agencies concerned with America's national security conveying information to them that their activities concerning the
assessment of conditions relating to the preservation of national security on the UM campus were not appropriate and were to be discouraged.
h. The UM President is reported to have declined a briefing by officials representing various national security agencies concerning national security threats caused by the education of foreign students....
Chinese, Iranians, etc,etc
i. The UM wages economic legal warfare upon whistle blowing faculty, staff, and students spending $10M's from their $8B endowment in order to fuel such efforts. The concept of "Equal Justice Under Law" does
not apply for those assaulted by UM.
j. The UM has a Office of Communications/Media Relations/Public Information which obscures the truth and creates deceptions on a scale not previously seen since the Third Reich, with the print and broadcast
media being willing accomplices well knowing of the ruse being perpetrated.
k. The UM has well established and severe procedures for harassing and terminating whistle blowers and others who offend the administration as revealed by the Boston presentation of Elsa Cole, UM General
Counsel, to her peers and her subsequent deposition by Phillip Green.
l. Many of the victims of UM crimes and retaliation develop stress related medical conditions and are also again exploited by the corrupt legal/judicial system from which they have sought relief.
m. UM Administrators convey the attitude that they have no loyalty or obligation to the State or Nation, but that they are "Citizens of the World", a situation effectively described in "The Rise of the New Ruling
Class", Chrystia Freedland, Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/01/the-rise-of-the-new-global-elite/8343/
6. The Peoples' Republic of China Takes via UM America's Industrial and Military Know How and Technology
(Chinese weapons are now acknowledged to be deployed against American troops in Afghanistan.)
a. Rockets, Launch Vehicles and Missiles (1948 alum, Applied Mechanics)
b. Nuclear and Thermonuclear Weapons (1965 alum, Physics)
c. Reentry Vehicle
d. Anti Satellite, ASAT
e. Cruise Missile
f. Trident SLBM (attempted but foiled)
g. Electric Vehicles
h. Fuel Air Explosives, FAE
i. Scramjets and Pulse Detonation Wave Engines, PDWE
j. Gas Turbine Combustors
k. Green Energy Devices
l. MEMS Devices for PGM's ( This military technology developed at UM apparently has been transferred to China because of the commercial activities of firms associated with current MI Governor, Rick Snyder.
The alleged details are described in the attachment, Research Backgrounder, at the YouTube website, "Chinese Espionage and the Michigan Election",http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WzkPPjyhCU and the latest information is at http://www.vincewadeusa.com/?p=352#more-352
m. An especially peculiar situation currently exists regarding the last Chief Scientist USAF, Werner J A Dahn and Professor of Aerospace Engineering, UM. Dahm was very instrumental in choosing Wei Shyy to
be Department Chair and was first to join in his defense when his loyalty to the US was questioned. Dahm also had a substantial commercial corporate relationship with Professor Jun Ni, the College of
Engineering "Dean for China" and the successor to Professor Sam Wu. The previous Chief Scientist, University of Maryland Professor Mark Lewis stated to me personally that "The US education of Chinese
students could not be terminated because of the adverse financial impact on American universities".
7. What Is To Be Done and Who Is To Be Blamed?
a. UM Administrators and Regents must disclose in full all financial assets such as income and its sources, stocks, bonds, real estate holdings, and positions held which may affect their personal
financial situation such as the creation of a new enterprise or a personal relationship with corporate executives.
b. In order to buy influence from and protection by public officials and the elite the UM distributes ~2,600 complementary tickets for each home football event. Who are the recipients of such largess?
c. The Regents represent only their own and other cliental corporate interests not those of Michigan and Federal taxpayers and students. Outrageous corporate behavior which is giving America's assets to the Chinese is detailed in the attachment China Squeezes Foreigners.
d. The UM receives massive governmental funding...no property taxes assessed by Washtenaw County or the City of Ann Arbor, ~$350M in direct State appropriations, and in excess of $1B in Federal grants and contracts. This is money which originates from American taxpayers. American and Michigan students and families now face a terrible financial burden in funding their higher education as described in the CNBC program, "The Price of Admission, America's College Debt" http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1719827701 In spite of complaints that domestic industries can not find suitably trained American workers academe persists to preferentially train Chinese students as described in the recent article "Recruiting by US universities of Chinese undergrads is hottest new educational trend," L M Krieger, http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_16994633?source=email Why does not the UM educate Michiganians and Americans...not Chinese so that trained workers are available here and not there?
e. The UM has an endowment in excess of $8B which grows at a rate of ~25% per year. It is known from Regents' records that at least $100M of venture capital is invested in Chinese start up firms. What other investments in any form does the UM, a public institution, have in China?
i. During the Cold War the USSR and other Warsaw Pact nations were recognized as a threat to the US. Now the RF and Poland ask that they be recognize as partners with America in jointly addressing the common Chinese threat and that they be welcomed into joint efforts (simply granting the same courtesies which have been extended to the Chinese).
j. Government officials and other policy makers at all levels must be informed and worked with in order to expose and rectify the current UM/China situation. Reps Walberg and McCotter have expressed concern as has Rogers who is now Chair, House Intelligence Committee, but there is conflicting data from his activities regarding the House China Caucus. For six months now there has been no action on these expressed concerns. And, Miller, Homeland Security, has remained totally silent. Rep Dingell and Senators Levin and Stabenow have been totally supportive of the UM activities. Nationally Reps Wolf, VA, Hunter and Rohrabacher, CA, have expressed concerns about the growing China threat. Rep Issa, CA, has promised a wide variety of hearings concerning government failings. Perhaps he could schedule one relating to the treasonous activities being undertaken by academe? At the state level Rep Irvin seems ambivalent, but Sen Warren seems to be concerned. The Senate Majority Leader and a reported GOP candidate for the 2012 US Senate seat is said to be concerned about the matter. Others have expressed interest, but must remain discreet at present.
k. The USA for Eastern MI, Barbara McQuade, A2 resident, UM graduate, and Democratic party activist and the DOJ must assess the information which is available with the intent to issue indictments. How much more investigation is required by already well informed Federal and State investigative agency authorities?
l. The Regental Candidates for the 2012 election must be totally different form those currently serving or those recently run. It is totally obvious that both the Democratic and Republican Parties have failed their obligation to furnish oversight for the public university, the UM. These parties and their representatives have scorned the interests of the people and students of Michigan and as such a Third Party must fill this void.
The UM has played a substantial and critical role in the creation of China Inc. As a participant in the Cold War I was well trained to recognize threats to American security. As such, I note the present situation at the UM to be such a threat. Because of my training and experience it is my opinion that the current UM Administration and the Board of Regents because of their PRC related activities have done far more damage to America than the Soviet connected Rosenbergs ever did or all of the other traitors back to and including Benedict Arnold or those later such as the Walkers, Ames, and Hanssen. It is long past time for the State and Federal governments to terminate these nefarious activities and to prosecute the individuals involved. Such behavior to provide aid and comfort to a likely enemy would have not been tolerated during the Cold War, so why is it now? But, while one may be disappointed, they should not be surprised if law enforcement and security officials continue to ignore the illegal and destructive activities perpetrated by UM. It may be necessary for the Minutemen to again come forward!
"Let China sleep for when China wakes it will shake the world". Napoleon Bonaparte
Research Backgrounder: Is Discera Exporting Sensitive Military-Grade Technology to China?
Discera, Inc. specializes in the development, production, marketing and sales of a cutting edge technology known as MEMS oscillators. MEMS – microelectromechanical systems – refers to the extreme miniaturization of a variety of electromechanical components so they can be embedded in a silicon chip as part of an integrated circuit.
One of those components is an oscillator, a device that generates a continuous electronic wave at a specified frequency that can be used in a wide range of commercial, industrial and military applications. MEMS oscillators are incredibly small, extremely accurate and highly shock resistant. These characteristics make them particularly useful in advanced timing applications.
Because oscillators are used in both commercial products and military products like missiles and smart munitions, they are classified and regulated by the federal government as a “dual use” technology. Tight restrictions are placed on the export of military-grade technologies to China that could be used to improve their missile technology and space programs.
Discera’s MEMS oscillator technology was developed at the University of Michigan, presumably with the assistance/subsidy of public funds, and exclusively licensed to Discera, Inc. The license agreement between U-M and Discera provides for royalty payments, stock options and reimbursement of patent-related expenses to the university, which means U-M has a financial interest in the successful commercialization of the technology.1
Military Application of Discera Oscillator Technology
Discera has partnerships with several companies to market their oscillator technology to different end users. One such partner is Vectron International, a subsidiary of Dover Corporation. Under the terms of their partnership, Discera offers commercial market applications of their MEMS oscillator technology, while Vectron offers military applications.
“Our respective markets are clearly demarcated," he added, "with Discera targeting consumer electronics, etc., and Vectron producing high-end consumer goods and primarily high-precision military and aerospace components."2
In 2007 the two companies announced the first product of their joint venture – a highly-shock resistant MEMS oscillator for use in guidance systems for missiles and other “smart munitions:”
“Our latest breakthrough, the VMEM5Q, clearly demonstrates our commitment to bring leading-edge technology to our customers who are manufacturing guidance systems for small munitions, projectile electronics, missiles, and high-shock vibration applications." Greg Smolka, vice president of Vectron's Industrial Military and Space Business unit, adds: "This MEMS-based oscillator addresses a strong need for high-shock resistant timing components in the Precision Guided Munitions (PGM) market." The Vectron oscillator makes use of a PureSilicon MEMS resonator from Discera.”3
Another industry trade publication reported that “the Vectron VMEM5Q has passed the company’s qualification testing, including MIL-PRF-55310, and has been qualified, approved, and installed by a top-level military customer for a gun-hardened munitions guidance system.”4
Discera’s military-grade oscillators are also embedded in defense industry hardware by M/A-COM, a division of Tyco, Inc. The DIscera MOS-1 oscillator is a key component in M/A-COM’s telemetry systems for missiles:
“The world's first design win for microelectromechanical-system oscillators is a high-reliability military application--a wireless transmitter that streams real-time telemetry data back from smart munitions to remotely guide them to their target. Discera Inc. will announce Monday (April 9) that Tyco Electronics' subsidiary M/A-COM (Lowell, Mass.) will use its MOS-1 MEMS oscillator in a wireless transmitter built for smart munitions. During testing, M/A-COM removed some warheads, allowing munitions to be retrieved after impact--and Discera's oscillators were still ticking.
"Our MEMS oscillator will be used in telemetry transmitters that must endure the shock of being fired with all the various different types of smart munitions in the U.S. arsenal," said Venkat Bahl, vice president of marketing at Discera (San Jose, Calif.). "Military observers present during M/A-COM's rigorous shock-testing procedures were at first skeptical of MEMS, but 100 percent of our MOS-1 chips passed [the tests]."5
New Export Controls on Military-Grade Oscillators
In December 2009 the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) – the federal agency responsible for the enforcement of “dual use” export controls – classified certain oscillators as a technology subject to export controls in the categories of national security (NS), missile technology (MT), nuclear non-proliferation (NP) and anti-terrorism (AT). According to BIS:
“The purpose of the control is to ensure that these items do not make a contribution to the military potential of countries in Country Group D:1 [ed.note: this group includes China] that would prove detrimental to the national security of the United States.6
According to the Commerce Control List (CCL) maintained by BIS and adopted by several international conventions, oscillator technology is designated with the Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 3A001.b.10. Exporting this technology to China is prohibited by federal law and international convention without an export license. Because export licenses are considered proprietary business information, there is no publicly available database to verify if Discera has obtained an export license to sell military-grade oscillators in China.
Additional restrictions apply to the export of missile technology to China. According to the BIS:
“Section 1512 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
requires a Presidential certification to Congress prior to the export to China of missile
technology controlled items, except for certain items used in manned aircraft.” 7
It should be noted that President Obama in 2009 delegated certification authority under this section to the U.S. Department of Commerce, a move that raised significant concerns in the national security community that certification authority for the export of sensitive missile technology should be vested in the Department of Defense.8
Missile technologies are also proscribed by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), a voluntary association of governments around the world that aims to reduce the proliferation of missiles. Not surprisingly, China is not a member of the organization. The MTCR maintains a detailed list of missile technologies subject to export controls. The list includes telemetry systems like those described in the Vectron and M/A-COM product announcements cited above.9
Concerns Over “Dual Use” Technology Transfer to China
In July, Discera opened a new business operation in Shenzhen, China. The company press release touted the new venture as a “state-of-the-art China applications center:”
“As the heart of the company’s permanent investment plan in China, the new office features engineers, equipment, and researchers to support sophisticated chip and module integration, high definition and 3D video technology, and radio frequency and smart grid design.”10
Company officials have since backtracked, describing the scope and scale of the Shenzhen operation as merely a “small sales office with five employees” who work with commercial end-users to incorporate Discera oscillators into Chinese consumer products.
Meanwhile, Vectron and M/A-COM are selling Discera oscillators to military end-users here in the US and abroad. Discera’s concurrent sale of their oscillator technology for use in U.S. missile guidance and telemetry systems as well as for commercial uses in China raises legitimate questions about the export of such “dual use” technologies to China. Once this technology is made available to China for commercial applications, it is difficult if not impossible to prevent the technology from being transferred to China’s military agencies.
Experts in the field of “dual use” technology transfer warn that the export of these technologies to China has serious implications for US national security.
“the acquisition of advanced dual-use technology by Chinese military and defense-industrial companies in the United States as well as technology ‘leakage’ through US joint ventures with companies in China pose the most serious national security concerns for the United States….”11
“In a 2005 exchange regarding U.S. exports of dual use technologies to China, former Department of Defense official Lawrence Korb (then with the Center for American Progress) told Peter Lichtenbaum, then Acting Undersecretary for Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce, that "…the United States exports equipment and technology to China that actively contributes to Beijing's ability to wage war." Korb noted that U.S. exports were not "…being used in a manner consistent with our national security and nonproliferation interests."12
Even the US government agency responsible for export controls on “dual use” technologies expresses concern about the long-term impact of high technology transfers to China on US national security. According to the BIS:
“Although it is not possible to make a clear determination of the US national security implications of commercial US technology transfers to China, the continuation of the trends identified in this study could pose long-term challenges to US national security interests. This study does not identify any specific Chinese military advances made as a result of US commercial technology transfers, but does suggest that continued pressures on foreign high-tech firms to transfer advanced commercial technologies, if successful, could indirectly benefit China’s efforts to modernize its military.”13
Further, a partially declassified Interagency Review of U.S. Export Controls for China (January 2007) conducted by the U.S. Departments of Commerce, Defense, State, Energy, Homeland Security and the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that “export control regulations and policies related to China should be strengthened” and that the Chinese government continues to pursue an “aggressive program of domestic industrial reform and acquisition of key weapons and technologies from foreign sources.” The report notes that the primary technologies sought by China include microelectronics, nanotechnology, space systems and missile systems.14
More recently, President Barack Obama called for a complete overhaul of the U.S. export control regime, according to a presidential directive signed Dec. 21, 2009.15
Conclusion
In sum, serious concerns can be raised that Discera’s Chinese sales activities may be tantamount to the transfer of military-grade technology to China under the auspices of selling it to commercial rather than military end-users. Unanswered questions include:
· Does Discera hold the appropriate export licenses needed to transfer their technology to commercial end-users in China? How do they prevent the technology from being obtained by military end-users in China?
· Do Vectron International and M/A-COM comply with appropriate export controls on military products that use Discera’s oscillator technology?
Even if all three companies currently hold valid export licenses for commercial or military products based on Discera oscillators, it remains possible that the federal authorities responsible for the enforcement of export controls are not aware that Discera may be exporting technology to China, ostensibly to commercial end-users, that is virtually identical to the technology used by Vectron and M/A-COM in guidance and telemetry systems for missiles.
NOTES
(1) Amendments to Discera Licensing Agreement, University of Michigan Board of Regents, Meeting Minutes for December 2002, page 171; October 2003, page 110; April 2004, page 251; July 2005, page 34. The original licensing agreement between U-M and Discera, Inc. does not appear in meeting minutes available through an online search.
(2) “Discera and Vectron formalized partnership”, EuroAsia Semiconductor, February 19, 2007http://www.euroasiasemiconductor.com/news_full.php?thumb_id=2&newsid=69312
(3) “Tracking The Technologies That Are Forging Future Systems”, by Jack Browne, Technical Editor, SECTION: DEFENSE ELECTRONICS: SPECIAL REPORT; Pg. 36 Vol. 47 No. 9 ISSN: 0745-2993
(4) “Military Clock Oscillator Rides MEMS Technology”, by Jack Browne, Penton’s Military Electronics, September 2008, p. 8.
(5) “M/A-COM qualifies MEMS oscillator for smart munitions”, by R Colin Johnson, EETimes, 4/9/2007 http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4070853/M-A-COM-qualifies-MEMS-oscillator-for-smart-munitions
(6) Final Rule, Docket No. 0908041218-91220-01, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Wassenaar Arrangement 2008 Plenary Agreements Implementation: Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Parts I and II, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Commerce Control List, Definitions, Reports; Federal Register: December 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 237).
(7) U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security, Missile Technology Controls Questions and Answers. https://www.bis.doc.gov/licensing/mctrfacts010802.html
(8) “Obama loosens missile technology controls to China,” by Bill Gertz, Washington Times, October 15, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/inside-the-ring-2059116/
(9) Missile Technology Control Regime, Equipment, Software and Technology Annex, 10 Nov 2009. http://www.mtcr.info/english/annex.html
(10) Discera Press Release, July 19, 2010, “Discera Establishes State-of-the-Art China Applications Center in Shenzhen”
(11) James Mulvenon in Chinese Military Commerce and US National Security, Center for Asia Pacific Policy, RAND Corporation, MR-907.0-CAPP (draft) July 1997
(12) RESEARCH REPORT ON CHINESE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRIES, U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission, Prepared by NSD Bio Group, LLC, January 2009, http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2009/NSD%20BioGroup%20Final%20Report%20'Sunrise'%20Report%2002June2009.pdf
(13) U.S. Commercial Technology Transfers to the People’s Republic of China, Defense Industrial Base Program, Defense Market Research Reports, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (undated) http://www.bis.doc.gov/defenseindustrialbaseprograms/osies/defmarketresearchrpts/techtransfer2prc.html
(14) Interagency Review of U.S. Export Controls for China - Report No. D-2007-050 (PDF) - Project No. D2005-D000LG-0220.001, January 31, 2007
(15) “Obama Memo Puts Export Reform on Front Burner”, by Amy Klamper, Space News, January 15, 2010 http://www.spacenews.com/policy/100115-obama-memo-puts-export-reform-front-burner.html
Discera, Inc. specializes in the development, production, marketing and sales of a cutting edge technology known as MEMS oscillators. MEMS – microelectromechanical systems – refers to the extreme miniaturization of a variety of electromechanical components so they can be embedded in a silicon chip as part of an integrated circuit.
One of those components is an oscillator, a device that generates a continuous electronic wave at a specified frequency that can be used in a wide range of commercial, industrial and military applications. MEMS oscillators are incredibly small, extremely accurate and highly shock resistant. These characteristics make them particularly useful in advanced timing applications.
Because oscillators are used in both commercial products and military products like missiles and smart munitions, they are classified and regulated by the federal government as a “dual use” technology. Tight restrictions are placed on the export of military-grade technologies to China that could be used to improve their missile technology and space programs.
Discera’s MEMS oscillator technology was developed at the University of Michigan, presumably with the assistance/subsidy of public funds, and exclusively licensed to Discera, Inc. The license agreement between U-M and Discera provides for royalty payments, stock options and reimbursement of patent-related expenses to the university, which means U-M has a financial interest in the successful commercialization of the technology.1
Military Application of Discera Oscillator Technology
Discera has partnerships with several companies to market their oscillator technology to different end users. One such partner is Vectron International, a subsidiary of Dover Corporation. Under the terms of their partnership, Discera offers commercial market applications of their MEMS oscillator technology, while Vectron offers military applications.
“Our respective markets are clearly demarcated," he added, "with Discera targeting consumer electronics, etc., and Vectron producing high-end consumer goods and primarily high-precision military and aerospace components."2
In 2007 the two companies announced the first product of their joint venture – a highly-shock resistant MEMS oscillator for use in guidance systems for missiles and other “smart munitions:”
“Our latest breakthrough, the VMEM5Q, clearly demonstrates our commitment to bring leading-edge technology to our customers who are manufacturing guidance systems for small munitions, projectile electronics, missiles, and high-shock vibration applications." Greg Smolka, vice president of Vectron's Industrial Military and Space Business unit, adds: "This MEMS-based oscillator addresses a strong need for high-shock resistant timing components in the Precision Guided Munitions (PGM) market." The Vectron oscillator makes use of a PureSilicon MEMS resonator from Discera.”3
Another industry trade publication reported that “the Vectron VMEM5Q has passed the company’s qualification testing, including MIL-PRF-55310, and has been qualified, approved, and installed by a top-level military customer for a gun-hardened munitions guidance system.”4
Discera’s military-grade oscillators are also embedded in defense industry hardware by M/A-COM, a division of Tyco, Inc. The DIscera MOS-1 oscillator is a key component in M/A-COM’s telemetry systems for missiles:
“The world's first design win for microelectromechanical-system oscillators is a high-reliability military application--a wireless transmitter that streams real-time telemetry data back from smart munitions to remotely guide them to their target. Discera Inc. will announce Monday (April 9) that Tyco Electronics' subsidiary M/A-COM (Lowell, Mass.) will use its MOS-1 MEMS oscillator in a wireless transmitter built for smart munitions. During testing, M/A-COM removed some warheads, allowing munitions to be retrieved after impact--and Discera's oscillators were still ticking.
"Our MEMS oscillator will be used in telemetry transmitters that must endure the shock of being fired with all the various different types of smart munitions in the U.S. arsenal," said Venkat Bahl, vice president of marketing at Discera (San Jose, Calif.). "Military observers present during M/A-COM's rigorous shock-testing procedures were at first skeptical of MEMS, but 100 percent of our MOS-1 chips passed [the tests]."5
New Export Controls on Military-Grade Oscillators
In December 2009 the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) – the federal agency responsible for the enforcement of “dual use” export controls – classified certain oscillators as a technology subject to export controls in the categories of national security (NS), missile technology (MT), nuclear non-proliferation (NP) and anti-terrorism (AT). According to BIS:
“The purpose of the control is to ensure that these items do not make a contribution to the military potential of countries in Country Group D:1 [ed.note: this group includes China] that would prove detrimental to the national security of the United States.6
According to the Commerce Control List (CCL) maintained by BIS and adopted by several international conventions, oscillator technology is designated with the Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 3A001.b.10. Exporting this technology to China is prohibited by federal law and international convention without an export license. Because export licenses are considered proprietary business information, there is no publicly available database to verify if Discera has obtained an export license to sell military-grade oscillators in China.
Additional restrictions apply to the export of missile technology to China. According to the BIS:
“Section 1512 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
requires a Presidential certification to Congress prior to the export to China of missile
technology controlled items, except for certain items used in manned aircraft.” 7
It should be noted that President Obama in 2009 delegated certification authority under this section to the U.S. Department of Commerce, a move that raised significant concerns in the national security community that certification authority for the export of sensitive missile technology should be vested in the Department of Defense.8
Missile technologies are also proscribed by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), a voluntary association of governments around the world that aims to reduce the proliferation of missiles. Not surprisingly, China is not a member of the organization. The MTCR maintains a detailed list of missile technologies subject to export controls. The list includes telemetry systems like those described in the Vectron and M/A-COM product announcements cited above.9
Concerns Over “Dual Use” Technology Transfer to China
In July, Discera opened a new business operation in Shenzhen, China. The company press release touted the new venture as a “state-of-the-art China applications center:”
“As the heart of the company’s permanent investment plan in China, the new office features engineers, equipment, and researchers to support sophisticated chip and module integration, high definition and 3D video technology, and radio frequency and smart grid design.”10
Company officials have since backtracked, describing the scope and scale of the Shenzhen operation as merely a “small sales office with five employees” who work with commercial end-users to incorporate Discera oscillators into Chinese consumer products.
Meanwhile, Vectron and M/A-COM are selling Discera oscillators to military end-users here in the US and abroad. Discera’s concurrent sale of their oscillator technology for use in U.S. missile guidance and telemetry systems as well as for commercial uses in China raises legitimate questions about the export of such “dual use” technologies to China. Once this technology is made available to China for commercial applications, it is difficult if not impossible to prevent the technology from being transferred to China’s military agencies.
Experts in the field of “dual use” technology transfer warn that the export of these technologies to China has serious implications for US national security.
“the acquisition of advanced dual-use technology by Chinese military and defense-industrial companies in the United States as well as technology ‘leakage’ through US joint ventures with companies in China pose the most serious national security concerns for the United States….”11
“In a 2005 exchange regarding U.S. exports of dual use technologies to China, former Department of Defense official Lawrence Korb (then with the Center for American Progress) told Peter Lichtenbaum, then Acting Undersecretary for Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce, that "…the United States exports equipment and technology to China that actively contributes to Beijing's ability to wage war." Korb noted that U.S. exports were not "…being used in a manner consistent with our national security and nonproliferation interests."12
Even the US government agency responsible for export controls on “dual use” technologies expresses concern about the long-term impact of high technology transfers to China on US national security. According to the BIS:
“Although it is not possible to make a clear determination of the US national security implications of commercial US technology transfers to China, the continuation of the trends identified in this study could pose long-term challenges to US national security interests. This study does not identify any specific Chinese military advances made as a result of US commercial technology transfers, but does suggest that continued pressures on foreign high-tech firms to transfer advanced commercial technologies, if successful, could indirectly benefit China’s efforts to modernize its military.”13
Further, a partially declassified Interagency Review of U.S. Export Controls for China (January 2007) conducted by the U.S. Departments of Commerce, Defense, State, Energy, Homeland Security and the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that “export control regulations and policies related to China should be strengthened” and that the Chinese government continues to pursue an “aggressive program of domestic industrial reform and acquisition of key weapons and technologies from foreign sources.” The report notes that the primary technologies sought by China include microelectronics, nanotechnology, space systems and missile systems.14
More recently, President Barack Obama called for a complete overhaul of the U.S. export control regime, according to a presidential directive signed Dec. 21, 2009.15
Conclusion
In sum, serious concerns can be raised that Discera’s Chinese sales activities may be tantamount to the transfer of military-grade technology to China under the auspices of selling it to commercial rather than military end-users. Unanswered questions include:
· Does Discera hold the appropriate export licenses needed to transfer their technology to commercial end-users in China? How do they prevent the technology from being obtained by military end-users in China?
· Do Vectron International and M/A-COM comply with appropriate export controls on military products that use Discera’s oscillator technology?
Even if all three companies currently hold valid export licenses for commercial or military products based on Discera oscillators, it remains possible that the federal authorities responsible for the enforcement of export controls are not aware that Discera may be exporting technology to China, ostensibly to commercial end-users, that is virtually identical to the technology used by Vectron and M/A-COM in guidance and telemetry systems for missiles.
NOTES
(1) Amendments to Discera Licensing Agreement, University of Michigan Board of Regents, Meeting Minutes for December 2002, page 171; October 2003, page 110; April 2004, page 251; July 2005, page 34. The original licensing agreement between U-M and Discera, Inc. does not appear in meeting minutes available through an online search.
(2) “Discera and Vectron formalized partnership”, EuroAsia Semiconductor, February 19, 2007http://www.euroasiasemiconductor.com/news_full.php?thumb_id=2&newsid=69312
(3) “Tracking The Technologies That Are Forging Future Systems”, by Jack Browne, Technical Editor, SECTION: DEFENSE ELECTRONICS: SPECIAL REPORT; Pg. 36 Vol. 47 No. 9 ISSN: 0745-2993
(4) “Military Clock Oscillator Rides MEMS Technology”, by Jack Browne, Penton’s Military Electronics, September 2008, p. 8.
(5) “M/A-COM qualifies MEMS oscillator for smart munitions”, by R Colin Johnson, EETimes, 4/9/2007 http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4070853/M-A-COM-qualifies-MEMS-oscillator-for-smart-munitions
(6) Final Rule, Docket No. 0908041218-91220-01, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Wassenaar Arrangement 2008 Plenary Agreements Implementation: Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Parts I and II, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Commerce Control List, Definitions, Reports; Federal Register: December 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 237).
(7) U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security, Missile Technology Controls Questions and Answers. https://www.bis.doc.gov/licensing/mctrfacts010802.html
(8) “Obama loosens missile technology controls to China,” by Bill Gertz, Washington Times, October 15, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/inside-the-ring-2059116/
(9) Missile Technology Control Regime, Equipment, Software and Technology Annex, 10 Nov 2009. http://www.mtcr.info/english/annex.html
(10) Discera Press Release, July 19, 2010, “Discera Establishes State-of-the-Art China Applications Center in Shenzhen”
(11) James Mulvenon in Chinese Military Commerce and US National Security, Center for Asia Pacific Policy, RAND Corporation, MR-907.0-CAPP (draft) July 1997
(12) RESEARCH REPORT ON CHINESE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRIES, U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission, Prepared by NSD Bio Group, LLC, January 2009, http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2009/NSD%20BioGroup%20Final%20Report%20'Sunrise'%20Report%2002June2009.pdf
(13) U.S. Commercial Technology Transfers to the People’s Republic of China, Defense Industrial Base Program, Defense Market Research Reports, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (undated) http://www.bis.doc.gov/defenseindustrialbaseprograms/osies/defmarketresearchrpts/techtransfer2prc.html
(14) Interagency Review of U.S. Export Controls for China - Report No. D-2007-050 (PDF) - Project No. D2005-D000LG-0220.001, January 31, 2007
(15) “Obama Memo Puts Export Reform on Front Burner”, by Amy Klamper, Space News, January 15, 2010 http://www.spacenews.com/policy/100115-obama-memo-puts-export-reform-front-burner.html