In recent weeks, there has been quite a clamor about Stanford and the international community: the potential withdrawal of Google from China as result of cyber espionage concerns particularly in regard to a Stanford student and Tibetan activist, and last Friday’s House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, “The Impact of U.S. Export Controls on National Security, Science and Technological Leadership.” Given the relevance of the topic to the Silicon Valley high-tech industry, the Committee, which heard a testimony from President John Hennessy, met on campus at the Arrillaga Alumni Center.

The event especially has significant implications on Stanford’s research environment and compliance obligations. Chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) plans to introduce in March a bill to revamp export controls laws. As Berman explained in his opening statement, export controls have been a central part of American national security policy. They involve the federal government restricting the international transfer of “dual use” technologies–those that can be used for legitimate commercial and civilian, but also military, purposes.

Hennessy urged reform of the current regulations, as they impede beneficial research through citizenship requirements. He highlighted how these regulations disrupted three breakthrough research projects at Stanford involving the development of microchip, design of an orbiting instrument and creation of a vaccine. Hennessy, along with other experts, emphasized the importance of safeguarding security while ensuring America’s leading role in science and technology.

James Fallows, in a feature published in the current January/February issue of The Atlantic, also points to the openness of institutions of higher education to international students as a critical component of America’s leadership in the world. In “How America Can Rise Again,” Fallows refers to the words of Shirley Tilghman, a research biologist and president of Princeton University on the American university model of advanced research as the engine of innovation. By ensuring that funding and promotions are widely available to young scientists, America is able to attract the best talent from around the globe.

However, this nation’s ability to absorb the best and brightest minds is jeopardized by the technology export regulations that restrict foreign students’ access to laboratories and research facilities. This will inevitably lead to diminished scientific leadership, erosion of soft power and reduction of a force that has historically made the United States great.

Export controls are not the only burdens experienced by foreign students studying in American universities. Apart from the difficultly in attaining financial aid and fellowships, visa regulations also significantly restrict international students’ ease of entry and possibility to pursue post-graduation career opportunities. Indeed, The Daily’s Editorial Board referred to this challenge on Wednesday in its “ASSU Executive Mid-Year Evaluation: Part Two,” deeming changes in immigration laws as an agenda item that the student body hopes to see progress on.

Grads should also consider pursuing agitation and activism on their own behalf. There is tremendous potential for Stanford students to champion the export controls reform movement. At Stanford, 32 percent of the graduate population comes from other countries and more than half of the international Ph.D. students are in engineering and the physical sciences.

Concerns may arise regarding the role of “scientific men” in policymaking and the boundaries between science and politics. However, it is vital for scientists to have an input in raising, shaping and amplifying policies when the future of international collaborative research is at stake.

A coalition of constituencies, including institutions of higher education and leaders in high technology industries, and scientific and research establishments can be mobilized to spearhead government relations campaigns. Developing tactics and incentives to gain support of the opposition, ranging from defense hawks to legislators like Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)–who said, “You are essentially exporting technologies straight into the hands of the Chinese military”–certainly represents a challenge. However, more voices participating in the discourse will hopefully lead to pragmatic reforms in export controls policy.