About Article

ince the 1990s, there has been a proliferation in science, technology, engineering, maths, and medical (STEMM) collaboration between Australian and Chinese universities and academics, which has produced divisions over the scientific, economic, human rights, and national security implications. Drawing on interviews with 22 academic researchers and the works of public commentators, I devise a typology of perceptions on STEMM collaboration: Pragmatic, Cosmopolitan, CCP-critic, and Leftist. Pragmatic and Cosmopolitan perceptions, which promote deep China engagement, are the most influential over the Australian government and university leadership strategy due to the economic and scientific opportunities that China presents, but CCPcritics, who highlight the national security and human rights risks involved, have growing influence over how the government and universities perceive and manage the relationship. The interviews also reveal that academic freedom means the freedom to pursue research without external influence. Shaped by individual experiences and assumptions regarding China, academics differ over what academic freedom should protect to maximise the benefits of STEMM collaboration while minimising risks. Overall, my findings suggest that geopolitical competition and perceptions of the risks and opportunities of China engagement shape STEMM collaboration and the freedom of academics.