A draft work programme for Horizon Europe (2026-2027) signals the European Commission’s intent to impose significant new restrictions on Chinese participation in the EU’s flagship research fund. According to the draft annexes, entities established in China would be ineligible to participate in “Innovation Actions.” They would also be barred from most “Research and Innovation Actions,” with exceptions made for specific fields like climate science, food systems, and cultural projects.

Furthermore, the proposal seeks to exclude all Chinese universities linked to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) from any participation. The Commission’s draft justifies these moves by citing persistent concerns over the undesired transfer of intellectual property, China’s “civil-military fusion” strategy, and the need to protect the EU’s broader economic security and technological autonomy.

Our Take

This proposal marks a significant politicization of Europe’s scientific ecosystem. While the EU has the prerogative to set funding rules, our focus is on the consequence of that decision. It explicitly subordinates the core mission of critical institutions like universities, namely, the pursuit of truth through open inquiry and the dissemination of research, to external geopolitical and economic security agendas. While the concerns over IP theft and civil-military fusion are substantial, this response sets a troubling precedent.

The 451 Institute’s concern is not the legality of the EU’s security strategy, but the disruption this strategy causes to scientific cooperation and the precedent it sets. When scientific collaboration is restricted based on broad geopolitical considerations, it is a dangerous expansion of the “attack surface” for conflict, turning research into a battleground. There is simply not enough information to determine whether these actions are truly warranted. Our mission is to develop safeguards that insulate essential institutions (including education and research) from such political manipulation, allowing them to focus on their public-serving mandates while maintaining the ability for decision-makers to take legitimate and proportionate actions to respond to actual threats.