Bipartisan US Resolutions Urge China to Release Two Scholars and Reconsider Travel Warning
Updated: 55 minutes ago
Washington, 19 September 2026
Bipartisan members of both houses of the United States Congress are promoting companion resolutions calling upon the Trump administration to make the safe return of two American scholars, Youlin Chen and Min Zin, a priority in its dealings with China ahead of President Xi Jinping's visit to Washington next week.
The proposals also urge the Secretary of State to consider raising the mainland China travel advisory from Level 2 to Level 3, adding the State Department's 'D' indicator for wrongful-detention risk and reviewing whether China meets the criteria for designation as a 'State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention'. US Congressional Record: S.Res.865; House Select Committee on China
The House Select Committee on China announced its version on 18 September. Its sponsors include the Republican chairman, John Moolenaar, Democratic Representative Stephen Lynch and Republican Representative Young Kim. The Senate version, S.Res.865, was submitted on 17 September by Democratic Senators Edward Markey and Adam Schiff and Republican Senators Ted Budd and John Curtis before being referred to the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Markey's office; US Congressional Record
The resolution presents the two cases as examples of China's arbitrary or wrongful detention of US citizens under the rubric of national security and uses the expression 'hostage diplomacy' to describe Beijing's conduct. China rejects that characterisation. It says the men are suspected respectively of espionage or offences endangering national security, that its judicial authorities are acting in accordance with law and that 'so-called wrongful detention' does not exist. No specific response to the new resolutions could be located by the time this report was completed from China's Foreign Ministry, its embassy in Washington or the local authorities handling the cases. Reuters on Min Zin and China's response; Reuters on Youlin Chen
Three policy options, but no binding effect
The Senate resolution asks the Secretary of State to use all available tools to secure the release of US nationals whom the United States regards as unlawfully or wrongfully detained in China. It identifies three possible measures: adding a 'D' indicator to the China travel advisory; moving mainland China from Level 2, 'exercise increased caution', to Level 3, 'reconsider travel'; and reviewing the criteria for designation under the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act. Full text of S.Res.865
These are resolutions expressing the view of legislators and urging executive action. They are not criminal or civil judgments and would not, merely upon introduction, alter the travel advisory, sanction Chinese officials or create an order requiring either man's release. S.Res.865 has been referred to committee, with no recorded vote by the full Senate. The House companion measure is likewise at the advocacy stage. Whether either chamber will vote, whether the wording will change and whether the administration will adopt any recommendation are all uncertain.
The State Department's current advisory, updated on 4 September, continues to place mainland China at Level 2. It cites arbitrary enforcement of local laws, exit bans imposed without a fair and transparent process, and the risk of unjust arrest or detention. It says that expansive national-security, counter-espionage and data-security laws give officials broad discretion, potentially exposing foreign nationals to questioning or detention even for routine research involving publicly available information. Academics are amongst the groups specifically identified as potentially vulnerable. The page displays an 'O', or 'Other', risk indicator rather than 'D'. US State Department: China travel advisory, updated 4 September 2026
The proposal therefore seeks more than a textual adjustment: it would raise both the alert level and the indicator. Level 3 officially means 'reconsider travel'. Such a change could affect university approval procedures, insurance coverage, researchers' risk assessments and Sino-American academic exchanges. The resolution does not quantify how much travel or co-operation might be lost, however. Those possible consequences are an inference from the policy mechanism, not outcomes that have already occurred.
Youlin Chen: an espionage charge without a trial
Youlin Chen is a US seismologist living in Boston who has used open-source data to study seismic signals from North Korean nuclear tests. Reuters reported that Chinese authorities arrested him at Beijing airport on 5 November 2024 as he prepared to return to the United States. They formally charged him with espionage in May 2025, but his trial had not begun by July 2026. Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated him wrongfully detained in March. Reuters
S.Res.865 says that Chen has been held for more than 600 days, was denied a lawyer during the first 434 days and underwent more than 100 interrogations without counsel. Markey's office says that he has had no contact with his family. Chen's wife, Yufang Rong, previously told Reuters that he had lost substantial weight and had faced delays or refusals in receiving medication. The information on his treatment and number of interrogations comes from relatives, advocates and US legislators. No public detention log or independent monitoring report permits each assertion to be checked. US Congressional Record; Reuters
China's Foreign Ministry has said that judicial authorities are handling the case according to law and has denied that Chen is wrongfully detained. Public reporting has not disclosed the indictment, prosecution evidence or complete case file. It is consequently impossible to assess independently how his research, travel and academic contacts relate to the legal ingredients of the espionage charge. US legislators describe the allegation as fabricated or baseless. That is their political and factual assessment, not a conclusion established after a public trial. Reuters; Senator Markey's office
Min Zin: detained in Kunming after an academic invitation
Min Zin is a Myanmar-born US citizen, a visiting scholar at the University of California, Berkeley, and executive director of a policy institute studying Myanmar. Chinese state-security officers detained him at Kunming Changshui International Airport on 3 June after, according to his family and American officials, he had been invited to an academic event at a university in Yunnan. China's Foreign Ministry later confirmed that he was under criminal investigation on suspicion of espionage and endangering national security. Reuters; Associated Press
Following an internal review, the State Department formally designated Min Zin as wrongfully detained in August and called for his immediate release. The designation engages the US government's hostage-affairs and diplomatic co-ordination machinery, but remains a diplomatic and policy determination made by the American executive under domestic law. It is not a ruling by an international tribunal or a Chinese court upon the facts of the case. US State Department: wrongful-detention designation for Min Zin; Reuters
Min Zin's wife, Sylvia Zin, told a congressional hearing this week that the family had had no direct contact with him since his detention and depended upon monthly consular reports. She said that he had initially been interrogated for four to six hours a day, that the light in his cell remained on around the clock and that she was concerned about his health. China's embassy in Washington did not respond to AP's questions about those specific claims. No independent detention monitor has confirmed the reported conditions. Associated Press
China's stated position is that it is a country governed by law, the investigation is proceeding lawfully and it does not accept the wrongful-detention label. Beijing has not publicly set out the acts, physical evidence or witness material supporting the suspected espionage or national-security offences. Min Zin has not been able to answer the allegations in an open proceeding, leaving outsiders without a sufficient basis to determine criminal responsibility. Reuters
Pressure before Xi's visit
Xi is due to make a state visit to Washington next week and meet President Donald Trump. Recent reports say that Trump plans to greet Xi personally at Joint Base Andrews, followed by a formal arrival ceremony, bilateral talks and a state dinner. Trade, rare-earth supplies and artificial intelligence are expected to feature prominently. Associated Press; Reuters
Sponsors in both chambers want the two cases placed on the leaders' agenda. Lynch said that Trump should demand the release of every American whom Washington regards as unlawfully detained. Moolenaar advised American professors and researchers to reconsider collaboration with China and travel there. In a separate letter on 18 September, he also asked Trump to maintain pressure during the summit over technology, Taiwan and detained US citizens, again using the expression 'hostage diplomacy'. Senator Markey's office; Reuters
The White House has said previously that Trump wants every American detained overseas to return home. It had not publicly undertaken, when this report was completed, to raise Chen and Min Zin individually during the visit, nor disclosed negotiations over an exchange, pardon or other arrangement. The congressional resolutions support presidential intervention but are not evidence that the two governments have agreed any terms for release. Associated Press
'Hostage diplomacy' and the boundary of the evidence
'Wrongfully detained' is a formal designation made by the US State Department under American law. 'Hostage diplomacy' is the description adopted by the resolutions' sponsors and some advocates when assessing China's motive. Establishing that detention is primarily intended to obtain diplomatic concessions would ordinarily require an explicit Chinese demand, internal records or other evidence directly linking a case to negotiations. No public material presently shows Beijing proposing a particular exchange for either man.
What can be established is narrower. Both men entered China in the context of academic activity or exchange before being dealt with by state-security agencies. Both cases have proceeded for substantial periods without a public trial or full evidential disclosure. The US government, after administrative review, designated each man wrongfully detained. China rejects those determinations and insists that national-security investigations are lawful. It would go beyond the public record to report as fact that China has taken the men as diplomatic hostages.
Similarly, descriptions of 'brutal and inhumane' treatment in the congressional material derive from legislators, relatives and the consular information available to them. They are newsworthy allegations, but independent detention monitoring, clinical records and a point-by-point Chinese response are absent. Precise reporting therefore requires their source and uncertainty to remain visible.
Public-interest implications for academic exchange and freedom of movement
The cases turn academic exchange into a practical intersection between travel safety and national-security law. China maintains that foreigners inside the country must comply with its criminal and security statutes and that academic status provides no exemption. The US travel advisory says that China's definitions of national security, data and publicly available material are broad enough that researchers may not know in advance which activities will prompt investigation. US State Department travel advisory
If the State Department adopted Level 3 and a 'D' indicator, American universities might raise approval thresholds for China visits, while researchers and insurers might reassess risk. A higher warning could also reduce ordinary research collaboration and people-to-people contact. Sponsors argue that releasing the two men would help restore a credible basis for academic exchange. China has not responded specifically to the proposed travel-advisory change.
The rights at issue extend beyond consular assistance and fair process for two nationals. They also concern the practical space for scholars to conduct research, exchange ideas and travel across borders. Any human-rights assessment must nevertheless separate two questions: whether China can substantiate a criminal case, and whether, even while investigating, the length of detention, access to counsel and relatives, openness of proceedings and conditions of custody meet standards of due process and humane treatment.
Sources
Comments