This paper analyses three governments’ institutional advisory mechanisms designed to shape and support universities and individual researchers’ decisions regarding international academic collaboration. Although ostensibly country-agnostic, increasing geopolitical tensions with China have catalyzed the creation of these new structures. Each mechanism seeks to address the complex trade-offs in international research collaboration caused by the complicated relationship between China and other advanced science nations. We compare the National Contact Point for Knowledge Security in the Netherlands; the Research Collaboration Advice Team and associated “Trusted Research” campaign in the United Kingdom (UK); and Australia's “University Foreign Interference Taskforce” process. The paper finds similarities in their goals - elevating national interest and security as considerations in research collaboration decisionmaking in order to enable it to continue under narrowed conditions - but divergences in their structure, usage and accessibility that produce distinctive strengths and shortcomings.