Connect with us

WORLD

Donald Trump’s campus crackdown hits Harvard university – and it’s just the beginning – The Times of India

Published

on

Donald Trump’s campus crackdown hits Harvard university – and it’s just the beginning – The Times of India


File photo: Harvard University campus. (Sophie Park/The New York Times)

In early April, US President Donald Trump asked a simple, incendiary question in a private White House lunch: “What if we never pay them?” The “them” was Harvard University, and the “pay” was $9 billion in federal grants. As per a New York Times report, Trump’s question was not rhetorical. Two weeks later, $2.2 billion in Harvard’s federal funding was frozen.
Driving the news
Harvard University — America’s oldest, richest, and most powerful college — is in open conflict with the White House after rejecting a sweeping set of demands from President Donald Trump’s administration aimed at remaking elite higher education in its ideological image.
The immediate fallout: The Trump administration froze $2.2 billion in federal grants and contracts, escalating a battle that some in academia are calling the biggest federal challenge to university independence in decades.
Harvard President Alan Garber made the university’s position clear in a public letter: “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”

Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle.

Harvard’s response to the Trump administration

Zoom in: Trump admin’s demands

By August 2025, the University must adopt and implement merit-based admissions policies and cease all preferences based on race, color, national origin, or proxies thereof, throughout its undergraduate program, each graduate program individually, each of its professional schools, and other programs. Such adoption and implementation must be durable and demonstrated through structural and personnel changes. All admissions data shall be shared with the federal government and subjected to a comprehensive audit by the federal government.

Trump administration’s letter to Harvard

Trump’s assault on higher education is not new — but it’s never looked like this before. Backed by a task force to combat antisemitism, Trump’s team is leveraging federal research dollars to force ideological reforms on elite universities. These include:

  • Eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs
  • Instituting “merit-based” admissions and hiring policies
  • Conducting audits of ideological bias among students and faculty
  • Banning student groups deemed hostile to Jewish students or accused of “illegal harassment”
  • Stopping recognition of protest groups and even banning protest-related face coverings

This follows months of intense campus protests over Israel’s war in Gaza, many of which involved pro-Palestinian student groups that clashed with police and drew accusations of antisemitic rhetoric.
While Columbia University accepted similar terms under threat of losing $400 million, Harvard refused — becoming the administration’s top target.
Harvard’s stance
In a letter sent by powerhouse law firms Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and King & Spalding, Harvard made its position plain: “Harvard remains open to dialogue about what the university has done, and is planning to do, to improve the experience of every member of its community. But Harvard is not prepared to agree to demands that go beyond the lawful authority of this or any administration.”
President Garber noted that while Harvard has made “lasting and robust” reforms to combat antisemitism — including placing the Palestine Solidarity Committee on probation and severing ties with Birzeit University in the West Bank — most of the administration’s demands veer far beyond those goals.
“Although some of the demands outlined by the government are aimed at combating antisemitism, the majority represent direct governmental regulation of the ‘intellectual conditions’ at Harvard,” Garber wrote.
Endowment rich, cash poor: Why Harvard can’t just write a check

  • Locked funds: 70% of Harvard’s endowment is restricted by donor terms—earmarked for specific programs and untouchable for general use.
  • Limited flexibility: Only about 20% of funds are discretionary, and even those often come with strings attached to schools or initiatives.
  • Federal funding still matters: Federal money makes up around 16% of Harvard’s operating budget—nearly $700 million a year.
  • Operational strain: Harvard has already implemented a hiring freeze and tapped the bond market for $450 million, signs the pressure is real.
  • Funding is not fungible: Endowment funds can’t simply be rerouted to cover research losses or frozen grants.
  • Political risk, not financial alone: The threat isn’t just about money—it’s about control, precedent, and Harvard’s ability to govern itself.

What they’re saying
The response has split starkly along partisan and ideological lines.
Support for Harvard

  • “I’ve never seen this degree of government intrusion, encroachment into academic decision-making — nothing like this,” Lee C Bollinger, former Columbia’s president, told the NYT.
  • Massachusetts governor Maura Healey praised the university for “standing up for education and freedom by standing against the Trump Administration’s brazen attempt to bully schools.”
  • Former Harvard president Larry Summers called it “the right stand.”
  • Alumni and faculty rallied, with a group filing suit arguing the administration violated due process and academic freedom.
  • Anurima Bhargava, a Harvard alum and civil rights advocate, said: “Harvard reminded the world that learning, innovation and transformative growth will not yield to bullying and authoritarian whims.”

Attacks from the right

  • Rep Elise Stefanik (R-NY): “It’s time to totally cut off US taxpayer funding to this institution that has failed to live up to its founding motto, Veritas.”
  • The Trump administration’s antisemitism task force accused Harvard of exhibiting a “troubling entitlement mindset.”
  • Conservative activist Christopher Rufo said told NYT: “We want to set them back a generation or two.”

A cultural counteroffensive
The Trump administration’s playbook is both aggressive and improvisational. It began with Columbia University, which conceded to federal demands after $400 million in funding was cut. Since then, the administration has partially or fully suspended research funding at Princeton, Cornell, Northwestern, Brown, and the University of Pennsylvania. The approach has been coordinated through an opaque and ideologically hardline group in Washington.
As per the NYT report, Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy, and activist Christopher Rufo have reportedly advocated for using financial pressure to “set them [elite universities] back a generation or two.” The broader strategy? Redefine civil rights enforcement as a mechanism to crush progressive influence in academia.
The administration argues that it’s responding to unchecked antisemitism on campus. But the demands go far beyond that. They include ideological audits of departments, bans on face coverings (seen as a rebuke to pro-Palestinian protesters), and the disbanding of student groups deemed politically unacceptable.
“This isn’t about antisemitism anymore,” Garber wrote. “The majority [of demands] represent direct governmental regulation of the ‘intellectual conditions’ at Harvard.”
The administration sees things differently. “Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset,” the task force wrote in response to the university’s defiance. “The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable.”
Catch up quick: Trump’s crackdown so far

  • Columbia: Lost $400m, agreed to policy changes.
  • Penn: Lost $175m, in part over support for a transgender athlete.
  • Princeton, Northwestern, Cornell, Brown: Contracts frozen.
  • Harvard: Facing the largest threat – a potential $9B loss in total funding.
  • The Department of Education has opened investigations into 60 universities, signaling this is only the beginning.

What’s next
Harvard is already tightening its belt:

  • Imposed a hiring freeze in March
  • Reentered the bond market, raising $450 million in tax-exempt debt
  • Monitoring donor fallout, after gifts fell more than $150 million in the last fiscal year

But donor intent laws limit how much of the endowment can be reallocated to plug federal shortfalls. A university source told Axios that Harvard can only “maneuver around the margins” of the budget without triggering legal or reputational blowback.
Meanwhile, lawsuits from Harvard faculty and allies argue that the administration’s actions violate Title VI and the First Amendment, and fail to follow required legal procedures for cutting federal funds.
The bottom line
Harvard may survive – but it won’t escape unchanged. The university’s endowment is not a silver bullet. The fight with Trump is forcing Harvard into uncomfortable trade-offs, strategic cutbacks, and public political warfare rarely seen from the ivory tower.
(With inputs from agencies)





Source link

Continue Reading
Comments

WORLD

Rishi Sunak condemns Pahalgam attack, stands in solidarity with India – The Times of India

Published

on

Rishi Sunak condemns Pahalgam attack, stands in solidarity with India – The Times of India


Former UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has expressed deep sorrow and outrage over the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, that killed at least 26 people on Tuesday. Most of the victims were tourists.
Taking to X, Sunak wrote, “The barbaric attack in Pahalgam has stolen the lives of newlyweds, children, and families simply seeking joy. Our hearts break for them. To those mourning – know that the UK stands with you in sorrow and solidarity. Terror will never win. We grieve with India.”
The Resistance Front (TRF), a group linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility for the attack. Gunmen opened fire near a popular tourist meadow close to Pahalgam town, in what has become the worst attack in the region since the 2019 Pulwama bombing.
Global leaders including US president Donald Trump have voiced their condemnation and support for India. Trump called the attack “deeply disturbing” and said the United States stood firmly with India in its fight against terrorism.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who returned early from a visit to Saudi Arabia, chaired a high-level security meeting in Delhi. India has since suspended the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan as part of its response.
Earlier, Defence minister Rajnath Singh assured the nation of a “loud and clear” response to the Pahalgam terror attack that killed 28 people, mostly tourists.Rajanth Singh said that the government would hunt down not only the perpetrators who carried out the ghastly attack, but also those behind the scenes.





Source link

Continue Reading

WORLD

With Hasina gone, BNP is torn by internal clashes

Published

on

With Hasina gone, BNP is torn by internal clashes


Lablu Mia, a 50-year-old local leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), was known as a devoted activist in Badarganj upazila of Rangpur district. But on April 5, his loyalty to the party meant nothing when rival BNP factions turned on each other in a vicious clash over control of a business near the upazila central Shaheed Minar. Stabbed repeatedly in the clashes, Mia became the latest casualty in a growing wave of internal clash tearing through the BNP.

The clash, which left at least 15 injured — nine critically — spiralled so out of control that police and army personnel had to be deployed to restore order. The BNP swiftly suspended eight of its leaders, including a former MP, in connection with the incident, but the damage was already done.

Mia’s death is not an isolated incident. Since the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government on August 5, 2024, the BNP, arguably the most dominant political force in the country, has been torn by internal divisions. With the Awami League’s influence diminished, BNP factions are now frequently locked in clashes for influence.

Just two days after Mia’s killing, another deadly clash erupted in Raipur Upazila of Lakshmipur district, between rival BNP factions. Two activists were killed, and 15 others were hospitalised with stab wounds.

According to the Human Rights Support Society (HRSS), a rights organisation in Bangladesh, at least 23 people were killed and 733 more injured in over 97 incidents of political violence across the country in March. Of the deaths, 17 occurred in 64 clashes between rival factions of the BNP. These incidents left 502 others injured.

The rights body said that most of the violence was driven by efforts to establish dominance, political vendetta, extortion, and the occupation of various facilities. Although the number of political violence incidents slightly decreased last month, from 104 in February — the number of deaths more than doubled from nine. Of them, five died as result of infighting between BNP factions.

Political violence

January also witnessed alarming levels of political violence, with at least 15 people killed and 987 injured in 124 incidents. The bloodshed predominantly stemmed from internal party conflicts, particularly within BNP, which accounted for 68 violent incidents resulting in 677 injuries and five deaths. However, inter-party clashes between BNP and Awami League activists turned deadly in 22 instances, leaving 106 wounded and four dead, while three confrontations between BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami supporters saw 60 casualties and one fatality.

According to data from Ain o Salish Kendra, another rights organisation, at least 36 people have been killed in political violence over the past three months, including 24 who were killed in infighting between the BNP and its affiliated organisations. Besides, at least 1,415 people were injured in clashes between BNP members and their affiliated wings during the period, while 189 were injured in clashes between the BNP and the Awami League, and 262 in clashes involving the BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami.

In 2024, following the fall of the Hasina-led government, violence within BNP circles intensified, leading to at least 1,697 injuries and 31 deaths. While the BNP has long positioned the Awami League as its primary rival, after Ms. Hasina’s fall and the Awami League’s political decline, internal instability appears to be the BNP’s most pressing challenge.

Although the BNP’s top leadership has consistently warned its leaders and activists of stern action if found involved in wrongdoings, including extortion, such warnings have largely gone in vain. Suspension orders are frequently issued when allegations surface against party members; however, these measures have failed to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

Asked how the BNP sees the infighting, party organising secretary Shama Obaid told The Hindu that internal competition is common in big political parties. However, BNP Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman has instructed party leaders and activists to always stand by the people.

When asked about the deaths reportedly caused by infighting within the BNP over the past three months, Ms. Obaid said, “Each incident needs to be examined individually to determine whether it was truly an internal conflict or part of a conspiracy against the BNP. In many cases, members of the Awami League and their fascist collaborators infiltrate the BNP to create unrest and sabotage the party from within. These isolated incidents are often the result of such conspiracies.”

“While competition exists in large political parties, it doesn’t usually lead to these many deaths. These fatalities are happening because outsiders are orchestrating plots and blaming the BNP for the consequences,” she added.

Amid such incidents, politicians from different parties have called on BNP Acting Chairman Rahman to take decisive action against leaders involved in extortion and violence.

Ariful Islam Adib, senior joint convener of the Nationalist Citizens’ Party (NCP), a newly formed political party of students who led the anti-Hasina protest, said: “I urge Tarique Rahman to take immediate action not only within the party but also through legal means against those involved in extortion and criminal activities. Merely expelling them from the party is not enough. If these individuals are not dealt with firmly, they won’t just target opposition activists—they will eventually destroy the BNP from within.”

The law-and-order situation in the country is yet to be fully restored, as incidents of extortion and deadly violence occur unabated.

However, Home Affairs Advisor Jahangir Alam Chowdhury warned that strict action will be taken against police officials who fail to maintain law and order. “Clear and firm instructions have already been issued to law enforcement agencies to further strengthen control on the ground. If any police officers fail to bring the situation under control, they will face severe consequences,” he said.

According to the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), a total of 390 individuals involved in various criminal activities — including robbery, extortion, mugging, and fugitives with multiple arrest warrants — were arrested across the country between April 10 and April 17 during joint operations conducted by the Bangladesh Army and other law enforcement agencies.

Changed situation

Advocate Saidur Rahman, chief executive of the Manabadhikar Shongskriti Foundation (MSF), told The Hindu that although the BNP has been out of power for nearly two decades, in the changed and favourable situation its leaders and activists are now involved in extortion.

“When they were completely out of power, we didn’t see such infighting among them. But now, driven by financial motives, they are clashing internally. When one faction tries to take control of an area, another group wants to dominate the same territory, leading to violent confrontations,” he said.

“We rarely see any concrete action from the government (against such incidents). Authorities seem to treat these internal fights as outside their jurisdiction. Even the police, despite being aware of the potential for violence, often refrain themselves from intervening out of fear for their own safety. There’s also a clear lack of coordination among different ministries; they don’t know what the others are doing. The government has largely taken a hands-off approach, as if to say, ‘Let the BNP fight among themselves; we don’t need to get involved’,” added Mr. Rahman.

(Rabiul Alam is a Dhaka-based journalist)



Source link

Continue Reading

WORLD

‘He can have peace or…’: Did Trump give an ultimatum to Zelenskyy? White House says ‘no’ – The Times of India

Published

on

‘He can have peace or…’: Did Trump give an ultimatum to Zelenskyy? White House says ‘no’ – The Times of India


Trump on Wednesday slammed Zelenskyy’s statement on Crimea.

The United States has dropped enough hints that it does not want to drag on with the Russia-Ukraine war and now President Donald Trump delivered the massive blow on Wednesday as he slammed Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s statement on Crimea.
“The situation for Ukraine is dire — He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country. I have nothing to do with Russia, but have much to do with wanting to save, on average, five thousand Russian and Ukrainian soldiers a week, who are dying for no reason whatsoever,” Trump posted on Truth Social.
“Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is boasting on the front page of The Wall Street Journal that, “Ukraine will not legally recognize the occupation of Crimea. There’s nothing to talk about here.” This statement is very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago under the auspices of President Barack Hussein Obama, and is not even a point of discussion. Nobody is asking Zelenskyy to recognize Crimea as Russian Territory but, if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired? The area also houses, for many years before “the Obama handover,” major Russian submarine bases. It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about!” Trump wrote.
Trump’s comments came a few hours after a meeting in London aimed at bringing about an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine had been downgraded after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he wouldn’t attend.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt denied that Trump has given an ultimatum to Zelensky to accept a standing peace offer “by the end of the day,” or risk the US walking away from peace talks. “Not by the end of the day today,” Leavitt told CNN’s Jeff Zeleny, contradicting some media reports.
Leavitt maintained that Trump is growing more frustrated and “he needs to see this thing come to an end.” She added that the Ukrainian president is moving in “the wrong direction” when it comes to peace talks and that Zelensky “has been trying to litigate this peace negotiation in the press, and that’s unacceptable to the president.” “His patience is running very thin,” the press secretary added

Emotions have run high today: Zelenskyy’s reply

Zelenskyy said that “emotions have run high today” after talks on the ongoing war in his country were held in London.
Representatives from Ukraine, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the United States met for the talks.
“The sides expressed their views and respectfully received each other’s positions. It’s important that each side was not just a participant but contributed meaningfully,” Zelensky said on X, noting that “the American side shared its vision” alongside Ukraine and the other European nations.
In what seemed to be an indirect response to US President Donald Trump’s criticism of Zelensky being unwilling to recognize Russian control of Crimea, Zelensky vowed Ukraine would abide by its constitution. He also shared a screenshot of former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s 2018 Crimea Declaration which rejected Russia’s occupation of the peninsula.
“Ukraine will always act in accordance with its Constitution and we are absolutely sure that our partners — in particular the USA — will act in line with its strong decisions,” he said.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Republic Diary. All rights reserved.