It’s always Beijing’s firm conviction that education cooperation must not be politicised if it is to benefit both sides. This principle applies no less to China-US education collaboration but what the US is seeking to do to Harvard University “will undoubtedly hurt its own image and reputation in the world”. On May 22, the US Department of Homeland Security abruptly revoked Harvard’s authority to admit international students, declaring that it’s only a “privilege, not a right”, for universities to enrol students from foreign lands and benefit from their higher tuition fees to support the institutions’ multibillion-dollar endowments.

Already Washington is ramping up control on American universities on many a front, portrayed unconvincingly as repercussions of what the government calls “uncontrolled anti-Semitism and a need to reverse diversity programs aimed at addressing historical oppression of minorities”.  Authorities have also moved to terminate visas and deport non-local students having participated in demonstrations against the war in Gaza, accusing them of supporting Palestinian militant faction Hamas.

At Harvard, the government has threatened to put under review funding of 39 billion US dollars, while continuing to freeze a first tranche of two billion US dollars of grants and 60 million US dollars of official contracts. US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanded in a letter to Harvard last month that the institution should submit to her department the records of overseas students allegedly getting involved in violent and anti-Semitic protests, adding that the University can restore its status if it complies with all her requirements within 72 hours.

Refusing to yield to the international student recruitment policy as imposed under President Donald Trump’s leadership, Harvard filed on May 23 a lawsuit in federal court in Boston, which states that the drastic decision by the Trump administration to put an immediate end to the recruitment of non-local students at the University violates the First Amendment of the country’s Constitution, and will engender an “immediate and devastating effect for Harvard and more than 7,000 visa students”, which came about from the campus being thrown into “disarray days before graduation”. Going forward, the lawsuit projects that “future applicants may shy away from applying out of fear of further reprisals” from the Trump administration. The ruling from US District Judge Allison Burroughs puts the government’s sanction against Harvard on hold, pending the outcome of the lawsuit.

Despite its status as a most storied university in the US history, spanning an extended period of 400 years since the year 1636, Harvard has been ordered to halt its intake of international students in the 2025-26 academic year. Existing enrolment statistics indicate that the University has enrolled 6,793 foreign students in 2024/25, occupying 27 percent of the University’s student body. Students from China account for around 1,282, about 20 percent of the institution’s total international student population.

Harvard is said to be the wealthiest US university holding an endowment valued at 53.2 billion US dollars in 2024. Yet, the showdown between the White House and Harvard has dealt an irreparable blow the US higher education on counts of image, confidence and reputation which have, in Harvard’s case, taken centuries to build up. Financially, the move from the Trump government to derail the University’s non-local student enrolments has costed the Ivy League higher education giant 384 million US dollars from its annual tuition fee income. However, the country’s Homeland Security Department has spelt out in its press release that the action taken against Harvard University should be regarded as an alert to universities and academic institutions across the country.

Foreign students from American universities are mostly being haunted by the prospect of having their education suddenly truncated in the country, if there is no change to the contrary passed by the judiciary in the official policy on the universities’ admissions of international students. And the US government has the authority to impose sanctions on colleges and universities failing to discharge their responsibility seriously and correctly regarding students’ applications for visas to stay in the country.

In the face of growing criticism from the stakeholding groups, President Donald Trump attempted to defend on May 25 his administration’s move to disallow foreign students to carry on with their studies at Harvard after such an action plan, branded by Harvard as “unconstitutional”, was thwarted temporarily by a federal court judge, pending the completion of a hearing to be called.

The Oval Office’s owner argued by putting up the question: “Why isn’t Harvard University saying that almost 32 percent of their students are from foreign lands, and yet those countries, some not at all friendly to the US, paying nothing towards their students’ education, nor do they ever intend to………We want to know who those foreign students are, a reasonable request since we give Harvard billions of dollars, but isn’t exactly forthcoming.”

Fallout from the conflict over international student enrolment at Harvard is reportedly continuing on May 26 when three students from Harvard remarked in their letter published in the Washington Post’s opinion columns that they were afraid but had to “speak up”. They said: “We have no choice but to take the fight now, or we will have surrendered our independence.” Instead of fighting on their own, they appeal for the support of all Americans to oppose Trump’s actions and safeguard the right to free speech.

Academic achievements and scholarship only thrive on openness in universities. Education, art and culture can function as vehicles for peace and advancement, or conversely for degeneracy and destruction. Already Trump’s decision has created snowballing uncertainty and anxiety which disrupt students’ pathway to academic success and scholarship development. Let’s keep our fingers on the pulse of the brawl over the lasting ideal of academic freedom, and hope for the best for the fair and justified expectations of the students and their families.

Mervyn Cheung Man-ping

Chairman of Hong Kong Education Policy Concern Organisation

The views do not necessarily reflect those of Orange News.

Cover Photo: AP