
Harvard's activities must alarm the Indian philanthropists
The Lakshmi Mittal and Family South Asia Institute at Harvard University is in the eye of the storm over the organization of the Pakistan Conference under its aegis, in which Pro-Pakistan speakers were invited, obviously to whitewash Pakistan's image in the wake of the Pahalgam carnage of 26 tourists. To counter the media backlash in India, the Institute page has removed the detail of proceedings from its website and supplanted it with a statement claiming that the student organizers along with their faculty advisor were solely responsible for organizing the event in which the Pakistani Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb and Pakistan's Ambassador to the US, Rizwan Saeed Sheikh participated.
'Following our principles of operation, we did not consult any benefactor of the Institute about this conference,' says the notice, alongwith a formal expression of sorrow, though without naming Pakistan in it. This is indeed a poor strategy to avoid criticism directed at the university and the benefactor concerned who were equally responsible for organizing the conference at this critical juncture. What lends credence to this conclusion is also the removal of a page from the Institute site whose rump is still available on Google. It begins with 'Previewing the inaugural Pakistan conference 2025: 14 Apr 2025 — The Mittal Institute sat down with the two conference co-chairs—Muhammad Hadi from the Harvard Graduate School of Education and Sannan Pervaiz …'. So, it is not just the students and the faculty advisor of the conference, but also the benefactor and two conference co-chairs. This conference by Pakistan sympathizers on the Harvard campus only shows disdain of the Centre for human rights of which the university professes to be the world champion.
It is not the first time that Harvard has been involved in anti-India and anti-Hindu projects. One recalls the Dismantling Hindutva Conference held online in 2022 in which Harvard was the key player along with many other American and European universities. It was basically directed at the pro-Hindu policies of the Modi government. Surprisingly, anything going in favour of Hindus in the world rankles these 'elite' institutions which are devoted to the DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity) philosophy.
One finds a number of India-centred study centres supported by Indian billionaires in many American universities. People like Murty, Ambani, Mahindra, Piramal, et al have been contributing mammothly to them without scrutinizing the operations of these institutions. Narayan Murthy's funding of the Murty Classical Library under late Sheldon Pollock is a case in point. Now, Pollock, much like Wendy Doniger, has been instrumental in presenting a distorted and degraded interpretation of our scriptural texts. Funding for the DEI projects supposedly to bring about social justice in India for the marginalized sections seems innocuous, but actually these projects are carried out with the aim to create divisions in the Indian society.
How Harvard has been aiming to create problems for India can be gauged from the Indologist Rajiv Malhotra's assertion in his recent book Snakes in the Ganga that a clandestine project undertaken by Harvard University to study the tribal Munda languages spoken in Chhattisgarh and Odisha states was not exactly for love of an obscure language but meant to promote a new theory that the Munda speakers were the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent which would mean that both Aryans and Dravidians were outsiders! One needs to be reminded of the Maoist movement rife in that area which might serve as part of the toolkit to dismember India.
When it comes to highlighting India and its positive influence on the world, Harvard is least interested. Malhotra's attempts to get its researchers take up projects on Vivekananda's influence on America got lip service only, so did his plea to promote India-loving Transcendentalist Ralph Emerson's writings. In case of Thoreau, Harvard simply denied India's influence – something clearly indicated in his book Walden Pond – besides ignoring such request in the case of Nobel-awardee T.S. Eliot, who had studied Sanskrit texts and used Sanskrit aphorisms in his poems.
Harvard has also been criticized by Malcolm Gladwell, the acclaimed author of The Tipping Point for its bias in admissions where it discriminates against Indian students and prefers other races. This attitude had been criticized by the US Supreme Court also which in its 2023 judgment mentioned race-conscious admissions programmes at Harvard and the University of North Carolina and found them violative of the Equal Protection Clause.
Now that the Trump administration has withdrawn grants to Harvard and some other universities, will the Indian billionaires have a second thought about funding these universities? Why don't they divert these funds to Indian universities and provide to Indian students good education at reasonable cost? The growing strictness about visa in America and Canada provides a huge opportunity to the Indian universities, government and the philanthropists to work together and come up with an elaborate world-class education system that will save for the country billions going out on account of foreign education.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author's own.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Supreme Court cancels Darshan's bail: Ramya welcomes verdict, justice above celebrity status
Speaker Ramya , a former Congress MP and actress, has welcomed the Supreme Court 's announcement that actor Darshan Thoogudeepa's bail has been cancelled. "This is a very important verdict that says everyone is equal before the law. It shows the society that the law will take its course and deliver justice," she said in an interview with ANI. SC bench highlights Karnataka HC ignored key evidence in granting bail As per ANI, the bench headed by Supreme Court Justices R. Mahadevan and J.P. Partiwala, which heard the case, said that the Karnataka High Court verdict granting bail to Darshan ignored strong evidence, it pointed out that the conviction was based on reasons that contradicted the legal principles established in murder cases. The court also held that reasons such as the mere filing of a chargesheet, the presence of a large number of witnesses, or the risk of the case being prolonged cannot be fundamental reasons for reducing the seriousness of the crime. Court cites Darshan's alleged attempts to influence probe and tamper evidence Furthermore, the court pointed to records showing that Darshan made systematic attempts to influence the investigation. Details such as arranging for them to surrender as co-accused, providing money to cover up the crime, and using the police to interfere in the FIR and postmortem process were placed before the Supreme Court. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The court pointed out that CCTV footage from the convict's house was destroyed and that he influenced witnesses by participating in open public meetings after bail. Judges stress that fame or political influence cannot dilute justice delivery In the end, the Supreme Court emphasized that bail cannot be granted based solely on the status of celebrities, and that fame, political dominance, and influence in society should not adversely affect the administration of justice. "Celebrities don't have less responsibility, they have more. They are role models in society. Granting bail in the face of allegations of conspiracy to murder would send a false message to society and undermine public confidence in the judiciary," the ruling stated. "Get the latest updates on Times of India, including reviews of the movie Coolie and War 2 ."


NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Zelensky Returns To Site Of Stunning Oval Office Shouting Match To Meet Trump
United States: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky returns to the Oval Office on Monday for the first time since a spectacularly tense exchange with President Donald Trump saw their talks cut short and question marks raised over future US support. I have already arrived in Washington, tomorrow I am meeting with President Trump. Tomorrow we are also speaking with European leaders. I am grateful to @POTUS for the invitation. We all share a strong desire to end this war quickly and reliably. And peace must be lasting. Not… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) August 18, 2025 At the February 28 meeting, President Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated Zelensky on live television, accusing him of being ungrateful for US aid provided since Russia's invasion three years prior, and pressing for quick negotiations to end the war. The hostile confrontation marked a turning point in Kyiv-Washington relations, which had been warm under former president Joe Biden, and raised fears that President Trump would cut off US military support. The scene quickly devolved at the end of a long question-and-answer session with the press. Vice President Vance accused President Zelensky of being "disrespectful" and displaying ingratitude for President Trump's diplomatic efforts, after the Ukrainian leader expressed skepticism that Russian President Vladimir Putin could be trusted, given his repeated violations of earlier agreements. As President Zelensky defended his position in his non-native English, President Trump was enraged by the Ukrainian leader's suggestion that while the United States was currently far from the fighting, "you will feel it in the future" if they appeased President Putin. "You don't know that. You don't know that. Don't tell us what we're going to feel. We're trying to solve a problem. Don't tell us what we're going to feel," railed President Trump, before adding: "You're not in a good position. You don't have the cards right now." As tempers flared, Vice President Vance demanded President Zelensky thank the United States for the billions provided to Kyiv in military aid. "Have you said 'thank you' once?" he asked. When President Zelensky attempted to respond, he was silenced by President Trump. "No, no. You've done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble," said President Trump, cutting President Zelensky off. The Ukrainian leader left the White House shortly after, without signing a mineral rights deal that was a key reason for his visit. In the ensuing days, the United States temporarily cut off military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, heightening European fears that Trump would side with Putin in trying to end the conflict. Shifting tides Much water has since flowed under the bridge, however. President Trump, who has in the past expressed his admiration for President Putin, began to lose patience with the Russian leader, as Moscow kept up its military offensive even as US special envoy Steve Witkoff engaged in feverish diplomacy to achieve a ceasefire. In April, President Trump met with President Zelensky at the Vatican and accused President Putin of "tapping me along" without delivering on promises. Days later, Ukraine and the United States finally signed a minerals deal, which Trump had earlier referred to as compensation for US aid. The two leaders also met face-to-face in June on the sidelines of the NATO summit at The Hague. On Friday, President Trump met with President Putin in Alaska to discuss the Ukrainian conflict, promising to run any proposals by both Ukraine and its European allies before agreeing to a deal. Shortly after the Russian summit, President Trump invited President Zelensky to the Oval Office. Perhaps wary of the contours of the previous diplomatic dust-up, President Zelensky quickly said he was "grateful for the invitation." European leaders will join President Zelensky in Washington on Monday, seeking above all else to prevent another Oval Office meltdown -- but also to coordinate on the path toward peace negotiations, especially on how to prevent any future Russian invasion. On the latter front, the Trump administration says it is now open to providing Ukraine security guarantees, a shift hailed Sunday by Ukrainian and European leaders. President Zelensky is expected to first meet one-on-one with President Trump before they are joined by European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and EU chief Ursula von der Leyen, a European government source said. According to US broadcaster CNN, President Zelensky's former sparring partner -- Vice President Vance -- will also be present.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to visit Pakistan this week: Report
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi will arrive in Islamabad this week to attend the Pakistan-China strategic dialogue and hold meetings with the civil and military leadership to discuss bilateral ties as well as key regional and international developments , a media report said on top Chinese diplomat will undertake a two-day visit beginning on August 21, The Express Tribune newspaper reported, citing official Islamabad, Wang will review the current state of bilateral ties between the two countries and discuss key regional and international developments, the paper visit comes against the backdrop of a host of developments, including the India-Pakistan four-day conflict in May, the Iran-Israel war in June and the recent warming of ties between Pakistan and the United the current geostrategic environment , both sides are expected to explore ways to deepen cooperation, the paper Wang's visit, the agenda of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's upcoming trip to China is also expected to be finalised, it is likely to travel later this month to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit and hold bilateral meetings with the Chinese leadership.