Aussies caught in Trump versus Harvard battle
Sabra Lane: Australian students are caught up in the Trump administration's escalating fight with Harvard University. US presidents warning the institution to behave as billions of dollars in funding has been slashed to the university. The State Department stopped scheduling interviews for prospective international students as it ramps up social media screening of applicants. North America correspondent Lauren Day reports.
Protestor 1: Harvard's voice is loud and clear.
Protest group: Harvard's voice is loud and clear.
Protestor 1: Every student's welcome here.
Protest group: Every student's welcome here.
Lauren Day: While their classmates gather in graduation gowns and caps, Harvard students fight for the future of America's oldest university.
Protestor 1: Free ideas and free speech get in the way of authoritarians. And so like authoritarians before him in places like Russia, like Turkey and like Hungary, Donald Trump is attacking universities.
Lauren Day: The Ivy League university has been in the president's crosshairs, along with a number of other institutions he accuses of promoting left-wing ideals and failing to address anti-Semitism on campus.
Donald Trump: Harvard is treating our country with great disrespect. And all they're doing is getting in deeper and deeper and deeper. They've got to behave themselves. You know, I'm looking out for the country and for Harvard. I want Harvard to do well. I want Harvard to be great again.
Lauren Day: The Trump administration has cut billions of dollars of federal funding for the university and moved to bar it from enrolling international students. It's now also stopped scheduling interviews for prospective students from abroad as it prepares to expand screening of their social media accounts. The moves have worried Australian students like Sarah Davis, the co-president of the Australia New Zealand Club at Harvard University.
Sarah Davis: The vast majority of students who are graduating or who have already graduated, most of us are staying in the United States and are completely reliant on Harvard University's continued sponsorship of our working rights.
Lauren Day: PhD student James Bailey is graduating this week. He had hoped to stay on to continue postdoctorate research on a project using AI to track poverty in Africa. Instead, he has to leave the US after massive funding cuts to scientific research.
James Bailey: It seems to me deliberately destructive and therefore kind of wasteful. Wasteful is maybe too light of a word in terms of how much disruption it's had on some people's lives.
Lauren Day: But he sees himself as one of the lucky ones.
James Bailey: I know many others that have been cut short or stopped mid-study, which is terrible for science, but also ethically difficult when you're studying people and you have to cut that study in the middle.
Lauren Day: The university's president, Alan Garber, told NPR the Trump administration's actions are part of a broader assault on higher education in America.
Alan Garber: It is a warning. They see this as a message that if you don't comply with what we're demanding, these will be the consequences.
Lauren Day: President Trump shows no sign of backing down, today describing Harvard as a disaster and totally anti-Semitic.
Donald Trump: Harvard has to understand the last thing I want to do is hurt them. They're hurting themselves, they're fighting, but Harvard wants to fight. They want to show how smart they are and they're getting their ass kicked.
Lauren Day: This is Lauren Day in Washington reporting for AM.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
'Drill, baby, drill' in Alaska ticks Trump's boxes but critics urge him to 'think, baby, think'
The phrase "drill, baby, drill" was coined by a Republican back in 2008 before Donald Trump had even switched his political affiliation from the Democratic party. Appropriated by the US president for his 2024 campaign, the slogan has become a policy, which his administration is wielding like a cudgel for its conservative, nationalist agenda. This week, officials hawked its centrepiece, a plan to open up oil and gas drilling within a 52,000 km2 expanse of Alaskan wilderness, about four-fifths the size of Tasmania. This would scrap executive orders last year by Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, aimed at preserving "special areas" on the Alaska North Slope, where the federal government holds a national petroleum reserve created for the US Navy more than a century ago. On paper, it wasn't a complete lockout. Companies had to prove minimal impact at ground level to get the green light. But Mr Biden spoke of the need to protect "natural wonders" in the form of Arctic habitats for grizzly and polar bears, caribou and migratory birds. This was a bridge too far for Alaska's biggest oil company ConocoPhillips, a regional government dependent on its revenues — and notably, Alaskan Native groups — who all sued the federal government. This week, Nagruk Harcharek, an Iñupiat representative who supports allowing resource projects because of their local economic benefits, said the Trump administration had treated "our communities and people as partners, not a check-the-box exercise". "Too often, federal decisions that affect our homelands are made without the engagement of the North Slope Iñupiat, the people these decisions will affect the most," he told the New York Times. In a bit of political theatre on Monday, Alaskan Republican senator Dan Sullivan tore up and tossed Biden's executive orders like confetti for the cameras, declaring there was "a new sheriff in town". It represents a supersized jump on a move by Mr Trump in his previous White House stint to open up oil exploration on 5,200 km2 of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. And it follows a blueprint laid out by Project 2025, the so-called right-wing wish list hatched by conservative US think tank the Heritage Foundation for Mr Trump to hit the ground running in his second term. US interior secretary Doug Burgum — a one-time software investor who chaired Australian tech giant Atlassian — said the government was "bringing an energy renaissance that utilises Alaska's resources instead of burying them under red tape". His department, which last year said the protections struck a balance between oil and gas development and protecting a "globally significant intact habitat for wildlife", this week said they were "unnecessary barriers to responsible energy development". It claimed an internal review found the protections were at odds with 49-year-old laws around navy fuel reserves, meaning its own officials had "overstepped legal limits" by enforcing them. Republicans denied the move cleared the way for desecrating America's last great wilderness, including Alaskan senator Lisa Murkowski, who said "world-class environmental standards" would be upheld. Environmentalists cried foul, accusing the Trump administration of pandering to corporate interests through a reactionary push for more decades of carbon pollution under the guise of shoring up US energy security. Earthjustice lawyer Erik Grafe said the government was trying to "grease the skids for oil companies intent on industrialising even the most sensitive areas in the western Arctic in pursuit of dirty oil that can have no place in our energy future". Mr Trump's plan not only ticks an ideological box of riding roughshod over environmental concerns voiced by left-wing opponents. It also serves as a diplomatic carrot alongside the stick of US tariffs. A conga line of officials and industry players from Japan, Taiwan and South Korea toured Alaska this week at the invitation of the US, which is touting investment opportunities in liquefied gas export projects as a quid pro quo for tariff concessions. Along with the goal of doubling oil production in Alaska after a steep decades-long decline, Mr Trump wants a major new natural gas project as what US energy secretary Craig Wright called a "big, beautiful twin". The administration's proposed new rules on Alaskan oil and gas projects will be open for comment by the US public for the next two months before they take effect. On the campaign trail last year, Mr Trump invoked the siren song of cheaper petrol prices for voters with his "drill, baby, drill" mantra. Big oil and gas, faced with putting their money where the president's mouth is, could prove more difficult to woo. The sector has applauded his changes but has hardly been champing at the bit for what was already on offer in the Alaskan wilderness. One exception was Australia's own Santos, which proposes to develop the huge Tikka oil field on Alaska's North Slope. But its plan involves counteracting its emissions by storing carbon underground, a practice that has been decades in development but its viability remains in question. Alaska-based analyst Mark Foster last year told local media that new Alaskan oil and gas proposals were dogged by doubts about their cost and performance. In January — after Mr Trump took office but before Mr Burgum took over the interior department — its auction on oil and gas drilling leases in the Alaskan Arctic refuge fell flat on its face, receiving no bids. All nine leases sold in the previous auction had been cancelled, two of them at the request of proponents. Outgoing deputy secretary of the department, Laura Daniel-Davis, said at the time that the "lack of interest from oil companies" was telling. "The oil and gas industry is sitting on millions of acres of undeveloped leases elsewhere," she said. "We'd suggest that's a prudent place to start, rather than engage further in speculative leasing in one of the most spectacular places in the world." The man who coined the "drill, baby, drill" slogan, former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele, has suggested Mr Trump throws around the phrase with "very little appreciation or understanding of the current US energy position". "It is strong and it is driven by robust oil and gas production here at home, making us the top producer of oil and natural gas, thereby reducing our reliance on foreign imports," he said in March. "It also is driven by our expanding renewable energy capacity, advancements in energy storage and efficiency, and our ability to meet the challenge of grid modernisation, supply chain vulnerabilities, as well as other geopolitical uncertainties. "So, when I hear Donald Trump say 'drill, baby, drill', maybe it should be 'think, baby, think'."
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
WorldPride Washington DC strikes a protest note on Donald Trump's doorstep
About a mile from the home of a president who has been rolling back LGBT rights, popular drag queen Gottmik is firing up a crowd of fans in Washington. "Sometimes it feels like a lot," she tells the crowd at the 'Drag is Not a Crime' event, part of the WorldPride festival. "Every day you wake up and your own government is trying to shut you the f--- down and tell you that you're not a person. "WorldPride being in DC could not have come at a better time. Now it's our time to fight." Washington DC was chosen as host city for the biennial festival — a cluster of LGBT+ parties, conferences and parades — well before last year's re-election of Donald Trump. But his presence in the White House has sent a strong fight-the-government theme running through all its events. On day one of his presidency, Mr Trump ordered government agencies to start recognising only two unchangeable sexes, including on official documents like visas and passports. Subsequent orders have sought to ban trans people from the military, block funds for gender-affirming care for people under 19, and shut down diversity and inclusion programs across all arms of government. Many Republican states have taken the policies further. The president even effectively installed himself as the chair of Washington's Kennedy Centre, known as the nation's premier performing arts venue, and declared an end to drag performances "targeting our youth". The political backdrop has generated a very different vibe to the previous WorldPride event in Sydney in 2023, which the Australian government used to announce millions of dollars in funding for LGBT+ organisations. "It couldn't be a starker contrast," said Monash University human rights law professor Paula Gerber, who attended both events. "Sydney was a celebration. We were really rejoicing in how far we'd come with human rights protection "Here, there's no celebration. This is a call to action. This is realisation of how quickly our rights can be wound back." The political environment has also discouraged corporate sponsors from continuing to back pride events in the US. Several big ones have pulled out of WorldPride this year, and others have asked for their logos to be removed from signage. The Marriott Hotel group asked for banners to be changed so they no longer said "presented by Marriott", according to a report in the Washington Post. But the Marriott has continued to host the festival's human rights conference, just 500 metres from the White House, with keynote speeches and panels examining the state of play for LGBT rights around the world. The administration said it was defending women's rights and protecting "freedom of conscience" with its changes to transgender policy. "Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being," the White House order said. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt this week said there were "no plans" for it to recognise Pride Month. Illinois Republican Mary Miller introduced a resolution to Congress to instead recognise June as "Family Month" to "reject the lie of 'Pride' and instead honour God's timeless and perfect design". Some speakers at WorldPride voiced fears the political rhetoric around LGBT rights was spurring hate crimes against the community. Media advocacy group GLAAD said it had tracked more than 900 anti-LGBTQ incidents in the US between May last year and March this year, and said many more incidents have likely gone unreported. They included violent attacks resulting in 84 injuries and 10 deaths. "For so many of us in this time right now, there's this very real sense of fear," GLAAD's senior manager of news and research, Sarah Moore, said. "This sense of distress, this sense of worry, is really heightened right now around Pride with that attention on our community." The three-week festival is wrapping up this weekend with a street parade, a party on the National Mall and a two-day music festival headlined by Melbourne pop star Troye Sivan and US singer Jennifer Lopez. Attendance numbers are not yet available, but hotel bookings for the opening and closing weekends were down compared to the same time last year. The city had initially expected 3 million people to visit for WorldPride, but organisers later halved that estimate. "We anticipated bookings to be much higher at this time for WorldPride and do know that the climate, the concern for folks internationally to travel to the United States is real," Ryan Bos, the executive director of organising body Capital Pride Alliance, told NPR. Professor Gerber told conference attendees they should consider "boomerang advocacy" to keep up the fight for rights in the US. That is where local human rights advocates harness overseas groups and global institutions to increase pressure on repressive regimes. "It's a strategy that's used when the government in a country is too hostile for local LGBTI activists to safely advocate for reform," she told the ABC. "I never in a million years thought that I'd be coming to America to talk to Americans about using boomerang advocacy."
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
J.D. Vance chastised Europeans on free speech. He wasn't wrong
There is a counterfactual fantasy, not much indulged but not dismissed entirely, in which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese went to his second election in the brief 'vibe shift' between Donald Trump's triumphant return to the US presidency in 2024 and his clumsy tariff whammy in 2025. Perhaps, if the Australian election had taken place before 'Liberation Day' the outcome would have been different for Peter Dutton. More likely, it would not. In any case, such imaginings are of no use to the Coalition. It's as helpful to them as the reverse counterfactual is to the Social Democrats I spoke to in Germany this week. Germany held its election in February. The incumbent government was led by a chancellor from the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the German analogue of the Labor Party. Perhaps if the election had come after Trump's global tariff day, the SPD might also have retained power. But as the German election was set for February, only 20 per cent of German voters chose the SPD. The Social Democrats now have a lower primary vote than the Alternative for Germany (AfD), an economically conservative-turned-far-right party that has made immigration control its primary platform. If the Albanese government cared to take the German experience as a cautionary tale – a possible but avoidable future – it could reflect that what occurred there is just part of a pattern rolling through the Western world. These trends come to Australia late and slowly. But they do seem to come eventually. US Vice President J.D. Vance described what was about to happen to Germany at the Munich Security Conference in February. He warned that European governments must listen to and respect their citizens, even when the message is not agreeable to the official and intellectual classes. And in this context he urged the conference to bear in mind that 'when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them'. The problem is one of free speech. The precise amount of it which should be permissible, the dose which inoculates against social strife and what constitutes an overdose which would poison the social waters. Germany has taken the homeopathic approach to free speech, hoping that a minuscule amount, heavily diluted, will cure what ails the nation. Vance's words generated indignation among European leaders and officials. But it spoke from the soul of many voters. Days later, the German public delivered a historic high primary vote for the AfD. The gulf between what is said and what is thought was dramatically exposed by democracy.
