Trump administration ramps up attack on Harvard, Columbia
Trump is seeking to bring the universities to heel with claims their international students pose a national security threat, and that they ignored anti-Semitism on campus, and perpetuate liberal bias.
A proclamation issued by the White House late Wednesday declared that the entrance of international students to begin a course at Harvard would be "suspended and limited" for six months, and that existing overseas enrollees could have their visas terminated.
"Harvard's conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers," said the order.
"I'm trembling. This is outrageous," Karl Molden, a Harvard government and classics student from Austria, told AFP.
"He is abusing his executive power to harm Harvard as much as he can."
"My god!" said another international student at Harvard, who declined to be named for fear of retribution, on learning of the executive order.
"This is such a disgrace."
The announcement came after the Trump administration's earlier efforts to terminate Harvard's right to enroll and host foreign students were stalled by a judge.
The government already cut around $3.2 billion of federal grants and contracts benefiting Harvard and pledged to exclude the Cambridge, Massachusetts institution from any future federal funding.
Harvard has been at the forefront of Trump's campaign against top universities after it defied his calls to submit to oversight of its curriculum, staffing, student recruitment and "viewpoint diversity."
Trump has also singled out international students at Harvard, who in the 2024-2025 academic year accounted for 27 percent of total enrollment, and a major source of income.
"This is yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights," a university spokesman said.
"Harvard will continue to protect its international students."
The latest sweeping action against Harvard came as Trump's education secretary threatened Wednesday to strip Columbia University of its accreditation.
The Republican has targeted the New York Ivy League institution for allegedly ignoring harassment of Jewish students, throwing all of its federal funding into doubt.
Unlike Harvard, several top institutions -- including Columbia -- have already bowed to far-reaching demands from the Trump administration, which claims that the educational elite is too left-wing.
- 'Combating anti-Semitism' -
But Wednesday's official action suggested it was not enough for Trump.
"Columbia University looked the other way as Jewish students faced harassment," US Education Secretary Linda McMahon said on X.
She accused the school of breaking rules prohibiting recipients of federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin.
"After Hamas' October 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel, Columbia University's leadership acted with deliberate indifference towards the harassment of Jewish students on its campus," McMahon said in a statement.
"This is not only immoral, but also unlawful."
In the statement, the US Education Department said its civil rights office had contacted Columbia's accreditation body about the alleged violation.
Withdrawing Columbia's accreditation would see it lose access to all federal funding -- a very significant proportion of the university's income.
Students attending the university would also not be able to receive federal grants and loans towards tuition.
Critics accuse the Trump administration of using allegations of anti-Semitism to target educational elites and bring universities to their knees.
The administration has already put $400 million of Columbia's funding under review, prompting the university in March to announce a package of concessions to the government around defining anti-Semitism, policing protests and conducting oversight for specific academic departments.
Following Wednesday's announcement, a Columbia spokesperson said the university "aware of the concerns" raised by the government with its accreditation body.
"We have addressed those concerns directly with Middle States," the spokesperson said, adding that "Columbia is deeply committed to combating anti-Semitism on our campus."
"We take this issue seriously and are continuing to work with the federal government to address it."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
21 hours ago
- SBS Australia
The Ukrainian areas Putin badly wants, amid doubt over Trump's plan for Putin-Zelenskyy meeting
Face-to-face peace talks between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia would be "incredibly significant", and they're the goal of US President Donald Trump as he pushes to end the war in Ukraine. After meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House on Monday, Trump suggested a trilateral meeting is in the works. "I called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a meeting, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy," he wrote in a social media post. He told reporters that meeting would be followed by another where he would join. "We'll see what happens there," he said of a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy. "If that works out, if it works out, then I'll go to the trilat and close it up." But experts have told SBS News that a ceasefire arrangement would be complicated, and part of the reason is the protracted disputes over Ukrainian territories. Will a trilateral meeting even happen? German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who attended talks between Zelenskyy and Trump, reportedly said a meeting between the pair and Putin could take place in as little as two weeks. "We do not know whether the Russian president will have the courage to attend such a summit. That is why persuasion is needed," Reuters reported him saying. Dr Jessica Genauer, a senior lecturer in international relations at Flinders University, said there was a "slim chance" Putin would agree to meet Zelenskyy face-to-face. "It would be incredibly significant if President Putin would meet with President Zelenskyy because it would mean acknowledging that President Zelenskyy is the legitimate leader of a legitimate state," she told SBS News. "Trump has talked about it and Trump is clearly pursuing the idea, but I think it's very unlikely that it will actually eventuate." Trump himself has said that while he "hopes President Putin's going to be good", it was going to be a "rough situation" if he didn't. Zelenskyy "has to show some flexibility also", Trump said. Zelenskyy has expressed interest in meeting with Putin, but the Russian president may be more likely to prefer to speak via Trump. "I think it's much more likely we'll see Putin agreeing to additional meetings with Trump — which are very much to his benefit — it means that he can show the Russian people that he is a peer to the United States, which is how he views himself and how he wants to appear domestically within the Russian context," Genauer said. "That's not true in reality, but that is what President Putin would like to broadcast to his people." Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, it has occupied large swathes of land and displaced millions of people. Russian-controlled territory and its future ownership will be a focus at any future peace meetings, as Putin has reportedly refused to withdraw Russian troops from those regions. Significance of this territory Russia currently controls large parts of four Ukrainian regions or 'oblasts' as they are known in Russia and some post-Soviet states. These oblasts share their names with their respective administrative capitals — Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk and Luhansk — which are along Ukraine's eastern border. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Source: SBS News These regions have reportedly been the hardest hit in the last three years, and Genauer said Putin has ambitions to gain even more Ukrainian territory. "He thinks that he can still gain control over more Ukrainian territory on the ground. He's determined to keep the territory that Russia has already captured. And what President Putin would like is for Trump to pressure Ukraine to formally cede territory to Russia," she said. The Russian-controlled area represents around 20 per cent of Ukrainian sovereign territory, according to Genauer. Pro-Russian sympathy An area of particular interest to Putin is the Donbas region, which overlaps with the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The Russian president has reportedly said he would not withdraw soldiers from that region in particular during talks with the White House. But Zelenskyy has signalled that ceding Donbas is not an option for Ukraine, and could embolden future Russian assaults. "We will not leave Donbas. We cannot do this," he said. "Our territories are illegally occupied. Donbas for the Russians is a springboard for a future new offensive." Professor emeritus Graeme Gill, a political scientist from the University of Sydney, said the region has an interesting history. He told SBS News the "loyalty" of the area has been "very fluid" due in part to the Russian heritage of some of its citizens. "Putin's argument is that it's always been primarily a Russian area, which was arbitrarily carved out of Russia and given to Ukraine when the Soviet Union was established. So it's also part of getting back some of what he feels was lost as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union," he said. "The taking of this region and the incorporation of it into Russia itself would conceivably be a lot easier than it would in those areas of Ukraine, which are not traditionally pro-Russian." Source: SBS News He explained that while Donbas has some Russian roots, people in the area ultimately voted in a referendum to become independent from the Soviet Union following its 1991 collapse. However, Russian-installed officials had taken ballot boxes from house to house in what Ukraine and the West said was an illegitimate, coercive exercise to create a legal pretext for Russia to annex the four regions. "This farce in the occupied territories cannot even be called an imitation of a referendum," Zelenskyy said at the time. Gill said Donbas also has important geographical and economic factors that could be desirable to Putin, as a major exporter of coal and heavy industiral production. "They make railway sleepers and industrial equipment, which would be attractive to Putin," he said. State of the war It's been three years since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and almost a decade since it annexed Crimea in 2014. Gill said Putin appears determined to continue the war. "Putin's not going to give up. And although his economy has run into some problems or he's running into some problems now, there's no evidence that those are sufficient to prevent him from continuing the war," he said. He added that Ukraine is losing ground "virtually every day to Russia". "The Ukrainians have been able to hold on through grit, determination, and the use of weapons from the West. But the problem for them is that they're very greatly outnumbered. "They cannot replace the soldiers that they're losing as a result of the conflict." Genauer said Zelenskyy "needs a ceasefire". "Ukraine is still bearing a lot of costs from the war. It's still being bombarded by Russia in terms of drones and other artillery. "So that's going to be the main sticking point between what Ukraine and the Europeans want, which will be a ceasefire first, followed by negotiations for some kind of territorial agreement."
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Will Trump's 'security guarantees' end Putin's war?
News report: It's been an absolutely dramatic day here at the White House in Washington to see that many world leaders, probably unprecedented for a long time anyway. News report: Mr Zelenskyy was joined by the European Commission president, the head of NATO, along with the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Finland. Donald Trump, US President: We're going to work with Ukraine. We're going to work with everybody and we're going to make sure that if there's peace, the peace is going to stay long term. This is very long term. We're not talking about a two year peace and then we end up in this mess again. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukrainian President: We need to stop this war to stop Russia. And we need support American and European partners. That we are strong people and we supported President Trump. To stop this war, to make a diplomatic way of finishing this war. Sam Hawley: Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been to the White House before in what became an infamous encounter with Donald Trump. This time, he took an entourage of European leaders as backup as the US president pushes for a quick end to the war in Ukraine. At the heart of the talks, security guarantees from the US and a possible meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. Today, a former US ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, on why it could actually be a step forward towards peace. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily. Sam Hawley: John, the last time Zelenskyy sat down with Donald Trump, of course, at the White House, it didn't go so well. This time, he went with a whole heap of European leaders and it was safe to say a smoother affair, wasn't it? John Herbst: Oh, without a doubt, because circumstances are completely different. And you know what? Late February, I think that was the last day of February, President Trump was pursuing a policy which, at least for several weeks, was not based upon the realistic recognition of what Putin was trying to do. And he kind of assumed that the glad words he was hearing from Putin over the phone reflected a desire to make peace as opposed to a desire to keep Trump on the sidelines as Putin tried to take over Ukraine. And if you go back and look, starting in the middle of March, so two and a half weeks after that unfortunate meeting, the Russians began their first refusals to various Trump ceasefire proposals, which Ukraine accepted. And we began to see Trump express frustration with the Russians, starting in May, and that frustration grew since May. Sam Hawley: Well, during this meeting, just to note that Zelenskyy had abandoned his military outfit, of course, which he's worn in solidarity with the soldiers in Ukraine. Reporter: You look fabulous in that suit. Donald Trump, US President: I said the same thing. Reporter: Yeah, you look good. Donald Trump, US President: I said the same thing. Reporter: Yeah, it's good on you. John Herbst: If you look at his outfit, it is a suit, but it looks very similar to the attire before. Sam Hawley: It's still black. John Herbst: So I'd consider that to be an interesting compromise. Sam Hawley: Yeah, but Trump would have liked that, wouldn't he? That he was wearing a suit this time. He likes the optics. John Herbst: But look, look, that was always a tertiary, if even a tertiary issue. Sam Hawley: Yeah, of course. John Herbst: It reflected Trump's desire to put pressure on Zelenskyy and nothing more. Sam Hawley: All right, well, apparently this is a really interesting part of this meeting. Trump got up and he went out and he called Vladimir Putin to discuss, in part, a meeting with Zelenskyy and Putin and then another meeting, a trilateral meeting, where Trump would also be President Zelenskyy was actually asked about this during a press conference afterwards. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukrainian President: We will see that the result of bilateral and then it can be the trilateral. So I said always so Ukraine will never stop on the way to peace. Sam Hawley: What do you think of that? Those meetings, are they actually a viable thing? Will they happen? John Herbst: Well, they are a sensible next step or next steps. But I agree with you, it's not clear that Putin will actually do this. He's been avoiding or evading Zelenskyy literally once he decided six or 12 months in Zelenskyy's term as president, that Zelenskyy was not going to submit to Putin's desires in Ukraine. Sam Hawley: So you think it's unlikely that Putin will show up? John Herbst: Well, I'm not going to say unlikely. I would say it's not certain that he will show up. That's a safe thing to say. You know, I put the odds at something less than 50 percent, but not at two percent. Sam Hawley: All right, well, a must, of course, for Zelenskyy going into this meeting and the European leaders was security guarantees that America would come to Ukraine's defence if Russia agreed to a peace deal, but later attacked Ukraine again. John Herbst: Well, point of fact, I would say that was easily the most important thing we've seen over the past 24 hours. And it was it was actually, you might say, anticipated by Trump's statement on the plane to Alaska that, you know, security guarantees may be something that's necessary. First time we've heard anything like that from President Trump. And then, you know, a more forward leaning position today. Donald Trump, US President: There'll be a lot of there'll be a lot of help when it comes to security. There's going to be a lot of help. It's going to be good. They are first line of defence because they're there, they're Europe, But we're going to help them out also. We'll be involved. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukrainian President:: It is important that the United States makes a clear signal that they will be among the countries that will help to coordinate and also will participate in security guarantees for Ukraine. I believe this is a big step forward. John Herbst: So that to me is a great positive. But of course, the Russians had regularly rejected the notion that European troops would appear in Ukraine. They rejected that again today. You know, that was a clear, important element that was and remains a clear, important element in security for Ukraine. Sam Hawley: In fact, the head of NATO, Mark Rutte, he told Fox News after the meeting that troops on the ground weren't even discussed. Reporter: Troops on the ground. Is that a possibility? Mark Rutte, NATO Secretary General: We have not discussed that at all today. So that will be part of the discussions which will now start. We will try to bring them to a next stage of understanding over the coming days and weeks, of course. I'm not sure that we can solve all the details. Sam Hawley: Is that surprising? John Herbst: That is surprising. I'm not certain what to make of it, but it's conceivable they could have talked about about this without actually getting into that detail. Sam Hawley: And the so-called coalition of the willing, that includes the UK and France and others, they're suggesting that they could deploy troops to Ukraine as part of a security guarantee. That really angers Putin, doesn't it? The idea of Western foreign troops on the ground in Ukraine. John Herbst: That's correct, because Putin's aim remains to take effective political control of the country, which means either changing the government or seizing 70 percent or 80 percent of the country, including all the cities alone, the Dnipro River, including the Black Sea coast and leaving a rump Ukraine in the West. Sam Hawley: So what is the security guarantee for Ukraine if it doesn't involve troops? What would we be looking at? John Herbst: Well, that's that's hard to imagine. I mean, there are things that could be done, making sure that that the air is controlled by Western forces with Ukraine were able to shoot at Russian troops on the ground if they go beyond certain points, but that nothing can substitute ultimately for having some force on the ground. Sam Hawley: Well, of course, Putin has long been opposed to Ukraine joining NATO. I mean, they've been discussing Article five, you know, NATO's treaty, Article five. What does that all mean? Just explain that. John Herbst: Well, I mean, Article five is the portion of the NATO charter, which says if one country is attacked, all countries will play a role in its defence. So an Article five is the reason why everyone wants to join NATO. So if you provide if you truly provide Article five type guarantees to Ukraine, that is a huge deterrence to further Russian aggression. And that is the ne plus ultra of security guarantees. That's why I say this is that's clearly the most important elements that's emerged over the past day or so. Sam Hawley: Well, on the ground in Ukraine, John, it seems locals and officials are pretty sceptical about these talks. What have you been hearing? What have people been telling you, people you know in Ukraine? John Herbst: I know that many Ukrainians were deeply concerned after the summit in Anchorage. I believe that they are encouraged by what happened between Zelenskyy and Trump with all the other European leaders. But encouraged is not the same as saying confident, because we've seen before President Trump move from one direction to another and sometimes relatively quickly. So the question is, are the good things that were spoken today an indication of where the process and President Trump will be a week or two weeks from now? So that that remains a question. Sam Hawley: But what does it say that just before the meeting began, Russia was attacking major Ukrainian cities, killing at least 10 people, including a child? John Herbst: Well, it means that their effort to bomb Ukraine into submission continues. And I think that's the reason to be concerned about President Trump allowing Putin to cross his deadline without consequences. Sam Hawley: All right. What about those people, John, living in the regions that Putin wants to hold in Ukraine? What happens to them if he succeeds in this? John Herbst: There's no question that that's a disaster for them. And that's why Trump's goal, in my opinion, is to achieve a durable peace. And I think that's a good enough outcome. But it includes the tragic element that you are consigning Ukrainians to live under dreadful Russian oppression. That's why I would not call it a just peace, but a durable peace. You know, international relations can be pretty rough. Sometimes people accept a durable peace as opposed to a just peace, because that's the best that they can achieve. Sam Hawley: So do you think this peace can actually be achieved? Zelenskyy wants a ceasefire. So negotiations before a peace deal. Putin doesn't want that. He wants to skip a ceasefire and just come up with the plan where Ukraine gives up land to Russia. And Zelenskyy has always said he's not going to do that. So where's the peace deal here? John Herbst: Well, Zelenskyy has often, I won't say always, but often going back to even before Trump took office, after he won the election, he has often demonstrated a willingness to make territorial concessions on a de facto basis in exchange for security guarantees. And this has always been kind of not the specific security guarantees, but security measures plus territorial compromise has always been the Trump approach, always meaning for the last eight or nine months going back before our elections. So everything we're hearing today has actually been discussed in some fashion in the past. But the key, in my opinion, has been even Trump's goal of a durable peace is in doubt because Putin doesn't want a durable peace. Putin wants control of Ukraine. So that means we ultimately have to put serious pressure on the Kremlin to demonstrate they're not going to get ultimate control of Ukraine. Sam Hawley: All right, well, John, we know Donald Trump wants to end the war. He likely does, of course, want to see the end to all the bloodshed, but he also wants a Nobel Peace Prize, right? Do you think he can achieve this aim to end this war? John Herbst: If he uses all the powers at his control, he can achieve a durable peace by making life miserable for an aggressive Kremlin. In other words, if he begins to put the serious pressure on Putin he's talked about, you know, major, major advanced weapons heading to Ukraine, paid for by someone else, not us, tougher economic sanctions on Russia and its trading partners, Putin would be in serious trouble. Now, these things would not bring the result we need in two months or four months. Putin has wagered successfully so far on outlasting all the Western leaders who've opposed his war on Ukraine going back 11 years. So Trump would have to demonstrate a willingness to persevere, certainly for seven or eight months, maybe for well over a year. But the cost to us of doing that is tiny. The cost to the Russians is enormous. Sam Hawley: All right. And what about the people of Ukraine, John? You know them. Do you think they should have some hope now? John Herbst: I think that they should not give up hope. I think that if Trump truly wants a durable peace, and I think he does, and if he truly wants a Nobel Peace Prize, and I think he does, he will have to move in this direction. It's coming much more slowly than I would like, but it may well come. Now, notice I'm even here a little bit tentative, but I think ultimately the different factors at play will move him in that direction. Sam Hawley: John Herbst is a former US ambassador to Ukraine and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead. Audio production by Sam Dunn. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. Thanks for listening.
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
What happened at the White House talks?
U.S. President Donald Trump meets Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Finland's President Alexander Stubb, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen amid negotiations to end the Russian war in Ukraine, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 18, 2025. REUTERS/Alexander Drago (Reuters: Alexander Drago)
