Hong Kong universities open doors to foreign students blocked by Trump's Harvard ban
The sharp escalation in US President Donald Trump's longstanding feud with the prestigious university came as tensions simmer between Washington and Beijing over trade and other issues.
The Trump administration's decision on Thursday — which was temporarily halted by a US judge after Harvard sued — has thrown the future of thousands of foreign students and the lucrative income stream they provide into doubt.
Yesterday, Hong Kong Education Secretary Christine Choi called on universities in the Chinese city to welcome 'outstanding students from all over the world'.
'For international students affected by the United States' student admission policy, the Education Bureau (EDB) has appealed to all universities in Hong Kong to provide facilitation measures for eligible students,' Choi said in a statement, noting the ban on Harvard's admission of international students.
She said local universities were making use of government measures, including relaxing the maximum limits on foreign students to attract more to Hong Kong.
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology on Friday invited international students enrolled at Harvard, as well as anyone with offers to attend the elite school, to continue their studies at HKUST.
'HKUST is extending this opportunity to ensure talented students can pursue their educational goals without disruption,' it said in a statement.
The university 'will provide unconditional offers, streamlined admission procedures, and academic support to facilitate a seamless transition for interested students', it added.
Harvard is ranked number one in US News and World Report's most recent list of the world's top universities, while HKUST is 105 out of more than 2,000 ranked.
President Trump is furious at Harvard for rejecting his administration's push for oversight on admissions and hiring amid his claims the school is a hotbed of anti-Semitism and 'woke' liberal ideology.
A US judge on Friday halted the administration's move to prevent Harvard from admitting foreign students after the university sued, calling the government's action unlawful.
US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Thursday that the administration's decision would hold Harvard 'accountable for fostering violence, anti-Semitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus'.
Beijing condemned the 'politicisation of educational cooperation', adding that the move by Washington would 'only harm the image and international standing of the United States'.
Around 1,300 Chinese students are enrolled at Harvard, around a fifth of its international student body, according to university data.
Hundreds of thousands more attend other US colleges and universities, long viewed by many in China as beacons of academic freedom and rigour. — AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
4 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Differentiate between right and wrong, Sarawak DAP Youth tells ‘peacemakers'
Sarawak DAP Youth said it had raised concerns and upheld justice in the matter of the upside-down Jalur Gemilang. PETALING JAYA : Sarawak DAP Youth today urged those attempting to play the peacemaker in DAP's spat with Umno Youth chief Dr Akmal Saleh over the upside-down Jalur Gemilang gaffe to differentiate between right and wrong. In a statement, it said Akmal had continuously gone overboard, without basis, while the party, on the other hand, had raised concerns and upheld justice. 'To label both parties as culprits is wrong,' it said. The wing gave the example of a situation involving an arsonist and a person who lodged a report against him, only to be accused of sowing hatred, saying this would be unreasonable. 'It is therefore unfair to lump Akmal and DAP Youth together,' it said. While Sarawak DAP Youth did not identify anyone in particular, its statement came two days after a DAP central executive committee member urged parties not to be distracted by the tiff over the upside-down Jalur Gemilang but to focus on more pressing matters instead. Banting assemblyman V Papparaidu said that parties in the government, even Umno, were no longer in the opposition and should focus on economic growth and other national matters. He added that friction in the unity coalition would not augur well with the Sabah state election just around the corner and the next general election not too far away. Papparaidu also said that 'no one should attempt to seek cheap publicity by highlighting the flag issue'. Akmal is under investigation for sedition and criminal intimidation over a video he posted related to the shop owner in Penang who accidentally hung the Jalur Gemilang upside down. Several DAP Youth chapters have called for the party to sever ties with Akmal, including Sarawak DAP Youth.
New Straits Times
5 hours ago
- New Straits Times
AI will replace most humans in workplace, but then what?
IS technology more job augmenting or job replacing? This has been a long-standing debate. But recent academic work suggests that technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for decades. Artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics could rapidly accelerate this trend, with significant implications for inflation, the size of government and United States-China relations. Over the long arc of history, technological advances have enabled industries to emerge, as workers, released from "older" jobs by machines, have been able to transition into newer ones. Indeed, 60 per cent of workers today are employed in occupations that did not exist in 1940, or 74 per cent if we consider just the professional category, which added the most workers during the past eight decades. However, recent academic research suggests we may have reached an inflection point in the US, whereby technology is now destroying more jobs than it is creating. David Autor, an economist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and winner of the 2005 John Clark Bates Medal, argues that since 1980, the jobs replaced by automation have not been fully offset by new jobs created. This reflects the pace of technological change and the fact that advancements are now increasingly focused on "professional, technical, and managerial occupations", Autor notes, rather than lower-skilled work. He finds that machines that are more powerful than an average human (e.g., a tractor) are typically labour-augmenting and productivity-enhancing, while machines that are also smarter than the average human tend to be labour-substituting. And AI is on pace to be a lot smarter than most humans. While forms of AI have been around since the 1940s, the immense computing power resulting from advances in semiconductor technologies has now allowed machines to attain multidimensional intelligence. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that many workers are going to be replaced by automation in the coming decades, even if the best AI is never as creative or imaginative as the smartest humans. A 2019 OECE report and a 2018 paper by PriceWaterhouseCoopers argue that 15 to 30 per cent of all jobs in developed markets are at risk of being automated. If AI does turn out to be a net job destroyer, what are some of the biggest implications? First, it's likely to be deflationary. High and rising unemployment resulting from ever cheaper and more capable machines should, in theory, lead to structural deflation, as technologies that can rapidly augment the supply of goods and services should reduce demand if they cause massive job losses. Next, the US government will probably get even bigger. In a mass unemployment scenario, the government would likely be compelled to step in to facilitate income and wealth transfers from the owners of robots and tech businesses to the unemployed workers. And which countries will come out on top? The economic winners and losers in the years ahead will likely be determined by who can best create and utilise technology. The US and China, both dominant in cerebral technologies, therefore, appear well positioned to thrive in this environment. Even if the trade war between the US and China is short, the tech war between these two countries could be protracted — and ultimately much more consequential. The tech war, unlike the trade war, is dynamic, meaning it's continually evolving and advancing. My views here are admittedly speculative. But the arguments for why AI and robotics could ultimately be labour-creating are as well. Furthermore, these arguments are often obscured by sloppy references to labour productivity, which is a simple ratio between output and labour input. When calculating this, there is often little explanation of what part of the output should be attributed to the labour input. For example, should subway train drivers account for the value of the entire subway system? Projections based on such questionable assumptions should be viewed cautiously. Finally, it's also true that populations in many developed markets are ageing, so the heavy use of automation could simply offset the shrinkage in the labour force, something we're already seeing in Japan and South Korea. But ageing, like natural evolution in general, is gradual, while computational and technological evolution accelerates at an exponential pace. Because of the convexity in technological advances, it's hard not to bet on technology rather than workers.
Free Malaysia Today
5 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Ex-MCA veep was comparing Akmal Saleh with PAS counterparts, not party
From Lee Chai Wah I refer to the letter by Terence Netto, titled 'Much to prefer in Puad-Ti clash than Akmal-DAP Youth slanging match' published on Aug 20. Netto wrote that former MCA vice-president Ti Lian Ker wants the party to leave Barisan Nasional, and 'holds PAS these days to be more rational than Umno'. However, a report published by another news portal on Aug 17 contradicts Netto's assertion. In the said report, Ti explicitly stated that his remarks, which were first reported by Malaysiakini, were not aimed at whitewashing PAS. Nor was it about pushing for MCA's exit from BN, but keeping the coalition intact amid concerns over the growing Umno-DAP alliance. Again, based on the Malaysiakini report, Ti never said that PAS these days was more rational than Umno. Ti was quoted as saying: 'In a way, (Umno Youth chief Dr) Akmal (Saleh)'s actions, in this respect, are worse than his contemporaries in PAS'. Ti was therefore comparing the current crop of youth leaders in the two parties and not the party itself. Based on the context – the reaction to the blunder involving the Jalur Gemilang – Ti was merely referring to and comparing the response to the controversy and nothing more. It was an observation and in no way an endorsement of PAS and its policies, past or present. Jumping to conclusions and making wayward assumptions is incorrect, especially when it was explained and expressed otherwise. It must also be pointed out that Netto's comments were also based on remarks by Umno Supreme Council member Puad Zarkashi, which have no reference to Ti's statements. Puad had reminded Ti of PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang's 1981 sermon on kafirs (infidels), when arguing against the claim that the Islamic party was more rational than Umno. But Puad's argument is off track, as it did not take into account the specific issue mentioned, which is the comparison of Akmal and his contemporaries in PAS. Instead, Puad defended Akmal's posturing as patriotism and chose not to address the comparison made by Ti in regards to how Umno Youth and PAS Youth reacted to the matter. The point was about tone and decorum, not ideology, and certainly not an endorsement of PAS. Ti's remarks must be seen in that context, and not twisted into something irrelevant. Lee Chai Wah is the general secretary of Kuantan MCA. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.
