Harvard's US-funded defense projects totaled $180 million in recent years, study shows
*
Trump administration cut an estimated $180 million in Harvard's defense projects
*
Funding cuts affect military medical and scientific research, Govini analysis shows
*
Harvard sues, claiming cuts violate free-speech rights
WASHINGTON, - When the Trump administration cut federal funding to Harvard University, it abruptly ended an estimated $180 million that the federal government had poured into U.S. military projects at Harvard in recent years, according to an analysis from a defense software company. The Trump administration announced in April that it was moving to freeze $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts to Harvard University. President Donald Trump said he was trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the U.S. - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of antisemitism.
Some of the grants paid for military-specific medical research, studies on countering weapons of mass destruction and research on lasers, among numerous other topics, Reuters found.
The abrupt halt stopped years-long projects and upended programs spread across several universities, not just Harvard. In 2025 alone, an estimated 103 grants totaling about $14 million will grind to a halt, according to an analysis by Govini, a defense software company.
For example, U.S. officials ended Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Professor Katia Bertoldi's $6 million Pentagon-funded project developing shape-changing structures with military applications two weeks ago, despite being at a critical juncture in its research cycle.
"We've been in year three, so we set up all the tools, and now we're really gaining momentum, and now it stops," Bertoldi said.
Funded through the Department of Defense's Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative, she was developing technology based on origami that would lead to reconfigurable antennas, and deployable shelters like field hospitals.
Since 2020 the Pentagon, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and every branch of the U.S. military have given Harvard 418 grants valued at $180 million, according to the analysis by Govini.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth "directed the termination of several programs, contracts and grants that were not aligned with the Department's priorities to cut wasteful spending, implement the President's orders, and reallocate savings to mission-critical priorities," a Pentagon spokesperson told Reuters.
The bulk of those grants went to military medical research, basic scientific research and applied scientific research, Govini found, with the Army providing the most funding.
The administration has frozen approximately $3 billion in federal grants to Harvard, with Trump complaining on Truth Social that Harvard has hired "Democrats, Radical Left idiots and 'bird brains'" as professors. On Monday, Trump said he is considering redirecting billions of dollars of previously awarded scientific and engineering research grants from Harvard to trade schools.
Harvard has sued to restore the funding, calling the cuts an unconstitutional attack on its free-speech rights.
The research cancellations affect extensive collaborative networks. Bertoldi's project included researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Georgia Tech.
Scientists warn these cuts may have strategic implications as China has heavily invested in research.
Bertoldi said, "In China, as far as I know, colleagues that moved back to China, there's a lot of support for this type of research."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
War Clouds Over Europe as Ukraine Hits Russia
On the eve of peace talks, Ukraine and Russia sharply ramped up the war with one of the biggest drone battles of their conflict, a Russian highway bridge blown up over a passenger train and an ambitious attack on nuclear-capable bombers deep in Siberia. After days of uncertainty over whether or not Ukraine would even attend, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Defence Minister Rustem Umerov would sit down with Russian officials at the second round of direct peace talks in Istanbul on Monday. The first round of the talks more than a week ago yielded the biggest prisoner exchange of the war - but no sense of any consensus on how to halt the fighting. Amid talk of peace, though, there was much war. At least seven people were killed and 69 injured when a highway bridge in Russia's Bryansk region, neighbouring Ukraine, was blown up over a passenger train heading to Moscow with 388 people on board. No one has yet claimed responsibility. Ukraine attacked Russian nuclear-capable long-range bombers at a military base deep in Siberia on Sunday, a Ukrainian intelligence official said, the first such attack so far from the front lines more than 4,300 km (2,670 miles) away. The official said the operation involved hiding explosive-laden drones inside the roofs of wooden sheds and loading them onto trucks that were driven to the perimeter of the air bases. A total of 41 Russian warplanes were hit, the official said. RUSSIA ACKNOWLEDGES AIR BASE ATTACKS, SAYS FIRES PUT OUT Ukraine did not tell the Trump administration about the attack in advance, Axios reporter Barak Ravid said on X, citing an unnamed Ukrainian official. Russia's Defence Ministry acknowledged on the Telegram messaging app that Ukraine had launched drone strikes against Russian military airfields across five regions on Sunday. It said the attacks repelled the assaults in all but two regions — Murmansk in the far north and Irkutsk in Siberia - where "the launch of FPV drones from an area in close proximity to airfields resulted in several aircraft catching fire". The fires were extinguished without casualties. Some individuals involved in the attacks had been detained, the ministry said. Russia launched 472 drones at Ukraine overnight, Ukraine's air force said, the highest nightly total of the war so far. Russia had also launched seven missiles, the air force said. Russia said it had advanced deeper into the Sumy region of Ukraine, and open source pro-Ukrainian maps showed Russia took 450 square km of Ukrainian land in May, its fastest monthly advance in at least six months. U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Russia and Ukraine make peace and he has threatened to walk away if they do not - potentially pushing responsibility for supporting Ukraine onto the shoulders of European powers - which have far less cash and much smaller stocks of weapons than the United States. According to Trump envoy Keith Kellogg, the two sides will in Turkey present their respective documents outlining their ideas for peace terms, though it is clear that after three years of intense war, Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart. Putin ordered tens of thousands of troops to invade Ukraine in February 2022 after eight years of fighting in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. The United States says over 1.2 million people have been killed and injured in the war since 2022. Trump has called Putin "crazy" and berated Zelenskiy in public in the Oval Office, but the U.S. president has also said that he thinks peace is achievable and that if Putin delays then he could impose tough sanctions on Russia. In June last year, Putin set out his opening terms for an immediate end to the war: Ukraine must drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw all of its troops from the entirety of the territory of four Ukrainian regions claimed and mostly controlled by Russia. Ukrainian negotiators in Istanbul will present to the Russian side a proposed roadmap for reaching a lasting peace settlement, according to a copy of the document seen by Reuters. According to the document, there will be no restrictions on Ukraine's military strength after a peace deal is struck, no international recognition of Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine taken by Moscow's forces, and reparations for Ukraine. The document also stated that the current location of the front line will be the starting point for negotiations about territory. Russia currently controls a little under one fifth of Ukraine, or about 113,100 square km, about the same size as the U.S. state of Ohio.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Why stricter voting laws no longer help Republicans
'The Republicans should pray for rain'—the title of a paper published by a trio of political scientists in 2007—has been an axiom of American elections for years. The logic was straightforward: each inch of election-day showers, the study found, dampened turnout by 1%. Lower turnout gave Republicans an edge because the party's affluent electorate had the resources to vote even when it was inconvenient. Their opponents, less so. The findings offered an empirical reason for Republicans to make voting harder for marginal or 'low propensity' voters. The party and its conservative allies had already adopted voting restrictions as an ideological plank, one previously advanced by southern Democrats courting white support in the Jim Crow era. In 2013 the Supreme Court gutted the preclearance system under the Voting Rights Act that had forced most southern states to vet changes to their voting rules with the federal government. Alabama, Mississippi and Texas immediately enacted voter ID laws that had been previously blocked. Over the next decade 29 states passed nearly 100 bills to restrict voting and Donald Trump's obsession with 'election integrity' became Republican doctrine. Yet Mr Trump's takeover of the Republican Party has scrambled the voting coalitions that underpinned the pray-for-rain logic. Rich people used to vote Republican and poor people Democrat. But the correlation started to wane in the 2000s and ultimately flipped for white voters when Mr Trump ran, according to research by Michael Barber and Jeremy Pope at Brigham Young University. Poor blacks and Hispanics still voted Democrat, but in 2024 they too moved to the right. At the same time, voters without college degrees took to the Republican Party and the college-educated moved in the other direction. Today voters who may or may not bother to turnout for elections no longer vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. Having embraced voting restrictions for so long Mr Trump and his party are reluctant to abandon them, even if they no longer help them win elections. In his second term the president is jostling for even tighter rules. Amongst his barrage of executive orders just one has dealt with elections, but it is one of his most constitutionally ambitious. In it Mr Trump criticises America's 'patchwork of voting methods' and calls for a national set of rules that require voters to prove their citizenship before registering. The attorney-general, it said, would also force states to stop counting absentee ballots that arrive after election day. A judge blocked the order, writing that Congress and the states set election rules under the constitution, not the president. She noted that Congress is considering a similar bill and Mr Trump should not 'short-circuit' that. The SAVE Act, which cleared the House in April, also makes voters prove citizenship. But it is very unlikely to pass the Senate. States, however, are passing voter restrictions with gusto. Since January at least 25 states have introduced new voter ID bills, 30 have ones related to citizenship verification and 26 are trying to change the rules around absentee voting. Florida lawmakers decided to punish non-citizens who vote with up to five years in prison and Wisconsin voters enshrined a voter ID requirement in their state's constitution. Americans want it to be harder to cheat in elections and 'that's why states aren't waiting for a solution from Washington,' says Lee Schalk of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative group that writes model legislation. Indeed, Gallup polling shows that more than 80% support stricter ID and citizenship rules. In every country in Europe, where politics tends to be more liberal, voters must show ID at the polls. Would even stricter rules affect election outcomes in America? Consider Georgia, a swing state controlled by Republicans. When an omnibus election bill that tightened voter ID rules passed in 2021 Stacey Abrams, a Democrat who had run for governor, warned that it would disenfranchise black voters. She called it 'Jim Crow in a suit and tie'. But turnout in the next year's midterms surged and a consensus grew among election wonks that the suppression effect was negligible. Analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice, a public-policy institute, found that the turnout gap between white and black voters did widen in Georgia between 2020 and 2024. But the new rules may not have been to blame. The drop-off was mostly limited to younger black men, who were particularly unenthused by Kamala Harris. Fewer young women of both races voted for the first time, but white women slid more than black women. Democrats across the country argue that new citizenship verification policies will cause mass confusion and get citizens tangled up in bureaucracy. The hassle would be more justifiable if the new laws solved a big problem, but non-citizens rarely vote. An audit by Georgia's secretary of state from the summer of 2024 found just 20 non-citizens out of 8.2m on the voter rolls. Most were registered before Georgia checked for citizenship and had never cast a ballot. The best evidence seems to be that the impact of restrictive laws is minimal. An analysis published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics of 1.6bn voting records from every state in America found that strict voter ID rules, on average, neither significantly suppressed votes nor prevented fraud. Nor do ID laws hurt Democrats any longer, other research by Jeffrey Harden and Alejandra Campos shows. While in 2010 voter ID laws reduced Democratic vote share by 3%, by 2020 they increased it slightly. Because of the changes in party voting coalitions, the overall effect of the next phase of even tighter voting rules could now 'easily be a wash' when it comes to benefitting one party or the other, says Nicholas Stephanopoulos, who studies elections at Harvard University. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
China is waking up from its property nightmare
CHINA'S ECONOMY has been through a stress test in the past six months with the trade war shredding nerves. The tensions over tariffs are not over yet. On May 29th Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, said that ongoing talks had 'stalled' and President Donald Trump complained that China 'had totally violated' the preliminary agreement to reduce duties reached between the two sides in Geneva on May 12th. Yet even as the trade war staggers on, two things are proving reassuring for China. One is that so far the economy has been resilient. Private-sector growth estimates for 2025 remain in the 4-5% range. The other is that one of China's biggest economic nightmares seems to be ending: the savage property crunch. To get a glimpse of that, consider a gated home in Shanghai's Changning district. It has an air of traditional German architecture and a large front garden, a feature of the city's most ritzy neighbourhoods. But what really stands out is the price. On May 27th the property sold for a stonking 270m yuan ($38m), creating a sensation in the Chinese press. At 500,000 yuan per square metre, it is one of the priciest home auctions in recent memory. That the wealthy are prepared to pony up such an exorbitant price is being interpreted as a sign that China's huge and interminable property crisis might finally be ending. Speculation about a turnaround has been building over dinner tables, in boardrooms and at state-planning symposia. The excitement is hardly surprising. Property, broadly defined, contributed about 25% of GDP on the eve of its crash in 2020. It now represents 15% or less, showing how the slump has been a huge drag on GDP growth. The depressive impact of falling prices on ordinary folk is hard to overstate. In 2021 80% of household wealth was tied up in real estate; that figure has fallen to 70%. Hundreds of developers have gone bust, leaving a tangle of unpaid bills. The dampening of confidence helps explain sluggish consumer demand. But while the market is still falling, for the first time since the start of the crisis, you can make a decent case that the end is in sight. In the first four months of 2025 sales of new homes by value fell by less than 3% compared with the year before. In 2024 the decline was 17%. Transactions will continue to drop only modestly for the rest of the year, reckon analysts at S&P Global, a rating agency. One of the biggest problems was that millions of flats were built but never sold. Last year as many as 80m stood dormant. Now in the 'tier-one' cities of Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen, that problem is easing. At the end of January the inventory held by developers in those cities would have taken around 12 and a half months to shift at current sales rates, according to CRIC, a property data service. That is down from nearly 20 months in July 2024, and not far from the average of ten months in 2016-19 across the country's 100 largest cities. In other words, the overhang is starting to look less terrifying. Shanghai's renaissance illustrates the trend. Transactions rose slightly each month from February to April compared with the year before, making it one of the few cities where prices have risen year on year for months in a row. It still has controls over who can buy properties and how many. But luxury homes are starting to be snapped up quickly, says Ms Fang, an estate agent. The prices of standard properties will probably continue to grow this year, she says, but the most expensive homes are increasing in value even faster. What explains the bottoming out of the market? Partly, just the passage of time. The average housing crash takes four years to play out, according to a study by the IMF of house-price crashes around the world between 1970 and 2003. Officials in Beijing started deflating the bubble by tightening developers' access to credit in mid-2020 and investors started to panic about the solvency of the monster developers at the end of that year. But as well as time, the government is more determined than ever to put an end to the downturn. Local governments have been encouraged to buy unused land and excess housing with proceeds from special bonds. Some are handing out subsidies for buying homes. A plan to renovate shantytowns could create demand for 1m homes. The central bank cut interest rates in May, reducing mortgage rates for new home purchases. This has boosted property sales activity, says Guo Shan of Hutong Research, a Beijing-based consulting firm. There are still dangers. The trade war is a drag on confidence. Home prices across 70 cities surveyed by the National Bureau of Statistics declined by about 2% in April from a month earlier. Sales of new homes and the starting and completion of housing projects all fell month on month. Fewer cities in April notched month-on-month price increases compared with the month before. Things are not getting much worse but they will probably not get better without more government support, says Larry Hu of Macquarie, an investment bank. In Wenzhou, a manufacturing city on China's southeastern coast, price declines are still sharp. Locals say the trade war with America is shaking confidence. Mr Zhou, a restaurant owner, says the official data do not capture huge discounts of more than 50% on some new homes in overbuilt areas. He blames a manufacturing downturn, and Mr Trump's trade war. In all probability the crisis is over in big rich cities, such as Shanghai, but may last longer in smaller cities, such as Wenzhou. New-home prices in first-tier cities will be flat this year and increase by 1% next year, according to S&P. But in third-tier cities and below they will fall by 4% this year and 2% next. Small cities are full of unwanted homes. China is escaping its property nightmare. Even so, the Communist Party must ensure it is not only big-ticket mansions in Shanghai that look appealing. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.
