The United States President Trump recently announced the cancellation of Harvard University’s qualifications to enroll international students, claiming that it promotes anti-Semitism and cooperates with the Chinese Communist organization. With its 389-year history, Harvard University finds itself at a crossroads in its standoff with the Trump administration.
Observers believe that Harvard University serves as a critical stronghold of extreme left-wing ideology in America, posing a serious national security threat. The ongoing confrontation with the Trump administration is not only causing significant damage but also tarnishing Harvard’s reputation. In essence, this is a battle of American values and an ideological cultural war.
President Trump stated on social media on the 26th that he is considering cancelling the $3 billion funding for Harvard University, accusing the institution of strongly supporting anti-Semitism.
Previously, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Mr. Noom, wrote to this Ivy League institution, alleging that Harvard campus “harbors hostility towards Jewish students, sympathizes with Hamas, and cooperates with the Chinese Communist Party.” This led to the decision to revoke its authority to admit international students.
This academic year, Harvard University admitted 6,800 international students, accounting for 27% of the total student population. Trump announced on the 22nd that through the Department of Homeland Security, Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) qualification has been canceled, effective from the 2025-2026 academic year, prohibiting the enrollment of international students.
On the 25th, Trump once again expressed dissatisfaction with Harvard University, advocating for the disclosure of the list of foreign students and criticizing the allocation of quotas to international students, which he believes hinders American students from attending Harvard. Trump told reporters that he is not against foreign students, but the proportion should not be 31% (currently 27%). This is too high, as many Americans also aspire to study at Harvard, but they are unable to do so because 31% are foreigners.
Harvard University views the Trump administration’s actions as illegal and immediately launched legal protests. While successfully obtaining a court injunction to temporarily halt the government’s decision, the White House’s stance remains unyielding. In response to Trump freezing approximately $30 billion in federal funding for Harvard University, the institution has also filed a lawsuit seeking to reinstate the funding.
In the escalating conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard University, American scholar Fang Wei, in an interview with The Epoch Times, stated that Harvard’s opposition to the federal government will incur significant losses. Harvard has two major vulnerabilities:
Firstly, Harvard relies heavily on federal funding, including research funds, cooperative funds, and student loans. Even if the court blocks the government from withdrawing current funds allocated to Harvard, it cannot prevent the government from discontinuing future funding. Since there is no U.S. law mandating federal funding for Harvard, the government can choose not to provide it.
Secondly, Harvard implements DEI policies, characterized by reverse racial discrimination.
Fang Wei pointed out that in the 2023 case where Asian Americans sued Harvard, the Supreme Court ruled that Harvard’s use of race in admissions, involving reverse discrimination based on race, is unconstitutional. Such discriminatory practices are prevalent on Harvard’s campus and are unsustainable when exposed and scrutinized. Therefore, resisting Harvard and related cases will bring significant trouble to Harvard, severely damaging its reputation.
Established in 1636, Harvard University, as the first university in American history, finds itself in a legal battle against the federal government, resulting in significant national security concerns. Long-time American commentator Tang Jingyuan told The Epoch Times that Harvard holds a unique and prestigious position in America. It has been renowned for its academic authority, academic contributions, and academic freedom worldwide.
“But the current Harvard has undergone a serious mutation, becoming a stronghold of extreme left-wing ideology in America. To some extent, present-day Harvard is akin to the central party school of extreme left-wing ideology in America. It not only dictates the interpretation and definition of extreme left-wing ideology but also engages in an exchange of interests with the extreme left in the West (America) and the extreme left of communist ideology in the East, notably China.”
Reuters reported that concerns about Harvard University being influenced by the Chinese Communist government have long been prevalent in American politics. Some Republican lawmakers, predominantly, are concerned that China is manipulating Harvard to acquire advanced American technology while circumventing U.S. security regulations and suppressing domestic criticism regarding the issue.
The White House also accused Harvard University leadership of transforming the once illustrious institution into a breeding ground for anti-American, anti-Semitic, and terrorism-supporting elements. In a statement issued to CNN, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson stated, “Harvard has repeatedly failed to address the widespread issues negatively affecting American students. Now they must bear the consequences of their actions.”
In response, Tang Jingyuan explained that the focal point of the conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard University appears to stem from security concerns regarding some international students admitted by Harvard, but its root cause lies in the institution’s extreme left-wing ideology. Policies such as DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and fervent promotion of extreme left-wing ideology have resulted in many students becoming ardent supporters of Hamas, turning them into breeding grounds for terrorism.
From this perspective, Tang Jingyuan believes that Trump may view Harvard as a significant target for his administration, aiming to eliminate the serious national security threat posed by the university.
Regarding the confrontation between Harvard and the Trump administration, Fang Wei stated that it epitomizes a concentrated manifestation of the American values war, a clash between America’s “progressive communism” and traditional values.
Tang Jingyuan stated that this conflict extends far beyond a dispute between a government and a university over institutional systems and educational philosophies. To emphasize, it is akin to a cultural war, a battle for ideological dominance in a cultural civil war.
Wenxue City, in recent reports, highlighted that this is not just a public relations disaster for a university or an ideological dispute but a cultural war that has spread to the core of power, impacting the nation. It represents the conflict and division between American societal power and cultural beliefs within the realms of higher education and politics.
Fang Wei indicated that due to Harvard’s representation of the American university’s extreme left-wing factions and its formidable influence, if Harvard were to comply with the federal government’s demands, a domino effect would ensue. American universities would need to acquiesce to the federal government’s requirements. The extreme left-wing forces dominating American universities would find this unacceptable.
Princeton University, another top Ivy League university in the United States, has not witnessed as turbulent protests and government interventions as seen at Harvard in recent years.
Speaking on Yom Kippur in 2024 at a Jewish center, Princeton President Eisenberg expressed sincere understanding of the rising anti-Semitic sentiments, emphasizing the university’s overall friendliness towards Jewish students. However, he acknowledged the surge in anti-Semitic rhetoric and advocated confronting the issue while affirming the community’s essential goodness, rejecting hostility in the face of hostility.
Dr. Chen Zhiyu, a medical professor residing in Princeton, informed The Epoch Times that from his observations, Princeton’s stance on campus policies holds a high ethical legitimacy. The university leadership’s leading by example demonstrates moral exemplariness.
Dr. Chen noted that Harvard exhibited excessive tolerance in handling radical protest movements, leading to the escalation of pro-Hamas advocacy activities, campus tent protests, and security concerns among Jewish students, drawing attention from the federal government. By contrast, Princeton, at the onset of the crisis, had the university president personally respond, emphasizing moral positions and reiterating institutional principles, effectively balancing campus freedom and order.