‘FROM pulling research funding to ending the university’s eligibility to host international students is not making Jewish people safer or more welcome. Instead, they are becoming pawns in a broader political agenda.’ This is a powerful statement from Jewish organisations on the Harvard campus that emerged amid escalating tensions between the Trump administration and the prestigious Harvard University. Harvard has refused to comply with government demands that it eliminate diversity programs, ban masks at protests, implement merit-based hiring and admissions reforms, and curtail faculty authority. The White House claims these faculties are ‘more committed to activism than scholarship.’
The administration has asked the university authorities to submit all anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim bias reports generated from the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, including those that have not yet been made public. The Harvard authorities were infuriated that the administration, without any prior notice, sent a letter freezing the federal funding of two billion dollars, which is directly related to science, research, and health institutions. The administration has accused the university authorities of practising anti-Semitism on campus, whereas the university authorities have already assigned a task force for tracking anti-Semitism on campus. The university president, Alan M Garber, who is Jewish, has himself reported that they have taken into account the anti-Semitic activities going on on campus and will take necessary measures to counter them. But freezing the funding has nothing to do with anti-Semitism protests going on around campuses. These will not only corner the Jewish people more but also put them in the spotlight of hatred.
The Harvard authorities have recently adopted a stricter definition of ‘anti-Semitism’. It came as a shock to many other universities, where they would shy away from this, regarding the number of protests that are going on in support of Palestine. The new definition includes words such as ‘atrocities towards Zionists are equal to atrocities towards Jews.’ But the definition is controversial as it also refers to Israeli people as a ‘double standard’ or describes the creation of Israel as a ‘racist endeavour’. Experts suggested that this will exacerbate tensions in the Middle East. This adoption of a new definition came right after the day of the inauguration of Trump, who explicitly declared that colleges must end the anti-Semitic propaganda or they will lose federal support.
The right-wing party’s domination over the freedom of education has been a long-standing tradition starting from Ronald Reagan, the ‘spiritual leader’ of the Republican Party, all the way to McCarthy, a US senator who rooted out people in the name of communists and Marxists. Trump is playing the standard flag-bearer of authoritarianism, like anywhere else in the world. Alan Garber, in an open letter, said, no government, whichever party is in power, can dictate what private universities will teach in class. The Trump government has acted furiously after the Harvard authorities refused to abide by the government’s executive orders. It is not only about the denial of Harvard against the administrative order but a larger setback from Trump, which will overhaul US democracy overall, as some believe.
The Trump administration is exploiting anti-Semitism as a political tool. While anti-Semitism remains a serious issue in the US — with the FBI reporting in 2023 that 9 per cent of 11,862 hate crimes targeted Jews, and the Anti-Defamation League’s noting a 140 per cent rise in attacks in 2024 — the administration has politicized the issue. Instead of addressing the root causes, it uses the narrative to silence dissent and threaten protesters, particularly students. This approach not only marginalizes Jewish communities but also fuels broader anti-immigrant sentiment. At institutions like Columbia University, administration officials have focused more on attacking critics of foreign policy than confronting genuine anti-Semitism. At Columbia University, some of Trump’s key appointees’ remarks about student protests generated public outcry. Rather than focusing on the true roots of anti-Semitism or hatred towards Jews, they were more focused on the groups who were engaged in criticising foreign policy and defending human rights.
The ongoing nationwide protests in the United States have found purpose and leadership when Harvard sued the Trump administration. The legal action followed several others, including one by the American Association of University Professors. They challenged the administration’s revocation of student visas and detention of several international students, which 86 universities joined with amicus briefs. Up until now, the Trump administration has shown no signs of slowing down its attack on educational institutions. The education department has warned 60 institutions that they are under investigation over alleged anti-Semitism. If the protracted battle founded by Harvard can bring a worthy conclusion, the future of federal funding and the stability of political democracy will be at stake.
What is at risk as this conflict unfolds extends far beyond university politics. The entire foundation of intellectual freedom in America is threatened by the weaponising of anti-Semitism and the unheard-of government intervention into academic freedom. Harvard’s opposition to the demands not only reflects institutional self-preservation but also a defence of values fundamental to a democracy, where dissent is safeguarded, education is free from political manipulation, and freedom of speech is not silenced.
Debi Karmakar is a research assistant at Centre for Governance Studies.
This article was originally published on New Age.
Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy.