Archive July 23, 2025

A new investigation against Harvard University, this time aimed at an exchange program that allows foreign scholars to visit the prestigious institution, has been launched by US President Donald Trump’s administration.

The investigation is likely to be seen by critics as the most recent attempt to bully the school into complying with President Donald Trump’s policies, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s statement on Wednesday.

According to Rubio, “the American people have a right to expect their universities to uphold national security, follow the law, and provide safe environments for all students.”

The investigation will ensure that State Department initiatives don’t conflict with the interests of our country.

The Harvard exchange visitor program, which allows professors, students, and researchers to temporarily visit the US, is at risk.

Participating scholars are granted a J-1 visa, which enables them to participate in cultural and academic exchange programs because they are visiting the US and not immigrants.

However, the State Department’s approval will determine whether Harvard is able to host such a program. Rubio suggested that Wednesday’s investigation should concentrate on whether the school’s “continued eligibility as a sponsor” would be resolved.

Sponsors must adhere to all rules, including ensuring that their programs are conducted in a way that doesn’t conflict with the United States’ foreign policy objectives or compromise its national security interests, according to Rubio.

National security concerns

In its efforts to expel foreign students, particularly those who are involved in pro-Palestinian and antiwar movements, the US has repeatedly cited issues of national security and foreign policy during President Trump’s second term.

In his efforts to deport student protest leaders like Mahmoud Khalil, Rubio has used the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, a relative obscure law from the Cold War, to make use of it.

The secretary of state has the authority to expel foreign nationals “whose presence or activities may have potential potentially disastrous consequences for the United States” under the law.

However, the government’s use of these laws is currently being challenged in court. They are alleged to violate the right to free speech and protest, according to critics.

President Trump had a public confrontation with Harvard, the nation’s oldest university and Ivy League member after protesting the pro-Palestinian demonstrations.

The protest movement’s epicenter was regarded as Harvard in Massachusetts and Columbia University in New York. For instance, students at Columbia constructed a tent camp that spawned international demonstrations.

However, other campuses acted similarly to the schools’ crackdowns on those protests. For instance, Columbia called in police to arrest pro-Palestinian demonstrators, and other schools followed suit, leading to more than 3, 000 campus arrests nationwide in the previous year.

President Trump and other leaders who oppose the protests have criticized the demonstrations as anti-Semitic and warned that Jewish students will not be able to learn in a safe environment.

However, protesters’ leaders point out that the majority of the demonstrations were peaceful and had vehemently opposed anti-Jewish hatred. They assert that the protests are intended to highlight the crimes Israel has committed in Gaza, and that the crackdowns are intended to outlaw views that conflict with the US’s close relationship with Israel.

Pressure on educational institutions

Trump, however, pledged to “forceful and unprecedented steps” to combat alleged anti-Semitism on campus when he took office in January.

He began his broadside on Ivy League campuses like Harvard and Columbia in early March. He started by removing $ 400 million in federal contracts and grants from Columbia, and then requesting compliance with a list of demands, including disciplinary reform and external oversight for some academic departments.

Columbia had made a commitment to make concessions by March 22.

Trump, however, faced even greater opposition at Harvard University. A list of demands was released by the Trump administration on April 11 that included demands for Harvard to make “structural and personnel changes” to promote “viewpoint diversity,” end its diversity programs, and approve external audits.

It turned down. Instead, Harvard President Alan Garber claimed that making such requests would violate Harvard’s commitment to academic freedom.

Since then, Harvard has been defrauded of billions of dollars in grants, research funding, and federal contracts. This week, a legal challenge to that ruling was heard in a Boston federal court.

a multifaceted attack

However, Harvard has also been pushed into compliance by the Trump administration.

Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, but some claim that doing so would be against the law, and Kristi Noem, the secretary of state, has barred Harvard from using the Student and Exchange Visitor Programme (SEVP), a system that schools are required to use to enroll international students.

About a quarter of Harvard’s student body is from abroad. Effectively, those students were unable to continue attending the school because of their lack of access to the SEVP system.

In court, Harvard filed a preliminary injunction that allows its international students to remain while the case is pending.

Since then, however, other obstacles have appeared. For instance, earlier this month, the Trump administration accused Harvard of violating civil liberties and demanded that its accreditation, which is the industry’s standard of quality, be reviewed.

Ukraine’s European allies marshalled resources this week to provide the besieged country with air defences against drones and ballistic missiles.

The European Union also announced an 18th round of sanctions designed to sever all remaining Russian energy imports, and proposed a fivefold increase in the common defence budget to boost EU defence research and procurement.

European leaders convinced the United States to symbolically rejoin the 52-nation Ukraine Defence Contact Group coordinating defence donations, but not as a donor.

It was the first such meeting attended by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth since February, when he told EU members that pushing Russia out of Ukraine’s internationally recognised territory was unrealistic.

Operational developments

As the ideological chasm between the EU and the US over Ukraine widened, Russia continued to pound Ukrainian defenders, making a few inroads.

Russian forces seized Degtyarnoye in Ukraine’s northern Kharkiv region, Popov Yar in its eastern Donetsk region, and Kamenskoye in the southern region of Zaporizhia on July 17. They captured Belaya Gora on Sunday and Novotoretskoye on Tuesday, both in Donetsk.

While holding its front line, Ukraine has targeted Moscow with long-range weapons for the past two weeks.

Russian air defences downed 13 drones approaching Moscow on Saturday, said its mayor, and Ukrainian drones disrupted traffic in Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport on Sunday, said Andriy Kovalenko, the head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation.

Then, on Monday, Russia claimed to have shot down 74 Ukrainian drones, a third of them near Moscow. Others must have hit their targets, because a fire at Kamenolomny station in the Rostov region caused delays to train services in the Caucasus.

Kovalenko also said that on June 11, Ukrainian drones attacked the Lukhovitsky Aviation Plant in the Moscow region, which produces MiG-29 and MiG-31 fighters. Ukraine’s General Staff said drones also hit the Shipunov Design Bureau – a manufacturer of anti-aircraft missiles.

The following day, Ukraine reportedly blew up a gas pipeline in Khanty-Mansiysk, about 3,000km (1,900 miles) from Moscow. The pipeline reportedly supplied military production facilities.

Drone air defence

At Monday’s meeting of Ukraine’s allies, known as the Ramstein format, after the German town where the meetings began, the United Kingdom and Germany pledged to jointly provide Ukraine with an unspecified number of missiles to defend its skies.

“Boris and I have agreed to jointly supply Ukraine with critically needed anti-aircraft missiles,” UK Defence Secretary John Healy said, referring to German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius.

Ukraine uses the German-made IRIS-T and US-made NASAMS and SHORAD missile defence systems against drone attacks, which have intensified in recent weeks.

From July 17 to 22, Ukraine shot down or electronically suppressed 833 of 968 unmanned aerial vehicles targeting its cities and critical infrastructure.

The largest attack came on Monday, when Russia launched 426 drones overnight, along with five Kh-47 M2 Kinzhal ballistic missiles, four Kalibr cruise missiles, one Iskander-K cruise missile and 14 Kh-101 cruise missiles.

The largest attack of the war on July 9 used 728 drones, and the head of the German Planning and Command Staff, Major-General Christian Freuding, said on Saturday that Russia plans to further increase its drone production capacity with the goal of launching 2,000 drones in one overnight strike package.

Ukraine has used a variety of methods to down or disable drones, including man-portable air defence kits, heavy machineguns and electronic warfare. But its most successful methods so far have proven the German radar-assisted Gepard anti-air 35mm gun and its domestically-developed interceptor drones, said Ukrainian drone warfare expert Olena Kryzhanivska.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made such domestically produced weapons a top priority.

Inaugurating a new government headed by Yulia Svyrydenko on July 17, Zelenskyy said its top priority was to increase domestic arms production: “Currently, about 40 percent of the weapons in the hands of our warriors are made in Ukraine. In six months, it should be no less than 50 percent,” he said.

The goal was “to push the war back onto Russia’s territory – back to where the war was brought from. So that they feel what they’ve done”, Zelenskyy said.

Pistorius revealed details of a separate German collaboration with the US to provide Ukraine with Patriot air defence batteries.

Ballistic air defence

Ukraine has no domestic solution for countering Russia’s deadliest long-range weapons, its ballistic missiles.

The only effective defence it possesses is the US-made Patriot surface-to-air missile system.

Pistorius revealed on Monday that “during my trip to Washington last week, I agreed with Pete Hegseth that Germany would contribute to the rapid provision of five much-needed Patriot systems.”

A complete Patriot system consists of a central radar and antenna array, and at least six launch vehicles carrying four interceptor missiles each.

It appeared that Germany would pay for these systems. In return, the US would award it – and other countries donating their Patriots to Ukraine – priority placement in the production queue when buying replacement systems.

Zelenskyy told Newsmax and the New York Post that he would separately buy Patriot systems and pay for them with Ukrainian-built drones.

“I told President Trump: ‘The American people need this technology, and you should have it in your arsenal.’ I believe this is a mega deal – a win-win for both sides. We’re ready to share our experience with America and European partners,” Zelenskyy told Newsmax.

Europe at the forefront of Ukraine aid

While the US administration of Donald Trump remains willing to sell military kit to Ukraine after suspending donations, Europe remains ideologically committed to bankrolling Ukraine’s defence and ending its own reliance on the US.

Presenting the EU’s next seven-year, 1,816-billion-euro ($2,130bn) budget on July 16, Ursula Von Der Leyen proposed a 131-billion-euro ($154bn) budget for defence and space, a fivefold increase on the 2021-27 budget.

The money, which is in addition to that spent by EU national governments, would go towards buying European defence goods, investing in European defence industries, cybersecurity and dual-purpose critical infrastructure.

Von Der Leyen proposed establishing a European Competitiveness Fund for defence research and innovation. She also proposed doubling the Ukraine Assistance Fund to 100 billion euros ($117bn).

On July 18, the EU succeeded in agreeing on an 18th raft of sanctions against Russia.

It bans the last remnants of Russian energy purchases from the EU, worth about 23 billion euros ($27bn), and lowers a price cap on oil carried to third parties on EU-insured tankers.

The UK, where much of the world’s tanker fleet is insured, has coordinated with the EU to follow the price cap of $47.60 per barrel, down from the price cap imposed in December 2022 of $60.

“The UK and EU are working in lockstep to combat those callously fuelling the fires of destruction in Ukraine,” said the UK Foreign Office.

The new price cap will be dynamic, and is to be set 15 percent below market prices every six months.

The EU forbade companies from transacting with the Russian-built Nordstream I and II pipelines, which were blown up in 2022, ensuring they would never be repaired or rescued from bankruptcy.

The EU also banned any refined oil products from entering the EU, and added 105 vessels to the Russian shadow fleet banned from entering EU ports or receiving services, bringing the total to 444.

The EU increased the number of Russian banks banned from transacting with its financial sector from 23 to 45, and sanctioned dozens of entities and companies believed to be helping Russia circumvent sanctions to its defence industry, 11 of them non-Russian.

Diplomacy versus all-out war

Amid this barrage of new measures from the EU and its slender mercantile collaboration with the US, diplomacy was not entirely given up.

Ukraine proposed, and Russia accepted, a third round of direct talks in Istanbul on Thursday. Putin would attend China’s 80th anniversary celebrations commemorating its defeat of Japan in World War II, the Kremlin said, and could meet with Trump if the latter accepted the invitation.

Trump has spent most of his political career demonising China, however, and might resist casting it in the role of peace broker.

US Air Force general Alexus Grynkewich told Bild last week that “the EU and the US have only 18 months to prepare for a global military conflict with China and Russia.

“China and Russia are preparing for a simultaneous strike on Taiwan and Europe,” Grynkewich was quoted as saying.

Nearly 80 students who participated in protests against Israel’s occupation of Gaza were expelled, given one-to-three-year suspensions, and were denied degrees at Columbia University.

The university’s annual alumni weekend, which includes the May 7, 2025, Butler Library demonstration on its campus, and the May 31, 2024, “Revolt for Rafah” encampment, have been adjourned from the Judicial Board’s findings on Tuesday.

Pro-Palestinian student camps at Columbia University became the scene of a global wave of campus demonstrations against Israel’s occupation of Gaza in 2024. Before university administrators called NYPD officers to dismantle the camps, which drew dozens of arrests.

In a post on X, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), an umbrella coalition of student groups, wrote, “Suspension from Columbia for protesting genocide is the highest honour.”

The student body remarked, “We reject Columbia has any reputation that it is deserving of protecting, and we categorically state that we do not want to uphold it.”

Why, then, did Columbia fire these students? And why has the Trump administration repressed higher education?

What has occurred?

Nearly 80 students have been disciplined by Columbia University for participating in pro-Palestinian demonstrations, “separating them from the University.”

Following a number of demonstrations on campus, including the Butler Library’s occupation by students during the school’s final exams on May 7 earlier this year, the disciplinary action follows.

That day, 78 people were detained by the NYPD. In response to the protests, the university is asking to cut all financial ties with Israel, cut all financial relationships with Israel, and show solidarity with Palestinians as the Israeli military fights on.

The suspended students took part in a “peaceful teach-in” that included readings and discussions of the Palestinian author and activist Basil al-Araj, who was killed by Israeli forces in 2017 according to student organizers.

Civil liberties organizations and fellow students have voiced opposition to the massive disciplinary action, which has been hailed as the largest of its kind in Columbia’s history.

According to organizers, the crackdown is a part of a larger effort to stop pro-Palestinian activism on US campuses, and it is related to a pending agreement between Columbia and Trump administration officials.

The majority of students were suspended for two years, according to Columbia Spectator, the university’s student newspaper. According to reports, the students have been asked to apologize to the university before returning to campus.

The Trump administration announced earlier this year that it would withhold about $400 million from funding Columbia University, citing the school’s alleged failure to adequately address anti-Semitism in the wake of campus pro-Palestinian protests.

In exchange for negotiations to reinstate its funding, Columbia agreed to a list of demands made by the government. The university also consented to enforcing a ban on face-protected clothing and gave 36 campus police officers unique authority to arrest students, among other things.

What has Columbia said?

The University claimed in a statement released on Tuesday that hundreds of students had been impacted by the disruption at Butler Library during the reading period, which ultimately resulted in the interim suspension of Columbia participants.

According to the university, sanctions would include probation, one-year to three-year suspensions, degree revocations, and expulsions.

In order to protect student privacy, it did not disclose the names of the students who faced each of these sanctions or how many were facing them.

Our institution must concentrate on fulfilling its academic mission for the community. Respect for one another and the institution’s fundamental work, policies, and rules must also be maintained, according to the statement. “Discretion of University policies and regulations results in consequences for academic activities that result in disruptions.”

What has the response been?

Just over a month after the 30-year-old, a legal permanent resident of the United States, was released from immigration custody&nbsp, in Louisiana, President Donald Trump met with lawmakers in Washington, DC, to discuss the suspensions and expulsions.

Under the Trump administration, Khalil is still facing deportation because it has relied on a secret provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to deport foreign students who engage in pro-Palestinian advocacy.

The student activist group Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), an umbrella coalition of student organizations, criticized Columbia for its Tuesday suspensions and expulsions, noting that “While the US and Israel starve 2.1 million Gazans to death, Columbia has diligently worked with Trump’s administration to suspend dozens of students for pro-Palestine activism.”

The group claimed that the suspensions “hugely exceed sentencing precedent for teach-ins or non-Palestine-related building occupations” and that they were the highest suspensions ever for a single political protest in Columbia’s history.

Despite the school’s sanctions, the student body stated in its statement that “students continue to support the US- and Columbia-backed genocide against Israel.”

The group continued, “Every university in Gaza has been destroyed,” quoting testimony from students’ July disciplinary hearings. Academicians have been murdered in the hundreds. Incinerated books and archives The civil registry has been made indefinite for entire families. Not a war, this. It is an “erasure campaign”

“We won’t be deterred,” he declared. According to the statement, “We are committed to the struggle for Palestinian liberation.”

Why has Trump repressed the university sector?

Comparisons have been made between the anti-Vietnam War era, when student activism directly challenged US foreign policy, and the anti-war protests against Israel’s occupation of Gaza that took place last year across US university campuses from Columbia to UCLA to Harvard.

Trump capitalizes on this by portraying students as part of a left-wing, anti-Semitic uprising and imposing sanctions on universities, particularly “elite” ones.

According to the administration, universities have failed to protect Jewish students from harassment and violence during demonstrations, citing incidents of anti-Semitic chants and campfires.

The administration has been conducting investigations by the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education against more than 50 universities, including Columbia, since the beginning of 2025.

As evidenced by demands placed on Harvard and Columbia, executive orders and actions have been implemented, including freezing billions in federal research grants and threatening to revoke tax-exempt status or accreditation.

The Harvard program’s refusal to have its programs audited for “ideological capture” resulted in the freezing of billions of dollars in federal funding. The administration threatened to outlaw international students from Harvard, citing “national security” and “high campus crime rates, which underscore the White House’s grip on universities.

Harvard has sued the administration to get a temporary ban on international students from entering the country.