Category World News

Donald Trump, president of the United States, has announced that he will let 600,000 Chinese students study in US universities.

His conservative base caught off guard by his announcement on Monday, which is a significant change from the Trump administration’s crackdown on Chinese students, which was first announced earlier this year.

In this article, we’ll learn more about what Trump is saying right now, in contrast to what the administration has previously said, and how some of his supporters from Make America Great Again (MAGA) are reacting.

What has Trump said about students from China?

Trump was asked if he would meet Chinese President Xi Jinping during a meeting on Monday at the Oval Office with South Korean President Lee Jae Myung.

Trump responded, “I’d like to visit China,” according to Trump. A very significant relationship is involved. As you may well know, we are receiving a lot of money in from China as a result of various tariffs.

Then he addressed Chinese students, saying, “We are going to allow their students, but we are going to allow their students to come in,” a phrase that I hear so frequently. We’ll permit it. It’s very important – 600, 000 students”.

Trump reiterated his recent opinions regarding Chinese students on Tuesday at a cabinet meeting, saying, “I told President Xi that we’re honoured to have their students here.

With that, we check, we’re careful, we see who is present, and we do that.

Without Chinese students, according to Trump, the US would struggle.

Trump told Xi during a phone call in June that the US enjoys having Chinese students study there.

What has the government of China done?

Guo Jiakun, a spokesman for the Chinese government, expressed hope that Trump will follow through on his promise to accept Chinese students into US universities at a regular press conference on Wednesday.

Guo urged the US to stop “unprovoked harassment, interrogation, and deportation” of Chinese students.

What has the previous administration said about Chinese students?

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio made the announcement in late May that Trump would “aggressively” revoke Chinese student visas.

Rubio wrote in an X post that “the US will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those who have connections to the Chinese Communist Party or are majoring in important fields.”

At the time, the Trump administration provided no specifics about the students whose fate the revocations would have. The brief announcement was intentionally vague, according to observers.

Because it is not about a concrete policy, Princeton University researcher on China Kelly Chan said to Al Jazeera in May, “I think the vagueness is part of the Trump administration’s strategy.” In the end, I don’t believe it’s really about finding the few people who might pose a real risk.

According to an unnamed department official, the US State Department revoked 6, 000 international student visas in August as a result of overstays and violations of US law. The identities of the students whose visas had been suspended were unknown.

A US congressional committee of the House of Representatives wrote to leadership at various US universities in March asking for information about Chinese students who were enrolling in advanced science, technology, engineering, and medicine programs on their campuses. Rubio did not specify what criteria were for “critical fields.”

The Chinese Communist Party, according to John Moolenaar, the committee’s chairman, is placing Chinese researchers in top US institutions with access to sensitive technology.

In the US, how many Chinese students are there?

According to the Institute of International Education (IIE) and the US State Department’s annual Open Doors report, 277, 398 Chinese students enrolled in US universities between the years 2023 and 2024, making up 24.5 percent of the 1.13 million international students.

In the 2023-2024 year, Chinese students accounted for 29 percent of international students, compared to Indian students, who were accounted for only 29 percent of those students.

27.4% of international students enrolled in China between 2022 and 2023 made up the total.

In 2020-2021, a proportion of Chinese students who were studying abroad increased to 34.7 percent.

What justifies Trump’s most recent admissions announcement regarding Chinese students?

Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick claimed that Trump’s recent statements are based on a “rational economic view” in an interview with Fox News on Monday.

According to Lutnick, 15% of US universities would shut down without international students.

According to data released by the nonprofit organization NAFSA: Association of International Educators, international students at US colleges and universities contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported more than 378, 000 jobs during the academic year 2023-2024.

There were 1.1 million international students in the US, or $ 39,800 on average, according to NAFSA.

According to that calculation, the US economy that year would have been made up of more than $11 billion if there had been 277, 398 Chinese students studying there in 2023-2024.

What has the response been for Trump supporters?

Some members of Trump’s MAGA base are upset about his most recent statements.

In an X-post on Monday, Republican representative for Georgia Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote, “These schools should fail anyways because they are being supported by the CCP,” as stated by Greene.

600,000 CHINESE students should not be admitted to American colleges and universities that might support the CCP.

If 15% of Chinese students fail in our schools by refusing to let these students attend, these schools should fail in any case because they are…

Laura Loomer, a Trump ally and far-right activist, wrote a number of posts on X in opposition to Trump’s plan to recruit Chinese students. Nobody, repeat no, wants 600, 000 more Chinese “students,” or Communist spies, in the United States, according to one of the posts.

Steve Bannon, a former White House adviser and Trump aide, said on Tuesday that anyone who wants to leave right away should have an exit visa adhered to their diploma. Give them a 30-day warranty.

We can’t accept 600, 000 Chinese students, according to right-wing internet personality Christopher Rufo in an X post on Monday. We should, in any case, reduce the number of Chinese visas, particularly those for students with political ties to the CCP.

After Israel suspended its “humanitarian pauses,” Palestinians in Gaza City are now facing fresh threats to their lives. displaced people are preparing to leave in the Sheikh Radwan neighborhood of Gaza City under the influence of Ibrahim Al-Khalili, according to Al Jazeera.

Today, there is a greater nuclear threat than there has ever been since the Cold War. Unconstrained by the agreements that have long kept catastrophe at bay, the world is now in for a new arms race. Worldwide, it is estimated that there are 12, 241 nuclear warheads. Before our eyes, there is arms control unraveling: inspections under the last remaining arms control agreement between the United States and Russia are still being conducted, and there is no known successor to this agreement due to expiration in February 2026. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty has not yet been implemented, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty has been abandoned, and the Open Skies Treaty has not yet been implemented. The geopolitical landscape of the world is also more volatile than ever.

Everyone is aware that nuclear weapons are a threat in the very beginning. We are aware of their destructive abilities, which include instant annihilation, radiation sickness, cancer, poisoned land, and generations of suffering. The notion that countries are safe is becoming more and more popular internationally. They can provide a shield of deterrence, as it is true at the level of geopolitics. They are, however, a sword of Damocles soaring over all of humanity on a global scale. The greater the chance that deterrence will fail one day as we continue to pretend to be secure. With more and more military technology being reliant on artificial intelligence, this danger is getting even more alarming.

I am aware of this danger well, both in my body and in the history of my nation. I was born without arms, a legacy of the Soviet Union’s nuclear tests in my birthplace of Kazakhstan. More than 450 nuclear tests were carried out at the Semipalatinsk test site between 1949 and 1989. More than a million people were directly exposed to radiation, which has had the effects of cancer, birth defects, environmental destruction, intergenerational trauma, and other causes. The human cost of supposedly pursuing “national security” is demonstrated by my own life. To prevent another country’s tragedy from occurring anywhere else, I became an activist and painter who painted with my feet and mouths.

My nation has been a strong supporter of nuclear disarmament because of what Kazakhstan went through since its independence. We voluntarily gave up the fourth-largest nuclear arsenal in the world. The Semipalatinsk test site will permanently be shut down. In order to provide a global response to nuclear fuel crises, we established the International Low-Enriched Uranium Bank in partnership with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Kazakhstan is currently preparing to construct its first nuclear power plant. This is a crucial distinction because our nation does not oppose nuclear energy, which can be peacefully used to meet the growing electricity demand and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the issue of nuclear weapons is entirely different. They only burn down homes; they don’t light them. The initiative of Kazakhstan at the UN, which was officially closed on August 29, was a result of this fact.

Kazakhstan has taken a stand. However, we are not the only ones fighting. If we want to reduce the threat posed by nuclear weapons, the world needs much more support. I understand that the utopian dream of a nuclear-free world may not be real right now. However, if only the will is found, the international community can take concrete steps right away to lessen the risk.

First, we must stop the absurdity of monitoring the behavior of thousands of warheads. Leaders are only given a few minutes to decide whether to unleash them, with about 2,100 still on short-notice alert. The risk of false alarms, technical issues, or even AI-driven misinterpretation increases intolerably in such a short amount of time. The most obvious near-term risk-reduction strategy is to stop these weapons from being present. Human survival shouldn’t depend solely on a quick decision.

Second, regardless of the political climate, nuclear-armed nations must publicly declare their end to the ban on nuclear testing. They should at least promise never to test again if they are unable to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty at this time. The victims of previous testing, from Semey to the Pacific and beyond, are owed the absolute minimum.

Third, we must reiterate the humanitarian principle that nuclear weapons are by nature inhumane. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is founded on this principle. No state, no people, can ever adequately respond to the detonation of a nuclear device in a populated area, even if governments are unable to sign or ratify it.

Fourth, international pressure must be put to stop developing new nuclear-related frontiers. To ensure that space is free of these doomsday devices, we must reaffirm the ban on nuclear weapons in orbit. Additionally, every state should commit to ensuring that artificial intelligence will never be tasked with making nuclear use decisions.

Finally, forgetting is the biggest threat of all. On August 29, we should also commit to education and remembrance, as well as observe the International Day against Nuclear Tests. Every schoolchild should be aware of the events at Semey, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Bikini Atoll. Only when the world remembers our suffering, will it choose to end it once more?

It is possible, but it is not naive to envision a world without nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan reopened its nuclear arsenal and demonstrated what was still possible. Others can choose a nuclear-weapon-free path if a country that endured hundreds of nuclear tests. Is it still a question whether people have the guts to do it?