Trump’s war on Harvard another own bullet in the f...

Trump’s war on Harvard another own bullet in the foot

Monica Cheru-Managing Editor

With Chinese students making up more than 1200 of the around 6000 students enrolled at the prestigious US university, the genesis of US President Donald Trump’s war on Harvard University is glaringly clear.

But what might not be obvious to Trump is that, just like the tariff wars meant to limit China’s economic growth, it is the US that stands to suffer more from the punitive measures.

Harvard is a global symbol of American excellence and attracts the top cream of all the other countries, making it a soft power asset of enormous strategic value to the US.

The brightest minds from over 160 countries that study at Harvard carry with them a lifelong association with the US when they return home or go on to hold global positions.

Ban Ki-moon, former UN Secretary-General, is a Harvard alumnus. So are Nobel Laureate and former Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

By locking out foreigners from Harvard, Trump is foregoing the golden opportunity to use higher education to shape global leadership.

The US is already alienating future decision-makers of the world with its America First rhetoric and policies. This means that in the future the US will have to rely even more on military force or economic coercion, and it is also losing ground in both spheres as other countries build up.

Trump also seems to be losing the iron grip on wiping out the US’s international top talent credit. With 27.2% of Harvard’s student body being international, the institution draws the best talent from across the globe.

Countries like China and India that have consistently shown that they have some of the best brains in the world are sending their top students to Harvard. Over 1,200 for China and almost 800 for India.

While Trump is worried that they harvest US education at the US taxpayer’s expense and take it back to their countries, facts show that they often chose to remain and work in the US.

They are highly skilled workers in positions of researchers, entrepreneurs, policy experts, and doctors. For example, graduates from the Kennedy School in 2024 took positions across the US, including in critical states and industries.

And even if they exit the US after their studies, their value in that nation’s development is obvious as they present a key cohort that contributes heavily to the U.S. scientific and technological ecosystem.

For example, Prof. Xihong Lin, a Chinese-American biostatistician at Harvard, is an example of such students who often remain in the US and contribute to that country’s progress.

Already lagging in terms of STEM skills base, the US will lose even more ground in long-term competitiveness in AI, biotech, clean energy, and other critical fields for tomorrow’s developed world status.

This is further exacerbated by Trump cutting off Harvard’s research grants, which do not sponsor foreign students’ fees but help the US progress its knowledge base.

The university received $686 million in federal research grants in 2024, much of it used to fund projects in medicine, engineering, and climate science

Finally, the Trump administration has often stated that it is gunning for a “merit-based” system favoring highly educated and skilled migrants for its lofty “quality migration” goals.

Harvard’s international students are exactly that: already vetted by one of the world’s toughest academic admissions systems and frequently sponsored by governments or top scholarship programs.

So, in a futile attempt to spite China, Trump is rejecting exactly the kind of high-skill, low-crime, tax-paying individuals that any government, including the US, finds desirable in migrants.

Whatever the legal outcome of Trump’s war with Harvard, the damage has been done. Many top international students who were aiming for the college are likely redirecting their ambitions to institutions in Moscow, London, Beijing, Singapore, or Berlin—anywhere but the US.

In addition, programs such as the Mandela Washington Fellowship have already been tainted by Trump’s negative comments on Africa, and few thinking Africans now want to be associated with the Young African Leaders Initiative.

The US has effectively tarnished its attractiveness to global talent—and future leaders—and influenced them to turn away from the American sphere of influence.