Editor,
The Indian rupee is on a downfall by the day. In 2014, one US Dollar was equal to around 63 Indian Rupees, currently in 2025, this number has seen an exponential increase to more than 86 Rupees; Yet, instead of focussing on progress and development all that this country is interested in is the Hindu-Muslim politics. This is the time to focus on an economic resurgence and to sort out problems instead of wasting time and energy by commenting on the rulers who have passed away centuries ago. Religious politics in a democratic country such as India is extremely harmful for the country and its citizens as well. This issue warrants a debate in the House in order to be resolved.
Yours etc.,
Arshad Bastavi,
Mumbai
Trump now targets Harvard
Editor,
The Trump administration’s decision to freeze dollars 2.2 billion in grants to Harvard University will be treated as a punishment for refusing to toe the line and comply with a list of ‘unlawful ‘ demands from the federal government. This exposes the authoritarian mindset that is anathema to the principles of academic freedom and independence. All are aware as to what has happened after triggering a global trade war and this war has now been extended to ideas. Sadly, these ideas form the very foundation of the country’s core values of freedom and liberty. Moreover, universities are the very birthplace of independent ideas- which are under attack by a regime that wants complete control over elite institutions which have assiduously built global reputations over decades.
The ugly showdown with one of the highly reputed universities underscores a disturbing trend of targeting high-profile institutions on flimsy grounds dressed up as serious national issues. Trump’s bid to run US varsities risks undermining their global reputation as he has threatened to tax Harvard University as a political entity after it rejected demands to limit activism on campus.
The US government has also announced that it will be freezing $60 million in contracts to Harvard University after the institution said it would defy the Trump administration. The warning by the US administration to the premier academic institution that is 140 years older than the United States was sent last Friday asking it to end its diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in hiring, admissions, and programs. The letter also called on the Harvard Administration to curb the powers of students and faculty members over the University’s affairs and demanded systematic screening of student organizations and international students. In a defiant response on Monday, the University rejected the Trump administration’s demands arguing that they were “in contravention of the First Amendment,” and “invade university freedoms long recognised by the Supreme Court.”
Harvard University has become the immediate locus of this struggle, as the Trump administration issued a series of demands, including auditing hiring practices, modifying curricula, eliminating DEI programmes, and mandating external oversight to enforce “viewpoint diversity.” Harvard, invoking constitutional protections and institutional autonomy, has refused to comply and has framed these demands as infringements on academic freedom and unlawful intrusion into internal governance.
This escalation must be viewed in the backdrop of a larger perspective. By tradition US academic institutions such as Harvard University have legitimised resistance to external pressures. However, when such pressures originate from overt political mandates rather than sectoral norms or peer benchmarking, they risk delegitimizing the Institution’s knowledge-producing role. In this case, enforced viewpoint diversity could paradoxically reduce epistemic pluralism by institutionalising ideological quotas, thus violating the University’s foundational logic of scholarly autonomy and peer evaluation.
The potential long-term ramifications for the American higher education system are profound. For decades, American universities have wielded disproportionate global influence not merely through rankings or research output but via their soft power. Their blatant subordination to political power risks hollowing out the US’s global academic advantage.
The government demanded that the University should report foreign students who commit conduct violations immediately to federal authorities; bring in an outside party to ensure that each academic department is “viewpoint diverse”; reduce the power of students and faculty members over the University’s affairs; provide all admissions data to the federal government, including information on both rejected and admitted applicants, sorted by race and national origin; shut down immediately any programming related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
Never in recent history has America witnessed such a blatant incursion into the education system. The extraordinary set of changes demanded by the government would have reshaped the university and ceded an unprecedented degree of control over Harvard’s operations to the federal government. The changes would have violated principles that are held dear on college campuses, including academic freedom.
The Harvard University administration deserves praise for defying the government’s order and asserting its independence. The demands suggest that the Trump administration wants to intrude on processes that universities prefer to have control over, like how they admit their incoming classes. It also touched on issues that conservative activists have used as cudgels against academics. Harvard said it was unfortunate that the administration had ignored the University’s efforts at reforming its internal processes and moved instead to infringe on the school’s freedom in unlawful ways. The university’s response, which called the Trump administration’s demands illegal, marked a major shift in tone for the nation’s most influential school, which has been criticised in recent weeks for capitulating to Trump administration pressure. No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.
The Trump administration should adopt a sensitive approach so that the reputation of an esteemed institution like Harvard is not tarnished.
Yours etc.,
Yash Pal Ralhan,
Via email