Lessons for Indian universities from the Harvard-Trump row

The recent confrontation between Harvard University and US President Donald Trump was not merely a legal disagreement — it was a modern-day parable about the struggle between academic freedom and political control. The implications of this clash transcend borders and offer significant lessons for universities around the world, including India.

At the centre of the controversy is Harvard’s principled refusal to dismantle its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes and submit to ideological audits demanded by the Trump administration. The Trump administration sought to monitor curriculum choices, faculty appointments and research directions — interventions that would undermine Harvard’s academic sovereignty.

In response, Harvard University filed a lawsuit against the US government, challenging the legality of freezing federal grants worth over $2.2 billion. The university contended that the funding freeze was an act of retaliation and warned that critical disease research and other key initiatives would be adversely impacted. Harvard’s interim president, Prof Alan Garber, made it clear: the institution would not compromise its values, even if it meant losing federal support.

Harvard’s strength lies in endowment, reputation and philanthropy and its capacity to resist government pressure was made possible by its deep financial foundations. The university operates on an annual budget of $6.5 billion, with $1.02 billion allocated to research, including $674 million from US federal agencies. More significantly, its $53.2 billion endowment provides a cushion of independence, contributing $2.4 billion annually to its operations. Nearly 45 per cent of Harvard’s revenue comes from philanthropy, while 16 per cent comes from research grants.

This diversified funding model gives the university the flexibility to stand by its values without succumbing to political or bureaucratic dictates.

This philanthropic culture carries profound lessons for Indian higher education. In India, people generously contribute to temples, gurdwaras and religious institutions as acts of faith and service. It is time to extend this spirit of giving to our universities and educational institutions, which play a vital role in nation-building.

Educational institutions should be seen as sacred sites of knowledge and social uplift and they must increasingly be funded by philanthropists. When institutions are supported by the community — through alumni, corporate CSR, individual donors and civil society — they gain not only financial autonomy but also become more accountable, transparent and socially relevant.

India’s public universities face their own set of pressures — ranging from financial constraints and administrative interference to curriculum standardisation. While the context is different, the core issue remains the same: how to preserve the university as a space for independent inquiry and ethical leadership.

Although the government is playing a critical and a crucial role in nation-building, it is important to recognise that institutions of higher learning must maintain a balanced distance from political influence. Autonomy is not just a privilege; it is a precondition for academic excellence.

The Harvard episode offers key lessons for Indian academia to secure its future. First, ethical and courageous leadership is crucial. University administrators must embody integrity and fearlessness, standing firm on academic values despite external pressures. Their leadership should inspire trust and set an example for students and faculty.

Second, financial independence through philanthropy must be pursued. Harvard draws nearly 45 per cent of its revenue from donors. Indian universities should similarly engage alumni, corporate houses and philanthropic foundations to create endowments, support research and enhance infrastructure. This financial cushion ensures autonomy and resistance to external influence.

Third, transparent and inclusive governance is the foundation of institutional excellence. Decision-making must be participatory and merit-based, with respect for all voices — faculty, students and staff.

Fourth, fostering an environment of free dialogue is essential. Universities should be safe spaces for open debate, dissent and knowledge pursuit, where intellectual diversity is valued.

Lastly, reviving indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) is vital for a globally competitive yet locally rooted education. Re-integrating India’s ancient wisdom, sciences, languages and philosophies into curricula will create a holistic education system. This fusion of global and local knowledge will help develop scholars who are deeply connected to their culture and prepared for the world.

The teachings of Guru Nanak Dev offer a timeless guide rooted in truth (sach), fearlessness (nirbhau) and contemplation (vichar). He opposed ritualism, casteism and corruption, advocating instead for education based on justice, compassion and equality. His words — “Pothi Parmeshar ka thaan" (The book is the abode of the Divine) — remind us that knowledge is sacred when it upholds truth.

Indian education must draw from such spiritual roots while also engaging global best practices. This is not about conflict, but meaningful collaboration with society, industry and alumni. Our universities must be seen as temples of knowledge, deserving of philanthropic support for research, innovation and inclusive growth.

The Trump-Harvard conflict is a mirror reflecting the fragility of academic freedom when institutions become political battlegrounds. Indian universities must not wait for a crisis to define their character. We must act with foresight, integrity and courage — to not just teach, but also to lead.

Let our universities become temples of knowledge and fortresses of truth, capable of serving both national aspirations and global good.

Karamjeet Singh is Vice-Chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University,  Amritsar.

Comments