In the 1930s and 1940s, the US played a crucial role in keeping academic inquiry alive. By welcoming thousands of researchers fleeing fascism in Europe, it enhanced its national brainpower and fostered breakthroughs of immense value to people everywhere — from the digital computer to the discovery of DNA.
Now it is in the process of throwing that priceless legacy away. If wiser minds do not prevail, one can only hope Europe and others would step into the breach.
Establishing itself as a haven of academic freedom was among the smartest moves the US ever made. Its unrivaled collection of research universities attracts top global talent, fostering innovation that enriches the nation. By some estimates, each dollar spent on research and development generates US$5 or more in social benefits, such as higher productivity and better living standards. It is by far the most profitable form of public investment.
Yet the White House now seems bent on destruction. Citing (among other things) alleged rising anti-Semitism on college campuses, it has withheld billions of dollars from the likes of Harvard and Columbia, forcing them to terminate projects, lay off researchers and limit graduate-school admissions. It has proposed tens of billions in budget cuts at federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. It has detained foreign academics and — most recently — sought to block enrollment of international students.
The repercussions promise to be devastating. The economic damage could exceed that of the recession of 2008. Projects in areas ranging from climate science to medicine have shut down. An exodus looms: Three-fourths of US-based scientists who responded to a recent Nature poll said they were seeking a way out, with Europe and Canada the top destinations. By one estimate, up to one-fifth of postdoctoral students at elite US universities have studied in the EU and hence might be amenable to moving.
Rival research centers are jumping at the opportunity. As Bloomberg News has reported, countries such as Australia, Canada, Denmark and Norway are offering funding, streamlined visas and other perks to lure top academics. Germany has invited Harvard to set up an “exile campus.” The EU has launched a 500 million euro (US$566.8 million) “Choose Europe” program.
These efforts are welcome, to the extent that they keep crucial work going. Yet the funds so far committed pale in comparison to the potential cuts in the US. If the US abdicates, Europe in particular would need to be much more ambitious.
A better option would be for the US to come to its senses. Legislators should reject the false economy of slashing public research funding. Courts should issue injunctions where the administration’s actions have violated the law or the constitution, as they plainly have in several cases. Researchers, alumni and industry groups should alert the public to the scale of potential damage ahead.
Universities, for their part, might consider some introspection. Although the administration’s actions are nuts, it is true that too many schools have indulged anti-Semitic protesters who have created chaos on campus, obstructed learning and menaced their fellow students. Imposing zero-tolerance policies for such disruption might placate the White House; it is also the right thing to do.
Amid the chaos, researchers will need to do their jobs as best they can. It would be a truly spectacular act of self-harm if the US managed to trigger an exodus of talent back across the Atlantic. If other countries rise to the occasion, its loss will be their gain.
The Editorial Board publishes the views of the editors across a range of national and global affairs.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Heavy rains over the past week have overwhelmed southern and central Taiwan, with flooding, landslides, road closures, damage to property and the evacuations of thousands of people. Schools and offices were closed in some areas due to the deluge throughout the week. The heavy downpours brought by the southwest monsoon are a second blow to a region still recovering from last month’s Typhoon Danas. Strong winds and significant rain from the storm inflicted more than NT$2.6 billion (US$86.6 million) in agricultural losses, and damaged more than 23,000 roofs and a record high of nearly 2,500 utility poles, causing power outages. As
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming