Home > Opinion > Columns

The U.S. turn against international students

Published: 02 Jun. 2025, 00:04

Chang Ha-sok
The author is a professor of history and philosophy of science at the University of Cambridge.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term has shown no signs of tempering the political spectacle that has defined his leadership. One of the most alarming developments is his administration’s ongoing conflict with Harvard University. Like many top-tier U.S. institutions and much of the intellectual community, Harvard has a reputation for progressive values — something that places it squarely in Trump’s crosshairs.

Demonstrators rally on Cambridge Common in a protest, organized by the City of Cambridge, calling on Harvard leadership to resist federal government interference at the university in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on April 12, 2025. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

The conflict began with cuts to federal research funding. More recently, the administration attempted to ban Harvard from admitting international students. Though the order was halted by an emergency court ruling, its legal fate remains uncertain. For Harvard, and institutions like it, the inability to admit international students would be more damaging than losing research support. While wealthy universities may find alternative funding, removing foreign students would threaten their core identity.

Unlike those of many countries, the United States’ elite universities take pride in attracting top students and faculty from around the globe. This diversity is not only a feature of their brand, but also a fundamental element of the educational experience they offer. By welcoming international students and scholars, they foster an academic community that reflects the interconnected nature of modern knowledge. Threatening that global dimension strikes at the heart of what higher education in the United States stands for.

Trump’s stance reflects a broader anti-immigrant impulse that has become a central theme of his presidency. Just days ago, the State Department ordered U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide to suspend visa interviews for student applicants. The government claimed it needed time to implement a new screening system that could more thoroughly investigate applicants’ political beliefs and affiliations. Chinese students, in particular, were singled out for reexamination, with warnings that even approved visas could be revoked.

Trump’s portrayal of international students as progressive agitators with disdain for the United States is not based on evidence. It reflects a nativist worldview rooted in exclusion and suspicion. More than a political position, it risks becoming a policy of national self-harm.

For decades, foreign-born students and immigrants have been essential to the United States' scientific and technological growth. Perhaps the most prominent example is the wave of Jewish scientists, including Albert Einstein, who fled Nazi Germany and transformed U.S. science. After World War II, the United States even welcomed scientists who had worked with the Nazi regime, including Wernher von Braun, a pioneer in rocket engineering.

America’s scientific leadership has always relied on its openness. Nikola Tesla, a Serbian immigrant, came to the United States in his late twenties, worked with Thomas Edison and eventually helped build the alternating current power system. The electric car company Tesla — founded by Elon Musk — is named in his honor. Musk himself arrived in the United States as an international student from South Africa before settling and building his empire.

Exclusionism runs counter to the very spirit of science. While international hiring and labor mobility may make economic sense, the scientific enterprise depends even more deeply on the free exchange of people and ideas. Researchers seek out knowledge and equipment regardless of national origin. At the most advanced research centers, collaboration across borders is standard. Talented students and scientists cross continents in pursuit of excellence, and institutions grow stronger through that exchange.

Without openness, scientific research hits a ceiling. And this is true in not only the hard sciences, but also the humanities and industry. In this ecosystem, international students are not peripheral — they are central.

A view of Harvard Business School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on April 15. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

Returning to the case of Harvard, the university represents more than academic excellence. It symbolizes the soft power that has long defined America’s global appeal. Many who experience American higher education return home with a deeper appreciation for the country’s values and institutions. This quiet diplomacy has served the United States well for generations.

My own father, a young civil servant at the time, was granted a fellowship to study at Harvard Law School for a year. That experience shaped his lifelong admiration for the United States. He was not alone. Around the world, countless professionals carry similar memories and loyalties. To see the Trump administration target such institutions without understanding their legacy or value is deeply disheartening.

Korea, too, is becoming a more attractive destination for international students. Last year, the number of foreign students in the country surpassed 200,000 for the first time. The number of foreign professors is also gradually rising. But are we doing enough to integrate them, to make them feel part of our society?

If the United States steps back from this role, perhaps it is time for countries like Korea — emerging as new advanced economies — to step forward. Openness is not just a virtue. It is a responsibility for any nation that wishes to lead in education, research and global cooperation.

Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.