OPINION — Since World War II, the federal government and American universities have developed a deep, symbiotic relationship. That relationship is now threatened. In an effort to punish some universities and to rein in others for failing to suppress antisemitism and for their embrace of DEI (diversity, equity and Inclusion) policies, the Trump administration has suspended or cancelled grants worth hundreds of millions – in some cases, billions –of dollars to some of the country’s most distinguished academic institutions. Pending grants to other universities have been placed under review. Harvard University is defying the administration’s efforts as an unacceptable infringement on academic freedom. Harvard is unlikely to be the only university that does so.
The rupture that has opened between the federal government and American academia has national security implications. According to the Association of American Universities, “America’s leading research universities are asked to conduct over half of the research and development (R&D) efforts funded by the Department of Defense (DOD).”
Major reductions of DOD grants to universities could be seriously damaging not only to the universities themselves, but to the technology ecosystem that has given the United States an unparalleled edge in defense technology. The impact of this might not be felt immediately, but would certainly be felt in due course. If that were to happen, the United States might be weakened just as we enter a new and uncertain era of great power rivalries, with conflict raging between Ukraine and Russia, wars in the Middle East and myriad conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa. Not to mention a long-running strategic competition with China. This is because, since the end of the Vietnam war especially, our military has become ever more dependent on sophisticated technology.
Experts are gathering at The Cipher Brief’s NatSecEDGE conference June 5-6 in Austin, TX to talk about the future of war. Be a part of the conversation.
For decades, America’s best research universities have conducted both basic science research and significant applied research, with military applications facilitated by the generous and sustained support of the U.S. Department of Defense. To be sure, the U.S. government has maintained some laboratories of its own, but the government has not had to replicate the universe of scientific talent and facilities the university community brings to the table; and even the government’s independent applied research and the private sector’s engineering accomplishments often derive from the basic scientific advances achieved by university researchers.
The dividends from the Defense Department’s investments in university research have helped to make the U.S. military the most technologically advanced and effective in the world. Examples of militarily significant technologies that derive from university-based research abound, and include everything from the development of “GPS, lithium batteries, night vision goggles, explosive sensing …and more.” Today universities are engaged in groundbreaking, federally supported work on nano-technology, synthetic biology and cognitive neuroscience, all important to our defense community.
Notwithstanding a record of almost unparalleled accomplishment, aggregate U.S. government funding for basic research, including university research, lags far behind China’s investment in many important areas. According to the recently published “Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community,” the Chinese government has invested “hundreds of billions of dollars in priority technologies, such as AI, microelectronics and biotechnologies…”. By some estimates, China has already surpassed the U.S. in many strategically significant disciplines.
At a time when the U.S. Army contemplates force reductions, and the U.S. Navy shrinks to below 300 ships, the possibility that the U.S. might also lose its lead in critical technologies looks particularly worrisome. And as some advanced weaponry becomes easier to reproduce or adapt (witness the advent of drone warfare in Ukraine), developing new technologies to contend with advances fielded by future adversaries is more important than ever.
Everyone needs a good nightcap. Ours happens to come in the form of a M-F newsletter that provides the best way to unwind while staying up to speed on national security. Sign up today.
It is in this light that the recent and threatened cuts to research funding for universities must be seen. The amounts announced so far are already game-changing in their implications. The latest news on this front is that the administration recently froze more than 2 billion dollars in grants to Harvard University after the Harvard administration defied the administration’s efforts to compel the university to conform to the administration’s guidelines and submit to outside oversight of some departments. Freezing money, moreover, is not the only step the administration is considering in its dispute with Harvard. The Trump administration has also paused or cancelled some $400 million dollars in federal grants to Columbia University for similar reasons. The University of Pennsylvania, President Trump’s own alma mater, might lose $190 million for failing to conform to the administration’s prohibition on biological males participating in women’s sports. Media reports suggest the administration may soon revisit pending grants to Brown, Princeton, Northwestern and others.
While the universities may not need these grants to survive, they do need them to conduct the kind of research in science and technology the federal government funds. The government’s willingness to challenge top, mostly private universities where critically important research is being done, puts the entire community of research universities on notice.
The justifications for the actions so far taken by the Trump administration have the support of a portion of President Trump’s base. Others, whether or not they are convinced by the administration’s arguments for the cuts, will not be disappointed to see rich, elitist institutions with large endowments lose federal funding. Of course, it is probable that much of the American public is paying relatively little attention to President Trump’s efforts to bring the academic elite to heel. There is, after all, a lot going on in the world.
What policy makers and the public need to accept, however, is that the U.S. government, American academia, and private defense industries comprise a technology ecosystem. Many of the top universities on which the administration has focused form a key part of that system, a system from which we all benefit. More to the point, much of the research that ultimately has sustained our defense community in the post-World War II world would not have been done without government support. Conversely, our military would not be as capable as it is absent the continuous flow of R & D inputs from our research universities. This symbiosis should figure prominently in everyone’s thinking, to include those who believe it is time for universities to face a comeuppance.
There can be a debate over how or even if the federal government should respond to perceived excesses on American university campuses, or whether responding to such excesses should be a matter best left to state or municipal governments or to the universities themselves. Reasonable people can also debate how much should be invested in our military. But surely there is no disputing the notion that a strong defense is necessary, and a uniquely effective hedge against being drawn into future damaging conflicts. Since at least the end of the Cold War, the U.S. military has been recognized as the world’s best. We have been the best in part because of the ground-breaking technological advances that have emerged from our top universities. Preserving the technology ecosystem that has delivered these advances is clearly in the U.S. national interest and is part of what has made America great.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals.
Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
