Harvard's US-funded defence projects totalled US$180 million in recent years, study shows
Some of the grants paid for military-specific medical research, studies on countering weapons of mass destruction and research on lasers, among numerous other topics, Reuters found.
The abrupt halt stopped years-long projects and upended programmes spread across several universities, not just Harvard. In 2025 alone, an estimated 103 grants totaling about US$14 million will grind to a halt, according to an analysis by Govini, a defence software company.
For example, US officials ended Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Professor Katia Bertoldi's US$6 million Pentagon-funded project developing shape-changing structures with military applications two weeks ago, despite being at a critical juncture in its research cycle.
'We've been in year three, so we set up all the tools, and now we're really gaining momentum, and now it stops,' Bertoldi said.
Funded through the Department of Defence's Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative, she was developing technology based on origami that would lead to reconfigurable antennas, and deployable shelters like field hospitals.
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
Sign Up
Sign Up
Since 2020 the Pentagon, Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency and every branch of the US military have given Harvard 418 grants valued at US$180 million, according to the analysis by Govini.
Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth 'directed the termination of several programmes, contracts and grants that were not aligned with the Department's priorities to cut wasteful spending, implement the President's orders, and reallocate savings to mission-critical priorities', a Pentagon spokesperson told Reuters.
The bulk of those grants went to military medical research, basic scientific research and applied scientific research, Govini found, with the Army providing the most funding.
The administration has frozen around US$3 billion in federal grants to Harvard, with Trump complaining on Truth Social that Harvard has hired 'Democrats, Radical Left idiots and 'bird brains'' as professors. On Monday (May 26), Trump said he is considering redirecting billions of dollars of previously awarded scientific and engineering research grants from Harvard to trade schools.
Harvard has sued to restore the funding, calling the cuts an unconstitutional attack on its free-speech rights.
The research cancellations affect extensive collaborative networks. Bertoldi's project included researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Georgia Tech.
Scientists warn these cuts may have strategic implications as China has heavily invested in research.
Bertoldi said, 'In China, as far as I know, colleagues that moved back to China, there's a lot of support for this type of research.' REUTERS
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
27 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Cornell close to White House settlement of up to US$100 million
The White House is eyeing a settlement of as much as US$100 million (S$129 million) in negotiations with Cornell University about an agreement that would reinstate hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen federal research funding, according to people familiar with the matter. A deal could be announced as soon as next week, said the people, who asked not to be named because the talks are private. One of the issues still under discussion is whether the pact would call for a resolution monitor to supervise how Cornell is carrying out changes required by the US – an arrangement accepted by Columbia University in a landmark US$221 million deal last month. An agreement would make Cornell the latest Ivy League school to settle with President Donald Trump as the White House probes US colleges over allegations they mishandled antisemitic incidents on campus after the October 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel and the Jewish state's retaliatory response in Gaza. Brown University announced a US$50 million deal with the government this week. Cornell declined to comment. The Cornell terms are still under discussion and subject to change. One of the people familiar with the talks characterised US100 million as the maximum, while another described it as within the range of US$100 million. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has said that additional settlements with universities are likely to use the Columbia agreement as a roadmap. That deal included a cash fine for civil-rights violations and a wide set of policy changes. In addition to mounting probes of antisemitism on campus, the administration has also pushed colleges to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs and criticised them for political bias against conservatives. The government agreed to restore funding to the University of Pennsylvania after the school reached a deal limiting the participation of transgender athletes in sports. The broad-based push for change has fueled concerns that the government is impinging on academic freedom and seeking to use the universities to advance its own viewpoints and agenda. Harvard University, the primary target of Mr Trump's pressure campaign, has filed two lawsuits challenging the government's efforts to freeze research funding and block international student enrollment. But the funding freeze has been taking a toll. Cornell warned in June that the pullback of US funding would force it to adopt 'financial austerity in all areas'. Cornell President Michael Kotlikoff said at the time that job cuts would likely be required, in addition to restrictions on discretionary spending and hiring. Cornell's US$10.7 billion endowment is one of the smaller funds in the Ivy League. BLOOMBERG

Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
Missing Kenya football tickets blamed on govt protest fears
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Kenya President William Ruto's government has been accused of buying up tickets in the stadium to avoid hostile chants from protestors. NAIROBI – As Kenya prepares its biggest-ever football hosting job this weekend, locals are wondering why they can't buy tickets, with some accusing the government of filling the stadium with its supporters to avoid hostile chants. Kenya has seen multiple deadly protests for more than a year over economic stagnation and police brutality, leaving dozens dead or missing. It is hoping for a more positive vibe as it co-hosts the African Nations Championship (CHAN) with Tanzania and Uganda in August. But local fans are puzzled over the difficulty of securing tickets for Kenya's first match, against Democratic Republic of Congo, at Nairobi's 48,000-capacity Kasarani Stadium on Aug 3. Tickets have been sold out since July 28 evening – the result of a 'more than eager' fanbase, according to Nicholas Musonye, head of the local organising committee. Some die-hard supporters find that hard to believe. 'We haven't found any fan who managed to buy a ticket,' said a Kenyan sports journalist, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals by the government due to the 'political' nature of the issue. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore 60 years of building Singapore World Trump deploys nuclear submarines in row with Russia World 'Optimistic' Bessent says US has makings of a deal with China Asia Not 'the end of the story'; some relief in Asia-Pacific over new Trump tariffs but concerns remain Singapore Man in SAF custody after allegedly vaping on bus while in army uniform Asia 'Like me? Approach me directly, okay?': Inside a matchmaking event for China's wealthy Opinion America is tearing down another great public institution Opinion Quiet zones in public spaces can help people recharge in the city He accuses the government of President William Ruto of buying up tickets in a bid to avoid chants like 'Ruto Must Go' that have become widely used since the protests began. He added that the government was likely handing tickets to people less likely to be critical. PropesaTV, an online media critical of Mr Ruto, told its 150,000 followers on X that the government had 'bought over half of the Kenya v Congo CHAN opening-match tickets in a bid to stop or avoid the chants'. It said tickets were being distributed to 'government supporters' who will be transported to the stadium by bus from Kibera, a huge Nairobi slum that has seen fewer protests against the president than other areas. A resident of the neighbourhood, also asking to remain anonymous, said he saw a 'massive' group of people hired by local officials to 'register' and collect personal data in exchange for tickets to the match. Kariuki Ngunjiri, a national youth leader for the president's party, said he had 'not seen the accusations'. 'Tickets are available online, we are encouraging a lot of people to come in large numbers on Sunday and enjoy the game,' he said, though tickets could not be found then or since by AFP. Kenyan Football Federation president Hussein Mohammed told AFP he was not responsible for ticketing, which falls under Confederation of African Football (CAF). CAF did not respond to a request for comment. Last week, Musonye of the organising committee told the Kenyan parliament that 'the current prevailing situation in the country, concerning the Gen Z protests, has been identified as a potential risk that can affect the safe delivery of the tournament'. AFP

Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
India reels from the shock of Trump's onslaught
NEW DELHI – President Donald Trump's new list of tariffs on half the world's countries sent the United States' trading partners scrambling to understand how their businesses will be affected. India got the bad news a day earlier – its goods face a tariff of 25 per cent or more – but the extra time was hardly enough to adjust to the fresh chaos. Indian negotiators had not expected to conclude a meaningful deal in time to meet Mr Trump's revised deadline of Aug 1. But they did expect to be treated as well as their neighbours, and to keep haggling with US officials until October or November, when Mr Trump was invited to visit India as part of the Quad defense group, which brings together four big democracies – India, the United States, Japan and Australia – with a shared interest in standing up to China. Instead, they were fed a heap of insults and injuries. Along with the 25 per cent rate, one of the highest in Asia and only a point lower than what was threatened on 'Liberation Day' in April, India was informed that its existing trade barriers are 'strenuous and obnoxious'; it will be charged an untold penalty for buying Russian oil; it is a 'dead economy.' It's archrival Pakistan was praised and promised an oil exploration deal. Hurt feelings aside, the results are confusing. Two of the biggest categories of exports to the United States from India are personal electronics, worth about US$14 billion a year, and pharmaceuticals, worth US$10 billion. Mr Rajesh Sharma, executive director of India Cellular and Electronics Association, said smartphones were exempted from these tariffs; so did executives at pharmaceutical companies. But on Aug 1, after reading the executive order, the Global Trade Research Initiative in New Delhi concluded the opposite. India's stock markets dipped on the news for two days running. Indian and international banks wrote notices warning that the country's generally hard-charging economic growth is likely to slow measurably as a result of the tariffs. Then there are the unknown tariffs. On July 6, Mr Trump wrote that countries aligned with the Brics group, of which India is a founding member, would incur an additional 10 per cent penalty. Then on July 14, he said that, if Russia didn't make peace with Ukraine within 50 days, he would punish its trading partners with 'secondary tariffs' of 100 per cent. That figure is making Indians worry anew. Mr Trump added 'plus a penalty' to the 25 per cent rate imposed on India, for buying Russian oil and weapons. Ms Shashi Tharoor, a prominent member of the opposition, spoke to an Indian news agency about the possible impact. 'There's even talk of a 100 per cent penalty,' he said, 'which will destroy our trade with America.' There is evidence that Indian buyers of Russian oil were already pulling back before the executive order. 'Indian refiners have reduced Russian crude purchases this week,' said Ms Sumit Ritolia, an analyst at Kpler, which tracks shipping and commodities. They were already 'looking to further diversify, amid rising concerns over potential US sanctions,' having spent years taking advantage of discounted Russian oil to reduce their imports from the Persian Gulf. Reducing the United States' trade deficit is one of the Trump administration's goals, so persuading India to buy more American oil and gas would make sense. Last year, India exported US$45.7 billion more goods to the United States than it imported. It spent about three times as much importing oil. If a third of that were redirected to American sources, their bilateral trade would be evened out. Mr Trump's angry barrage of social media has complicated further negotiations. The breakdown of trust between Mr Narendra Modi, India's prime minister, whom Mr Trump called his 'true friend,' the US president is likely to make it harder to complete any deal, analysts say. Indian news outlets have reported that Mr Trump wanted to iron out some outstanding issues, after four rounds of direct talks between the two sides, in a phone call with Mr Modi. The Indian government was anxious to avoid any of his last-minute surprises. The US commerce secretary accused India of 'slow-rolling' its trade negotiations. Indian officials and analysts say the friction is caused by a fundamental difference of approach. Mr Trump has a penchant for quick, top-down dealmaking. India's bureaucracy moves at a methodical pace, especially when it comes to opening up the agriculture market, which is politically sensitive. India's recently concluded trade deal with Britain took three years of talks, under two British prime ministers. On Aug 1, India's Foreign Ministry released a statement that put on a brave face. 'India and the United States share a Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership,' established in 2013 between President Barack Obama and then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, 'anchored in shared interests, democratic values and robust people-to-people ties.' The ministry stuck to principles, revealing no plan for breaking through Mr Trump's hard line. 'This partnership has weathered several transitions and challenges,' the statement said. 'We remain focused on the substantive agenda that our two countries have committed to and are confident that the relationship will continue to move forward.' NYTIMES