Harvard University under fire as US Congressional probe exposes deep ties to Chinese Communist Party
According to a letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, Reps. John Moolenaar (R-MI), Tim Walberg (R-MI), and Elise Stefanik (R-NY) accused Harvard of actively collaborating with organisations under the control of the CCP's Central Organisation Department. This department is responsible for indoctrinating officials with "Xi Jinping Thought" and selecting leaders for key positions within China's authoritarian regime.
Of particular concern is the Harvard Kennedy School's long-standing cooperation with the Chinese Executive Leadership Academy Pudong, an institution controlled by the CCP. Whistleblower testimony indicates that cadres from China's party and government institutions were sent to Harvard as part of their official training, raising alarms about foreign influence on American soil.
"Harvard's formal partnership with a CCP-controlled school to train their future leaders raises serious concerns about the CCP's influence in American institutions," said Rep. Moolenaar. "We are committed to uncovering the full extent of these relationships to ensure transparency and protect national interests."
The revelations come at a time when Harvard is already under scrutiny. The university is reportedly considering a USD 500 million payout to resolve a standoff with the Biden administration over campus anti-Semitism complaints and controversial DEI policies. But lawmakers argue that financial settlements cannot undo the damage caused by Harvard's entanglement with entities implicated in human rights abuses.
In April, The Free Beacon exposed Harvard's past training of members from the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a CCP paramilitary group sanctioned by the U.S. for its role in the genocide of Uyghur Muslims. That report prompted congressional leaders to threaten Harvard's tax-exempt status.
Now, Harvard faces a deadline of August 7 to provide Congress with all records relating to its interactions with CCP-affiliated bodies, including any financial or material exchanges.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times of Oman
an hour ago
- Times of Oman
Will increase tariff on India "very substantially" over next 24 hours for purchase of Russian oil: Donald Trump
Washington DC: Hours after he mentioned raising tariff on India, US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he would increase the tariff charged on imports from India from the current rate of 25% 'very substantially' over the next 24 hours due to New Delhi's continued purchases of Russian oil, Reuters reported. 'They're fuelling the war machine, and if they're going to do that, then I'm not going to be happy,' Trump told CNBC in an interview, according to Reuters. According to the report, he added that the main sticking point with India was that its tariffs were too high but did not provide a new tariff rate. Trump had said on Monday that the United States will 'substantially raise' the tariff paid by India for buying 'massive amounts of Russian Oil', stating that much of the oil purchased from Moscow is being sold in the open market 'for big profits'. Trump's announcement, made on his social media platform Truth Social, came days after he announced a 25 per cent reciprocal tariff on India and an unspecified penalty for importing oil from Russia. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil, they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits. They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!' the US President said in the post. Soon, after the US President's remark, India said that 'the targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable'. A statement by official spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs said that the government will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security. The spokesperson said that India has been targeted by the United States and the European Union for importing oil from Russia after the commencement of the Ukraine conflict. 'In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict. The United States at that time actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability. India's imports are meant to ensure predictable and affordable energy costs to the Indian consumer. They are a necessity compelled by global market situation. However, it is revealing that the very nations criticizing India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia. Unlike our case, such trade is not even a vital national compulsion,' the statement noted. MEA spokesperson said that the European Union in 2024 had a bilateral trade of Euro 67.5 billion in goods with Russia. In addition, it had trade in services estimated at Euro 17.2 billion in 2023. 'This is significantly more than India's total trade with Russia that year or subsequently. European imports of LNG in 2024, in fact, reached a record 16.5mn tonnes, surpassing the last record of 15.21mn tonnes in 2022.' The spokesperson said that Europe-Russia trade includes not just energy, but also fertilizers, mining products, chemicals, iron and steel and machinery and transport equipment. 'Where the United States is concerned, it continues to import from Russia uranium hexafluoride for its nuclear industry, palladium for its EV industry, fertilizers as well as chemicals. In this background, the targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable. Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,' the statement said. India has, earlier too, defended its sovereign right to conduct energy policy based on national interest. The government had clarified that India's energy purchases are guided by market dynamics and national interests. 'You are aware of our broad approach to energy sourcing requirements, that we look at what is available in the market and the prevailing global situation. We are not aware of any specifics,' MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said last week, answering queries on Trump's announcement of a penalty for purchasing Russian oil. Answering another query, Jaiswal said India's relations with any country are based on their own merit and shouldn't be viewed through the lens of third countries. 'Our ties with any country stand on their merit and should not be seen from the prism of a third country. As far as India-Russia relations are concerned, we have a steady and time-tested partnership,' he a query on Friday, Trump indicated that if India stops buying Russian, it will be a good step. Trump announced the imposition of 25 per cent tariffs on Indian goods and a penalty for importing Russian oil in the last week of July, even as there were hopes of an interim India-US trade that would have otherwise helped avoid elevated tariffs. There are apprehensions that global crude prices could jump to $200 a barrel if India were to stop buying Russian oil, which will severely harm consumers.
Times of Oman
7 hours ago
- Times of Oman
Fact check: Are X's community notes fueling misinformation?
New York: On July 9, the US government sanctioned United Nations Human Rights Council special rapporteur Francesca Albanese for what the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said was a "campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States." Albanese has consistently denounced Israel's actions in Gaza since its offensive against the Palestinian group Hamas began in October 2023, as well as the Trump administration's efforts to suppress dissenting voices critical of Israel. The announcement was rejected by the UN, which called for a reversal of the sanctions, and it also prompted a debate online, where Albanese's name began to trend on X (formerly Twitter). Posts poured in both defending and criticizing her work, accompanied in several cases by "Community Notes," X's signature tool to fight misinformation. The notes, which are essentially brief clarifications or extra context attached to posts, can be submitted by anyone. X claims it uses what it calls a "bridging algorithm" to prevent bias, lending more weight to upvotes from users with historically different viewpoints and thus theoretically reducing the chance that a single group can dominate the narrative. But that doesn't make them immune from error. In the case of Albanese, for instance, one community note claimed that "Francesca Albanese is not a lawyer," amplifying arguments by her critics about her qualifications and "ethical conduct." While Albanese did admit in an interview with Vanity Fair that she didn't take the bar exam, which would have qualified her as a practising attorney, she did study law. Her official profile on the website of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) describes her as an "international lawyer" who has authored publications on International Law. What this example shows is that while community notes can be a valuable tool to reduce the spread of disinformation, they are not always accurate and often fail to paint the whole picture. Notes are meant to be a system where users collaboratively add context and verify facts. Research from Cornell University has shown that notes on inaccurate posts on X help to reduce reposts and increase the likelihood that the original author deletes the post. However, according to an analysis of X data by NBC News, the number of community notes being published are declining in number, and DW Fact check spotted several examples of the tool misleading users instead of helping them spot falsehoods. Misleading community notes slipping through In July 2025, a post by Sky News quoting the United Kingdom's Metropolitan Police chief went viral, accumulating over 4.7 million views. The post linked to a Sky News article based on an interview with the police chief, which highlighted structural inequality, noting it was "shameful" that black boys in London were statistically more likely to die young than white boys. The community note was then added; however, it was reframed, stating: "The headline lacks the essential context that despite making up only 13% of London's total population, Black Londoners account for 45% of London's knife murder victims, 61% of knife murder perpetrators, and 53% of knife crime perpetrators." While factually correct, the note introduced unrelated crime statistics from 2022 — subtly shifting the focus from systemic inequality to framing black boys as perpetrators of crime. Instead of clarifying the issue, the note distorted the original message, misleading users who hadn't actually clicked on the link in the post. Community notes and elections Another problem was spotted by experts during the 2024 US Presidential elections. Researchers Alexios Mantzarlis and Alex Mahadevan from the Florida-based Poynter Institute analysed community notes posted on Election Day. Their goal was to assess whether community notes were helping counter election misinformation or not. Their findings raised concerns. Out of all fact-checkable posts analyzed, only 29% carried a community note rated as "helpful." In X's system, a note is rated "helpful" when it is upvoted by a diverse group of contributors and prioritised for public display. But of these "helpful" notes, only 67% actually addressed content that was fact-checkable. In other words, nearly a third of the notes that appeared as helpful were attached to posts that didn't contain factual claims at all. The researchers saw this as a problem of low precision and recall: too few misleading posts were getting corrected, and even when notes appeared, many weren't targeting actual misinformation. As Poynter noted, "This is not the kind of precision and recall figures that typically get a product shipped at a Big Tech platform." Meanwhile, Germany's Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft, a research institute based in Berlin analyzed nearly 9,000 community notes in the run-up to the country's federal elections in February this year, and found that "community notes follow political patterns." The institute said, "Users who write notes are not free of political views. Their assessments and comments may therefore be influenced by their own interests or ideological biases." Poynter's Mahadevan explained in an interview with DW's fact-checking team how people may be gaming the system: when someone new joins Community Notes, X assumes they're unbiased because they haven't rated many notes yet.
Times of Oman
11 hours ago
- Times of Oman
Trump unwilling to criticise China even after being largest Russian oil buyers, targets India unfairly: GTRI report
New Delhi: US President Donald Trump has been unfairly targeting India over Russian oil imports, while choosing not to criticise China, according to a recent report by the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI). The report suggested that this selective approach may be driven by geopolitical calculations. As per the data from the report, China is the largest buyer of Russian oil. In 2024, China imported USD 62.6 billion worth of Russian oil, compared to India's USD 52.7 billion. Despite this, Trump has focused his criticism on India, ignoring China's bigger role. GTRI stated, "Trump appears unwilling to criticize China, perhaps because of geopolitical calculations, and instead targets India unfairly". The report also rejects Trump's recent claim posted on Truth Social, where he alleged that India is "buying massive amounts of Russian oil and selling it on the open market for big profits." GTRI clarified that this statement is factually incorrect and misleading. The think tank explained that India does not export crude oil, Russian or otherwise. India is a net importer of crude oil, and its total crude oil exports stand at zero. What India does export are refined petroleum products, including diesel and jet fuel, some of which are processed from Russian crude. This is standard practice among energy-importing countries, the report said. GTRI further stated that India's oil refineries, both public and private, operate independently in deciding where to source crude oil from. These companies do not need government permission to buy oil from Russia or any other country. Their decisions are based on commercial considerations, including price, supply reliability, and rules in export destinations. The report noted that if Indian refiners find that importing Russian crude involves risks, such as secondary sanctions or restricted access to global markets, they may reduce or stop such imports voluntarily. For example, India exported diesel and aviation turbine fuel (ATF) to the European Union in FY2025, but these exports will now stop due to the EU's ban on products refined from Russian crude. In such cases, refiners will shift away from Russian oil without needing a government order. This trend is already visible. In May 2025, India's imports from Russia declined by 9.8 per cent, amounting to USD 9.2 billion, compared to imports in May 2024. The GTRI report concluded that India is being unfairly targeted, while China's larger role goes unquestioned, possibly due to broader geopolitical interests.
