Today, I’d like to walk you through the recent news regarding the supposed ban on international student admissions at Harvard University.

The Trump administration has demanded that Harvard cease admitting international students, and even suggested that current international students should be sent back to their countries or transferred elsewhere. But what prompted such extreme measures, and what might happen next? Let’s take a step-by-step look.

Now, our channel is not just about relaying headlines — I also share my personal insights, which I believe is why many of you find our content valuable. So as I go through today’s topic, please keep in mind that this is my professional interpretation based on decades of experience.

Let me start with a simple analogy before diving into the Harvard case.

Imagine a building owner and a tenant.

Tenant A pays $5,000 in rent each month. On top of that, they also pay a triple net fee — which includes property tax, insurance, and maintenance — amounting to $500 monthly.

Now, suppose inflation rises, and the building owner wants to increase the fees. Naturally, the tenant resists.

So, the landlord proposes this: “Fine, I’ll keep the triple net fee at $500, but I’ll raise your base rent to $6,000.”

In the end, the tenant reluctantly agrees to a $200 increase in the fee, simply to avoid an even bigger rent hike.

What happened here? The landlord pushed the tenant into a corner and used negotiation tactics to gain the upper hand.

That’s exactly how Trump negotiates.
He begins with extreme demands, delays negotiations, and then gradually backs off — while still achieving his original goal.

This analogy mirrors the Trump administration’s current approach to Harvard.

Let’s look at the broader context behind this.

In January 2020, during Trump’s first term, Professor Charles Lieber of Harvard was arrested for his ties to China’s "Thousand Talents Program" — a state-run initiative to recruit top global scientists.

He was later convicted in December 2021, and sentenced after the Biden administration took office in 2023.

Fast forward to 2024, tensions flared at Harvard amid the Israel-Palestine war, leading to intense ideological clashes on campus.
There was a noticeable rise in antisemitism, and by the start of Trump’s second term in 2025, his administration began viewing Harvard as a threat to America’s democratic values.

On January 29, 2025, Executive Order 14188 was issued.

This order instructed all higher education institutions to crack down on antisemitic political activism and report such students immediately to federal agencies.

In April 2025, Harvard was warned for failing to comply with this executive order.

Harvard, however, responded by asserting that suppressing student speech would violate their freedom of expression, and so refused to enforce the order.

In doing so, Harvard directly challenged the administration.

As we’ve seen before, Trump often starts with hardline positions — only to ease off later and still get what he wants.

Harvard likely expected that Trump’s team would eventually soften their stance. So, they held their ground.

But in return, the administration doubled down, making it seem like real, serious action was being taken.

May 22, 2025: SEVP Certification Revoked

The Trump administration formally revoked Harvard’s SEVP certification — meaning the university can no longer host international students under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program.

The administration accused Harvard of fostering antisemitic violence on campus and collaborating with the Chinese Communist Party.

They stated:

“Recruiting international students and collecting billions in tuition is not a right — it’s a privilege.”

Despite having ample opportunities to correct course, Harvard “refused to comply,” and thus the certification was stripped.

This was clearly intended as a warning to all universities and academic institutions nationwide.

The administration explicitly said it wanted to “make an example” of Harvard — a bold and intimidating statement.

The very next day, on May 23, Harvard filed a lawsuit.

Fortunately, the court sided with Harvard and issued a temporary injunction, halting the executive order’s enforcement.

Why? Because such a directive violates the U.S. Constitution and would impose severe harm on international students.

Let’s also recall: during Trump’s first term, his administration, following the Reagan-era ethos, emphasized manufacturing and demanded that countries with trade surpluses purchase more American goods.

He imposed 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum, and launched a tariff war with China, ending his first term with notable economic policy moves.

Now, in Trump’s second term, he’s again enforcing broad, aggressive tariffs, calling them “universal tariffs.”

China initially considered a retaliatory 145% tariff, then delayed action by 90 days, dropped it to 10%, and later settled at 30%.

The U.S. economy is already struggling under the weight of these tariffs.

The Trump administration might blame the previous administration for Q1 and Q2 economic issues — but from Q3 onward, they can’t avoid accountability. That pressure is mounting.

And with the 2026 midterm elections looming in November, Trump likely fears entering a long lame-duck period if his party loses.

So it’s possible that the administration is starting to soften, realizing that hardline tactics could backfire.

Originally, Trump likely wanted moderate tariffs, such as 10% across the board — slightly higher for China — and just came out strong to force negotiations.

He has always maintained that any force within the U.S. that threatens democratic values will be dealt with, regardless of its political origin.

Trump’s first official overseas visit this term was to the Middle East.

Unlike Obama and Biden, who tried to push Middle Eastern nations toward democratic reforms, Trump seems uninterested in such intervention. This is another clear distinction between his approach and that of his predecessors.

He believes Harvard allowed activity that disrupted democratic order, and his administration responded — in line with his usual negotiation strategy — with harsh, attention-grabbing measures.

In Conclusion

I do not believe the Trump administration’s measures — such as banning international students or forcing them to leave the country — will actually go through.

So in my professional opinion, there’s no need to panic.

That wraps up today’s briefing on the recent actions taken against Harvard University.

If you have more questions, feel free to contact A ONE INSTITUTE.