War in the Middle East

After watching the attack by Israel and the U.S. on Iran and the resulting war enveloping the entire Middle East, one has to wonder where all of this will lead. Safe havens in the Arabian Gulf for the wealthy who could build more wealth by not having to pay taxes are suddenly the targets of missiles and drones.  Travelers and expatriate workers are looking for a way out but airports close and open depending on the apparent threat of Iranian or friendly fire risks.

Before considering the current dilemma faced by countries in the Gulf region, it's important to have background about the role each has played. Specifically, Qatar has been the global center for diplomacy for some time and especially leading up to the summer of 2025. This role was carefully crafted for geographic, economic, and political purposes. Some have seen Qatar as playing all sides from the middle but, instead, it should be seen as attempting to bring resolution to regional conflicts. The March 2026 Iranian attack on natural gas production in Qatar as well as the disruption of everyday life makes it obvious that Qatar is paying a huge price. Qatar's Prime Minister stated the obvious after Israel's first attack in September - no one benefits from the aggression other than Israel.

U.S. universities who offer programs or branch campuses in the UAE and Qatar moved to virtual learning. Administrators at home and at the branches sites are scrambling to protect, sometimes reassure, and to help those who want a way out. Threats over missiles striking Education City on Saturday, March 14, required evacuation of students from residence halls. QF President for Education Francisco Marmolejo announced, "All the universities have been providing the flexibility for people who decide to leave the country on a temporary basis, with the assumption, of course, that they will come back when the situation becomes more normal." After attacks on its higher education institutions, Iran vowed to retaliate with attacks on U.S. universities that have branches in the Middle East. Iran's threats resulted in NYU Abu Dhabi "closing indefinitely" and Qatar's U.S. branches at Education City remaining remote-only. Lebanon University was attacked by Israel resulting in the death of two professors. Attacking Lebanon is part of Israel's assault on the Iranian proxy Hezbollah.

It's hard to predict the long-term consequences for international partnerships in education. Declining interest in partnering is likely but established centers such as Qatar's Education City will hopefully remain as beacons of knowledge diplomacy.

The ripple effect of rising energy costs is something that the US and Israel evidently did not consider. As Iran blocks shipping through the Straits of Hormuz, campuses in Bangladesh and Pakistan are restricting energy use which is forcing them to move classes online.

As the damage in lives lost, property destroyed, reputations tarnished, and dashed hope rises, it is hard to figure out what the motivation(s) were to attack. Pronouncements by President Trump and military staff conflict, causing questions or disbelief that any of what is being said is honest. As opposition to the attacks by the U.S. and Israel on Iran continued to unfold, GOP House leaders pushed the narrative that U.S. higher education is systemically antisemitic. This view is central to controlling criticism of Israel and Trump administration complicity. Was there a threat that Iran was ready to attack or is this simply a very costly distraction from the reality of failed governance, desperation for respect, and striving to accumulate more wealth? As the story unfolds, I will add more commentary by linking to others' analysis.

The Brookings Institute summary provides both background and proposes scenarios of where the war on Iran is headed. What is clear is that regime change is unlikely and that the best outcome is some sort of "deal" that allows Trump to save face but leaves Iran to its own devices to maintain or modify its governmental rule.

Dangers of transactionalism

In the current national environment, one based substantially if not completely on a transactional way of relating to the public, opposition, and former international partnerships, higher education has to hold the ground of individual, collective, and public transformation.

Kathy Johnson Bowles Inside Higher Education article warns that "The corporatization of education attracts people in direct opposition to many in the sector who believe education serves the public good. Education in the service of the public good isn't always for tangible, monetary effect. It is a pathway for self-actualization, knowledge development, independent thought and agency. It provides tools for communicating, problem-solving and betterment. Students are seen as individuals with innate value and potential for success, defined by their capacity, strengths and beliefs. Here, education is society's great leveler - egalitarian and democratic."

Bowles' critique includes critical insights that signal transactionality. These include cults of personality, invisible webs of communication, over-reliance on relationships over evidence, and the wielding of power and money. Transactional colleagues and the networks they create "benefit the self and the acquisition of power, prestige and money" yielding the ultimate public good that many have believed education was all about virtually impossible to achieve. In a follow-up, Bowles warned of "avoidant leadership" that soothes rather than deals with the reality of circumstances that call for complex and innovative solutions.

Holding on to a goal of something other than a transactional approach is tough. The 2026 survey of university presidents revealed a plethora of challenges that have to be navigated. With the flurry of Trump administration interventions eliminating DEI, restricting research funding, overhauling financial aid, challenging accreditation systems, and more, what's a president to do? The most important commitment is to avoid hunkering down, reducing deliberation, and spinning everything as okay. Facing the challenges of the Trump era requires authenticity, practicality, and keeping the end goal of advancing education central in all discussions.

Who has voice in the academic community is a critical considerations when considering the risks of transactionalism. Academic faculty were accorded academic freedom and protections to allow them to do research and to teach without fear of retaliation if they explore issues that are politically volatile. Other academic staff do not have this protection and face punishment if they step out of line from the accepted narrative.  Educational decision making, data interpretation and reporting, policy advocacy, and research and assessment are all potentially compromised if administrators, academic support and student affairs staff do not have the same protections as faculty.

The transactions around budget are some of the most difficult to resolve and it's clear that pressure on state funding will increase. The unfortunate part is that states are managing many competing priorities and in some cases higher education may be seen as a discretionary item that can be postponed.

We live in BONKERS

It sounds like the name of a quaint town somewhere in the midwest but it's actually the state of affairs in higher education and many other sectors as the repercussions of reelecting Donald Trump to the US Presidency continue to unfold. My blog posts have continued to chronicle what has been underway, including Resistance and Ingenuity under Fire, Trauma and Renewal, and Is it a Myth? - the last specifically focused on debunking misinformation that has become commonplace.

Educators should not miss understanding the dire circumstances that the Trump initiatives foretell. Former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary, David Pressman, warned attendees at the ACE annual conference that the perspective and strategy of the Trump administration is very similar to the authoritarian regime of Viktor Orban. Controlling education is essential in order for authoritarians to create their own narrative of institutions that are so fundamental to a nation's culture and future. In a remarkable show of arrogance, Education Department Nicholas Kent warned "change is coming whether institutions like it or not. 'I hope that you all are ready, having made it through the five stages of grief and, most importantly, reaching the final state of acceptance." Reacting to Kent's speech, Ted Mitchell of ACE encouraged attendees to fight back against the "outrageous assault aimed at a few of us but intended to hurt all of us" rejoining with "we can acknowledge our critics when they're right." Driving toward systems he perceives as perpetuating liberal ideology, Kent threatened accrediting bodies for not eliminating DEI in their standards. Amid the turmoil, accrediting bodies should focus on continuous improvement and peer review in order to serve the institutions seeking their approval.

The carnage of Education Secretary McMahon's reflects the ruthless strategies she and her husband used in controlling the WWE. Daniel Collier, an assistant professor at the University of Memphis and life-long WWE enthusiast, said "plans to break up ED as well as work on other key priorities across the federal government will further accelerate as the administration prepares for the midterm elections, when Republicans could lose control of Congress." Although she claimed greater efficiencies from reducing staff, the scars left after McMahon's firing frenzy reduced the ability of Education to deliver on its legislative mandates. Inter Agency Agreements (IAA) transferring functions to other governmental entities are continuing with one of the most significant being transfer of student financial aide to the Treasury Department. The haphazard and unlawful rampages during Musk's DOGE days that dismantled NEH's ability to do its job may be the ultimate goal of the Education Department IAAs.

The recent Inside Higher Education article That's Nuts offers a summary of the most recent crazy interventions and implications we are experiencing at institution, state, and federal levels. The article concludes "Fortunately, there are groups forming that are starting to organize around the challenges we're facing." Organizations such as the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom and the Alliance for Higher Education will hopefully demonstrate that "We don't have to let the bonkers stuff keep happening. There is a future where we have the freedoms and support we need for higher ed institutions, and the people who intersect with them, to thrive."  While most institutions have not chosen to sue the Trump administration, San Jose State took the Education Department on for penalizing it for supposed violations of Title IX. Of course, McMahon bullied back by threatening withdrawal of federal funding.

Research using statistical analysis of Trump's "scattergun" approach (a favorite of Stave Bannon) is important because it illuminates the focus areas. Christina Pagel, who pioneered the analysis says that her tracker is a "'way to sift through the shit' - because such attacks become normalized very quickly." For instance, of the 404 "attempts to control science and health" 185 are directed at education, arts, and museums. The reason - "universities are attacked because that is where resistance to authoritarian regimes often starts." Populist regimes strive to control the narrative by contrast to intellectual inquiry which relies on evidence and critical thinking.

Adding another element of hitting from all sides, Secretary of Defense Hegseth attacked several prestigious universities for presumed liberal bias. Specifically, partnerships with MIT, William & Mary, Carnegie Mellon, Yale, and Harvard as alternatives to the Army War College for military officer training may be severed. The potential partners Hegseth identified include the University of Michigan, University of North Carolina, Virginia Tech, Regent University, Hillsdale College and Liberty University. Communicated through social media and press conferences, it is unclear what Hegseth plans but his X pronouncement was alarming. He said, "'America's highly ranked universities no longer live up to their founding principles as bastions of free speech, open inquiry' and commitment to 'American values.'"

Critical research is another area languishing under the Trump administration. Half way through its fiscal year, the National Institute for Health (NIH) has obligated only15% of its available funding. "Consequently, many of our universities have lowered the number of Ph.D. students in life sciences that they have admitted this year or admitted them with the caveat that they may not be supported." Inequities in who receives NIH support is hitting women scientists in disproportionate ways.

One of the first Trump era initiatives was to claim that higher education was liberally biased and that this created a hostile environment for conservative students. Come to find out, most conservative students don't feel persecuted at all. The sad reality is that the attack on behalf of conservative students' woes resulted in a chilling effect on all speech on campus, some of which resembles the fear of free speech and press of McCarthyism.

DEI prohibition by the Education Department has repeatedly been struck down in court challenges. Mirroring Trump's persistence in numerous areas, Education and DOJ officials persist in finding other ways to control programs that advocate diversity of viewpoint. Civil rights investigations, funding parameters, and financial extortion to avoid investigations have been favorites and are likely to continue. Threats by Trump's Justice Department that Harvard is anti-Semitic have persisted for months as well as charges that Harvard considers race in admissions decisions. Stanford, Ohio State, and UC-Sandiego medicals schools received notice that they were under investigation for preferential (discriminatory) admissions.

Reflecting on her new role as president and CEO of the National Association of Diversity Officers (NADO) in Higher Education, Emelyn A. dela Pena, said that diversity will continue to be a central element of higher education even though the Trump administration has forced new language to describe it. Fortunately, states are stepping up to provide funding for minority serving institutions, a segment that has seen cuts under the anti-DEI umbrella. The gift of Trump's prohibition is that it will help institutions realize how DEI should have been embraced from the start - a shared value-based and institutional commitment. The 800 educators who attended the March 2026 NADO conference gathered to grieve their losses and rally to continue their work.

All in all, the Trump era's impact on higher education in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world is devastating. Glimmers of hope occasionally emerge. These small wins must be celebrated and doing so will give life to other constructive responses to come.

We are all Minneapolis

The murder of two citizens involved in or adjacent to protests over the ICE presence in Minneapolis has captured the attention of a wide and diverse segment of the U.S. One of the most damning aspects of these murders is the spin of DHS and ICE, both of which reversed the blame to place it on the victims themselves, local and state officials, and "radical left" protestors who threatened ICE officers. Both conservatives and liberals only have to view the videos. No narrative is necessary to understand that the murders overstepped law and any reason in policing.

Minneapolis higher education institutions have responded by issuing shelter in place orders, stepping up security, and moving to temporary on-line learning. The demonstrations have been very public and, while not centered on campuses, precautions have been reasonable and necessary. Minneapolis College of Art & Design President Freed issued a statement reflecting the sentiment of many, "From Student Affairs staff who braved teargas to get to residence halls, to volunteers who helped us pick up and deliver food for students and employees, to our Facilities team members who boarded up our 26th Street windows amid the mayhem and subzero cold, and so many more - everyone gave their all." A collection of school districts and university faculty sued ICE for violating immigrant individual rights and disrupting citizens' lives.

The Minneapolis mayhem may have been intentional, designed to threaten and create fear among those who would oppose the Trump administration. What is amazing is that the sloppiness of everyone from Steven Miller to Greg Bovino has now created a warranted backlash that will result in ICE drawing down in Minneapolis and removal of those who have been the face of immigration enforcement. The irony is that higher education could have been a resource to provide analysis and improve selection/training of ICE personnel. The long-standing relationships of Minneapolis institutions with immigrant communities established trust that helped to get through the ICE occupation but it was severely tested. Had the Trump administration carefully studied and designed a response to Trump's campaign promise to tackle immigration, the current damage control could have been avoided.

A key strategy of Trump administration officials is to preempt the narrative by spinning every offense in the media before the facts are known. Another way to deal with opposition is to silence it. Although Trump and his appointees are aggressive in both, academics are increasingly speaking out even in the face of retribution or targeting of various sorts. International scholars who are less vulnerable are joining U.S. scholars to increase the international resistance. Protestors at Columbia University, motivated by various issues including standing up for international students, were arrested for refusal to disperse and blocking traffic. Columbia officials criticized the University for assisting ICE officials. The presence of ICE recruiters has become a source of protests at some campus career fairs.

Minneapolis demonstrated many things - how grass roots mobilization can resist but it has also  exposed vulnerabilities of institutions in the face of ICE. We are all Minneapolis because every institution, every educator, has to watch carefully and determine where we stand. The issue is not to oppose government initiatives but instead to push for reason, respect for constitutional rights, respect for institutions, and compassion. All of us hope that Minneapolis may be a turning point on ICE and on other issues that will bring the Trump administration to some semblance of reason.