Uncategorized
Can Donald Trump “Fix” Higher Education in the United States?
By HENRY SREBRNIK When protests disrupted campuses nationwide in the United States last year celebrating the Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel, signs and chants demanded “Divest!” and “Cease-fire now!” This fall, much of the protest language has grown darker, echoing language used by Hamas, and declaring “Glory to the resistance!”
Some protesters now refer to them as the “al-Aqsa flood,” the name Hamas uses. “Oct. 7 IS FOREVER” has been spray-painted on walls at colleges. The shift is very apparent at Columbia University in New York, one of the main centres of the protests.
This new messaging has been noticed by Hillel chapters across the country, observed Adam Lehman, president and CEO of Hillel International. “The overall picture on campus,” he said, “has moved from a mass protest movement that embodied a diverse set of goals and rhetoric to this more concentrated and therefore more extreme and radical set of goals, tactics and rhetoric.”
President-elect Donald Trump has promised to crack down on these campus protests, and his allies expect the Department of Education to more aggressively investigate university responses to pro-Palestinian movements.
“If you get me re-elected, we’re going to set that movement back 25 or 30 years,” he told donors last May. Trump called the demonstrators part of a “radical revolution” that he vowed to defeat. He praised the New York Police Department for clearing the campus at Columbia University and said other cities needed to follow suit, saying “it has to be stopped now.”
In an Agenda47 policy video released last July, he asserted that “the time has come to reclaim our once great educational institutions from the radical Left, and we will do that.” Trump promised to axe federal support and accreditation for universities that fail to put an end to “antisemitic propaganda” and deport international students that are involved in violent anti-Israel campus protests. “As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave.”
At a recent antisemitism event in Washington DC, he pledged to protect Jewish students on American campuses. “Here is what I will do to defeat antisemitism and defend our Jewish citizens in America,” he declared. “My first week back in the Oval Office my Administration will inform every College president that if you do not end antisemitic propaganda they will lose their accreditation and federal support.”
He announced that he “will inform every educational institution in our land that if they permit violence, harassment or threats against Jewish students the schools will be held accountable for violations of the civil rights law.
“It’s very important Jewish Americans must have equal protection under the law and they’re going to get it. At the same time, my Administration will move swiftly to restore safety for Jewish students and Jewish people on American streets.”
When back in the White House, Trump announced that he would direct the Department of Justice to pursue federal civil rights cases against schools that continue to engage in racial discrimination “under the guise of equity” and will advance a measure to have schools that continue these illegal and unjust policies fined up to the entire amount of their endowment.
Citing Trump’s campaign pledge to push for significant reforms, the Stand Columbia Society, which is dedicated to restoring the university’s “excellence,” has identified a handful of ways in which the federal government could pull financial support from Columbia, or any other university. They estimate Columbia could lose out on $3.5 billion in federal funding should they face government retaliation.
The most likely action, according to the group, would be for the government to slow down on issuing new research grants to the university, a move that would require no justification at all. The government could also squeeze the enrollment of international students by curbing issuance of student visas.
Columbia boasts upwards of 13,800 international students. Losing out on the cohort could cost them up to $800 million in tuition money. Neither one of these scenarios requires the administration to take legal action.
Moreover, the government could, additionally, push to withhold all federal funding should it determine that a university had violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. That statute bars recipients of federal funding from discriminating based on race, colour, or national origin. It was later clarified in 2004 by the then-assistant secretary for the Department of Education, Kenneth Marcus, that Title VI also protected the rights of ethnic groups that shared a religious faith, such as Jews.
Given the explosion of antisemitism that erupted on college campuses in the wake of Hamas’s attack, it doesn’t appear it would take much to make the case that Columbia, and a whole host of other universities, violated Title VI.
Columbia, for its part, already faces at least three Title VI lawsuits over campus antisemitism. (Among other major universities, Harvard faces two, and the University of California Los Angeles, University of Pennsylvania, New York University, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology are also on the list.)
“These problems have existed for some time,” a contributing member of Stand Columbia, Alexandra Zubko, who is a Columbia graduate, contends. “This might be the moment that administrators look in the mirror and decide that they can’t let them continue.”
“All we need to do is listen to what President Trump has said during his campaign to understand that this administration will be serious about enforcing anti discrimination laws in ways that could be problematic to those institutions that have been getting a free pass for too long,” Marcus has said.
With Trump promising to make higher education “great again” once he returns to office this coming January, American universities will face increasing pressure to comply with his administration, if they don’t want to lose billions in federal support.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
Uncategorized
Spanish PM Sanchez Says US Invasion of Greenland ‘Would Make Putin Happiest Man on Earth’
Russian President Vladimir Putin welcomes US President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff during a meeting in Moscow, Russia, Aug. 6, 2025. Photo: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov/Pool via REUTERS
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said a US invasion of Greenland “would make Putin the happiest man on earth” in a newspaper interview published on Sunday.
Sanchez said any military action by the US against Denmark’s vast Arctic island would damage NATO and legitimize the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
“If we focus on Greenland, I have to say that a US invasion of that territory would make Vladimir Putin the happiest man in the world. Why? Because it would legitimize his attempted invasion of Ukraine,” he said in an interview in La Vanguardia newspaper.
“If the United States were to use force, it would be the death knell for NATO. Putin would be doubly happy.”
President Donald Trump on Saturday appeared to change tack over Greenland by vowing to implement a wave of increasing tariffs on European allies until the United States is allowed to buy Greenland.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said additional 10 percent import tariffs would take effect on February 1 on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and Great Britain — all already subject to tariffs imposed by Trump.
Those tariffs would increase to 25 percent on June 1 and would continue until a deal was reached for the US to purchase Greenland, Trump wrote.
Trump has repeatedly insisted he will settle for nothing less than ownership of Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. Leaders of both Denmark and Greenland have insisted the island is not for sale and does not want to be part of the United States.
Uncategorized
Damascus and Kurdish Forces Agree to Immediate Ceasefire
Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a Ministerial formation of the government of the Syrian Arab Republic, in Damascus, Syria, March 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
i24 News – Syrian state media reported on Sunday that the Syrian government and the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have reached an immediate ceasefire after days of clashes in Kurdish-held areas of the northeast.
The agreement, announced electronically by Damascus, marks a major shift in Syria’s ongoing efforts to reassert control over its Kurdish-majority regions.
According to the Syrian presidency, the deal, signed by President Ahmed al-Sharaa and SDF commander Mazloum Abdi, calls for a full halt to combat operations on all fronts, the withdrawal of SDF-affiliated forces to the east of the Euphrates, and the integration of SDF fighters into Syria’s defense and interior ministries on an individual basis.
The agreement also stipulates that the Syrian government will assume military and administrative control over Deir al-Zor and Raqqa, take over all oil and gas fields, and assume responsibility for prisons and camps holding ISIS members and their families. The SDF has committed to evacuating all non-Syrian PKK-affiliated personnel from the country.
“All lingering files with the SDF will be resolved,” Sharaa said, adding that he is scheduled to meet Abdi on Monday to continue discussions. The ceasefire is intended to open safe corridors for civilians to return to their areas and allow state institutions to resume their duties.
US Special Envoy Tom Barrack praised the agreement, describing it as a “pivotal inflection point” that brings former adversaries together and advances Syria toward national unity. Barrack noted that the deal facilitates the continued fight against ISIS while integrating Kurdish forces into the broader Syrian state.
The ceasefire comes after days of heavy fighting in northeastern Syria, highlighting both the fragility and potential of Damascus’ reconciliation efforts with Kurdish forces.
Uncategorized
World Markets Jolted, Euro Softens, as Trump Vows Tariffs on Europe over Greenland
A person walks along a street on the day of the meeting between top US officials and the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland, in Nuuk, Greenland, January 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Marko Djurica/File Photo
Global markets are facing volatility after President Donald Trump vowed to slap tariffs on eight European nations until the US is allowed to buy Greenland, news that pushed the euro to a seven-week low in late Sunday trading.
Trump said he would impose an additional 10 percent import tariff from February 1 on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and Britain, which will rise to 25 percent on June 1 if no deal is reached.
Major European Union states decried the tariff threats over Greenland as blackmail on Sunday. France proposed responding with a range of previously untested economic countermeasures.
As early trade kicked off in Asia-Pacific, the euro fell 0.2 percent to around $1.1572, its lowest since November. Sterling also dipped, while the yen firmed against the dollar.
“Hopes that the tariff situation has calmed down for this year have been dashed for now – and we find ourselves in the same situation as last spring,” said Berenberg chief economist Holger Schmieding.
Trump‘s sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs in April 2025 sent shockwaves through markets. Investors then largely looked past US trade threats in the second half of the year, viewing them as noise and responding with relief as Trump made deals with Britain, the EU and others.
While that lull might be over, market moves on Monday could be dampened by the experience that investor sentiment had been more resilient than expected in 2025 and global economic growth stayed on track.
US markets are closed on Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day, which means a delayed reaction on Wall Street.
The implications for the dollar were less clear. It remains a safe haven, but could also feel the impact of Washington being at the center of geopolitical ruptures, as it did last April.
Bitcoin, a liquid proxy for risk that is open to trade at the weekend, was steady, last trading at $95,330.
Capital Economics said countries most exposed to increased U.S. tariffs were the UK and Germany, estimating that a 10 percent tariff could reduce GDP in those economies by around 0.1 percent, while a 25 percent tariff could knock 0.2–0.3 percent off output.
European stocks are near record highs. Germany’s DAX and London’s FTSE index are up more than 3 percent this month, outperforming the S&P 500, which is up 1.3 percent.
European defense shares will likely continue to benefit from geopolitical tensions. Defense stocks have jumped almost 15 percent this month, as the US seizure of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro fueled concerns about Greenland.
Denmark’s closely managed crown will also likely be in focus. It has weakened, but rate differentials are a major factor and it remains close to the central rate at which it is pegged to the euro, and not far from six-year lows.
“The US-EU trade war is back on,” said Tina Fordham, geopolitical strategist and founder of Fordham Global Foresight.
Trump‘s latest move came as top officials from the EU and South American bloc Mercosur signed a free trade agreement.
HOT SPOTS EVERYWHERE
The dispute over Greenland is just one hot spot.
Trump has also weighed intervening in unrest in Iran, while a threat to indict Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has reignited concerns about the US central bank’s independence.
Against this backdrop, safe-haven gold remained near record highs.
Given Trump’s recent Fed attacks, an escalation with Europe could pile pressure on the dollar if it adds to worries that US policy credibility is becoming critically impaired, said Peel Hunt chief economist Kallum Pickering.
“(This) could be amplified by a desire, especially among Europeans, to repatriate capital and shun US assets, which may also pose downside risks to lofty US tech valuations,” he added.
The World Economic Forum’s annual risk perception survey, released before its annual meeting in Davos next week, which will be attended by Trump, identified economic confrontation between nations as the number one concern replacing armed conflict.
A source close to French President Emmanuel Macron said he was pushing for activation of the “Anti-Coercion Instrument,” which could limit access to public tenders, investments or banking activity or restrict trade in services, in which the US has a surplus with the bloc, including digital services.
“With the US net international investment position at record negative extremes, the mutual inter-dependence of European-US financial markets has never been higher,” said Deutsche Bank’s global head of FX research George Saravelos in a note.
“It is a weaponization of capital rather than trade flows that would by far be the most disruptive to markets.”