Pentagon widens university scrutiny over foreign research ties
The Pentagon has ordered 30 leading US universities to audit foreign research partnerships within two weeks, escalating Washington’s effort to prevent federally funded science and advanced technology from benefiting institutions linked to China’s military and other strategic rivals.
The universities must examine collaborations involving organisations identified by the Pentagon as research-security risks and terminate arrangements considered problematic or face possible loss of federal funding. Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Johns Hopkins University are among the institutions affected, while other schools identified include Georgetown University, Cornell University, Duke University, New York University and several University of California campuses. The reviews are due by August 31.
The directive follows an updated Pentagon assessment identifying about 130 foreign universities and research organisations whose activities are considered capable of increasing the likelihood that US government-funded research and development could be diverted or exploited. Most are based in China, although institutions from Russia and Iran are also included.
The move has gained added significance following a congressional investigation into Harvard’s dealings with China. Two House committees alleged this month that Harvard maintained research relationships with institutions connected to China’s defence research establishment and operated an affiliated non-profit that could have been used to circumvent federal foreign-funding disclosure requirements. Harvard has faced growing scrutiny over research security as well as its wider financial links with overseas donors.
The congressional report identified Harvard Global Research and Support Services, commonly called Harvard Global, as an affiliated organisation capable of accepting certain awards when Harvard University itself could not accept a sponsor’s terms for legal or financial reasons. Archived material cited by lawmakers said Harvard Global could become the formal applicant and award recipient while Harvard researchers carried out the work using university resources.
Lawmakers characterised the arrangement as a potential mechanism for bypassing Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which requires universities receiving federal financial assistance to disclose qualifying foreign gifts and contracts. Harvard Global began operations around 2012, and its annual revenue grew from about $621,000 in its 2012 tax filing to more than $7 million in 2023, the congressional investigation found.
The investigation does not establish that the roughly $630 million Harvard has disclosed as having come from Chinese sources was routed through Harvard Global. The larger figure refers to Harvard’s overall reported funding from Chinese sources over decades, while the congressional allegation concerns whether the affiliated organisation could have provided a structure through which some transactions escaped normal disclosure rules. Federal records place Harvard’s total reported foreign funding at about $4.5 billion.
That distinction is important because congressional investigators have alleged a disclosure loophole rather than demonstrated that hundreds of millions of dollars were secretly channelled through the non-profit. The House report said Harvard Global’s earlier website language was removed after committees sent the university a draft of their findings. It also noted that federal guidance treats intermediaries operating for the benefit of universities as potentially subject to foreign-funding disclosure requirements.
Harvard’s foreign-funding compliance has previously been examined by federal authorities. An Education Department review opened in 2020 was closed in December 2024 after Harvard attested that its disclosures were current and that systems were in place to comply with Section 117. A new review was opened in April 2025 after authorities identified what they described as incomplete or inaccurate disclosures. That review remained open when the House committees issued their report.
Research-security concerns extend well beyond Harvard. A separate congressional examination published in 2025 identified about 1,400 scientific papers produced between June 2023 and June 2025 through collaborations involving Pentagon-funded US researchers and Chinese partners. The work was associated with roughly 700 defence grants worth more than $2.5 billion, with research covering artificial intelligence, semiconductors, hypersonics, advanced materials and propulsion technologies. More than half of the publications involved organisations affiliated with China’s defence research or industrial system.
University representatives have cautioned that Washington risks treating legitimate scientific cooperation as evidence of wrongdoing. The American Council on Education has argued that universities have worked with federal authorities for years to strengthen safeguards and that institutions should not automatically be penalised for partnerships established before particular foreign organisations were placed on security lists.
The universities must examine collaborations involving organisations identified by the Pentagon as research-security risks and terminate arrangements considered problematic or face possible loss of federal funding. Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Johns Hopkins University are among the institutions affected, while other schools identified include Georgetown University, Cornell University, Duke University, New York University and several University of California campuses. The reviews are due by August 31.
The directive follows an updated Pentagon assessment identifying about 130 foreign universities and research organisations whose activities are considered capable of increasing the likelihood that US government-funded research and development could be diverted or exploited. Most are based in China, although institutions from Russia and Iran are also included.
The move has gained added significance following a congressional investigation into Harvard’s dealings with China. Two House committees alleged this month that Harvard maintained research relationships with institutions connected to China’s defence research establishment and operated an affiliated non-profit that could have been used to circumvent federal foreign-funding disclosure requirements. Harvard has faced growing scrutiny over research security as well as its wider financial links with overseas donors.
The congressional report identified Harvard Global Research and Support Services, commonly called Harvard Global, as an affiliated organisation capable of accepting certain awards when Harvard University itself could not accept a sponsor’s terms for legal or financial reasons. Archived material cited by lawmakers said Harvard Global could become the formal applicant and award recipient while Harvard researchers carried out the work using university resources.
Lawmakers characterised the arrangement as a potential mechanism for bypassing Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which requires universities receiving federal financial assistance to disclose qualifying foreign gifts and contracts. Harvard Global began operations around 2012, and its annual revenue grew from about $621,000 in its 2012 tax filing to more than $7 million in 2023, the congressional investigation found.
The investigation does not establish that the roughly $630 million Harvard has disclosed as having come from Chinese sources was routed through Harvard Global. The larger figure refers to Harvard’s overall reported funding from Chinese sources over decades, while the congressional allegation concerns whether the affiliated organisation could have provided a structure through which some transactions escaped normal disclosure rules. Federal records place Harvard’s total reported foreign funding at about $4.5 billion.
That distinction is important because congressional investigators have alleged a disclosure loophole rather than demonstrated that hundreds of millions of dollars were secretly channelled through the non-profit. The House report said Harvard Global’s earlier website language was removed after committees sent the university a draft of their findings. It also noted that federal guidance treats intermediaries operating for the benefit of universities as potentially subject to foreign-funding disclosure requirements.
Harvard’s foreign-funding compliance has previously been examined by federal authorities. An Education Department review opened in 2020 was closed in December 2024 after Harvard attested that its disclosures were current and that systems were in place to comply with Section 117. A new review was opened in April 2025 after authorities identified what they described as incomplete or inaccurate disclosures. That review remained open when the House committees issued their report.
Research-security concerns extend well beyond Harvard. A separate congressional examination published in 2025 identified about 1,400 scientific papers produced between June 2023 and June 2025 through collaborations involving Pentagon-funded US researchers and Chinese partners. The work was associated with roughly 700 defence grants worth more than $2.5 billion, with research covering artificial intelligence, semiconductors, hypersonics, advanced materials and propulsion technologies. More than half of the publications involved organisations affiliated with China’s defence research or industrial system.
University representatives have cautioned that Washington risks treating legitimate scientific cooperation as evidence of wrongdoing. The American Council on Education has argued that universities have worked with federal authorities for years to strengthen safeguards and that institutions should not automatically be penalised for partnerships established before particular foreign organisations were placed on security lists.