ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

Below is an AI-generated translation of Lars Strannegård's op ed in Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter. The original op ed can be found here: .

In the ongoing, relentless political turmoil in the United States, uncertainty grows by the day. Financial markets are on edge, waiting for the next blow to land – or be suddenly halted –while the American stock market is falling. The astonishing statements from Trump, Musk, and Vance follow one after another, each more extreme than the last, leaving observers stunned.

Universities and academics in the U.S. find themselves in a quagmire of uncertainty, realizing they are directly in the line of fire. They may have suspected that winds of change were coming, but not at hurricane strength and so immediately. The journal Nature reports that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has halted hundreds of payments to ongoing research projects related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). USAID-funded research on HIV and malaria has suddenly been cut off. Government agencies are announcing that they will not hire students who graduated from universities with DEI programs. The U.S. government is now publishing lists of words that may no longer be used in applications to federal research funders or in presentations on research content.

It is now reasonable to say that academic freedom in the U.S. is a thing of the past. However, this did not happen overnight – the dismantling has been underway for many years, albeit under a completely different rhetorical guise. Trump and Vance appear to be driven by a genuine hatred of the well-known so-called elite universities and the "woke virus" they see as having spread like a pandemic. Despite Trump having been educated at UPenn’s Wharton and Vance at Yale, they express contempt for the very institutions that likely contributed to their professional success. They also have broad support for their deep skepticism – not least from many academics themselves, who are appalled by how universities have become politicized and ideological in recent years. Historian Niall Ferguson has been particularly harsh in his criticism of universities, both in the U.S. and in England (which has followed the U.S.'s lead). He highlights the significant growth in DEI administrators, the perceived decline in freedom of expression among students, and the sharp rise in tuition fees. The internet is overflowing with student conduct guidelines, lists of prohibited words, and instructional videos urging students to view skin color as a marker of privilege or oppression. The numbers showing how even researchers and professors feel their freedom of speech has diminished are striking. Academic freedom has hardly ever truly thrived in American universities.

The fact that universities have allowed themselves to be steeped in what the Trump administration calls "wokeism" has led to an intensified battle. Trump has used the term "Marxist maniacs" to describe elite universities. Vance explicitly calls them enemies and argues that they have "metastasized into the most corrupt and politically hostile organizations in the U.S." The blows have already landed. Columbia University, seemingly out of nowhere, has seen $400 million in state funding suddenly frozen. News of cutbacks is coming in rapid succession. One proposal suggests that universities with an endowment of $10 billion or more – clearly targeting elite institutions – should be taxed at 35% instead of the current 1.4%. Additionally, there is talk of taxing the endowments themselves. At nearly the same time, Trump has floated the idea of launching a free, digital, "woke-free" university.

Crisis meetings are now unfolding across universities, with leadership scrambling to prepare for major revenue losses. Harvard has just announced extensive cost-cutting measures and a hiring freeze.

In modern knowledge economies, research and high-quality education are the engine of progress. Moreover, the pursuit of truth and academic freedom are fundamental pillars of democracy. The restrictions we are now witnessing are clear threats to democratic governance, and attacks on research freedom are often part of a broader process of democratic erosion. It is no surprise that this is likely what we are witnessing in the U.S.

In this dangerous and in many ways tragic development, Europe—and particularly Sweden—can step up. Our country already stands on relatively stable ground, but now we should:

1. Stand up and firmly cement academic freedom.Sweden has a tendency to import diluted versions of what happens in the U.S., and we must draw a line here. Academic freedom means the right to independently choose research questions, methods, and publication channels, free from political, ideological, or commercial influence. The European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities has urged universities, institutions, and governments to strengthen the work of protecting academic freedom. Sweden’s Royal Academy of Letters, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and the Young Academy of Sweden are among the organizations that have signed. However, academic freedom in Sweden does not enjoy a strong enough protection. It should be enshrined in the constitution. We have already seen political decisions that operate in a gray zone—sudden changes in university boards and cuts to development research funding. Individual researchers have reported threats, harassment, and exclusion for holding the "wrong" opinions. We now need confirmation—preferably a broad, cross-party one—that academic freedom will be protected and that there is political consensus on its importance. The government should take into account the proposals from the Academies' Committee for Human Rights.
2. Attract top talent.As the world’s leading U.S. universities are thrown into disarray, Sweden has a potential Einstein moment. During World War II and its aftermath, European talent flowed into the U.S. due to persecution or perceived insecurity. The situation today is reminiscent of that era, but the brain drain may now flow in the opposite direction. With American universities not hiring and a growing skepticism toward elite institutions, academics are starting to look toward other countries. We already know that this year’s recruitment of researchers to the Stockholm School of Economics is seeing an unusually high caliber of applicants. Few industries are as globally mobile as academia. Science is international, Sweden has strong English proficiency, and the quality of life is high. Both the public and private sectors should now come together to establish a strategic talent fund. Perhaps now is the time for Sweden to take inspiration from our neighbors or from Singapore: for every private krona invested, the government matches it with one, two, or three kronor. This incentivizes foundations to contribute, stimulates philanthropy, and fosters a sense of collective purpose. By working together, we also strengthen national cohesion.

From the extraordinary events unfolding in the U.S., a golden opportunity emerges for Sweden. If we act together, we can inoculate ourselves against authoritarian forces. Let’s call it opportunism in the service of democracy. Other European countries will likely not hesitate, so let this happen swiftly. The path to a stronger democracy in our time lies in affirming fundamental values and enhancing our global competitiveness by welcoming top international talent.