This article continues the Harvard Political Review’s investigation into the experiences of Harvard’s international students amid escalating federal threats. Following “Silenced Stories: The Impacts of Trump’s Demands on Harvard’s International Students,” the HPR reconnected with the same students to ask a new set of questions, focusing on Harvard’s response to government pressure and the broader consequences of institutional inaction.
Editor’s Note: All interviews were conducted anonymously to protect students, unless explicit permission was granted. Any identifying details were willingly shared by the student. Leo Gerdén — an international student leading the movement — is featured alongside four other international students, who are referred to as Student 1 through 4.
These interviews have been edited for length and clarity.
Harvard Political Review: The Department of Homeland Security recently issued a letter threatening to cancel Harvard’s SEVP certification unless they submit information on international student protest participation and disciplinary records by April 30. What should Harvard’s response to the Department of Homeland Security be?
Leo Gerdén: I understand that people come from different points of view on this, but if we give Trump five names, he’s going to demand a hundred more. Giving in even a little bit is just going to encourage him to come after us again. That’s why I think it’s so important that we stand by the words of Alan Garber last week, that we’re not going to surrender our independence. We’re not going to give him any powers beyond what the law requires of us.
Student 1: I think Harvard’s response should be similar to its first response: non-compliance. Harvard needs to fight on behalf of all of us, because if they make concessions and give in to some of the demands, Trump is simply going to ask for more.
Student 2: I’ve been very impressed with what Harvard’s done so far. They’ve done a very good job of standing up and making sure they don’t cave in, but what’s absolutely critical is that they continue to do that. I’m constantly worried that they might give in, and while I’ve been delighted so far that they haven’t, the pressure is only going to increase. By nature, Trump is a bully. He doesn’t want to lose a fight, especially not to Harvard, which is arguably the most famous educational institution in the world. He’s just going to keep pushing. Harvard needs to keep standing up the way you deal with the bullies, which is by punching back.
Student 3: Harvard should fight. I understand that this might disrupt the studies of international students. I understand this might mean I have to leave. But there’s a sort of larger war at stake. Academia stands for important principles that must be protected, and I think Harvard should fight to defend them. The other thing I’ve considered is, if Harvard capitulates on this, Trump will now know that he has a trump card. He knows that if he threatens international students, he can force universities to capitulate.
Student 4: My perspective is that they should push back, but they should also try for a more diplomatic approach where possible. They can fulfill the demands of the government that are not straight up outrageous, like providing all the information about every minor crime. At all costs, Harvard must not submit any sensitive personal information of any student on campus. However, they should definitely take steps to ensure the government believes that Harvard is successful at dealing with anti-semitism, all kinds of hate, and promoting a diversity of viewpoints. I have felt that there have been issues when it comes to both anti-semitism and Islamophobia on campus, and the university could do better.
HPR: Do you believe Harvard has done enough to advocate for you? How could they do more?
Leo Gerdén: Many of us were proud of Alan Garber after his statement last Monday. I think Harvard did a good job not only of sending an answer to the White House but also of making our stance very public. I do place a lot of trust in Harvard’s commitment to having us here. But there’s still going to be a fight when students start facing deportation. One of the things that we’ve been demanding is support in helping us graduate, whether it’s at Harvard or other institutions. Don’t leave us hanging or force us to take a leave of absence, but rather, help us find other opportunities, either in our home countries or in other countries.
Student 1: Obviously, they can do more. Deans have already made statements, and they’re providing us with very crucial information. Harvard is trying to do what it can, but there can always be more. Right now, we really need it, but it’s a difficult situation. I think all international students know that Harvard is experiencing this just like we are, with a very strong uncertainty about what’s going to happen and how far this administration is willing to go.
Student 2: Harvard could do more groundwork to make international students feel safer and to let us know what our options are. I’m a part of the Harvard Undergraduate Woodbridge International Society, and we’ve been carefully speaking to the administration about these concerns. They’ve started offering more advice sessions along with information on how to respond to ICE agents — all these sorts of things. However, I think they could host more sessions and maybe even make them mandatory for all international students, so that everyone is fully aware of their rights.
Student 3: I don’t envy Garber’s position, because I’m sure he’s losing quite a bit of sleep, and it has been a trying time. I spoke to the international office, and they basically said, ‘Don’t worry, Harvard will handle it.’ I’m getting the sense that they also don’t know what’s going to happen. I pity them, because they’re definitely understaffed for this circumstance, and they are also waiting for directions from the top as well. I just hope Harvard gives me some clarity as to what they’re going to do and what the likely ramifications are sooner rather than later.
Student 4: Harvard has done a lot to advocate for us. Right now, the Harvard International Office is hosting sessions, but it still feels slightly less comprehensive than I would have expected. I also wish that Garber’s emails were more assuring or affirming of the steps the university plans to take. One thing I would like to mention is that, while the university is rightly pushing back against the government, I believe the changes that they’re hoping to make, such as combating anti-semitism, seem to reflect only one side of the issue. When it comes to combating Islamophobia, that is neither mentioned nor catered to, which is a concern as well. Harvard shouldn’t just be protecting one religious group. They should have the other side’s back as well.
HPR: What is your reaction to recent organizing events like the international student protest on April 17th? Do you think it is helping the cause? If not, what do you wish had happened instead?
Leo Gerdén: Definitely, because Harvard also responds to incentives. If we don’t show Alan Garber that we’re behind him, then he might take another course. And as I’ve said, this is going to be a marathon. We’re going to raise the cost of Harvard complying, and by the students showing up, by the faculty showing up, we’re sending that message pretty clearly.
Student 1: It does help the cause because it can influence decision-making. If there’s a visible group of students, faculty, and even just Cambridge citizens who care about Harvard and care about their country, I think they can make a huge difference. I also think they should continue by building a coalition including everyone, because everyone does have a stake in this fight.
Student 2: I think protests like those are absolutely critical for standing up to the government. The student body needs to show how it wants Harvard to respond, and they can do that through protesting. One of the best speakers was a Jewish girl who spoke up and talked about how the administration is using Jewish people as a scapegoat for all of their actions. I thought that was absolutely amazing, and I believe more voices like hers would go a long way.
Student 3: I wasn’t there at the protest, so I don’t know what exactly transpired. I did see some murmurings on Sidechat suggesting that the message got taken over by the Israel-Palestine issue, which I think is a little bit sad. That said, I am grateful that some American students were angry about the situation and want to fight on our behalf. I’m quite politically inactive on campus. I don’t attend protests, and I’m not necessarily sure that they will do that much, but I appreciate the solidarity.
Student 4: It’s helping the cause. I think it will bring students in front of the eyes of the government, which could be scary, but then if the government were to take strict action towards the student, it would be well known, and there would be less of a justification. Legally, freedom of speech is protected, and students have the right to protest.
HPR: What are some of the consequences, on campus and beyond, of silencing international voices at Harvard?
Leo Gerdén: If you only have freedom of speech for some, then you don’t have freedom of speech in this country. Our voices matter, whether it’s in the classroom or the public conversation. But just as a principal stance, if they can do this to us, then they’re also going to do it to Americans, too. They might not be able to deport them, but they have other types of pressures in their toolbox.
Student 1: The consequences are going to hit Harvard eventually, because fewer international students might apply in the future, or they might choose to attend other schools. Harvard is not entirely to blame for this, but this is something that will naturally happen. There are leaders around the world who would welcome all these amazing students and faculty who might be forced to leave. Given that Harvard takes the best students from everywhere, if those students can no longer be here anymore, I’m sure someone else will be ready to take them.
Student 2: This is something that I cared about during the protests. I was on the international students’ group chat, and it was constantly pinging with people telling internationals not to go to the protest because of the risks to their livelihoods, advising them to stay indoors until it was all over. As I mentioned previously, there was already a disproportionate number of international students at the protest, and so the numbers would have been significantly lower without them. I’m not saying that any international should feel obliged to go to a protest. However, I do think that encouraging international students not to protest and to stay indoors is actually a great risk that goes against our mission. International students should feel free to both protest and not protest. They should never be discouraged. If you discourage them, you will have significantly fewer people at those protests and fighting for the very cause that directly impacts them.
Student 3: Part of what makes college a very special experience for people is the chance to meet people from all kinds of places, to see how they think, and how they move through the world. That’s also why I came to America. I think that for American students, if Harvard really becomes a place that is devoid of international presence, there is a sense that you won’t be able to see and hear voices from all over the world.
Student 4: There’s no point in boasting as an institution about being open to diverse viewpoints, accepting of those viewpoints, and a place of open inquiry and intellectuality when an entire group of the student body is being silenced.
Senior U.S. Editor
