House Committees Critique Harvard’s Ties to Chinese Communist Party

The House Select Committee on China, alongside the House Education and Workforce Committee, published a report on Thursday that highlights serious concerns regarding Harvard University’s connections with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and associated groups known for human rights violations.

“The American public expects our top universities to safeguard U.S. research and innovation instead of promoting adversarial interests. Unfortunately, Harvard University is, I think, falling short of this expectation,” said Chairman John Moolener (R-Michigan).

He went on to emphasize the gravity of Harvard’s actions, noting examples like condoning violence against anti-China protestors and collaborating with organizations linked to the People’s Liberation Army. “Harvard has made significant errors and needs to act immediately to avoid repeating them. This investigation should drive vital reforms to minimize CCP influence on campus and emphasize secure American research,” he stated.

Education and Labor Committee Chairman Tim Wahlberg (R-Mich.) pointed out that Harvard has created a corporation seemingly to bypass federal laws requiring disclosure of foreign funding. He criticized this as completely unacceptable, especially given Harvard’s prior failures in compliance.

“Americans deserve transparency about the flow of foreign money at their colleges. This investigation underscores the need for Congress to enact laws that ensure universities abide by these requirements,” Walberg remarked.

The proposed Defending Transparency in Education and Ending Unjust Regimes Engaging in Fraudulent Transactions (DETERRENT) Act would mandate that higher education institutions file annual reports with the Department of Education about foreign gifts and contracts. The legislation aims to ban contracts with foreign “countries of concern” unless specifically exempted.

Some educational organizations are not on board with the DETERRENT Act, expressing concerns that it might hinder scientific and academic collaboration with other nations, notably China, which has a vast research network. They also fear that stringent reporting mandates could prove burdensome and expose faculty to potential harassment.

Moolener and Wahlberg further pointed out that the Securing Innovation and Research from Adversaries (SIRA) Act would explicitly prohibit federally funded research partnerships with problematic organizations, particularly those linked to the Chinese military.

Due to China’s “civil-military fusion strategy,” most major universities and research entities are influenced by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), potentially limiting federally funded research in collaboration with China.

Many academics are disheartened by the decline in productive partnerships. A report—titled “Compromised Independence: The Chinese Communist Party’s Influence at Harvard University”—argued that while some compromises may be necessary, the current CCP influence on institutions like Harvard is excessive.

The report highlighted that Harvard has permitted CCP officials to disseminate propaganda on campus without opposition and has allowed intimidation against students who challenge the Party.

Furthermore, it outlines a troubling scenario where the priorities of the CCP take precedence over American economic, technological, and national security interests, often ignoring U.S. laws and human rights standards.

According to the report, “Harvard University is advancing the objectives of the Chinese Communist Party in various ways, including its technological and scientific goals,” and it called attention to numerous research partnerships involving Harvard-linked scholars and Chinese defense projects.

It noted that many concerning connections are legal, shrouded in limited transparency, and continue despite evident risks to U.S. national security.

“Harvard has the ability to take responsible actions that protect its faculty and research without advancing China’s defense capabilities, yet it is opting not to do so,” the report’s authors argued, suggesting legislation like the DETERRENT Act or the SIRA Act as potential solutions.

The House report provides substantial evidence that suggests Harvard is aware that its functions may promote Chinese objectives at the expense of U.S. interests and has actively sought ways to bypass existing oversight, including establishing a “third-party agency” staffed by its own people to evade gift reporting stipulations.

While the Biden administration previously gave Harvard a clean bill of health toward the end of President Biden’s term, an investigation review in April 2025 raised serious “questions about its accuracy.” The Education Department later discovered that Harvard had submitted “incomplete and inaccurate disclosures” accepted by the prior administration, and this review is still pending.

When a House committee requested a brief list of Harvard’s Chinese collaborations, the response was delayed for months, with Harvard claiming the request was too burdensome. Investigators eventually found the necessary database themselves, easily compiling a list of contributors that resulted in just 50 entries included in the report.

Also noted, the report observed that Harvard often overlooks government alerts regarding sanctioned Chinese individuals and entities, showing a tendency to simplify searches in government databases and giving up too quickly if initial searches yield no results.

The House report recommends that universities should adopt strong multilingual due diligence measures to recognize variations in names, subsidiary relationships, and defense connections.