Thirty institutions, including Duke and UNC, face scrutiny over research ties to foreign entities
Category: Politics
In a move that has stirred considerable debate in academic circles, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has mandated 30 research-focused universities to undertake immediate audits of their foreign partnerships. This directive, announced on August 17, 2026, is aimed at ensuring that sensitive research does not fall into the hands of foreign adversaries. The universities must complete these audits and submit their findings by August 31, 2026, or risk losing federal research funding.
The DoD's order has raised eyebrows among scholars and academic associations, who argue that it could lead to racial and national-origin profiling, undermining the principles of academic freedom and collaboration. Joseph Jewell, assistant secretary for science and technology, emphasized the necessity of safeguarding research investments from foreign exploitation, stating, "Universities are critically important partners in executing a wide range of Department of War research programs, and the Department must, of course, protect our research investments from foreign exploitation."
The audit primarily focuses on partnerships with Chinese institutions, particularly those associated with rebranded Confucius Institutes, as well as any other foreign entities deemed a concern under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). According to the DoD, an updated list of 130 entities of concern was released just a month prior to the audit announcement, which includes institutions from China, Iran, and Russia.
As part of the audit, universities are required to identify relevant foreign collaborations, assess whether sensitive or export-controlled research has been exposed, and develop mitigation plans. These plans could potentially involve ending partnerships that the department considers problematic. Emil Michael, the undersecretary for research and engineering, reinforced this stance, declaring that the department has "zero tolerance for academic partnerships that compromise our national security." He added, "Institutions that receive funding from American taxpayers must uphold the highest standards of research security, and these mandated audits will help guarantee accountability across the board."
Among the universities ordered to conduct these audits are Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). Duke has reported approximately $52.3 million in Department of Defense-funded research and development expenditures in fiscal year 2024, whereas UNC reported nearly $30 million. The implications of this order are particularly pronounced for these institutions, as they have existing research ties to the military.
Interestingly, the DoD has not publicly disclosed which specific partnerships or research activities prompted Duke and UNC's inclusion in the audit. It is important to note that being on the list does not automatically imply that either university has violated federal law or improperly transferred research. The audits are more about ensuring compliance and preventing potential risks.
The academic community has responded with criticism, particularly from organizations like the American Federation of Teachers and the American Association of University Professors. They argue that the inspections represent a form of "funding-based coercion" that could stifle academic inquiry and innovation. In a joint statement, they said, "Safeguarding national security is a legitimate government priority, but this demand creates a serious danger of racial and national-origin profiling that threatens the foundational principles of academic freedom, open inquiry, and global scholarly collaboration."
This sentiment echoes a broader concern among educators and researchers about the potential chilling effect such audits could have on international collaborations. Many fear that the heightened scrutiny may discourage universities from pursuing beneficial partnerships with foreign institutions, particularly those in countries that might be viewed unfavorably by U.S. officials.
The recent audit order follows a growing trend of increased scrutiny over foreign partnerships in U.S. academia. In 2025, congressional Republicans had already expressed concerns about Duke University’s relationships in China, particularly its operation of Duke Kunshan University through a partnership with Wuhan University and the city of Kunshan. Leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party had called for Duke to end this partnership, citing national security risks.
Duke defended its global education mission at the time, stating it would work to educate lawmakers about its objectives. The current audit adds another layer of complexity to Duke's operations, as it now faces heightened scrutiny from the DoD.
UNC, meanwhile, is simultaneously looking to expand its relationship with the DoD, having recently been approved to participate in the revamped Senior Service College Fellowship program. This program sends senior military officers to civilian universities for education and research, which could lead to new opportunities for collaboration, albeit under the watchful eye of the DoD.
As the deadline for the audits approaches, universities across the country will need to navigate the delicate balance between maintaining valuable international partnerships and adhering to the stringent requirements set forth by the DoD. The outcome of these audits could have lasting implications for how U.S. universities engage with foreign entities in the future.
In the end, the audits are not merely bureaucratic exercises; they represent a fundamental shift in how academic institutions must approach foreign collaborations. As the DoD continues to prioritize national security, universities must adapt to an environment where their partnerships are under constant scrutiny, raising questions about the future of academic freedom and international cooperation.