Speaking at the International Dialogue on Education (ID-E) conference in Berlin on 30 September, I was struck by how fundamentally the conversation about universities and national security has changed in the past year.
What was once a niche discussion about research governance and international partnerships has become a frontline policy challenge for higher education leaders across the Western world.
Representing the UK, I joined colleagues from the US, Finland and Germany to grapple with the question of how universities can prepare for emerging security threats while remaining open, international and committed to academic freedom.
A growing policy challenge
The timing of the discussion could not have been more relevant. On the same day as we were meeting in the Felleshus Berlin, MI5 had warned that more than 100 UK-linked academics had contributed to projects funded by a Chinese research institute alleged to support espionage activities.
This prompted UK ministers to urge universities to exercise greater vigilance over their international activities, highlighting how universities have become both strategic assets and critical battlegrounds in the race for global dominance.
As geopolitical tensions deepen, Western governments are paying closer attention to the role universities play in developing new technologies, protecting sensitive research and cultivating the talent on which future prosperity and security depend.
The nature of defence has changed too. National resilience today relies not only on military capability but also on advanced skills, scientific expertise and technological innovation. Cyber security, artificial intelligence (AI), quantum technologies and surveillance systems all draw heavily on knowledge generated within universities.
Universities educate the engineers designing future defence technologies, they train the cyber specialists protecting critical infrastructure and they conduct essential research in relevant and emerging fields.
At the same time, they are expected to preserve the openness that underpins academic inquiry and sustain the international networks that help societies anticipate and respond to complex global challenges.
Whether they are comfortable with the idea or not, universities have become an integral part of our national resilience infrastructure.
A licence to operate?
While universities are unlikely to be taking on James Bond’s mantle any time soon, I told colleagues in Berlin that Britain’s most famous fictional spy may provide a useful analogy for their situation.
‘Agent 007’ possesses a licence to kill, granted by the state and exercised on its behalf in the interests of national security. Universities operate under a different but equally important licence, whereby society grants them the freedom to educate, research, innovate and challenge conventional thinking in pursuit of the public good.
Yet, like Bond’s, that licence is not unconditional and can be revoked if future political masters are unconvinced by their offering to the nation.
In the UK, institutional autonomy depends on public confidence that universities are acting responsibly and serving wider societal interests. With this freedom comes an obligation to manage risk, safeguard sensitive knowledge wherever necessary and ensure international engagement is undertaken with care and judgement.
This does not mean universities should become agents of the state, but demonstrating their value in areas that matter to the public is one of the strongest ways institutions can maintain legitimacy and trust.
International engagement remains vital
Cutting themselves off from international engagement is just not an option for universities today. Institutions that isolate themselves from global networks are likely to become less innovative, less competitive and ultimately less resilient.
Internationally mobile staff and students broaden institutional expertise and deepen cultural understanding on campus. In the same way, global research partnerships provide access to knowledge that no single nation can generate alone. So, the challenge facing universities today is how to continue being international responsibly, not stopping engagement altogether.
As security concerns rise, international activities require robust governance, effective due diligence and mature risk management. University managers and their governors must understand who they are working with, where vulnerabilities may exist and how risks can be mitigated without closing off vital opportunities for collaboration.
The cyber frontier
The key is not to get fixated on physical mobility alone. As our higher education institutions become more globally connected, they become more exposed to cyber-attacks, data theft and attempts to access sensitive research and intellectual property.
Addressing these risks requires investment, expertise and the sustained attention of university executives. Governors, too, need to ensure they are building institutions capable of anticipating disruption, adapting quickly and continuing to operate effectively when challenges arise.
Finding the right balance
While the discussion in Berlin was wide-ranging, my overriding takeaway was that universities must resist allowing legitimate security concerns to evolve into a culture of suspicion.
The purpose of higher education is to bring people, ideas and cultures together and, if security measures become so restrictive that they undermine collaboration and academic exchange, we risk weakening the very qualities that make universities valuable in the first place.
Perfect security will never be achievable for institutions whose mission depends on openness and engagement. The task for university leaders, therefore, is to navigate the delicate space between protecting what matters to the country and preserving what matters to their mission.
In an increasingly uncertain world, universities do not need to choose between openness and security. They need to uphold both – not by closing doors, but by ensuring they remain open safely.
