Brain circulation

Orwellian restrictions

The new US administration’s attacks on the American scientific community began shortly after US President Donald Trump took office. The first scientists were made unemployed by funding cuts or the partial break-up of entire government departments and agencies. The damage in terms of academic and research posts destroyed reportedly runs into the thousands already. Among those worst affected are the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which played a key role during the Covid-19 pandemic, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is important for climate research, and the space agency NASA.[1] Countless jobs are also being cut at universities. Nature, the highly respected British science journal, published a widely cited article in February that noted how the cuts were accompanied by “Orwellian restrictions on research”, deplored by the scientific community. The Trump team has, for example, decided that any studies described with “certain terms” such as “gender, race, disability” would no longer permitted.[2] Research fields hit hardest include climate research and many areas of social science. Cuts are even damaging research into avian flu, a disease currently rampant in the United States and leading to egg shortages for consumers.

‘A great opportunity’

The first American scientists have now looking for jobs outside the United States and leaving the country. An interest in research posts abroad is also growing among scientists and academics not yet affected by the wave of programme closures and redundancies but fear they no longer have a future as the country pursues ever stronger ideologically driven constraints. The President of the Max Planck Society, Patrick Cramer, reports that applications from American scientists to the organisation’s eighty-four research institutes have already doubled, and in specific cases even tripled. This undoubtedly is seen as “a great opportunity for Europe as a research location”, although, looking at the international picture, he adds that “for research as a whole it is a clear step backwards”.[3] More and more European science and research institutions are pondering steps to attract US scientists. The European Innovation Council (EIC), for example, is set to discuss a concept for recruitment. The EU Commission is looking into a simplified visa procedure. China and South Korea are also stepping up their efforts to bring in US-based scientists and academics who have either lost their jobs or already want to leave the country out of fear of being fired in the foreseeable future.

‘The best minds in the world’

The outgoing Federal Minister of Education and Research, Cem Özdemir, also sees a good opportunity. During a recent visit to the Thünen Institute (Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forests and Fisheries) in Braunschweig, Özdemir had spoken of how some scientists in the US no longer even dared to “confer with their scientific colleagues in the free world from their place of work.”[4] For Germany, he continued, it is now “in part a question of becoming an attractive destination country for those who can no longer work there.” The new President of the Thünen Institute, Birgit Kleinschmidt, said, “A window is opening. Let’s bring back the best minds”. And Özdemir reasserted Germany’s interest on Monday. He said that it was necessary to “make it clear” that if “top researchers in the US no longer see any opportunities for themselves to research freely over there, they will be welcome in Germany.”[5] “We need the best minds in the world here,” continued the science minister, “whether it’s health research, climate research or high-tech.” Özdemir, however, did not want this to be understood as “mere poaching”. Germany’s offer was not about “brain drain” but about “brain circulation”.

Funding squeeze and red tape

The push to attract significant numbers of leading US researchers to Germany is taking place in a difficult institutional environment: Germany’s major science and research organisations have long been complaining that research is underfunded, suffers from too many bureaucratic obstacles and, as a result, is failing to meet expectations. Research expenditure in Germany totalled around 130 billion euros in 2023. A good two thirds of this money came from industry. Expenditure on research makes up 3.11 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), which falls well short of the 3.5 per cent target which was set back in 2018. In fact, the proportion has more or less stagnated since it rose to 3 per cent in 2017. If German research was to have a chance of keeping up internationally, spending would need to reach 4 per cent of GDP, according to a paper presented by 24 scientific and academic institutions and associations seeking to inform the negotiations between the CDU/CSU and SPD on the future programme of a coalition government. Indeed, not only more money would be needed but also reforms: freedom for science and research is increasingly being strangled by “an excessive number of small and petty regulations and provisions, by insufficient administrative digitisation, as well as by documentation and reporting obligations”.[6] At the end of February, the Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation (EFI) commissioned by the German government was warning that, “The German research and innovation system is falling behind internationally when it comes to generating new, economically relevant ideas and developing novel key technologies.”[7]

State paternalism

The attempt to lure American scientists to Germany is occurring in the context of the Trump administration’s widening culture war, designed to undermine academic freedom. Yet in Germany there are also concerns about government moves to regiment scientists and academics. What is particularly worrying in the humanities is the impact of two resolutions passed by the Bundestag. The lawmakers claim they are taking strong action against antisemitism. The first, adopted on 7 November 2024, is directed against antisemitism in general, while the second, adopted on 30 January 2025, specifically targets antisemitism in schools and universities.[8] Both are based on the highly controversial definition of “antisemitism” formulated by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which makes it possible to proscribe practically any criticism of the state of Israel and defame critical academics as “antisemitic”. The President of the German Rectors’ Conference (HRK), Walter Rosenthal, has stated that at least some of the resolution’s provisions “could, even with the best of intentions, be taken as a gateway to restrictions and paternalism, such as in the field of research funding.”[9] The Director of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Ralf Michaels, judges that in this regard the German government “is essentially relying on methods that are popular in authoritarian states: surveillance, repression and security forces.”

[1] Fred Schwaller: Trump’s ‘assault on science‘: Bad for the US, good for EU? dw.com 12.03.2025.

[2] Trump 2.0: an assault on science anywhere is an assault on science everywhere. nature.com 25.02.2025.

[3] Fred Schwaller: Trump’s ‘assault on science‘: Bad for the US, good for EU? dw.com 12.03.2025.

[4] Sorge um Wissenschaft: US-Forscher in Niedersachsen willkommen. ndr.de 07.03.2025.

[5] Özdemir fordert Solidarität mit US-Wissenschaftlern und temporäre Forschungs-Angebote. msn.com 17.03.2025.

[6], [7] Ein Brandbrief für den Innovationsstandort. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 17.03.2025.

[8], [9] See also: Berlin and antisemitism (II).