Clarion Call: Islamic influence on America’s universities

Why would foreign donors give large sums of money to already wealthy American colleges? What do they get out of it?

Healy Hall of Georgetown University. (Wikipedia)

In a recent, insightful First Things piece, Peter Hitchens reiterates the not so well known fact that Hitler was, in many respects, a progressive. And like progressives everywhere, Hitler saw young people as the vanguard of his movement. Thus:

When an opponent declares ‘I will not come over to your side’ I say calmly ‘Your child belongs to us already… What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing but this new community.’

I thought of this as I was reading a recently released Clarion Project report on “Foreign Influence Ops on U.S. Universities.” Now, college students are not children, but neither were many of the Hitler Youth. Moreover, most college students today seem to enjoy a prolonged adolescence that was not available to young people living in the Germany of the 1930’s. Like adolescents everywhere, university students today are still at an impressionable stage. And “impressionable” would also describe a lot of graduate students as well.

Why would foreign donors give large sums of money to already wealthy American colleges? What do they get out of it? Are they doing it simply out of the goodness of their hearts or are they, as the Clarion report title suggests, carrying out influence operations?

What would we think if historians discovered that Hitler’s government had given huge sums of money to select British and American universities in the years leading up to World War II?

It would seem fairly obvious, wouldn’t it, that Hitler hoped to bring Anglo-American youth over to his side? But why, then, aren’t we disturbed to discover that countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar are donating vast quantities of cash to dozens of prestigious American universities?

Well, perhaps because we didn’t know. I’ve been familiar for a long time with the large gifts given to select American universities by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and other wealthy Arabs. But it wasn’t until I read the Clarion report that I became aware of the full extent of foreign funding (although Clarion warns that what they’ve uncovered is just the tip of the iceberg.)

With all the talk of Russian interference in our elections you might think that Russia would top the list of would-be influencers, but the United Arab Emirates donates more than twice as much as Russia, and Saudi Arabia and Qatar contribute far more. China, as you might expect is near the top of the list, but tiny Qatar donates twice as much as China.

Since 2012 Qatar has donated $376 million to Carnegie Mellon University, $351 million to Georgetown, $340 million to Northwestern University. $275 million to Texas A&M, $41 million to Virginia Commonwealth University, and lesser amounts to about two dozen other institutions of, er, higher learning.

In the same time frame, Saudi Arabia has donated $83 million to MIT, $75 million to George Washington University, $59 million to George Mason University, $31 million to Harvard, $30 million to the University of Kansas and millions more to about 58 other universities.

Other large gifts to U.S. universities come from the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon.

Islam, in case you didn’t know it, is a proselytizing religion. And among Islamic states, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are, perhaps, the foremost evangelizers. Both promote “Wahhabism”—a puritanical and theocratic version of Islam that, as the Clarion report observes, “inspires Sunni jihadists around the world.” Indeed, the Qatari government is a strong supporter of Hamas and other terrorist groups.

As far as I know, no American university has expressed shock at this rank influence pedaling. Unlike Rudy Giuliani, who turned down $10 million from the Saudis after 9/11, universities don’t seem to mind accepting money with strings attached. Except, apparently, if the money comes from the U.S. government, and the strings require that you teach subjects in a balanced way.

Academics everywhere were outraged when the Department of Education threatened to cut funding for a Middle East studies program run by Duke University and the University of North Carolina. The letter from the Education Department cited courses that failed to provide a “balance of perspectives.” According to the letter, “the positive aspects of Islam” were emphasized, but there was no similar attention to the “positive aspects of Christianity, Judaism or any other religion or belief system in the Middle East.”

Indeed, the NC-Duke Consortium had sponsored a conference featuring “severe anti-Israeli bias and anti-Semitic rhetoric.” In other words, the consortium was using U.S. taxpayer money to present the Qatari point of view on the Middle East.

Academics were incensed that the government wanted to know what they were doing with its money. Jay Smith, a history professor at UNC said that the official who signed the letter from the Department of Education, “should stay in his lane and allow the experts to determine what constitutes a ‘full understanding’ of the Middle East.”

This might seem like a fairly risky response to give to a large government bureaucracy. But the reason that Mid-East studies programs can say “we don’t need your stinkin’ money” to the U.S. is because there’s plenty more stinkin’ money available from Middle East governments to fill the gap. The amount in question was a mere $235 thousand, which in Qatar would just about cover the cost of a week-end shopping trip to London.

Henry Reichman, of the American Association of University Professors warned that the threat to withdraw funds “could have a chilling effect.” But the Saudi-Qatar money already seems to have had a chilling effect on American universities. Else why would pro-Israel speakers be so seldom invited to speak on American campuses, while anti-Semitic speakers are given free rein? Why would history texts for students tell them that “Jihad actually means ‘striving in the way of the Lord’ to achieve personal betterment…”? And why would scholarly books keep insisting that the history of Islam was one long Golden Age of tolerance, scientific advancement, and social harmony?

During the centuries-long Islamic rule of Spain, Christians were treated as a subjugated people. They were considered inferior to Muslims and were made to feel their inferiority in a hundred different ways. Yet contemporary historians portray them as living happy and contented lives under the beneficent rule of their enlightened Muslim masters—in much the same way that earlier American writers portrayed black slaves as happy beneficiaries of their master’s kindly solicitude.

Of course, Muslim also held slaves—in great numbers; but contemporary scholars still manage to present the enslavement in a positive way. Historian Dario Fernandez-Morera says that modern professors, like 19th century painters, portray the harem in a romantic light. “Some ingenious academic specialists have argued,” he observes, that “sexual slavery under Islam actually promoted women’s liberation.”

It’s ironic that academics are worried about the chilling effect that the withdrawal of a relatively small sum by the Education Department might have. When it comes to freedom of speech, the average university has already entered an ice age. There is far more freedom of expression in a hair styling salon than in most college classrooms.

Fernandez-Morera says that academics who research and teach about Islam and the Middle East have been compromised by “stakeholder” incentives. They have a financial interest in keeping certain narratives alive. But the chilling effect is not confined to the campus. It reaches out to affect the whole society. What’s taught at the university trickles down to high schools and elementary schools, and sometimes it trickles down rather quickly. Don’t be surprised if one of your child’s homework assignments requires him to memorize and recite the shahada.

The universities also have an effect on government policies. They are the go-to- places to find out what the experts are saying on a variety of issues. That may be why so much Arab money flows into Washington DC area universities. Saudi Arabia and the UAE contribute, respectively, $59 million and $5 million to George Mason University, and $75 million and $4 million, respectively, to George Washington University. Meanwhile, Georgetown University has received $6 million from Saudi Arabia, and a whopping $351 million from Qatar. The Saudi money to Georgetown comes on top of a 2005 donation of $20 million from Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal to fund the Alwaleed bin-Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU).

But what’s so important about Georgetown—other than being located in Washington—that merits so much largesse? Well, two things come to mind. First, the Alwaleed bin-Talal Center is part of the university’s prestigious School of Foreign Service, also known as the Walsh School of Foreign Service because it was established by Fr. Edmund A. Walsh, S.J. The Walsh School turns out more diplomats, State Department officials, and other experts on international affairs than any other American school. It is considered to be one of the best schools of its kind in the world. Yet, what if the international affairs experts who shape our foreign policy have been shaped by a Saudi/Qatari perspective on Islam and the Middle East? It’s a question worth asking because a foreign relations expert who subscribes to the ACMCU’s cockeyed view of Islam is arguably a risk to national security.

The second Georgetown connection is with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) which is also located in Washington, and which considers the bin Talal Center the go-to place for guidance on Islam. So it seem safe to assume that the USCCB’s understanding of Islam is also shaped by the Saudi/Qatari perspective. And that, in turn, means that American Catholics are being seriously misled about the nature of Islam.

Hitler told his opponents “Your child belongs to us already.” Are we coming to the point where well-funded Islamic proselytizers and their collaborators in academia will be able to say the same?

And, of course, it’s not just the children who are being influenced, but the whole culture. I said earlier that there’s more freedom of expression in a hair styling salon than in a college classroom, but that statement probably ought to be qualified.

Would you really feel free to say anything critical about Islam the next time you get your hair cut? Would you feel free to say anything at all about Islam? Maybe you’re upset about all those Christians being massacred in Nigeria. Maybe you’re concerned about mistreatment of women and children in the Islamic world. Or maybe you only have a question about the hookah parlor that just opened around the corner. But in all likelihood you’ll keep your thoughts to yourself.

Many in our society worry a great deal about global warming, but it may be time to worry instead about the chilling effect that Islamic influence has brought to bear on our freedom of expression.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About William Kilpatrick 81 Articles
William Kilpatrick is the author of several books on religion and culture including Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West (Ignatius Press) and What Catholics Need to Know About Islam (Sophia Institute Press). For more on his work and writings, visit his Turning Point Project website.


  1. There is a void in America, specially among the present generation.. They lost faith in God and religion.. They have not been guided or taught about morality, religion etc by parents.In. View of this the younger generation is in darkness and confusion. So something new they hear from Islam propagators. American parents and Church are responsible for the malady.

  2. I am critical about any propaganda that is against Catholics. No, I am not afraid to open my mouth – why would I be? Jesus Christ died for me, why would I not risk persecution for Him?

    • Not sure what is going on, but it could be the server was down for a few moments. This comment came through, obviously, so please consider trying again. Thanks!

  3. Once upon a time (2007) I found myself interested in finding a book that (a) for secularists would differentiate the faith of Christianity from Islam as another religion, (b) that for Muslims would differentiate Christianity from Western Secularism (with its indifference and pornography, etc.), and (c) that for Christians would be invited back to the table currently confined to a talking-head yawner between secular mouthpieces and insular Muslims who at least know what they believe. I was especially interested in the real day-to-day story about Mohammed in early Arabia—free from any later imprints. (I do not speak or read Arabic, but there are translations…)

    No such triangular book. So after a personal treasure hunt resulting in over 100 pages of small-print footnotes, I produced such a book: “Beyond Secularism and Jihad–A Triangular Inquiry into the Mosque, the Manger & Modernity” (University Press of America, 2012). I understand from the publisher that a modest 100 colleges and universities (probably smaller liberal arts), at least, purchased copies for their shelves.

    Am I afraid? I’m not a paid university professor; I’m not seeking advancement or tenure; I’m not subject to toxic office politics; am no longer a student seeking dissertation signatures; don’t own anything worth destroying in the dark of night; and am not a staff person anesthetized by the apparent cut-and-paste mindset at the USCCB.

    While not a credentialed “authority,” I’m FREE, reasonably literate, intellectually curious even at my age, equipped with a keyboard at my fingertips and with time on my hands, and (in the book) I think I’m incisive, but not with an ax to grind (nor a scimitar). All as a vibrant retiree! Toes not pointed up yet. It’s a wonderful life (to borrow an expression)!

    The Catholic World Report author interview can be found at:

  4. The Left and Islam have joined hands, in order to create a one world government with brutal Islam as the religious enforcer. To accomplish this global feat, they must silence criticism of Islam. They have done this in Europe where Christianity is weak. Islam only advances where Bible-based Christians have forsaken the faith. Islam advanced with the Eastern Orthodox Empire was weak. Now, the West has be weakened by Communistic subversion, with pornography and situational ethics, and the abandonment of right and wrong. Note that Islam doesn’t have the 10 Commandments or the Golden Rule. So, who is doing the silencing of free speech to criticize Mohammad? The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) which consists of 56 Muslim-dominant nations, the largest lobby in the UN and the largest voting block. The OIC has added even more African nations that are not Muslim dominant, so they are even a larger lobby in the UN. The OIC has representatives to the EU Commission, which is how they pressuring the EU to shutdown criticism of Islam. CAIR (Hamas + Muslim Brotherhood) is doing the same in the US now. The Left (DNC) is helping CAIR to suppress criticism of Mohammad, which they call Islamophobia, a made-up word. There should be real fear of homicidal Islam. Read The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Human Rights book (2019). The OIC has created the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, where each section starts out with similar working as in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (a Marxists document) but each section ends with the works “consistent with Sharia”, where Sharia is Islamic Law. Nice, huh. The UN in 1993 received this 1990 document and it is just sitting their to be implemented in the future.

    • Roger, a superbly condensed overview!

      The step-by-step infiltration is apparent from your reference to the 1990 Cairo declaration re Sharia Law. . .

      I point to the only slightly less aggressive, halfway-house declaration from the previous decade. The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (September 19, 1981) has “Islam” as the first word in its Foreword, and then contains this sentence (Section XIII) related to freedom of religion: “Every person has the right to freedom of worship [also the restrictively privatizing and deceptive Obama expression] in accordance with his religious beliefs.”

      Pompeo and Trump have at least begun to turn the lights on:


  5. Another question rightfully asked in my opinion…since the Pope has such a love affair with Islam….is he getting money from them too? Georgetown at the top of the list is a Catholic University, I think.

  6. Kilpatrick’s bio states that he is “supported by the Shillman Foundation”. Shillman is the Tech mogul who “sits on boards of THE FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES.” (Wikipedia). The author never mentions the Israeli Lobby, the most powerful foreign lobby in Washington and on university campuses in the US today.

4 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Academic Freedom and Palestine – Islam at the University
  2. Muslim nations are donating huge amounts to American universities. Here’s why by William Kilpatrick | RUTHFULLY YOURS
  3. Hvordan Saudi Arabisk og Qatars donationer, hvidvasker Islam, på de Amerikanske Universiteter. – Jorgen Vium Olesen
  4. Muslim nations are donating huge amounts to American universities. Here’s why – Marietta OH 9-12 Project

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.