Geopolitical tensions, technological competition and the growing strategic importance of knowledge are changing the role of universities within the state. Science is increasingly becoming not only a driver of progress, but also a matter of security. Academic freedom, national interests, international cooperation and the protection of sensitive knowledge are increasingly converging in the same space.
How can universities remain open to the world while taking genuine risks seriously? Where should the line be drawn between legitimate national security interests and university autonomy? And who should decide when an international partnership or research collaboration becomes too risky?
These questions will be discussed in Vilnius on 14–16 October at the anniversary conference of the Magna Charta Observatory (MCO), hosted by Mykolas Romeris University (MRU). One of the conference sessions will focus specifically on security challenges, the role of universities, their relationship with the state and international strategies.
The session will be moderated by Hilligje van ’t Land, Secretary General of the International Association of Universities (IAU), and will feature Prof. Dr Eglė Malinauskienė, Vice-Rector for Research and Innovation at Mykolas Romeris University.
What Threatens Research Today?
Prof. Dr Eglė Malinauskienė defines research security as “the capacity to create an enabling environment for secure international cooperation and the development of open science under conditions of heightened risk”.
According to Malinauskienė, the range of risks facing universities today is very broad. These include cyberattacks targeting research infrastructure and data, the unlawful or inappropriate transfer of intellectual property, technologies and knowledge, dual-use research, artificial intelligence, and dependence on particular research infrastructures or sources of funding.
She also points to attempts to influence research agendas and academic decision-making processes, as well as the threats that geopolitical tensions may pose to academic freedom and institutional autonomy.
In her view, these risks are driven by the growing internationalisation of universities, the increasing digitalisation of higher education, and the expanding influence of research on the development of strategic technologies, policy-making, data-driven decision-making in the public and private sectors, and human behaviour.
When Universities Become Part of Geopolitics
From an international perspective, Hilligje van ’t Land sees the same developments as part of a broader geopolitical shift.
“We are entering a period in which geopolitics has moved to the centre of international relations and countries increasingly compete for technological, economic and strategic advantage.” Higher education and research, she notes, are inevitably becoming part of this geopolitical competition.
Governments increasingly look to universities not only as institutions of education and knowledge creation, but also as strategic assets for research, innovation and technological development, with the objective of strengthening national competitiveness and resilience.
This also places international research cooperation in an increasingly complex position. On the one hand, it remains an extraordinary resource: by bringing together knowledge, expertise and infrastructures across borders, universities can achieve scientific advances that would often not be possible in isolation.
On the other hand, international collaboration is increasingly viewed through a security lens, particularly when it involves institutions or countries perceived as strategic competitors or adversaries, or where research may have dual-use potential.
Openness and Security: How Can the Balance Be Found?
“There is currently no clear answer as to how openness can be preserved while at the same time protecting sensitive knowledge, technologies and data,” Malinauskienė stresses.
Research security policy and practice are still taking shape. Universities are looking for ways to learn from countries and institutions that are more advanced in this field, raise awareness within the academic community, and strike a balance between the likelihood and potential impact of research-security risks and the cost of mitigating them.
Researchers themselves also have an important role to play. Through their work, they can help build a better understanding of how academic, political, economic, cultural and technological factors affect the advancement of science and knowledge from the perspective of societal security and resilience.
How Far Should the State Go?
Van ’t Land stresses that the debate should not be framed as a choice between security and academic freedom.
Universities cannot simply disregard genuine security risks, and institutional autonomy does not mean that universities should operate outside the legal and security frameworks of the societies in which they are embedded. The challenge is not whether security should be taken into account, but how far the state should intervene, on what grounds, and with what safeguards.
State involvement may take direct forms, through legislation, regulation, export controls or restrictions on particular forms of collaboration. It may also take more indirect forms, for example through research funding, strategic investment priorities or conditions attached to international partnerships.
Some of this intervention is legitimate and necessary. The risk, however, is that legitimate concerns about security gradually become a justification for broader political intervention in academic life.
If security considerations become too expansive, insufficiently defined or politically driven, they can undermine academic freedom, institutional autonomy, open science and the very international cooperation on which scientific progress depends.
Van ’t Land also points to a wider danger: excessive restrictions may fragment the global research system precisely at a time when many of the challenges facing humanity, including climate change, pandemics, artificial intelligence, biodiversity and global inequality, require knowledge to cross borders.
Universities are rooted in national societies and have responsibilities towards their governments, students and the communities they serve. But their fundamental mission is also universal: to create, question and disseminate knowledge in the service of society and, ultimately, of humanity.
Security Is Not the Responsibility of Universities Alone
Malinauskienė emphasises that research security is not solely the responsibility of universities.
“Universities are an integral part of a broader innovation ecosystem which, alongside universities themselves, includes government and public-sector institutions, businesses, investors, research-funding organisations and local communities,” she says.
Managing these risks effectively and strengthening research security therefore requires the involvement of all these stakeholders.
Van ’t Land takes a similar position. Restrictions should be clearly co-defined, if by governments then with universities, proportionate to demonstrable risks, evidence-based, transparent and subject to appropriate oversight and review.
Universities themselves should have a central role in identifying risks and developing responsible research-security frameworks rather than having security policies imposed upon them from outside.
Van ’t Land therefore calls for a renewed social contract between the state and higher education: one in which universities accept their responsibility to protect knowledge, people and society from genuine security risks, while governments recognise that academic freedom, institutional autonomy and international scientific cooperation are not obstacles to national security.
On the contrary, she argues, they are an essential part of the long-term resilience and strength of societies themselves.
The Most Important Thing Is Not to Lose What Makes a University a University
Malinauskienė links this principle to the fundamental values of the academic community:
“One of the cornerstones of both research security and societal resilience is the ability to remain faithful to the fundamental principles of the academic community: academic ethics and integrity, academic freedom, and the universal values of higher education and humanity.”
This is why university security is not a concern for the academic community alone. The knowledge universities create, their ability to preserve academic independence, critically assess information and cooperate internationally are directly connected to the resilience of society as a whole.
A secure university should not become a closed university. The central challenge today is to manage risks in a way that protects not only knowledge and technologies, but also the university’s mission itself.
The Magna Charta Observatory (MCO) brings together universities around the world committed to the principles of the Magna Charta Universitatum. Its work is centred on strengthening academic freedom, institutional autonomy and universities’ responsibility to society. Today, more than 1,000 universities in 94 countries have signed the Magna Charta Universitatum.