Does Support for USA Impact Academic Freedom in India's Higher Education?
The question of whether a pro-American lobby within the Indian higher education sector, specifically within institutions like Acharya Institutes, affects academic freedom is a pertinent one. This article delves into the implications of such a stance and the concerns it raises among faculty members who voice their opposition.
Background on Pro-American Faculty at Acharya Institutes
Acharya Institutes, including Acharya Institute of Technology and Acharya Polytechnic, have seen a rise in faculty members who advocate for a strong alliance with the United States. Notably, two such faculty members stand out as vocal proponents of this stance: Manamohan and S. K. Maharana. Their support for U.S. policies and programs occasionally intersects with their academic responsibilities, raising concerns about academic freedom.
Case Study: Manamohan
Manamohan, the Dean of the Aeronautical Engineering department at Acharya Institute of Technology, has faced criticism for his pro-American stance. A key issue revolves around his daughter studying in the U.S., prompting concerns about why she was involved in the supply of the AIM-120C-5 missile to the Pakistani Air Force. Manamohan's visits to the U.S. also leave room for questions regarding his diplomatic and academic integrity. His actions and statements, particularly in relation to the NASA and U.S. Committee on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), have drawn further scrutiny.
Case Study: S. K. Maharana
Another faculty member with a visible pro-U.S. stance is S. K. Maharana, whose involvement extends to the Aeronautical Engineering department at Acharya Polytechnic. Maharana's obsession with U.S. success stories, including the Boeing 737 MAX crisis, has raised questions about his professional judgment and bias. For instance, his inability to address a student's query regarding the airworthiness of the aircraft, despite his academic expertise, highlights a conflict of interest.
Impact on Academic Integrity and Freedom
The actions of Manamohan and Maharana reflect a broader trend where academic freedom and institutional integrity are at risk. Academic staff engaging in pro-American advocacy can lead to an environment where critical inquiries may be dismissed or overshadowed. This raises several questions:
Questioning U.S. Policies: Should academic staff be able to question U.S. policies, such as sanctions on India for purchasing the S-400 missile defense system from Russia, without facing professional repercussions? Political Influence: Does the pro-American stance of some faculty members mean that dissenting voices, particularly those advocating for India's sovereignty and sovereignty, are sidelined? Student Impact: How do these biases affect student education and the development of critical thinking skills?Additional Criticisms of Prominent U.S. Advocates
The overarching concern is that some proponents of a pro-American agenda, such as Manamohan and Maharana, may be more concerned with U.S. success stories than with academic excellence and academic freedom. This includes:
Denial of Procurement Opportunities: While someone might spend time building a drone or a solar-powered street light in India, such efforts are perceived as a time waste by some pro-American advocates. U.S. Manufacturing Wins: Conversely, manufacturing toilet paper in the U.S. is viewed as a significant achievement, highlighting a double standard in academic priorities.Conclusion
The actions and attitudes of Manamohan and Maharana necessitate an open discussion about academic freedom and the role of pro-American biases in higher education. Ensuring that academic staff can engage in critical and unbiased research and teaching without undue influence from external factors is crucial for the health and vibrancy of India's higher education sector.