The first line of the “About” page on the University of Oxford’s website makes a claim for the institution’s central focus on internationalism: “Oxford is a world-leading centre of learning, teaching and research.” Despite the fact that the University consciously fashions itself as a world leader, proudly promoting its international profile and multicultural scholarly community as a strength which is “unlike that of any other university”, xenophobic sentiment amongst the student population is rising.
It is true that the proportion of international students in the United Kingdom has risen to 26%, partially as a result of the exorbitant international fees that these scholars from abroad pour into UK institutions. Furthermore, these international fees, to a certain extent, make universities more accessible to less-privileged home students by supplementing their fees which are capped by the British government. It is, however, disappointing to see increasing globalisation framed as solely due to these financial considerations. Especially at purportedly proudly multicultural institutions like Oxford, it is hypocritical and reductive to discuss the systemic flaws of the British university system as if it mainly victimises British students.
Whenever an anti-international moral panic seems poised to ensnare British students and taxpayers, it is important to humanise “the international student” with an individualised account. As a South African student, I sought tertiary education in Britain due to the extreme lack of funding for my subject area in the humanities back home – a situation which Britain directly contributed to as a colonial power, and still unapologetically profits from culturally and fiscally.
I rarely see students like myself – hailing from developing nations with already-crippling international fees compounded by unfavourable interest rates – represented in these conversations. Even when some of our families have to scrape together years of savings and make immense sacrifices to afford a British education, we are erroneously reduced by mainstream political discourse to a bottomless wallet.
The University and student body often claim to be committed to decolonisation and diversification, hence the “Uncomfortable Oxford” walking tours and the removal of statues and portraits of slave owners, yet there is a worrying lack of accountability when the time might come for a British student to make what they perceive as a sacrifice. When both elite British universities have historically accrued wealth through imperialist investments, how ethical is it to prioritise giving exceptional academic opportunities to British citizens over international students simply because of where they were born? Even average Britons benefit from a higher quality of life and financial freedom than the majority of the world. The Global South may not pay taxes to the British government (anymore), but they often pay dearly for the privileged lifestyles which have become normalised in the North. The South, for instance, disproportionately shoulders the negative impacts of climate change, all while struggling to recover from the atrocities committed by European colonialists.
Of course many international students come from wealthier countries and personal backgrounds, not all of which are shadowed by colonialism, but this is not to say that these students are undeserving of the uniquely exceptional resources and training Oxford has to offer, which may still be superior to the offerings of their home countries. To imply that an international student is only offered a place because of their increased fees does a gross disservice to their intelligence, tenacity, and holistic potential.
Clearly, there are deep injustices of the current university admissions and funding system, but pitting international and domestic students against one another is a misguided response. If we can agree that the main functions of a university are to provide high-quality education and to produce cutting-edge research, it is in our best interests as a global community to ensure that the brightest thinkers gain access to it, regardless of nationality.
I have concerns that closed-minded, “us vs. them” rhetoric about university access can be a slippery slope to the kinds of extreme right-wing views espoused by President Trump in his de-globalisation efforts. International students do not swoop in and snatch opportunities away from British students any more than immigrants come to maliciously “steal jobs” from citizens. Many make extraordinary financial and personal sacrifices to seek better opportunities, which citizens of more developed countries often assume is rightfully theirs. Let us not be tempted by the easy response of scapegoating the Other and look to approach systemic injustices together.
