SUNSET: 
15European nations and universities have pledged more than $850 million for international scientists.
The Trump administration has proposed halving the budgets for the National Science Foundation (NSF) and for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate — two of the United States’ primary funders of astronomy and planetary science research. Combined with unprecedented financial threats to top American universities, the space science community is left feeling unsure of the future of research in the U.S. Amid the chaos, other countries see an opportunity to attract American talent—and they’re putting money where their mouths are.
“The investment in fundamental, free, and open research is questioned,” said Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, in a speech last month in Paris. There, she announced €500 million for international researchers. “Europe will always choose science,” she stated. “And Europe will always make the case for the world's scientists to choose Europe.”
Although Europe has historically had lower budgets for science than the U.S., its universities and governments are setting notable financial goals to attract Americans unsettled by Trump’s research policies. French President Emmanuel Macron has announced a new $113 million commitment to international researchers, and France’s Aix-Marseille University put up $17 million for a program dubbed “Safe Place for Science.” Spain has made $51 million available; the UK will soon announce $67 million; Norway pledged $30 million; and the Royal Society set aside $40 million.Hundreds of U.S. scientists have already applied for such grants.
Faced with mounting funding threats at home, many space scientists are considering their options. “There’s a lot of anxiety and fear and depression,” says cosmologist Kevork Abazajian (University of California, Irvine). He noted his university has had more than a dozen NSF grants cancelled. “I don’t want to be in a situation where I have to flee my country,” he says, but then again, he adds, “Never say never.”
Others have already taken the leap. John Houghteling, a master’s student in cosmology (University of New Mexico), is leaving the country for his PhD because of worries about funding in the U.S. He says undergraduates in his department have been talking about pursuing their graduate education abroad, and that a Peruvian postdoc in his lab will also be joining him at Italy’s International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) in the fall. “It’s tough to convince people that we're important, especially at a time where people just seemingly don't trust or care about science,” he adds.
Amid a dreary American research atmosphere, Europe (as well as Canada, Australia, and China) stands to gain significantly if it can lure top scientists across its borders. American researchers have contributed to numerous breakthrough technologies, Nobel Prizes, and even the economy— estimates suggest that every $1 of federal research spending returns $4 to $9.
“The best scientific talent will be looking for stability,” said Sir Adrian Smith, president of the Royal Society, in a press release. “The UK can be at the front of the queue in attracting that talent.”
Other Europeans have more ideological aims. “Above all, this initiative is a response to Donald Trump’s dogmatic policies,” said Eric Berton, the President of Aix-Marseille University, in an emailed statement. “We believe in scientific freedom and this is our way of demonstrating it.” He notes that Aix-Marseille has one of France’s leading astrophysics institutions and would “warmly welcome researchers in astronomy, planetary science, or any space-related field.”
While new funding opportunities may enable some researchers to move abroad and continue their research, that won’t work for everyone. “Clearly, all U.S. scientists moving to Europe is probably not realistic, and also probably not beneficial for U.S. science in the long term,” says Samaya Nissanke, a Europe-based astrophysicist (University of Potsdam, German Center for Astrophysics, and DESY). She hopes Europeans will also prioritize helping early-career scientists, putting political pressure on the U.S., and standing up for diversity, equity, and inclusion in the sciences. Europe must “step up and be firm in those core values that we care about as scientists, and that do enable fantastic science,” she adds.
Abazajian is particularly concerned with the impacts of reduced funding on universities. An April report from the American Institute of Physics found that more than a third of U.S. physics and astronomy departments expect to enroll fewer graduate students in fall 2025 than fall 2024.
While he thinks it’s fair game for Europe to draw current and future American talent, he can’t help but draw comparisons to the exodus of astronomers and astrophysicists in the late 1980s and 90s from the Soviet Union when it collapsed (and where he was born). “I knew a lot of scientists in the former Soviet Union that became taxi drivers because that was the only work available,” he says. “That's a real fear that exists.”
Nissanke is more hopeful. Even with severe funding cuts, “it’s not the end of space science,” she emphasizes. “I think that’s really important that we as an international community do not give up.”
About Hannah Richter
Hannah Richter is a freelance Earth, space, and science policy journalist based in Washington, D.C. In addition to Sky&Telescope, her work has appeared in Science, Nature, Scientific American, Popular Mechanics, Smithsonian, WIRED, Science News, Ars Technica, and Sierra, among others. She has also written an e-book for NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope and is an alumna of MIT's Graduate Program in Science Writing.
Comments
Andrew James
June 11, 2025 at 8:46 pm
To openly paraphrase Emma Lazarus: "Give me your scientists, your astrophysicists, your huddled space scientists yearning to breathe free."
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andrew James
June 11, 2025 at 9:48 pm
Not only Europe is doing this. As I highlighted before...
The sheer damage currently to all the sciences remains to be of great concern. It affects to other countries who each in their own way contributes to programs like NASA in the desire to promote similar goals and aspirations.
According to the 'US Embassy and Consulates in Australia' [1] the US policy says in black-and-white: "Australia is a vital ally, partner, and friend of the United States. The United States and Australia maintain a robust relationship underpinned by shared democratic values, common interests, and cultural affinities. Economic, academic, and people-to-people ties are vibrant and strong. The two countries marked the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations in 2015. ...Bilateral defense ties and cooperation are exceptionally close."
As for science your own embassy says: "The two countries have also signed tax and defense trade cooperation treaties, as well as agreements on health cooperation, space, science and technology, emergency management cooperation, and social security. Many U.S. institutions conduct cooperative scientific activities in Australia. The United States and Australia responded to the Ebola and Zika epidemics and support the Global Health Security Agenda to accelerate measurable progress toward a world safe and secure from infectious disease threats."
Yet the US presently continues down the path of doing as much destruction to agreements and cooperation as possible, to the extent that it is producing strong anti-American sentiments. Example: Just the few days, we hear the Administration declare the Pentagon is reviewing the AUKUS security pact between Australia, the US and the UK to ensure it aligns with President Donald Trump's "America First" agenda - which in the near future is supposed to help develop new submarine technology using both Australian, British and US scientists. In Australia's commitment, it has contributed $800 billion dollars towards the project on the guarantee of its commitment to the pact. From what is going on it seems the US wishes to change the agreement it was committed to. Even worse was that the US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth basically mandated that Australia must "as soon as possible", increase its defense spending 3.5% of GDP. Yet at the very same time, this current administration slaps a 50% tariff on aluminum and steel exports and a general 10% tariff on everything else, when the US already has a trade surplus favouring itself!
There is now a serious talk about going in a different direction altogether and have partnerships with other countries looking for more stable support for the sciences we do here and the projects we are attempting. e.g. The Square Kilometre Array (SKA) project comprising sixteen countries - notably not with the US. Another is the Murchison Widefield Array is a radio telescope, made of 4,096 spider-like antennas tuned to receive signals from the sky between 70 and 300MHz. It is is an international Collaboration, comprised of 259 astronomers and 28 partner institutions from Australia, Japan, China, Canada, the United States and Switzerland. Oddly, the US is a minor contributor to this project, which has already contributed much to radio astronomy and study.
This highlights very much about the dilemma science in America is facing, and the US now being an unreliable and chaotic partner that cannot be depended on, forces Australia and other countries to go in a different direction. We see it is a great opportunity, and projects like that to mention above, show great potential for future scientists. Worse is the unilateral banning of overseas students in your universities, who's learning and skills that are often shared in collaborations are being torn asunder.
This article is right on the mark because the damage to this being caused by pretending that no one else matters and that science is the enemy. As a species we need to strive to improve the lives of the inhabitants of the Earth. With the multiple problems occurring in the world, understanding of nature and avoiding humankind destruction by our by our own hands, cannot be determined by singular countries having agendas of isolationism or irrationality. The biggest fear is perhaps societal collapse, which goes through many people is mind now: Does every society have to have a use-by date?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Jim-Gasser
June 12, 2025 at 10:52 am
I agree with you. We (America) are indeed an unreliable chaotic partner- really not a partner at all, anymore. Politically we are awful, self centered, science deniers, and I urge technical people to go elsewhere with their talents. Our congress has let this admin get away with it. The only conclusion is that they strongly agree. So sad.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Lou
June 13, 2025 at 6:04 am
Well I never thought I would see the day: the 'brain drain' in reverse!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Alain Maury
June 14, 2025 at 3:17 am
As a european, I see the whole thing as weird at best. There is never any money to make new projects, and suddenly, money which the state doesn't have (France has a debt above 3 trillions of dollars), appears in order to pay some american scientists. One has to know that in France, an average astronomer earns something between 3 to 4 Keuros per month and only a little bit more than half of that when you start your career. I guess the situation in the US will have to deteriorate much more before the european wages do motivate US scientists to come to Europe. Unless they decide to give american wages to american scientists coming to Europe, which then would be unfair for the local scientists. The good thing is that the current process will only last a short time (one hopes), and that the next US government will be a little bit smarter and understand that it's fundamental for a country to support science. At least the useful fundamental science.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 16, 2025 at 1:02 pm
Seems to me we have ALWAYS poached each other's talent. It is called "competition". In the current climate American scientists may indeed accept European levels of compensation in order to continue in their profession----some may go into the private sector. Science will continue. Granted science is being negatively affected by political forces that are driven by a popular demand for efficiency and care in the expenditure of the public fisc which remember comes out of the paychecks of the voters. It is my belief in reference to Astronomy Space Science and Space Exploration in particular, NASA and other Space and Astronomy related institutions would be much less politically vulnerable if we all did a better job of publicizing their achievements and the resulting benefits to mankind. Now---such coming from the institutions themselves might be dismissed as special pleading---people after all get really cynical about money after all, but better independent science journalism and education might result in more political support for these institutions. Especially NASA. I suspect NASA will get a real boost when PRC Taikonauts set foot on the Moon----but we should not wait that long. NASA has been a political whipping boy since the Nixon cuts. The media cover NASA very little except when something explodes, Coverage of Juno has been close to non-existent. Maybe we the Astronomy community do have to do more outreach.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 16, 2025 at 4:45 pm
As far as Australian defense policy goes----Reality is reality. The PRC is closer geographically to Australian than the mainland USA---and has ben rattling it sabers lately. If I was PM Albanese, I'd keep an eye on the attitudes of Indonesia, and the Solomon Islands---and worry less about deposing King Charles III and the actions o THE BIG BAD ORANGE MAN. Off topic I know---but someone keeps bringing up US-Australian relations.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andrew James
June 16, 2025 at 11:01 pm
So off the mark. Your comment here just shows you have no idea what you are talking about. US-Australian relations or defence policies have nothing to do with it.
The point is that when you make an agreement you stick with it, and you don't totally change direction or deliberately cause damage. e.g. removing funding collaborative projects that you've already agreed to support. Australia is not the only country in this position, and most are just looking to determine what direction now they should go for their own scientific research. Your President complains that the US is doing all the heavy lifting, when things like the Square Kilometre Array is not even US involved!
Clearly as many of these S&T articles truly infer, all US science is being undermined by eliminating its scientific workforce because of the current Administrations lack of vision and antiscience stance. By your argument it seems you would much prefer that your scientists drive taxis instead of doing what they trained for.
Note: If, as you say Australia is geographically so far away, then why are US troops are in Northern Australia, your intelligence gathering being supported by bases on Australian soil, all your deep space network monitoring satellite and Solar System exploration?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 17, 2025 at 3:21 pm
You may ask your government why it approved of them being there. I suspect that at least part of their reasoning would be the very proximity of the PRC. In any event this is not the website of a political or international security journal and an extended discussion of such would become noisome to other readers and most be deleted by the site's monitors.
I do NOT wish scientists to be forced to drive taxis, -- NOT That there is anything wring with getting a hack license and doing so---it IS honest work if you do not mess with the meter, I merely stated that some in order to continue in their profession may indeed accept "European" levels of compensation. Others---not wishing to move to Europe may elect to do so. Asfar as NASA and Science funding I would have preferred that any cuts not be so draconian, but they are what they are. The are PROPOSED cuts subject to political give and take in the relevant committees and ultimately in the Committee of the Whole, i.e. the House of Representatives. The delegations from Texas, Florida and Alabama tend to be more "Space Friendly" then others regardless of party because the affected people are their constituents and the facilities bring in business and influence. Ditto for Congressional districts elsewhere where such facilities are located. Hopefully what ACTUALLY happens will not be as drastic. But---what ANY government does is ultimately politically determined---and in the USA in particular over the last decade there has been a sort of political realignment. Like any such realignment there will be benefits and demerits. At this point NOTHING is sacred----it is all under scrutiny. That IS a people's right whether their ultimate decisions are wise or foolish. Again--it is our money. It comes out of our paychecks. We work for it. Personally, I am GLAD that part of it is spent on NASA, and Astronomical research. I'd gladly kick in more. but because our media do such a lousy job of reporting on science NASA, NSF etc. are politically low hanging fruit, Outside the astronomy community--professional and amateur, these proposed cuts are NOT BEING DISCUSSED in any forum or media---Left Right OR Center. I guess after the PRC lands on the moon people will begin to ask why we can't do what we did in 1969-1972. Co-operation is very well and good---and necessary---but so is competition. A replay of the old Space Race could get people and politicians motivated. Media should find knowledgeable enthusiasts like Walter Cronkite was reporters who would stop asking astronauts how they go to the bathroom--and talk real science. If this were the case---that budget might just increase because more people would want it too. BUT--calling people stupid and worse will only get a negative response.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andrew James
June 17, 2025 at 4:58 pm
PRC here is irrelevant to this discussion.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andrew James
June 18, 2025 at 5:03 am
"You may ask your government why it approved of them being there."
Did you not read my longer initial response? Your own embassy in Australia explains most of that. We are there for mutual security and cooperation. Everyone benefits. Why don't you get that?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andrew James
June 18, 2025 at 5:56 am
Thanks for the deletion. "You may ask your government why it approved of them being there." Is unacceptable with the contributor doesn't know what they're talking about. Delete this comment as you may, but I don't accept people to degrading my country based on ignorance.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 20, 2025 at 12:41 pm
Would LOVE to see the deleted comment--it must have been a doozy.
Formally, I only have two B.A. degrees in Pollical Science and Russian Area Studies with minors in History and Polish Studies. i pursuit of those I did coursework in International Security and Comparative Government. Additionally, I did graduate level work on the PRC and studied Geology. I have NOT formally stuidied Astronomy except as a layman---bem following Astronomy since I was 9 years old. I did NOT degrade Mr. James, nor have I degraded the Commonwealth of Australia---a nation I have the greatest amount of respect for. I have in my comments advocated neither for nor against any incumbent in political or appointed office either in the USA nor in the Commonwealth of Australia. (Save for one mildly snarky comment about Prime Minister Anthony Albanese). Academic credentials are no measure f actual wisdom---but still I do think that I have some idea of what I am talking about. What is scientifically desirable, and politically feasible are sometimes two different things.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 23, 2025 at 1:46 pm
Whatever
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enrico the Great
June 23, 2025 at 1:50 pm
Ending it here----this thread is exhausted. In the end----write e-mail send smoke signals--POLITELY to your Congressperson. Let them know some of us DO care about NASA and Astronomy! No matter how other issues may have influenced how we voted.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment.