Georgetown honors Sheikha Moza, igniting debate over Qatar’s influence on U.S. campuses

In a move raising eyebrows far beyond the halls of academia, Georgetown University awarded Sheikha Moza bint Nasser its President’s Medal on April 16 during a ceremony marking the 20th anniversary of its Qatar campus.

The award, one of the university’s highest honors, was presented by Interim President Robert M. Groves, who lauded Sheikha Moza’s contributions to global education and philanthropy.

But behind the polished ceremony and diplomatic praise lies a more complicated story—one that highlights the increasingly blurred lines between institutional values and financial entanglements.

Sheikha Moza, the mother of Qatar’s emir and chairperson of the Qatar Foundation, has played a central role in shaping Doha’s Education City, home to GU-Q and branches of other major American universities. Her influence is undeniable. But so is the baggage.

After Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar—architect of the October 7 massacre—was reported killed last year, Sheikha Moza shared a eulogy-like post on social media: “The name Yahya means the one who lives. They thought him dead but he lives… He will live on and they will be gone.” 

The timing and tone of the message spoke volumes, reverberating far beyond Twitter. It wasn’t just a statement—it was a signal, and one Georgetown has now effectively chosen to overlook.

That decision has deeper implications.

Since 2005, Georgetown has received nearly $930 million from Qatari sources, largely through the Qatar Foundation, according to U.S. Department of Education disclosures.

At a time when universities are being called to account for the ethical dimensions of their funding, Georgetown’s silence speaks as loudly as its ceremonial applause.

This isn’t a one-off misstep.

In 2023, GU-Q invited Wadah Khanfar, former head of Al Jazeera, to headline a conference titled “Reimagining Palestine.” Khanfar has praised the October 7 attacks as a historic shift in the Palestinian struggle and once delivered a eulogy for Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the radical cleric who authorized attacks on American troops. Rather than challenge these views, Georgetown offered them a platform.

In 2022, a senior GU-Q administrator published a book thanking Sheikha Moza for her “incredible vision,” while hailing her for fostering cultural dialogue. It’s a recurring theme: rhetorical commitments to coexistence, underwritten by funding from a state that selectively defines it.

The influence doesn’t stop in Doha. In Washington, Georgetown’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies hosts a fellowship funded by Qatar, and a Qatari minister sits on its advisory board. 

These arrangements are often cloaked in the language of academic partnership, but the power dynamics are clear: Qatar writes the checks, and American institutions adjust their standards accordingly.

Qatar’s track record as a foreign benefactor is both vast and opaque. It has funneled more than $6.25 billion into U.S. universities since 2001, more than any other country. 

Given its reputation for evading transparency and the weak enforcement of federal disclosure rules, the real total is likely much higher. Doha has mastered the art of soft power—leveraging wealth, not ideology, to shape how the West talks, teaches, and thinks.

There is a troubling irony here. As U.S. policymakers sound the alarm over foreign influence from adversaries like China, Qatar’s far subtler form of ideological patronage continues largely unchallenged. It doesn’t come with coercion or surveillance—it comes with ribbon-cuttings, medals, and standing ovations.

But medals have meaning.

They are statements of values, not just acknowledgments of generosity. When an institution like Georgetown chooses to celebrate a figure like Sheikha Moza—despite her public alignment with extremist narratives—it sends a message. Not just to students and faculty, but to the world: that principle can be bought, and prestige leased, at a high enough price.

In the end, this isn’t just a story about one medal or one university. It’s about a higher education system that, too often, seems willing to outsource its conscience.