brusselssignal.eu / archive
6 February 2025
President Donald Trump’s decision to dismantle the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has left Democrats reeling and knees quaking in Brussels. Normally, internal reorganisation of government agencies would not affect Europe – or much of anything, for that matter. But USAID disappearing is going to affect massively the entire continent because its elimination effectively rips the heart out of the liberal international project.
USAID, as indicated by its acronym, is supposedly responsible for sending aid around the world. When people hear about this, they immediately think of things like feeding starving children in Africa or working on HIV prevention. And it does do those things, to be clear. But it, and the State Department, have also done some rather strange things, as when they funded programmes designed to make Nepal safe for atheism. USAID also spent $1.5 million on diversity, equity, and employment workshops in Serbia; while it is somewhat unclear exactly where that meant, much of it seems to have gone to “Izadi,” a pro-LGBT group. What they exactly have done with that large amount of money is somewhat a mystery.
That was not the extent of USAID’s activities in Europe. Consider what they were up to in Moldova. A trip to the bottom of the website of Moldova’s Electoral Commission reveals a list of funders – already somewhat strange – among them being USAID. But that was not the only USAID project in Moldova. One $20 million project, the “Moldova Resilience Initiative,” was supposed to run for only one year (2022-2023) before being extended into 2026. The project was designed to “strengthen popular support for a democratic, European Moldova” by “uniting Moldovans around a shared European identity.” Why the United States was trying to Europeanise Moldova, instead of the European Union trying it, is something of a mystery.
But efforts did not stop in Moldova. It turns out that their eastern neighbour – Ukraine – was heavily reliant upon USAID funding. USAID has been all over Ukraine, from governance to healthcare. But the country’s so-called “independent” media was also dependent upon American funding. The Centre for European Policy Analysis, a pro-Ukraine think-tank, called USAID funding “the backbone” of Ukraine’s independent media (as an aside – if you are dependent upon one single source for the bulk of your funding, you are in no way independent).
USAID did not only fund media in Ukraine, of course. They also acted within the European Union itself. In 2022, USAID announced “support” for activities in Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. In Poland specifically, USAID funded left-wing activist newsletters. Then-USAID Administrator Samantha Power – who had previously served as former President Barack Obama’s United Nations Ambassador – visited Hungary a year later, to “engage with Hungarian civil society.” Of course, this meant – in real terms – throwing hundreds of thousands of dollars toward media opposed to Viktor Orbán’s government. And Peter Magyar, Orbán’s major competitor in 2026’s parliamentary elections, was previously placed under investigation for foreign funding – who knows how that investigation might end up.
But why does – or should – this matter to Brussels? The issue is that, when one takes all of this funding together (and there is a litany which has gone unmentioned here – if all of it was listed out, Brussels Signal’s servers might combust under the digital pressure), a clear picture emerges: the United States was acting at all levels across Europe to artificially create a pleasant atmosphere for progressive, liberal democratic politics.
Why Brussels thought it was a good idea to offshore “making Moldovans Europeans” to the United States is a mystery – but nonetheless, they did. And without USAID dollars, a lot of these initiatives will immediately die. And the knock-on effects will be immense. For example, Moldova’s pro-EU president, Maia Sandu, barely won her re-election last year. How many people were swayed by USAID’s programmes? It is impossible to tell, but USAID was obviously trying to sway as many as possible. In the next elections, without USAID, how strong will the pro-EU side be? Likewise, how many people in Ukraine were convinced by “independent” media to support pro-EU paths – but that “independent” media will shortly not even exist.
As for internal issues? Donald Tusk knocking out PiS was huge for Brussels in 2023 – but who can say how much he was helped by USAID’s spending? Likewise, establishmentarians clearly hoped that Peter Magyar would be the one to finally topple Orbán after 16 years. But if his foreign friends have stopped helping him pay the bills, will he – and the anti-Orbán press – remain a threat for long? It’s a question which remains to be answered.
Without USAID’s help, Brussels is actually going to have to start convincing people – both within the Union and outside of it – that their liberal democratic ideas are the best way forward. But with their recent string of losses – even in Brussels itself, with right-winger Bart De Wever becoming prime minister of famously left-wing Belgium – there is not much of a reason to assume they will be successful. After all, for years they have been used to arguing using America’s megaphone – and without it, they’re sounding a little hoarse.
Without USAID, the EU will have to pay for its own propaganda
Anthony J. Constantini6 February 2025
President Donald Trump’s decision to dismantle the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has left Democrats reeling and knees quaking in Brussels. Normally, internal reorganisation of government agencies would not affect Europe – or much of anything, for that matter. But USAID disappearing is going to affect massively the entire continent because its elimination effectively rips the heart out of the liberal international project.
USAID, as indicated by its acronym, is supposedly responsible for sending aid around the world. When people hear about this, they immediately think of things like feeding starving children in Africa or working on HIV prevention. And it does do those things, to be clear. But it, and the State Department, have also done some rather strange things, as when they funded programmes designed to make Nepal safe for atheism. USAID also spent $1.5 million on diversity, equity, and employment workshops in Serbia; while it is somewhat unclear exactly where that meant, much of it seems to have gone to “Izadi,” a pro-LGBT group. What they exactly have done with that large amount of money is somewhat a mystery.
That was not the extent of USAID’s activities in Europe. Consider what they were up to in Moldova. A trip to the bottom of the website of Moldova’s Electoral Commission reveals a list of funders – already somewhat strange – among them being USAID. But that was not the only USAID project in Moldova. One $20 million project, the “Moldova Resilience Initiative,” was supposed to run for only one year (2022-2023) before being extended into 2026. The project was designed to “strengthen popular support for a democratic, European Moldova” by “uniting Moldovans around a shared European identity.” Why the United States was trying to Europeanise Moldova, instead of the European Union trying it, is something of a mystery.
But efforts did not stop in Moldova. It turns out that their eastern neighbour – Ukraine – was heavily reliant upon USAID funding. USAID has been all over Ukraine, from governance to healthcare. But the country’s so-called “independent” media was also dependent upon American funding. The Centre for European Policy Analysis, a pro-Ukraine think-tank, called USAID funding “the backbone” of Ukraine’s independent media (as an aside – if you are dependent upon one single source for the bulk of your funding, you are in no way independent).
USAID did not only fund media in Ukraine, of course. They also acted within the European Union itself. In 2022, USAID announced “support” for activities in Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. In Poland specifically, USAID funded left-wing activist newsletters. Then-USAID Administrator Samantha Power – who had previously served as former President Barack Obama’s United Nations Ambassador – visited Hungary a year later, to “engage with Hungarian civil society.” Of course, this meant – in real terms – throwing hundreds of thousands of dollars toward media opposed to Viktor Orbán’s government. And Peter Magyar, Orbán’s major competitor in 2026’s parliamentary elections, was previously placed under investigation for foreign funding – who knows how that investigation might end up.
But why does – or should – this matter to Brussels? The issue is that, when one takes all of this funding together (and there is a litany which has gone unmentioned here – if all of it was listed out, Brussels Signal’s servers might combust under the digital pressure), a clear picture emerges: the United States was acting at all levels across Europe to artificially create a pleasant atmosphere for progressive, liberal democratic politics.
Why Brussels thought it was a good idea to offshore “making Moldovans Europeans” to the United States is a mystery – but nonetheless, they did. And without USAID dollars, a lot of these initiatives will immediately die. And the knock-on effects will be immense. For example, Moldova’s pro-EU president, Maia Sandu, barely won her re-election last year. How many people were swayed by USAID’s programmes? It is impossible to tell, but USAID was obviously trying to sway as many as possible. In the next elections, without USAID, how strong will the pro-EU side be? Likewise, how many people in Ukraine were convinced by “independent” media to support pro-EU paths – but that “independent” media will shortly not even exist.
As for internal issues? Donald Tusk knocking out PiS was huge for Brussels in 2023 – but who can say how much he was helped by USAID’s spending? Likewise, establishmentarians clearly hoped that Peter Magyar would be the one to finally topple Orbán after 16 years. But if his foreign friends have stopped helping him pay the bills, will he – and the anti-Orbán press – remain a threat for long? It’s a question which remains to be answered.
Without USAID’s help, Brussels is actually going to have to start convincing people – both within the Union and outside of it – that their liberal democratic ideas are the best way forward. But with their recent string of losses – even in Brussels itself, with right-winger Bart De Wever becoming prime minister of famously left-wing Belgium – there is not much of a reason to assume they will be successful. After all, for years they have been used to arguing using America’s megaphone – and without it, they’re sounding a little hoarse.
