The Dissolution of the US Agency For Global Media and Its Implications for American Soft Power

Last week, President Trump signed an executive order that eliminated the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), an entity responsible for significant platforms such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia. Critics of this decision assert that this move represents a significant blow to American soft power, a strategy that promotes cultural influence through media and information dissemination. However, shifting dynamics in international relations and information warfare might lead to a revitalization of America’s approach to soft power, albeit in a different form.

The Rationale Behind the Decision

The rationale provided for dissolving the USAGM aligns with Trump’s broader vision of countering what he perceives as the state funding of ideologically radical propaganda. The USAGM had requested $950 million for the current fiscal year, which critics argue could be better allocated to support foreign experts, influencers, and media who inherently understand the local context of the audiences the US aims to influence.

A Shift to Public-Private Partnerships

It’s expected that operations similar to those previously conducted by USAGM will not vanish entirely but will rather transform into public-private partnerships. These partnerships are likely to involve collaboration with foreign entities that respect and share Trump’s populist-nationalist worldview. This change addresses the criticism that USAGM’s agenda has been too centralized and ideologically driven while promising a more localized and pragmatic approach to communications.

The realization of such reforms suggests that messaging will be more tailored and relevant to targeted foreign populations. With a focus on utilizing informed figures abroad, officials might prioritize assembling a network of “agents of influence” who are better equipped to connect with their local audiences. This could enhance the effectiveness of American soft power strategies by making them more culturally and contextually relevant.

The Market for Ideas

Trump’s vision of a liberated “marketplace of ideas” eliminates the heavy-handed influence of federal agencies in dictating editorial preferences. Instead, he proposes that they should oversee funding and support contractors who align with his administration’s objectives. By doing so, there is potential for a more diversified array of voices and a broader interpretation of what soft power can mean for America. However, there’s a risk that this would open the door to host countries implementing restrictions similar to America’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) that could stifle the proposed media partnerships.

The Challenges Ahead

As seen with Georgia’s implementation of transparency laws regarding foreign funding, nations could require media organizations and influencers to disclose their connections to foreign funding sources, creating significant hurdles for American efforts. This can create a chilling effect where those wanting to amplify American narratives might face burdensome regulations that disincentivize cooperation. While the US might push back against such measures, they would still highlight concerns around the clandestine funding of foreign figures to sway public opinion.

Indirect Funding Strategies

Furthermore, the intertwining of USAGM and USAID’s missions with agencies like the CIA raises questions about how financial support might be funneled indirectly to compliant journalists and influencers who escape the regulatory environment in their countries. One possible avenue might be through crowdfunding, ad revenues from platforms such as YouTube and X, or other virtual channels. However, local governments could implement stringent measures against foreign donations, complicating the flow of support that American agents require to operate effectively.

Adapting to New Digital Landscapes

As new restrictions may emerge, the potential for influencers to relocate abroad and continue their work without constraint could increase. This migration would likely reveal an important dynamic where stakes in maintaining influence would push the agenda forth while circumventing local laws. With access to global platforms and virtual private networks (VPNs), audiences may still engage with influential figures without facing censorship or opposition from their governments.

The Future of American Soft Power

In conclusion, even though the restructuring of USAGM may appear detrimental in the short term, it could create new avenues for American soft power. Strategies emphasizing localized influence through diverse partnerships might ultimately prove more efficient. As future reforms take shape, American soft power may not only survive but adapt creatively, allowing it to remain relevant in an increasingly complex global landscape.