Trumps Magafizierung Europas hat einen Gang zugelegt – und zwar mit dem Geld der US-Steuerzahler

Just when [Donald Trump](https://inews.co.uk/topic/donald-trump?ico=in-line_link) had left the [Nato summit](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/europe-building-nato-trump-wanted-own-cost-4620666?ico=in-line_link) without blowing it up, and European allies thought they could breathe a sigh of relief, the US President was readying his next grenade.

The US government has announced millions in funding for [Maga](https://inews.co.uk/topic/maga?ico=in-line_link)-aligned groups, think-tanks and non-governmental organisations across Europe, in a naked attempt to redraw the politics and culture of the continent in its own image.

On 13 July, the US State Department called for proposals from European civil society groups that develop “civilisational self-confidence in Europe” through research, conferences and cultural engagements. Successful applicants could receive between $1m and $3m.

Applicants must address questions around national sovereignty, migration and censorship – issues central to [far-right](https://inews.co.uk/topic/far-right?ico=in-line_link) movements – and which align with what the department called the United States’ “shared political philosophy” and “common Western civilisational heritage”.

The language echoes themes long associated with white-identity politics.

The offer comes more than a year after a blistering [speech by the US Vice President, JD Vance,](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/uk-politics-live-latest-updates-3-3526770?ico=in-line_link) at the Munich Security Conference, in which he railed against alleged censorship, political correctness, liberal values and illegal immigration that he claimed were destroying the continent.

The fund also comes just months after the US government released its [Maga-influenced National Security Strategy](https://inews.co.uk/opinion/us-potent-threat-europe-no-one-alive-this-4102012?ico=in-line_link), which warned Europe of “civilisational erasure” owing to high immigration rates into the continent. The strategy called for “cultivating resistance” against the continent’s liberal trajectory. It also condemned what it claimed was “censorship of free speech” in Europe, after the UK and the EU [moved to regulate US tech companies](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/vance-and-trump-in-outrageous-and-appalling-bid-to-subvert-eu-democracy-3735547?ico=in-line_link).

The funding programme is being led by Sarah Rogers, the US under-secretary of state for public diplomacy. Rogers has made a name for herself as an outspoken opponent of Europe’s liberal democracies, with repeated inflammatory claims about “freedom of speech” arrests in Britain that the UK government has rejected.

Rogers has also previously criticised the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) which seeks algorithmic transparency from X, TikTok and others to safeguard European democracy. She described the UK’s Online Safety Act as “tyrannical and absurd”.

Zsuzsanna Vegh, a political analyst, said the State Department’s offer was the first tangible manifestation of the policy suggested in the national security document. “Namely the administration’s intention to support ideologically-aligned actors in Europe who share a sovereigntist, nationalist, culturally conservative worldview and oppose immigration – particularly of people from culturally different backgrounds.”

“The advertising of the funding calls follows a long period of networking among Maga and like-minded European actors, which have already facilitated the identification of a pool of possible recipients of the planned awards around the priority areas the administration has identified,” Vegh added.

There is concern that the funding might end up going to the continent’s far-right political parties.

German Chancellor [Friedrich Merz](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/european-leader-standing-up-trump-military-threats-4239402?ico=in-line_link) said: “We do not interfere in American elections. Conversely, I don’t want the American government or government-affiliated institutions to interfere in German elections.”

But acolytes of the US President have openly thrown their weight behind Europe’s conservative movements.

Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has been backed by various actors in the Maga universe, including former Trump adviser Elon Musk and Vance. AfD is polling ahead of the German chancellor’s Christian Democratic Party (CDU) in the run-up to elections in September in the state of Saxony-Anhalt.

[In Poland, Karol Nawrocki](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/next-european-country-trumps-sights-maga-makeover-4642284?ico=in-line_link), a far-right backed candidate, won the Polish presidency last year after he advertised his meeting with Trump in the White House and aligned himself with similarly nationalist, anti-immigration, Christian conservative values.

Yet Trump and Maga’s backing for various far-right candidates so far has yielded mixed results. Vance [appeared this year at an election rally](https://inews.co.uk/opinion/jd-vance-save-orban-no-one-knew-4345568?ico=in-line_link) for the right-wing then-prime minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary. Despite Trump’s vociferous backing, Orbán was roundly beaten by his more liberal opponent.

On election day in Romania last year, hard-right presidential candidate George Simion told me that he was standing up to the EU’s woke politics, namely its policy on green energy and support for the LGBTQ+ community. During the campaign, Simion tried to brand himself as a Trump ally and widely publicised his appearance on former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s podcast. He still lost the election.

Now, some in Europe’s far right see too close an alignment as a double-edged sword, with their followers turning against Trump, particularly after he threatened to annex [Greenland](https://inews.co.uk/topic/greenland?ico=in-line_link), imposed tariffs on the continent, then started a [war with Iran](https://inews.co.uk/topic/iran-crisis?ico=in-line_link) and blamed European countries for not helping him to finish it.

Some far-right groups distanced themselves when Trump imposed tariffs. [Jordan Bardella](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/jordan-bardella-the-27-year-old-general-taking-control-of-frances-far-right-from-marine-le-pen-1957114?ico=in-line_link), president of France’s far-right National Rally, described Trump’s return to power in 2024 as a “wind of freedom”. Yet only months later, Bardella said his tariffs were unacceptable and amounted to “commercial blackmail”. Last year he refused to speak at the Trump-aligned Conservative Political Action Conference.

Italy’s Prime Minister, [Giorgia Meloni](https://inews.co.uk/topic/giorgia-meloni?ico=in-line_link), previously one of Trump’s staunchest supporters in Europe, [fell out with him](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/trump-losing-allies-influence-europe-time-runs-out-4632093?ico=in-line_link) over his disparaging comments about the Pope, the Iran war and Trump’s claim that she was desperate for a photograph with him at the G7 summit.

Even in the UK, the very public bromance between Reform UK leader [Nigel Farage](https://inews.co.uk/topic/nigel-farage?ico=in-line_link) and Trump has steadily dissipated. Farage had been a regular among Washington insiders under Trump, but the US President’s threats, disparaging remarks about Britain and overwhelming unpopularity among the UK public have forced Farage to distance himself.

Only around 12 per cent of British people hold a favourable opinion of Trump, while a whopping 85 per cent view him unfavourably, [according to YouGov](https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54921-how-popular-is-donald-trump-in-europe-may-2026). “I’m a friend of his, and our interests are similar, but they’re not symmetrical,” Farage has said.

And while supporters of right-wing populist parties in Europe were significantly more likely to express confidence in Trump, even among these groups support declined in several countries between 2025 and 2026, according to Pew Research.

The US State Department claims all activities under the funding will be non-partisan and “will not seek to influence the outcome of any election”. However, whether the new fund amounts to direct or indirect influence, few doubt the funding will end up with the eurosceptic far right.

“The point is not swaying elections and altering election outcomes,” Vegh said. “The goal in this case is strengthening an ideologically-aligned ecosystem of organisations over time.”

In a recent study, the European Council on Foreign Relations said that far-right parties across the continent increasingly operated as national branches of this broader ideological movement. “This is not an episodic deviation; it is a systemic realignment,” it said.

When it comes to their security interests, many European countries have decided to manage Trump, resorting to flattery and appeasement, but there is no policy or even discussion about how to counter Maga’s ideological encroachment. The continent remains largely reactive, hoping a change in Washington in 2028 will solve the problem. But hope is not a strategy.

This iswhat the American government does. Trump didn’t start it, trump continued the policies democrats had set.

Last presidency Biden gave billions to left leaning think tanks and ngos. This isn’t new, what’s new is what’s being funded.

What I think is real criticism is trump supporting politicians in other countries, government officials shouldn’t do that. I don’t care if they do it after they leave office, like Elon can do whatever he wants now that he’s not part of government (was he ever? I don’t know) but government officials shouldn’t.

I don’t think many in Europe will want to be associated/backed by Trump, just ask Orban how that worked out, even Nigel Farage has been distancing himself from him

Interesting.
So, the move is to burn your influence in Europe by making threats and demands, then throw US tax dollars at unpopular groups, who then become more unpopular by association.
This is why I have a poor opinion of most billionaires: they have low problem-solving skills; their main move is to throw money at issues and just double down if the initial amount didn’t work.
That’s what they have always done for any personal issues in their lives. They never really have to use their brains; they just throw magic paper at stuff, and it works out for them.

Don’t European countries have any laws or regulations to prevent foreign governments or government-affiliated institutions from interfering in elections? Or have similar situations occurred before (such as through intelligence agencies), but they were just not as openly discussed as they are now?