July 23, 2025

SHARE |

Surrendering the Narrative: How U.S. Cuts to Soft Power Are Empowering Rivals

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

On Friday, the United States House of Representatives passed a final vote approving President Donald Trump’s proposal to cut $9 billion from public broadcasting and foreign aid. Among the foreign aid reductions were $800 million in refugee assistance, $496 million for natural disaster relief, and, most notably, $4.15 billion from programs aimed at strengthening economies and democratic institutions in developing countries. The $1.1 billion cut to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) will impact longstanding domestic institutions such as National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), as well as over a thousand locally operated public television and radio stations.

These cuts follow a series of reductions to public services throughout the year, including actions by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the White House. Earlier in the year, reductions targeted the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) — the parent organization of outlets such as Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Radio Free Asia (RFA). Both USAID and these media organizations have long served as key pillars of U.S. soft power, promoting American influence abroad for decades. While U.S. soft power has been in gradual decline since the post-Soviet era, these cuts have significantly accelerated that downward trajectory.

VOA and RFE/RL have long been at the forefront of U.S. efforts to shape international perceptions through broadcasting. These state-supported media outlets served as reliable sources of information in regions where press freedom was limited, reinforcing American values abroad. Complementing these efforts, the United States also exported its culture through films, music, and other forms of entertainment. Together, these initiatives formed a powerful strategy of soft power, allowing the U.S. to expand its global influence through communication and cultural appeal rather than force.

While U.S. soft power dominated during the Cold War and remained influential through the 1990s, other global powers — most notably Russia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) — have increasingly developed their own soft power strategies. Since the early 2000s, both countries have focused their efforts on regions often overlooked by the West, such as Africa and Latin America. Over the past decade, these initiatives have intensified, with the PRC expanding its economic footprint in developing nations and Russia deploying sophisticated influence campaigns to shape public opinion and advance its geopolitical goals.

Although the U.S. was lagging behind these efforts long before President Trump’s funding cuts –– having dismantled key institutions like the U.S. Information Agency in 1999, which once coordinated American messaging and cultural diplomacy abroad, and already underfunded international broadcasters –– the recent reductions to foreign aid and public broadcasting have all but crippled the U.S.’s ability to compete in the soft power arena. Without a coordinated strategy to shape global narratives, the global popularity of American media alone is insufficient to counter the deliberate efforts of Russia and the PRC to influence public opinion — particularly when those narratives directly undermine U.S. interests.

Though much of the PRC’s soft power has involved infrastructure investments, particularly through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the PRC has begun a more holistic approach, with U.S. funding cuts allowing them to quickly fill holes and increase its soft power. The PRC has long sought to control the global narrative, with propaganda being central to its overall strategy. Therefore, budget cuts to U.S. communication services are wholly welcome by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with Hu Xijin, a former editor in chief of the PRC’s state-run outlet Global Times, expressing that the funding cuts of Voice of America and Radio Free Asia were “really gratifying” and hoped would be “irreversible,” according to the New York Times.

The PRC has made significant efforts in Africa, particularly in the media sector, to win the hearts and minds of the African people. For example, the PRC’s largest media conglomerate, Xinhua, has 37 bureaus on the continent. Additionally, a number of countries including Kenya, South Africa, Zambia, Ghana, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe have content-sharing agreements with the PRC. Efforts have gone even further with the establishment of Chinese training programs for African journalists with the goal of shaping perceptions of the PRC and may include deceptive forms of disinformation.

Much like the PRC, Russia has moved to fill the gaps left by the U.S. This month, the Kremlin announced the launch of an international development agency — functionally an analogue to USAID — focused on its former satellite states. However, Russia’s soft power is most pronounced in Africa, particularly the Sahel, where it has exploited the failures of Western counterterrorism efforts to gain a cultural foothold. Through coordinated “e-propaganda” campaigns, the Kremlin has promoted anti-Western and pro-Russian narratives, capitalizing on widespread information poverty and the growing reliance on social media for news.

Even before the latest U.S. funding cuts, under-resourced outlets like VOA and RFE/RL were ill-equipped to counter these coordinated efforts. Today, Kremlin-backed media campaigns account for nearly 40 percent of all disinformation activity on the continent, according to the Harvard International Review. This weakness has enabled Russia to exploit the Sahel’s valuable resources, which are highly sought after by the U.S. and its partners.

Analysts assess that the Trump administration’s funding cuts to cultural and humanitarian organizations are not just contributing to the loss of the United States’ ability to shape international discourse but actively ceding it to rival powers. As such, the U.S. is surrendering its role as a leading global voice and is failing to protect itself against the harmful propaganda and disinformation that may emerge in its absence. In an era of Great Power Competition, decisions like these can undermine a nation’s global standing.