Many Americans have never heard of the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM). However, for decades, hundreds of millions of people around the world have relied on the outlets that USAGM funds — including Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, the Office of Cuba Broadcasting and Radio Free Asia (RFA) — for accurate, unbiased news. That changed in March, when US President Donald Trump signed an executive order reducing the agency’s operations to the legal minimum as part of a supposed cost-cutting effort. USAGM, in turn, terminated grants and contracts for all the international broadcasters under its umbrella, citing the order.
Thousands of journalists stand to lose their jobs, and access to verifiable reporting in some of the world’s most politically repressive countries is at risk. This blow to the US’ soft power has created an information void that authoritarian regimes are keen to exploit. For example, the Chinese and Cambodian governments have celebrated the dismantling of USAGM as an end to “biased propaganda poison” and “fake news,” underscoring the agency’s role in combating misinformation.
While RFE/RL’s funding has been restored following a federal judge’s temporary ruling, RFA’s annual budget of US$60.8 million remains in jeopardy. The Asian broadcaster won a court ruling ordering the funds to be disbursed, although that has not happened yet.
Illustration: Mountain People
This would have far-reaching consequences. Despite its relatively limited budget, RFA has long served as a vital source of uncensored news for its 60 million weekly readers and listeners. Operating in environments where press freedom is absent or under siege, RFA is also often the only broadcaster exposing the realities of life under authoritarian rule. From providing early evidence of China’s mass internment of Uighurs in Xinjiang to reporting on the civil war in Myanmar, RFA has consistently brought international attention to abuses that might otherwise have remained hidden.
Nowhere is RFA’s impact more evident than in Cambodia, where the government has severely curtailed press freedom. For decades, outlets such as RFA and VOA have symbolized hope, and today they are among the few trusted news sources for Cambodians at home and abroad. In recent years, their operations have become more essential than ever against a backdrop of democratic deterioration: The Cambodian government has shuttered independent media, dissolved opposition parties and jailed dissenters.
The arrest of award-winning Cambodian journalist Mech Dara, known for his courageous reporting, and the blacklisting of British journalist Gerald Flynn for appearing in a climate documentary that the regime accused of spreading false information, are emblematic of this trend. However, through it all, RFA has continued to publish investigative reporting on everything from official corruption and cybercrime to the erosion of civil liberties.
The gutting of RFA is not simply a media story; it is also a geopolitical one. Across Southeast Asia, regimes with close ties to China increasingly rely on state-controlled narratives to suppress dissent. In Myanmar, where a 2021 military coup ushered in an era of violence and repression, RFA has provided crucial on-the-ground reporting that counters misinformation spread by the ruling junta. In the absence of such coverage, the atrocities being committed in Myanmar — and in other countries — would be concealed from view domestically and globally. Authorities would be able to act with impunity and pursue ever-more repressive tactics to enforce their rule.
Also at stake is the US’ ability to project democratic values and its credibility in doing so. RFA, much like the BBC World Service or Deutsche Welle, has long functioned as a strategic instrument of soft power, supporting the free flow of information. This tool has arguably never been more important, as China expands its state media apparatus, including outlets such as CGTN and Xinhua, into countries where US influence is waning to promote its worldview.
Cambodia’s increasing reliance on China — which accounts for nearly half of foreign direct investment in the country — underscores the shifting landscape of influence. Chinese-backed infrastructure projects, coupled with growing diplomatic alignment, have made Cambodia an increasingly loyal partner, while China has gained a presence at Ream Naval Base that could threaten regional security. Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) recent visit to Phnom Penh further cemented the relationship. For the US to abandon RFA would be tantamount to ceding yet another front in the global contest of ideas.
US Congress must act to prevent that outcome. Judicial freezes on Trump’s executive order targeting USAGM are certainly welcome, but are only a temporary reprieve. Restoring RFA and funding it beyond the current fiscal year are much more important, especially for foreign policy objectives. US policymakers should also explore long-term independent funding mechanisms that could insulate RFA from political interference and ensure its durability.
Ultimately, the decision to sustain RFA is about more than budget lines. It is about whether the US remains committed to defending press freedom and supporting the journalists who risk their lives to expose corruption and abuse. At least two RFA Khmer journalists are facing deportation when their US visas expire. For them, returning to Cambodia would mean certain imprisonment. Equally importantly, the US must not abandon the millions of people who rely on RFA for accurate reporting in an era of heightened mistrust and upheaval.
Mu Sochua, a former Cambodian politician and Nobel Peace Prize nominee, is president of the Khmer Movement for Democracy.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS