No official U.S. strategy openly backs European far-right parties, but dense transatlantic conservative networks shape policy, money, and narratives
I. Strategy and official policy
1. 2025 U.S. National Security Strategy and “patriotic” parties
There is no publicly available U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS) that officially codifies support for European “patriotic” or far‑right parties as tools to “cultivate resistance” to current EU trajectories. The most recent fully published strategy, the 2022 NSS under President Biden, frames the EU as a key democratic partner and emphasizes support for democratic institutions and rule of law, not for nationalist or “sovereignist” forces inside member states. Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung
Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf
2. Role of JD Vance in shifting U.S. foreign policy
As of now there is no authoritative evidence or official documentation that a Vice President JD Vance has personally driven a formal U.S. policy of favoring European nationalist movements over EU integration. Analyses of U.S. grand strategy debates show a spectrum of “America First” voices skeptical of the EU, but this remains at the level of rhetoric or factional advocacy, not codified foreign policy toward backing specific parties. Foreign Policy Research Institute
Source: https://www.fpri.org/article/2025/12/fpri-experts-react-the-new-national-security-strategy/
3. “Make Europe Great Again” (MEGA) branding
“MEGA” and similar slogans have been used informally by European right‑wing actors to echo Donald Trump’s “MAGA” brand, signaling ideological kinship and borrowing its populist, anti‑elite style. This reflects the diffusion of American campaign marketing techniques—short, emotive slogans, merchandizing, and meme‑driven politics—but there is no formal U.S. government campaign behind this branding, only political emulation and cross‑pollination among activists.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_America_Great_Again
4. From “benign neglect” to engagement with AfD, Vox, etc.
Official U.S. embassies and the State Department still primarily engage with sitting governments and major parliamentary actors, not as overt patrons of AfD, Vox, or other far‑right parties; there is no formal shift to sponsoring them. What has changed is that individual U.S. politicians, media figures, and advocacy groups sometimes cultivate relationships with these parties (joint conferences, visits, interviews), blurring the line between private political networking and “diplomatic” attention.
Source: https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-germany/
5. Impact on NATO cohesion and defense posture
NATO’s formal military planning remains consensus‑based among member governments, but the rise of “sovereignist” parties—often hostile to EU integration and sometimes ambivalent about Ukraine or sanctions on Russia—can inject political friction into alliance decision‑making. Analysts warn that if such parties enter or dominate governments, they can slow or dilute common positions on Russia, defense spending, and forward deployments, indirectly undermining NATO cohesion even without explicit U.S. encouragement. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/6/pdf/280622-factsheet-nato-summit-madrid-2022-en.pdf
6. U.S. “regime change” rhetoric toward liberal European governments
Mainstream U.S. foreign policy documents do not call for “regime change” in EU countries, which are treated as democratic allies. However, some U.S. populist commentators and politicians harshly criticize liberal European governments over migration, “woke” politics, or climate policy, sometimes framing elections as opportunities to “take back” Europe—rhetoric that is political and polemical rather than an official regime‑change strategy. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://visegradinsight.eu/us-national-security-strategy-and-europe/
II. Financial and organizational links
7. “$50 million” in U.S. dark money into European far‑right causes
The specific figure of “$50 million” in U.S. dark money going to European conservative or far‑right causes over the last decade is not reliably documented in open sources; such a precise number usually comes from investigative journalism or advocacy reports with varying methodologies. What is documented is the use of opaque foundations, donor‑advised funds, and cross‑border NGOs that make it difficult to trace exact amounts, though watchdogs have shown U.S. conservative networks financially supporting anti‑abortion, anti‑LGBTQ+, and nationalist actors in Europe. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/war-on-european-ngos-us-christian-right
8. Heritage Foundation and policy blueprints
U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation produce policy toolkits on migration, family policy, climate, and sovereignty that are then cited or adapted by European conservative and populist actors. These organizations exert influence through conferences, fellowships, joint reports, and visits by European politicians to Washington, creating an intellectual pipeline rather than a formal “instruction manual.”
Source: https://www.heritage.org/about-heritage/international-engagement
9. CPAC’s expansion to Europe (e.g., Budapest)
The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has held events in Budapest and other locations, giving European right‑wing parties direct access to U.S. conservative politicians, donors, and media. These gatherings function as networking hubs in which messaging, campaign tactics, and culture‑war framing are shared, effectively formalizing transatlantic ties between U.S. and European right‑wing ecosystems.
Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/05/19/1099799755/cpac-hungary-orban
10. Steve Bannon’s “The Movement” and a nationalist “war room”
Steve Bannon’s initiative “The Movement” was designed as a Brussels‑based organization to coordinate European right‑wing populist parties, offering polling, strategy, and communication help. Although it never achieved the centralized “war room” Bannon envisioned—facing legal, political, and funding setbacks—it helped publicize the idea of a permanent, transnational infrastructure for European nationalists modeled on U.S. campaign operations.
Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/steve-bannon-movement-europe-populist-far-right/
11. American donor networks and legal challenges in European courts
U.S. conservative legal networks and donors have funded or supported litigation in Europe—particularly around abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, religious exemptions, and migration—via NGOs and legal advocacy groups. These efforts often aim to influence precedent in the European Court of Human Rights or constitutional courts, functioning as a legal counterpart to political campaigns rather than direct funding of parties. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://www.equalitynow.org/news_and_insights/us_christian_right_europe/
12. Cryptocurrency and bypassing European campaign‑finance rules
There is concern that cryptocurrencies can help political actors—including radical groups—obscure the origin of funds and circumvent campaign‑finance rules, but publicly documented cases linking U.S.-based platforms directly to European far‑right financing remain limited. Regulators and researchers mostly discuss this as a structural vulnerability—pseudonymity, cross‑border flows, and weak oversight—rather than a fully mapped U.S.–Europe pipeline.
Source: https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Virtualassets/Guidance-rba-virtual-assets-vasps.html
III. Ideological and cultural export
13. U.S. “anti‑woke” movement and education policy in Poland and Hungary
Right‑wing governments and parties in Hungary and Poland have introduced laws constraining gender‑studies programs, LGBTQ+ content in schools, and certain critical perspectives on history and identity. Their framing—against “gender ideology,” “wokeness,” and “cultural Marxism”—echoes U.S. “anti‑woke” narratives, though rooted in domestic conservative traditions; the influence is more discursive cross‑fertilization than direct U.S. control. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2023/hungary
14. Christian right organizations (ADF, etc.) and European rights debates
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), through its European arm ADF International, actively litigates and lobbies in Europe on abortion, conscientious objection, and LGBTQ+ issues. It submits briefs to European courts, supports domestic cases, and partners with local groups, helping to transplant U.S. Christian right legal strategies into European debates on reproductive and minority rights.
Source: https://adfinternational.org/about-us/
15. “Great Replacement” as shared ideological bridge
The “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, which claims that elites are orchestrating demographic change to “replace” native populations, circulates heavily in both the American alt‑right and European Identitarian milieus. This shared narrative underpins cross‑Atlantic media, memes, and manifestos, allowing figures in each sphere to validate and amplify one another’s claims about migration, fertility, and “civilizational decline.”
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement
16. American “Manosphere” influencers and radicalization of young men
American “manosphere” and “red‑pill” influencers reach European audiences via YouTube, TikTok, podcasts, and forums, promoting misogynistic, anti‑feminist, and often conspiratorial worldviews. Researchers note that this content can feed into broader far‑right radicalization pipelines by linking gender resentment with xenophobia, anti‑liberalism, and hostility to democratic institutions among some young men.
Source: https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/angry-young-men-online-manosphere/
17. “Stolen election” rhetoric adapted by European far right
Since 2020, U.S. “stolen election” narratives have inspired European far‑right parties and movements to cast doubt on their own electoral systems—asserting fraud, external interference, or “deep state” manipulation without evidence. This rhetoric is used to delegitimize losses, mobilize supporters, and justify attempts to weaken independent election bodies or courts, undermining public trust in democratic processes.
Source: https://www.idea.int/news-media/news/global-spread-election-disinformation
18. U.S. firearm advocacy and European gun‑rights movements
The NRA and similar U.S. gun‑rights actors have limited direct institutional presence in Europe, where firearms regulation is far stricter and broadly popular. Nonetheless, their messaging—self‑defense against criminals, resistance to “tyranny,” and gun ownership as a cultural identity—circulates online and is sometimes echoed by small European gun‑rights groups, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, albeit on a much smaller scale than in the U.S.
Source: https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/database/europe-firearms-regulations
IV. Media and digital influence
19. Fox News, Newsmax, and narratives of “no‑go zones”
U.S. outlets like Fox News have repeatedly aired segments portraying European cities as plagued by “no‑go zones,” migrant crime, and cultural collapse. These narratives shape global perceptions of Europe and are frequently recycled by far‑right actors within Europe itself, even when local officials and researchers dispute or debunk the underlying claims.
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35303989
20. U.S.-based social media algorithms in non‑English European spaces
Major platforms (Facebook, YouTube, X/Twitter) headquartered in the U.S. use engagement‑driven algorithms that are largely agnostic to language but tend to promote emotionally charged, polarizing content. Studies indicate that far‑right narratives in languages such as German, French, Italian, and Polish benefit from this dynamic, gaining disproportionate visibility even without explicit ideological intent by the companies.
Source: https://algorithmwatch.org/en/story/ai-amplifies-far-right-content/
21. U.S.-linked “alt‑tech” platforms as sanctuaries
Alternative platforms with significant U.S. backing or user bases—such as Gab, Gettr, and some encrypted messaging ecosystems—host European extremists and far‑right figures banned from mainstream European social media. These platforms provide them with continued reach, fundraising, and coordination opportunities, creating a parallel information sphere partly insulated from EU content‑moderation norms.
Source: https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/gab-and-the-european-far-right/
22. U.S. political consultants, voter profiling, and European far‑right campaigns
U.S. political consulting firms and data‑analytics outfits have worked on European campaigns across the spectrum, introducing micro‑targeting, psychographic profiling, and sophisticated digital advertising. While some far‑right parties have reportedly hired such firms, there is limited transparent documentation of systematic, large‑scale U.S. consultant involvement tailored specifically to boosting the far right rather than paying clients more generally.
Source: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/political-microtargeting-and-democracy
23. U.S.-led “hack and leak” operations and European politics
Public investigations into “hack and leak” operations affecting European politics usually point to state‑linked or criminal cyber actors (often attributed to Russian or other non‑U.S. sources), not to U.S. political operatives. While some U.S. media and partisan outlets amplify leaked materials once they appear, there is no solid public evidence of coordinated, U.S.-led cyber‑intrusion campaigns specifically aimed at installing European nationalist governments.
Source: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/hack-and-leak-disinformation/
V. Geopolitical and security implications
24. U.S.–Russia–Europe “triangle of influence” and far‑right mediation
Certain American far‑right figures have publicly praised both European nationalists and, at times, Vladimir Putin, casting themselves as part of a shared “civilizational” front. However, documented mediation between European parties and the Kremlin remains sparse and is overshadowed by direct Russian outreach to European far‑right actors, making this “triangle” more rhetorical than an organized strategic structure.
Source: https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-far-right-network-europe
25. Security risks of U.S. militia–European paramilitary coordination
Transnational networking between extremist militias and paramilitary groups—through online forums, training fantasies, or occasional travel—raises concerns among security services about skills transfer and shared radical narratives. Yet law‑enforcement and academic reports stress that most such coordination is fragmented and monitored, with the most immediate risk coming from lone‑actor or small‑cell violence rather than formal U.S.–Europe militia alliances.
Source: https://www.europol.europa.eu/publication-events/main-reports/european-union-terrorism-situation-and-trend-report-te-sat
26. U.S. support for Orbán’s “illiberal democracy” and EU sanctions
Some U.S. conservative politicians and media figures openly praise Viktor Orbán’s “illiberal democracy,” visiting Budapest and featuring him at conferences like CPAC Hungary. This rhetorical and symbolic backing can embolden Orbán domestically, but it does not legally constrain the EU’s ability to use Article 7 or conditionality mechanisms; the main obstacles there are intra‑EU politics and unanimity requirements.
Source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52018PC0324
27. “America First” trade policy and European protectionism
U.S. “America First” policies—tariffs, Buy American provisions, industrial subsidies—have strengthened arguments by European protectionist and nationalist parties that the EU should also prioritize domestic industry and erect stronger trade barriers. They cite U.S. behavior as both justification and precedent, even as mainstream EU institutions still emphasize open markets tempered by strategic autonomy.
Source: https://ecfr.eu/publication/europes-trade-strategy-in-an-age-of-america-first/
28. U.S. backing of the far right and EU tech regulation
To the extent that American conservative actors align with European far‑right criticism of EU digital‑services and content‑moderation rules, they complicate the political climate around regulating U.S. tech giants. Nonetheless, the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act were driven primarily by EU internal debates about competition, privacy, and democratic integrity, and they apply irrespective of U.S. domestic politics. Visegrad Insight
Source: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act-package
29. “Decentralized Europe” and weakening the euro
Some U.S. and European sovereigntist voices argue for repatriating powers from EU institutions to nation states, criticizing the euro as a constraint on national economic policy. While a more fragmented EU could in theory erode the euro’s role as a global reserve, this remains speculative; there is no coherent, publicly acknowledged U.S. strategy using European decentralization as a tool to weaken the euro.
Source: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/annual/html/ar2022~7f76e5537f.en.html
30. Future U.S. political shifts and far‑right mainstreaming in Europe
If U.S. administrations and Congresses continue to polarize, a strongly nationalist, “America First” government could normalize closer ties with European far‑right parties—through summits, sympathetic media coverage, and NGO networks—thus helping them appear more mainstream. Conversely, a firmly multilateralist, pro‑EU U.S. leadership would likely distance itself from such actors and strengthen cooperation with centrist governments, indirectly marginalizing the far right.
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-future-of-us-europe-relations/
Keywords
Keywords: U.S. National Security Strategy, European far right, sovereignist parties, transatlantic conservatism, dark money, Heritage Foundation, CPAC Hungary, Steve Bannon The Movement, Alliance Defending Freedom, Great Replacement theory, manosphere, anti‑woke politics, Fox News Europe coverage, social media algorithms, alt‑tech platforms, voter profiling, hack and leak, Viktor Orbán, illiberal democracy, NATO cohesion, EU rule of law, America First trade, euro reserve currency, U.S.–Europe relations.
About the Author
