The Trump administration's move to cut public funding for the Voice of America (VOA), a propaganda tool for the U.S. government, is due to competing interests and struggles between different political factions, a Chinese expert said during an interview on Monday.
U.S. President Donald Trump on March 14 signed an executive order, which listed the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the parent agency of VOA, as part of "unnecessary" federal bureaucracy.
More than 1,300 VOA employees, including journalists, producers and assistants, were reportedly placed on administrative leave on Saturday.
Diao Daming, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Renmin University of China, shared his insights on why Trump halted funding for the agency during his second term.
"He feels that VOA has not effectively fulfilled its mission to make the United States great again and serve the country's interests. On the other hand, public opinion institutions under the USAGM, including VOA, have been openly critical of Trump, his team, and his administration, particularly regarding certain policies during his first term. After assuming office for a second term, Trump swiftly implemented this tough measure, which is evidently influenced by competing interests and struggles between different political factions," said Diao.
Founded in 1942, the VOA has long served as a political tool for the U.S. government, engaging in ideological confrontation and shaping public opinion. For over 80 years, regardless of whether the Democratic or Republican Party was in power, funding for institutions like VOA remained uninterrupted.
Experts described the VOA as a propaganda machine aimed at ideological infiltration in certain regions, as many of its programs are inaccessible within the United States and are instead broadcast exclusively to specific countries abroad.
"In the past, when I served as a spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense, I encountered VOA reporters at domestic events, international conferences, and various occasions. They would, for example, selectively ask questions during interviews, selectively edit our responses, and then selectively report and broadcast them. Given such practices, how much credibility can VOA really have?" said Yang Yujun, dean of the Academy of Media and Public Affairs at the Communication University of China.
Trump's cut to VOA due to struggles between different political factions: expert
The U.S. military strike against Venezuela and capture of its president, Nicolas Maduro, has shocked the international community, triggering a steady stream of condemnation and serious concerns worldwide.
Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay and Spain issued a joint statement on Sunday, expressing serious concern about and firm opposition to the U.S. unilateral military operations in Venezuela.
The U.S. actions contravene fundamental principles of international law, particularly the prohibition on the use or threat of force, and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, as enshrined in the UN Charter, constituting an extremely dangerous precedent against peace and regional security, according to the statement.
In expressing profound concern and firm rejection, the six countries stressed in the statement that the situation in Venezuela must be resolved exclusively by peaceful means, and through dialogue, negotiation and respect for the will of the Venezuelan people in all its expressions, without external interference and in accordance with international law.
Only an inclusive political process, led by Venezuelans, can lead to a democratic, sustainable solution that respects human dignity, according to the statement.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez condemned the U.S. raid in Venezuela as a violation of international law, adding that the Spanish government always advocates and defends international law and peaceful resolution of conflicts.
Addressing a meeting of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez demanded the unconditional and immediate release of Maduro and his wife.
Noting that Latin America and the Caribbean are a zone of peace, he expressed his firm opposition to the use of force, which is an unshakable principle.
Any aggression against Venezuela shall be regarded as an attack against all CELAC member states, and nations must collectively oppose it, he stressed.
The South African government denounced the U.S. attack on Venezuela as a violation of international law, according to a statement released on Sunday.
History has repeatedly demonstrated that military invasions against sovereign states yield only instability and deepening crisis, the statement said.
South Africa calls on the UN Security Council to urgently convene a session to address this situation, according to the statement.
Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said what happened in Venezuela demonstrates that international law and the UN Charter are losing their practical effectiveness.
U.S. military action against Venezuela marks a dangerous precedent, as similar actions could be taken against any other nations, he said.
In addition, the foreign ministries of Namibia, Singapore, Oman and Pakistan also issued statements on the same day, expressing grave concern over U.S. interference in Venezuela's internal affairs.
They emphasized the need to uphold international law and the principles of the UN Charter while respecting Venezuela's sovereignty.
They also called on all parties to exercise restraint and resolve the crisis through peaceful dialogue.
U.S. move against Venezuela sparks condemnation, concerns worldwide
