US funding for global internet freedom ‘effectively gutted’
The United States has dramatically reduced funding for its Internet Freedom program, a two‑decade effort that supported anti‑censorship technologies in countries like Iran, China and Myanmar. The cuts, driven by a Trump‑era efficiency drive, have left many grantees without money, endangering tools…
In early 2025 the United States dramatically slashed the budget of its Internet Freedom program, a covert initiative that for almost twenty years funneled more than $500 million into technologies designed to bypass state‑run internet firewalls. The funding freeze, ordered by the Department of State’s efficiency office often dubbed “Doge,” has left the program effectively gutted, with no new grants issued for the year.
What the Internet Freedom program did
Managed jointly by the State Department and the U.S. Agency for Global Media, the Internet Freedom effort channeled money to small, often volunteer‑run groups across the globe. Recipients ranged from Iranian developers who built satellite‑datacasting tools that kept news flowing during a nationwide blackout, to Myanmar activists who used advanced circumvention software to slip past the junta’s “digital iron curtain.” In China, funded projects helped users leap the Great Firewall with custom Tor bridges and encrypted messaging apps.
Typical tools supported by the program included well‑known services such as Signal and the Tor Browser, as well as more experimental solutions like low‑cost satellite broadcast receivers and “middlebox‑bypass” hardware. These technologies made it costly for authoritarian governments to completely seal off their populations, forcing them to choose between a partially open internet that sustains commerce and a fully isolated network that stifles dissent.
How the cuts were implemented
The budget reduction was part of a broader push by the Trump administration to shrink the size of federal agencies. In 2025, career staff who administered Internet Freedom were either laid off or forced to resign. The program’s primary granting office stopped disbursing money altogether, and the Open Technology Fund (OTF)—the nonprofit that managed roughly half of the allocations—won a lawsuit in December to recover some of the withheld funds. The administration is now appealing that ruling, leaving the future of OTF’s budget in limbo.
Compounding the financial squeeze, the United States withdrew from the Freedom Online Coalition in January, a multilateral alliance it had created to coordinate global digital‑rights policy. The withdrawal signaled a retreat from the diplomatic front of the anti‑censorship effort, further isolating the remaining grantees.
Impact on users and activists
When the funding stopped, several projects that had become lifelines for protesters and journalists were forced to downsize or shut down. In Iran, a network of volunteers used OTF‑backed tools to share real‑time alerts about police raids during anti‑government demonstrations. With the money gone, many of those volunteers are now operating without pay, and some have already laid off staff.
In Myanmar, activists who relied on custom VPNs to bypass the military’s internet shutdowns reported that their servers are running on dwindling electricity budgets. Chinese companies have begun exporting sophisticated “middlebox” devices that allow regimes to monitor traffic while keeping commercial services online, a trend that could accelerate without the counterbalance of U.S.-funded circumvention tools.
Experts warn that the loss of a single, well‑coordinated funding stream makes it easier for authoritarian states to erect a full‑scale digital iron curtain. “When you challenge censorship, the long‑term effect is that oppressive governments must either open their internet or move toward a North‑Korea‑style total lock‑down,” said a former State Department official familiar with the program.
What comes next?
While a recent appropriations bill includes a line item for Internet Freedom, it does not name specific projects, leaving grantees in a state of uncertainty. Some groups are looking to Europe for a new source of support; several have already petitioned EU officials for funding. Meanwhile, the OTF continues to fight the appeal in court, hoping to restore at least a portion of the lost budget.
For users in censored environments, the immediate outlook is mixed. New, cheaper circumvention tools are emerging from the private sector, but they lack the coordinated development and testing that the U.S. program provided. Activists and journalists are now forced to rely more heavily on ad‑hoc solutions, increasing the risk of surveillance and failure.
The situation underscores a broader strategic question: can a single nation’s funding model sustain a global network of digital‑rights defenders, or must the effort become a truly multilateral enterprise? Until a stable financing mechanism is secured, the fight against state‑imposed internet isolation remains precarious.
Why it matters
The funding cuts jeopardize the only coordinated global effort that helps citizens in authoritarian states access uncensored information, potentially enabling regimes to fully isolate their populations.
Key points
- The U.S. Internet Freedom program, which spent over $500 million in a decade, received no new grants in 2025.
- Cuts were driven by a Trump‑era efficiency office that dismissed staff and halted the main granting office.
- Projects in Iran, Myanmar, and China that enabled real‑time protest coordination and news access are now underfunded or shut down.
- The U.S. withdrawal from the Freedom Online Coalition further weakens international digital‑rights cooperation.
- European actors are being approached for new funding, but no concrete commitments exist yet.
Frequently asked questions
What was the purpose of the U.S. Internet Freedom program?
It aimed to fund the development of technologies that let users bypass government censorship, keeping the global internet open and limiting the ability of authoritarian regimes to create isolated digital spaces.
Why did the funding stop in 2025?
A Trump administration efficiency office ordered large‑scale cuts to federal programs, resulting in staff layoffs, the shutdown of the main granting office, and the suspension of new grants.
How does the loss of funding affect activists in censored countries?
Many rely on tools built with U.S. money to coordinate protests and share information; without funding, these tools may become unavailable, slower to update, or unsupported, increasing the risk of surveillance.
Is there any chance the funding will be restored?
The Open Technology Fund won a lawsuit to recover some money, but the administration is appealing, and a recent appropriations bill only provides a vague line item without earmarked projects.
Could other regions fill the funding gap?
European governments have been approached, and some NGOs are seeking EU support, but no large‑scale commitments have been announced yet.
