Could Poland become MAGA’s new bridge to Europe?

Millions are once again flowing from the MAGA movement into Europe, funding everything from “building a civilizational alliance” to campaigns against the EU’s AI Act. Donald Trump’s camp is backing countries where political forces friendly to it are gaining ground. Poland’s right wing continues to position itself firmly in that camp. What lies behind MAGA’s financial offensive in Europe?

According to recent reports in the Financial Times, Donald Trump’s camp is stepping up financial support for organizations in Europe that are aligned with its agenda.

Fighting the EU mainstream

USD 2 million is set to go to groups in Eastern Europe to fight “attempts to undermine Western civilizational norms”, while another USD 5 million will be earmarked for “building a civilizational alliance”. A further USD 2 million is to fund a campaign against “censorship” in opposition to the AI Act adopted by the European Union, which has been openly criticized by Republican political leaders in the United States.

The British newspaper also reports that grants are being awarded to American organizations that are, in practice, expected to pursue policies in line with Donald Trump’s agenda. The largest sum – no less than USD 40 million – is reportedly going to the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. That may seem rather peculiar given that the United States is a country where, under the guise of rooting out alleged communism, political opponents were persecuted during the period known as McCarthyism. But it fits with Trump’s strategy of portraying the Democratic Party as communist ahead of the midterm elections in November.

The sums involved may not be staggering, but that is not where the real significance lies. Donald Trump’s camp is stepping up implementation of the commitments set out in the now-famous National Security Strategy published late last year. Under MAGA leadership, the United States has declared that it will seek to weaken the European Union’s political influence by supporting countries such as Italy, Austria and Poland, where political forces deeply skeptical of the EU mainstream are strong and, at the same time, willing to cooperate with the current White House administration.

Filling the void left by Orbán

Viktor Orbán’s spectacular defeat in Hungary in April was undoubtedly a reputational blow for the White House as well. Hungary’s former prime minister had been its closest ally on the Old Continent. And not merely an ally: the MAGA movement had openly drawn inspiration from Hungary’s post-2010 dismantling of liberal-democratic institutions. That close alliance is now a thing of the past. In one of his first speeches, Péter Magyar pledged to abolish the Matthias Corvinus Collegium, which effectively served as Fidesz’s intellectual and financial backer – a clear signal that he intended to distance Hungary from its close ties with Donald Trump.

The Hungarian angle matters here because the MAGA movement has not given up on building influence in this part of Europe. And with a friendly government no longer in power in Budapest, Trump’s camp is turning to what it sees as promising prospects elsewhere in Europe. One such country is Britain, where the first edition of the CPAC conference was held.

It was not, however, a successful outing.

An attempt to implant MAGA in Britain

The British website The Nerve has published an investigation into the domestic edition of the CPAC conference. According to its author, Alice McCool, the event was clearly intended to transplant MAGA’s institutional and political infrastructure onto British soil. The conference organizers themselves have direct ties to Nigel Farage and his Reform UK party, which has led British opinion polls for some time.

CPAC GB was organized by Touchpoint Strategy. Founded just two years ago, the company now has a footprint stretching from Budapest to Washington. According to McCool’s investigation, its founders have close ties to former Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán as well as Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, one of Donald Trump’s closest allies.

Joseph Robertson and Tess Wheldon of Touchpoint Strategy reportedly traveled repeatedly to Hungary, including during Viktor Orbán’s time in office, and attended events devoted to “Hungarian influence operations”. The group to which the CPAC GB organizers previously belonged, the Orthodox Conservatives Group, published a manifesto in 2021 praising the family policies promoted by Hungary’s former prime minister.

Although the organizers were closely connected to their right-wing allies on the continent and in the United States, the recent edition of CPAC in Britain was not a success. The audience included plenty of empty seats, and the presence of Farage and former prime minister Liz Truss failed to provide enough of a draw.

But one should not mistake a single unsuccessful conference for the beginning of the end of alt-right ideas in Europe. The determination of the Americans to continue funding sympathetic groups is evidence of that. So, too, is the enduringly pro-American orientation of the right wing of Poland’s political scene.

MAGA and Poland’s right

With the alliance between Washington and Budapest in tatters, Warsaw could emerge as one of its natural successors. That, of course, would depend on a change of government in 2027 – something that cannot be ruled out.

Dr. Jan Misiuna, a political scientist at SGH Warsaw School of Economics who specializes in the United States, points to the potential.

“There is room for this relationship to grow. Much will depend on the outcome of the upcoming election and whether it produces a coalition capable of carrying out fundamental changes. If that happens, Poland could indeed become a very strong foothold for them. The open question, however, is how determined the new government would be to assume the role previously played by Viktor Orbán and his circle,” says Misiuna.

At present, the only right-wing Polish politician who has perhaps sporadic, but nonetheless some, contact with Donald Trump is President Karol Nawrocki. But according to Misiuna, Poland’s president lacks one key advantage that Orbán spent years building.

Expert: Karol Nawrocki does not yet have what Orbán had

“I get the impression that, at this point, he is not yet regarded as someone with full political agency because he does not control his own budget. That is a crucial difference when compared with Viktor Orbán, who was not only an ideological ally of the MAGA movement and its affiliated circles in Europe, but also a generous sponsor. Orbán provided substantial financial support for these initiatives, whether in propaganda, informal activities or the organization of high-profile gatherings in Budapest. Poland’s right wing today does not have access to resources on that scale,” says Dr. Jan Misiuna.

There is another side to MAGA’s financial support that is also worth noting. At the very beginning of Trump’s second term, news that the United States was suspending billions of dollars in funding through USAID came as a major blow to many civil-society organizations. The program had historically been expanded under both Democratic and Republican administrations, and the agency also supported humanitarian efforts in the world’s poorest countries.

Trump and his camp, however, decided at the time to curtail funding for organizations that promoted a social and political vision at odds with that of the White House. As Elon Musk – then still serving in the White House administration – put it in February 2025, the agency was, in his view, supporting “radically left-wing” and even “anti-American” causes.

The White House returns to pragmatism in building influence abroad

Today, however, we are seeing a shift in the White House’s approach to funding foreign organizations. According to the political scientist from SGH Warsaw School of Economics, pragmatism is what ultimately drove the change.

“Initially, the plans for these cuts were taken seriously, but in the end, a pragmatic logic prevailed. If the tools and federal funds are available, then from the standpoint of building your own influence, it makes far more sense to use public money than to rely on private donors – or, even more so, your own wealth. It was a simple business calculation,” explains Dr. Jan Misiuna.

The political scientist also points to a different approach to building influence abroad during Trump’s second term.

“There has been a fairly clear shift. It is reflected in the fact that these efforts are beginning to take different forms. The plan is no longer to rely solely on funds from private donors, but simply to use federal funds,” he explains.

As mentioned above, the United States will hold politically crucial midterm elections in November. All members of the House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate will be elected. So does the intensification of MAGA’s influence abroad have anything to do with the upcoming elections?

Political scientist: it is not about the US elections

Dr. Jan Misiuna is skeptical of that interpretation.

“I do not think the situation in Europe will have a direct impact on the outcome of the US elections. What we are seeing is rather an attempt to build a political base, which is, in fact, part of a long-standing American tradition – the pursuit of a presence that can represent US interests in Europe and encourage Europeans to speak the same political language. Above all, however, I would point to the fact that no US administration in the past several decades has pursued its own narrow interests so openly while in office,” the political scientist notes.

As he adds, the current administration makes little effort to conceal this.

“The shifting of these funds toward Europe and groups there should be interpreted as an attempt to secure purely business interests for the future. The aim is to generate benefits regardless of the outcome of the US elections and regardless of when European allies from this political camp come to power. It is about building a network of contacts and relationships that could later translate into purely private business cooperation,” says Misiuna.

While this perspective may be surprising from a European standpoint, it has long been an intrinsic part of American political culture.

The distinguished journalist Stefan Bratkowski put it particularly well in his book The Receding Continent, published to mark the bicentennial of the United States. He wrote that Americans are “200 years ahead, 200 years behind, but above all, 200 years to the side.” It is an extraordinarily apt diagnosis of the American reality.

Key Takeaways

1. Donald Trump’s camp is expanding financial support for sympathetic groups in Europe. Several million dollars is set to go to organizations in Europe, including to efforts to counter the EU’s AI Act. The largest amount – USD 40 million – is reportedly earmarked for the US-based Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. The efforts are in line with the US National Security Strategy, which calls for supporting euroskeptic political forces in countries such as Italy, Austria and Poland.
2. According to Dr. Jan Misiuna of SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Poland could eventually take Hungary’s place as MAGA’s main partner in the region, but much will depend on the outcome of the 2027 election. At present, the only Polish politician maintaining contact with Trump is President Karol Nawrocki, who, unlike Orbán, does not control his own budget. The expert also points to a shift in how influence abroad is being financed. Rather than relying on private donors, the Trump administration is increasingly turning to federal funds, which he sees as part of a long-term business strategy designed to pay dividends regardless of the outcome of November’s US elections.
3. According to Dr. Jan Misiuna of SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Poland could eventually take Hungary’s place as MAGA’s main partner in the region, but much will depend on the outcome of the 2027 election. At present, the only Polish politician maintaining contact with Trump is President Karol Nawrocki, who, unlike Orbán, does not control his own budget. The expert also points to a shift in how influence abroad is being financed. Rather than relying on private donors, the Trump administration is increasingly turning to federal funds, which he sees as part of a long-term business strategy designed to pay dividends regardless of the outcome of November’s US elections.