It is well known that funding is a powerful tool to influence international organizations (IOs). The recent decision by the Trump administration to withhold voluntary funding from much of the UN system has plunged the organization into a major financial crisis, leading to downsizing and restructuring across many UN bodies, from the World Health Organization to the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Because of its scale and suddenness, this approach to funding IOs has become mainly associated with the disruptive politics of the second Trump administration. However, it has a long pedigree in far-right approaches to global governance: once in government, radical and extreme-right parties use voluntary funding allocations as a strategic tool to change how IOs operate.

Radical-right and extreme-right parties promoting ultranationalist and exclusivist positions have been on the rise in Europe, the Americas, and Asia. They currently sit in around a third of all OECD governments as junior coalition partners or even as heads of government, shaping the IO funding policies of the most important donor governments. Beyond the US, far-right governments are also in power in Finland, Hungary, and Italy, among many other countries. Particularly among OECD donors, ultranationalist positions are often tied to strong anti-migration preferences. This ideological commitment of far-right parties, together with their electoral promises to halt migration, is key to understanding whether and how they try to shape IOs.

One avenue many governments, both far-right and otherwise, can use to shape IOs is earmarked funding—voluntary funding that is tied to specific themes, countries, or projects. Earmarking gives donors significant discretion over IOs, their programs, and how and where they spend money. The donors, for their part, benefit from IOs’ pooled expertise and capacity to efficiently implement projects. Read more