The Trump administration pressured several countries to pull their sponsorship of a major European disinformation conference, and Canada, Lithuania, and the EU’s diplomatic service eventually agreed to do so, the Guardian has learned.
The conference, #Disinfo2026, runs Wednesday and Thursday and is the annual gathering of Europe’s counter-disinformation community. It has brought hundreds of researchers, journalists, technologists, and policymakers to a hotel in Vilnius, Lithuania. It is organized by EU Disinfo Lab, an independent Brussels nonprofit.
Days before the conference, the logos of its main sponsors—Lithuania’s foreign ministry, the European External Action Service (EEAS), and Global Affairs Canada—were removed from its website.
Photos of the event shared with the Guardian also show white stickers placed over these organizations’ logos on official conference materials, suggesting they were removed from the program in haste.
Three people familiar with the matter, including European officials, confirmed that the US State Department had contacted multiple governments about their support for the conference.
Internal State Department documents seen by the Guardian also show US officials thanking Lithuania for “taking US concerns seriously.” The document says Washington was “grateful” that Lithuania supposedly found a panel framing the US as a foreign information threat “reprehensible and surprising,” and welcomed its decision to limit involvement in the conference.
That panel—titled “USA as a FIMI threat: adapt, acknowledge, push back,” with FIMI standing for “foreign information manipulation and interference”—took place Wednesday. It examined how Europe’s disinformation community could rebuild resilience without Washington, and it appears to be the first time the conference has considered the idea that the US could be a disinformation actor in Europe. Sources and the internal document indicate the State Department was explicitly focused on this panel, which included three American speakers, among them a former CIA officer.
According to one person familiar with the discussions, other communications appeared to come from the office of Sarah B. Rogers, the US undersecretary of state for public diplomacy.
Nina Jankowicz, a former US official and disinformation expert who briefly headed the Biden administration’s Disinformation Governance Board in 2022—which Republicans attacked as a vehicle for policing Americans’ speech—said she understood that Washington had pressured Lithuania and Canada to withdraw from the conference. The Guardian understands that France was contacted as well.
“What this amounts to is a purported defender of free speech at the State Department using the enormous power of the US government to try to pressure Americans from criticizing their government,” Jankowicz said.
In statements, Lithuania, Canada, and the EU said the conference program did not align with their official views on the US role in disinformation—even though that program had been in place since June, months before they withdrew their support.
“Lithuania has cancelled its participation in ‘Disinfo 2026’ as several parts of the conference programme differ from the official position of the Government,” Lithuania’s foreign ministry wrote in a statement.
Global Affairs Canada “carefully assesses participation in, and sponsorship of, external events on a case-by-case basis,” GAC spokesperson Samantha Lafleur said. “Following changes to the framing of several panel discussions, GAC decided to revise its participation in those sessions at the EU DisinfoLab 2026 conference.”
Canadian officials are still taking part in the conference, Lafleur added.
An EU spokesperson confirmed that the European ExteThe European External Action Service had decided to withdraw its support from the conference because “the organisers chose to frame some of the discussions in a way which does not align with the official positions held by the EU.” EU officials, the Guardian understands, did not agree with the characterization of the US as a disinformation actor. Despite withdrawing its branding as an official supporter, the EU continues to fund the conference. In its latest report on foreign information manipulation and interference threats, published in March, the EU’s diplomatic service named Russia and China as “threat actors” without any negative reference to the US. A diplomatic source at France’s foreign ministry said “there’s absolutely no reason for us to change our commitments” when it came to supporting the conference. “We stick to supporting civil society. It’s not just principled, it’s operational,” she said, adding that the conference was a “laboratory” that helped Europe develop key policy around disinformation. The US state department has taken an increasingly interventionist posture towards free speech and civil society in Europe over the past year. The Guardian has revealed that the state department is awarding millions of dollars in non-competitive grants to organizations across the continent supportive of Trump’s agenda. Lithuania’s withdrawal comes just after the prime minister, Mindaugas Sinkevicius, said Lithuania would pay for a permanent US military base if the US agreed, a day after Trump said he would consider the request. Sinkevicius called a lasting American presence a critical guarantee of deterrence against Russia. “They are great people, so we will certainly look at it,” the US president said on Monday. Sinkevicius said he first proposed the idea in a meeting with Trump’s envoy John Coale, and called it a “critically important guarantee of deterrence and security.” Lithuania, a member of the EU and Nato, borders Russia and its close ally Belarus. The US has kept a rotating armored battalion of almost 1,000 troops in the country since 2019, the US Army has noted.
Frequently Asked Questions
FAQs The EU Canceling Its Sponsorship of a Disinformation Conference After a Trump Officials Request
1 What actually happened here
The European Union withdrew its sponsorship of a conference focused on disinformation after officials from the Trump administration asked it to The event went ahead but without EU backing
2 Which conference was it
It was a conference on disinformation and information integrity Reports at the time said the EU pulled its support shortly before the event following pressure from US officials
3 Why would the EU cancel its own sponsorship
The EU said it wanted to avoid the event being politicized Critics argue the EU gave in to political pressure rather than defending its own antidisinformation work
4 Why did Trump officials want the EU out
They objected to the events focus and the way disinformation was being framed seeing it as targeting conservative voices and US political figures They pushed for the EU to drop its sponsorship
5 What is disinformation in simple terms
False information spread on purpose to mislead people Its different from misinformation which is false info spread by mistake without intent to deceive
6 Why does the EU care about disinformation at all
The EU sees disinformation as a threat to elections public health and trust in institutions It has funded research factchecking and platforms transparency rules to fight it
7 Did canceling the sponsorship stop the conference
No The conference still took place The EU just wasnt listed as a sponsor anymore
8 Did the EU break any rules by pulling out
Sponsorship decisions are usually political and discretionary so its unlikely any law was broken But it raised questions about the EUs independence and consistency
9 Isnt it normal for governments to lobby each other
Yes lobbying is routine in diplomacy The unusual part is a foreign government successfully pressuring the EU to drop support for its own policy event
10 Whats the main criticism of the EUs decision
That it looks like the EU caved to US political pressure undermining its stated commitment to fighting disinformation and setting a bad precedent
11 Whats the main defense of the decision
Supporters say the EU avoided being dragged into a partisan US fight and kept the event from becoming a political battleground rather than a serious policy discussion
