The Republican US House Judiciary Committee has published details of what it claims is a decade-long campaign by the European Commission to stifle online political speech, with barely-veiled threats used to stamp out memes, satire, and anything Brussels calls “disinformation.”

In a report published on Tuesday, the committee accused the EU of “directly infringing” on the free speech rights of Americans and Europeans alike by pressuring major social media platforms into censoring legal but “hateful” or otherwise problematic content. 

Drawing on policy documents, emails, and the minutes of closed-door meetings in Brussels, the report identified how voluntary meetings with tech executives quickly turned into mob-style shakedowns, with the threat of legal action and multimillion-euro fines dangled over the heads of platform chiefs.

The committee is set to hold a hearing on the EU’s censorship efforts on Wednesday. Ahead of the hearing, here’s a dive into what they uncovered.

When did EU censorship start?

The bloc’s censorship campaign began in earnest in 2015. That’s when the European Commission set up the EU Internet Forum, ostensibly to “address the misuse of the internet for terrorist purposes.” Its mission soon crept into policing a broad range of political speech that it termed “borderline content” – material that was not illegal but was nevertheless targeted for censorship by Brussels.

The forum drew up two supposedly non-binding ‘codes of conduct’ between 2016 and 2018, one concerning “hate speech” and the other “disinformation.” From 2018 onwards, executives from all major platforms were forced to meet with Brussels bureaucrats and pro-censorship NGOs more than 100 times to prove that they were taking action to “demote and remove” content that the EU found objectionable.

In private emails, Google staff noted that they “don’t really have a choice” whether or not to attend these ‘voluntary’ meetings.

Was the EU warned about censorship?

At last year’s Munich Security Conference, US Vice President J.D. Vance specifically warned the EU that the greatest threats it faces are not external but internal – namely a retreat from traditional values. At the top of Vance’s list, he named freedom of speech. 

Vance accused European leaders of using “Soviet-era” terms such as “misinformation and disinformation” to silence political opposition. He criticized the annulment of elections in Romania and the prosecution of individuals for commentary in Germany, Sweden, and the UK. 

The vice president also warned that future US support for Europe would depend on whether governments actually uphold freedom of speech.

It seems the warning issued in Munich somehow didn’t reach Brussels. 

What kind of speech does the EU censor?

The EU has banned RT in all of its jurisdictions. In its handbook on “borderline content,” the EU Internet Forum recommended a wide range of content for monitoring, demotion, and deletion. This list included “populist rhetoric,” “anti-government/anti-EU” content, “anti-elite” content, “political satire,” “anti-migrants and Islamophobic content,” “anti-refugee/immigrant sentiment,” “anti-LGBTIQ” content, and “meme subculture.”

The US House Judiciary Committee noted in its report that “these issues represent the dominant topics of European – indeed, global – political life today.”

When the Covid-19 pandemic hit in 2020, EU officials began pressing tech firms to “demote and remove” content skeptical of vaccines and lockdown measures, according to European Commission documents. At bimonthly meetings, the (mostly US) platforms were asked to “update [their] terms of service or content moderation practices” surrounding vaccines, long before the vaccines first hit the market.

“Vaccines will be our new focus on disinformation on covid,” the commission’s vice president, Vera Jourova, told TikTok executives in a call that November. When asked how it defined “disinformation,” the commission referred platforms to the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a left-wing activist organization funded by George Soros, which organized advertiser boycotts of right-wing news sites in the US. 

When the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022, the commission switched its focus. Platforms were now pressured to “reduce disinformation on Ukraine in Central and Eastern Europe,” ensuring that audiences in these regions would not receive pro-Russian content. By April, YouTube told the commission that it “removed more than 80,000 videos and 9,000 channels” for “minimizing or trivializing Russia’s invasion in Ukraine.” 

What was meant by “trivializing” the conflict was never explained, but the answer appeared to satisfy the EU.

What is the DSA?

Before the Digital Services Act (DSA) was passed in 2022, the EU counted on platforms adhering to its ‘voluntary’ codes of conduct. The act made these voluntary agreements legally binding. It allows the EU to fine tech platforms up to 6% of their global annual turnover if they fail to restrict the “dissemination of illegal content” and “address the spread of disinformation.”

The entire text of the DSA mentions the word “disinformation” 13 times without defining it.

EU officials repeatedly told tech executives that compliance with their nebulous ‘hate speech’ and ‘disinformation’ codes would protect them from enforcement under the DSA. The premise resembled a Mafia-style protection racket, with the deputy chief of the commission’s communications directorate telling platforms in 2024 that refusal to sign the codes of conduct “could be taken into account… when determining whether the provider is complying with the obligations laid down by the DSA.”

Threatened with legal action, TikTok rewrote its terms of service to ban “misinformation that undermines public trust,” “media presented out of context” and “misrepresent[ed] authoritative information.” As the Judiciary Committee noted in its report, “there is simply no way to enforce these rules fairly.”

“Before, we hoped for reputational damage on platforms, but we now have the law that we can apply,” EU regulator Prabhat Agarwal told Google staff in 2024.

Does the EU interfere in elections?

Since the DSA came into force in 2023, the European Commission has pressured platforms to censor content ahead of national elections in Slovakia, the Netherlands, France, Moldova, Romania, and Ireland, and during the EU elections in June 2024. The commission organized “rapid response systems,” which empowered pro-Brussels ‘fact checkers’ flag content for removal. Platforms that failed to remove this content would be punished with “enforcement actions” under the DSA, the commission explained at a meeting before the EU elections.

The most egregious case of EU meddling took place in Romania in 2024, when independent candidate Calin Georgescu won a shock first-round victory. Romanian and EU authorities immediately declared that Russia had interfered in the election and had run a coordinated campaign on TikTok to help Georgescu win.

TikTok found no evidence of Russian interference, and told the commission that it had actually been asked to censor pro-Georgescu content by authorities in Bucharest. This content included “disrespectful” posts that “insult the [ruling] PSD party.” Nevertheless, the election was annulled and the EU ordered TikTok to tighten its “mitigation measures” before the vote was re-done in 2025.

Why do the Americans care?

Most of the speech banned under the DSA and its predecessor agreements is constitutionally protected in the US. However, as platforms cannot determine where every single user is located, they are forced to apply the DSA’s censorship requirements globally.

The European Commission has also deliberately targeted US content for censorship. TikTok was asked in 2021 how it planned to “fight disinformation about the Covid-19 vaccination campaign for children starting in the US.”

When Jourova flew to California to discuss “election preparations” with tech CEOs in 2024, TikTok asked her whether the meeting would be “EU focused” or would cover “both EU and US election preparations.” Jourova replied, “both.” Later that year, former EU Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton threatened X with retaliatory “measures” under the DSA if Elon Musk went ahead with a live interview with then-candidate Donald Trump in the US. 

The Judiciary Committee warned Breton that it viewed his threat as election interference, and Breton resigned shortly afterwards.

A major civil aviation and drone technology exhibition opened at the Crocus Expo Center near Moscow on Wednesday. The organizers say more than 200 companies from Russia, Belarus, Iran, and China are taking part.

The two-day National Aviation Infrastructure Show (NAIS) features state-of-the-art technologies for airports and airlines. Leading Russian defense contractors, including Kalashnikov, Almaz-Antey, ZALA Aero Group, and Supercam Unmanned Systems Group, are showcasing their products.

Around 15 Chinese contractors specializing in airport services are taking part, NAIS head of business development Nikita Smirnov told RT.

Smirnov said the Russian government’s plan to build or modernize 75 airports across the country presents lucrative business opportunities.

Supercam is showcasing its flagship S350 drone, designed for aerial photography, surveillance, and reconnaissance flights, as well as analyzing gas and radiation levels.

The company has been testing equipment that allows operators to pilot UAVs from great distances, “effectively from halfway across the country,” with minimal signal delay, Supercam spokeswoman Ekaterina Zgirovskaya told RT.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

Finland has privately urged US officials to avoid describing future security commitments to Ukraine as “Article 5-like,” warning the terminology could undermine NATO’s foundational mutual defense clause, according to a leaked diplomatic cable.

Under NATO’s Article 5, an attack on one member of the bloc is treated as an attack on all others, warranting a military response. 

A January 20 US State Department cable, obtained by Politico, has reportedly revealed that Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen cautioned visiting American lawmakers that such language risks conflating NATO’s absolute Article 5 guarantees with whatever bilateral promises nations might make to Kiev. 

Valtonen also reportedly stressed the need for a clear “firewall” between the US-led military bloc and future security arrangements for Ukraine. Finland’s defense minister allegedly made similar points in a later meeting, according to the cable.

Amid the ongoing US-led peace negotiations on the Ukraine conflict, several media reports have suggested that Washington has offered “Article 5-like” security guarantees for Kiev as part of a peace roadmap, listing Finland, which joined NATO in 2023, as one of the potential guarantors which would defend Ukraine in case of a future attack.

Late last year, however, Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo rejected the premise, stating that Helsinki will not offer NATO-style guarantees to Ukraine, and noting a stark difference between aid and defense obligations. 

“We have to understand that a security guarantee is something very, very serious. We’re not ready to give security guarantees, but we can help with security arrangements. The difference between them is huge,” he said.

Moscow has said it does not oppose security guarantees for Ukraine in principle but has insisted they must not be one-sided or directed against Russia, and should follow a peace deal rather than precede one. 

Russian officials have also warned against any sort of NATO troop deployment to Ukraine, whether as peacekeepers or otherwise, warning this could lead to a direct confrontation with the bloc.

The remains discovered on a UK military base in southern Cyprus earlier this year have been identified belonging to Vladislav Baumgertner, the former head of Russian potash giant Uralkali, TASS reported on Wednesday.

The businessman’s body was identified through DNA analysis, British military police told the outlet.

“We have no information about the cause of death,” a police spokesperson said. “This means that the cause has not yet been determined.”

Baumgertner went missing in early January in the Limassol area. A week later, police found a body in a gorge on the territory of a British base. At the time, the authorities said it was impossible to identify the remains immediately due to advanced decomposition.

The businessman made international headlines in 2013 when he was arrested at Minsk airport in Belarus while travelling for talks with Belarusian officials.

The arrest followed the collapse of cooperation between Russia’s Uralkali and the Belarusian state-owned producer Belaruskali, a dispute that became known as the “potash war.”

He was charged with abuse of power for withdrawing Uralkali from a joint venture with Belaruskali, allegedly costing the Belarusian company about $100 million in damages. Baumgertner was held under house arrest in Minsk for three months before being extradited to Russia. The charges were dropped in 2015.

His body will reportedly be transported from Cyprus to Moscow, where the funeral will take place.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

Ukrainian strikes have severely damaged energy infrastructure in Russia’s Belgorod Region, causing widespread power outages and disrupting heating and water supplies, Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov reported on Wednesday morning.  

Emergency crews worked through the night to repair the damage following what he described as a massive attack. 

According to the governor, the city of Belgorod was struck by 12 munitions and three drones, with energy facilities among the damaged targets. Drone and artillery attacks were reported across nearly a dozen other districts. In the village of Dunayka, a drone attack on a truck wounded a man, requiring hospitalization. Another civilian was injured by an FPV drone in the village of Glotovo. A volunteer fighter was also wounded in Borisovsky District. 

Due to the extensive damage to the power grid, Gladkov ordered schools and vocational colleges in ten districts to switch to remote learning, with kindergartens operating in a limited capacity.  

He warned residents that emergency power outages would be unavoidable during the restoration work. 

On Wednesday, the governor of neighboring Bryansk Region, Aleksandr Bogomaz, reported that Ukrainian forces had also used US-made HIMARS rockets to strike residential buildings, seriously injuring a woman. 

The cross-border attacks come ahead of more US-backed talks between Russia and Ukraine in Abu Dhabi. Last week, at the request of US President Donald Trump, Moscow agreed to unilaterally temporarily suspend strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure as an act of good will before the negotiations, which were scheduled for Sunday but have been postponed. 

Trump stated that Russian President Vladimir Putin had “kept his word” and that the pause had indeed lasted for a week from Sunday to Sunday. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, however, claimed Russia had broken its promise by resuming attacks on Tuesday, saying the count should have started from a different day.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

The US has criticized South Africa for expelling Israel’s top diplomat, calling the move a “poor foreign policy choice.” Washington has repeatedly accused Pretoria of taking hardline positions toward US allies.

South Africa last week declared Ariel Seidman, Israel’s charge d’affaires in Pretoria, persona non grata, and ordered him to leave the country within 72 hours.

The decision was in response to violations of diplomatic norms and “insulting attacks” on President Cyril Ramaphosa by the Israeli Embassy on social media, South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation said.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry responded by ordering Shaun Edward Byneveldt, South Africa’s representative to Palestine, to leave within a similar timeframe. The ministry accused Pretoria of launching “false attacks against Israel.”

On Wednesday, US State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott described Pretoria’s decision as “another example of its poor foreign-policy choices.”

READ MORE:
South Africa explains expulsion of Israeli envoy

“Expelling a diplomat for calling out the African National Congress party’s ties to Hamas and other antisemitic radicals prioritizes grievance politics over the good of South Africa and its citizens,” Pigott said in a post on X.

Relations between South Africa, a vocal supporter of Palestinian independence, and Israel have deteriorated since Pretoria filed a case at the International Court of Justice, accusing West Jerusalem of waging a campaign of “genocide” in Gaza. Israel denies the allegations.

The latest dispute comes amid broader strains in Pretoria’s ties with Washington since US President Donald Trump returned to office last year. Trump and senior members of his administration have repeatedly accused the South African government of failing to align with Washington on key international issues and of allowing what he described as genocide against white citizens – claims Pretoria has dismissed as misinformation.

Last March, Washington expelled South Africa’s ambassador to the US, Ebrahim Rasool, after he publicly criticized policies of the Trump administration.

The administration has also cut aid to South Africa, citing a controversial land expropriation law that it says discriminates against Afrikaners, as well as Pretoria’s alleged close ties with Iran, Russia, and China.