MPs Urge Increased Funding to Combat Foreign Disinformation

Government ministers are facing mounting pressure to increase funding for the Foreign Office and BBC World Service as part of a strategic effort to combat international disinformation campaigns, according to a new parliamentary report.

The Foreign Affairs Committee has issued a stark warning about the UK’s vulnerability to hybrid warfare tactics, particularly from Russia, calling for immediate action to strengthen the country’s defenses against organized disinformation.

In its report, the committee recommends reallocating funds from the planned defense budget increase to bolster the Foreign Office’s Hybrid Threats Directorate, which is tasked with countering hostile information operations abroad. The committee also emphasized the critical need for sustained, long-term funding for the BBC World Service.

“Russia’s hybrid attacks in particular amount to a state of war against the West,” said committee chairwoman Emily Thornberry, the Labour MP for Islington South and Finsbury. “The work of the FCDO in Eastern European countries is remarkable, but it is very disappointing to see that the FCDO lacks the resource to do more and meet the ever-increasing need elsewhere.”

Thornberry described organized disinformation as “the new warfare” and warned that open liberal democracies are “sitting ducks” without adequate defensive measures.

The recommendations come amid heightened security concerns across NATO. The UK, along with other alliance members, has committed to spending 5% of its GDP on defense in line with demands from US President Donald Trump. This commitment includes 3.5% spending on core defense and 1.5% on security and resilience measures by 2035.

The committee argues that countering information warfare should be classified as an essential component of national security spending, justifying a reallocation of resources from this expanded defense budget.

Of particular concern is the funding structure for the BBC World Service, which the report criticizes as “ill-advised.” Since the World Service has been funded through the domestic license fee—which has been frozen for two years—its global operations have contracted significantly.

MPs highlighted specific examples of how these cutbacks create security vulnerabilities. In one alarming instance, the frequency formerly used by BBC Arabic in Lebanon was quickly filled by Sputnik, a Russian state-backed broadcaster, after the BBC service was discontinued.

“If the BBC World Service does not receive the funding it needs, it will continue to contract with a diminishing influence,” the report warns. “Its loss would significantly diminish the UK’s soft power and undermine our ability to counter information warfare.”

Although the government has promised additional funding for the World Service over the next three years, the committee believes this will effectively be “flat” when accounting for inflation—insufficient to reverse recent cutbacks or expand coverage to meet emerging threats.

The report frames accurate, impartial news as “essential to the UK’s national security and overseas interests,” positioning the BBC World Service as a crucial element of the country’s defense infrastructure rather than simply a cultural export.

Security experts have long warned that disinformation campaigns from hostile states represent a growing threat to Western democracies. These operations, which often combine sophisticated social media manipulation with traditional propaganda, can undermine democratic processes, inflame social tensions, and damage trust in institutions.

The committee’s recommendations represent an acknowledgment that modern warfare extends beyond conventional military domains into information spaces, requiring a coordinated response that bridges diplomatic, media, and defense capabilities.

As global tensions continue to rise, particularly with Russia and China, the pressure on the government to implement these recommendations is likely to intensify in the coming months.