Absolutely, although the risk for them is retaliation, especially with the US deciding that it wants to be the chief geopolitical chaos generator in the world.
Having US social media in your country is a huge geopolitical risk, especially if you're one of the regimes that isn't just doing what the US wants at all times.
I think we are seeing psychogical warfare occurring on any platform possible by many groups & governments. If we keep using technologies that refuse to adapt to strictly prevent this, rather than enable it, we are doomed. Metrics will always be gamed, and cat-and-mouse moderation makes this a losing game.
How would you even do that? Government controls mass communication by law, its privately operated with federal permission essentially (FCC). Government sets up the frameworks that media operates in. the best you an do is akin to zine printing with your little independent website. Once you go big you are subject to attack by the media if you go against elite business interests and vilification by the wider public who will never be exposed to nuance, then its over. The public narrative moves on to the next permitted discussion point and leaves you behind. I hate to be a cynic but this is what the history books suggest.
I think platforms and users need to be willing to sacrifice functions that can be abused. at least by default. Email and phone are both examples where enforcing allow-list communication at the protocol level could save them. Instead, both of these communication protocols are dying because they are now overflowing with scams and spams that are allowed to reach you instantly by default, with little to no distinction from legitimate communication. Something like Twitter probably should not exist in its current form.
