By Francisco Bencosme
On 5 March, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs held a hearing titled “Examining the Office of Insular Affairs’ Role in Fostering Prosperity in the Pacific Territories and Addressing External Threats to Peace and Security.” This article is based on Francisco Bencosme’s written testimony focused on transnational crises like climate change undermining Pacific peace and security. Bencosme served as the China Policy Lead at USAID until January 2025.
The United States is at risk of ceding its influence in the Pacific Islands and repeating the mistakes it failed to learn after World War II. Our partners in the Pacific are calling it our “yo-yo” policy towards the region. The United States spent the last six years saying it would intensify our engagement in a crucial national security region, and we did so, only to now pull back US presence on the ground and self-sabotage American influence. Gutting foreign assistance limits our ability to influence and address challenges in the Pacific, especially climate change, disaster response, and food security, key areas of strategic competition.
The Pacific Islands countries do not want a militarized, competitive approach to the region and are extremely sensitive to great power competition undermining their sovereignty. However, in order to project power across the Pacific and have access to the skies and seas, we need to win the hearts and minds of the Pacific. In the Pacific community, there is no distinction between hard power and soft power, instead, the two are intertwined. For example, in the 2018 Boe Declaration, the Pacific Community embraced a broader definition of “security inclusive of human security, humanitarian assistance, prioritizing environmental security, and regional cooperation in building resilience to disasters and climate change.” USAID was pivotal in responding to these security threats. USAID was working side by side with our diplomats and military officers to help the United States project power across the Pacific.
Climate Change
Climate change remains an existential threat to the Pacific Islands. Sea level rise continues to be above the global average and ocean heating and acidification are threatening to harm ecosystems and livelihoods. For many Pacific Island countries (PICs), this is the “single greatest threat” to the people of the PICs, as shown at the 49th Pacific Island Forum’s Boe Declaration in 2018. At the COP26 United Nations climate summit, the Tuvalu Foreign Minister, Mr. Simon Kofe, delivered a speech, while standing ankle-deep in water, stating that when it comes to addressing climate change, “there really are no good guys and bad guys.” This past year, the Pacific Island Forum secretary general stated very clearly, “Geopolitical maneuvering means nothing to Pacific peoples who have cyclones coming over the horizon… Geopolitical maneuvering means nothing to Pacific peoples who have water lapping at their doorsteps due to sea level rise… Geopolitical maneuvering means nothing to Pacific peoples who are focused on building resilience, peace and prosperity for our families, communities, nations and our region.”
In recent years, USAID announced the Pacific Islands Climate Finance Activity to strengthen the capacity of the PICs – including the Freely Associated States (FAS) – to increase access to and improve management of financing and investments to support climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. The United States also announced the expansion of the Papua New Guinea (PN) Electrification Partnership through the Pacific Islands. This expanded energy access in the rest of the Pacific Islands through a multilateral partnership with Australia, Japan, and New Zealand – and was an example of how to leverage small amounts of US investment and multiply it with US partners and allies. With rising sea levels, increased flooding, and stronger tropical cyclones, the Pacific Islands are on the frontlines of the climate crisis. Climate change also risks exacerbating the impact of natural disasters and food security in the region. The Trump Administration’s removal of climate change considerations from foreign and security policy, abandonment of multilateral fora, and elimination of critical USAID projects in the region means this top priority for the PICs has been abandoned.
Natural Disasters
The Pacific Island countries are in one of the most natural disaster-prone regions in the world. Disaster-related events are both seasonal and cyclical, with the small size, remoteness, and fragile biodiversity of the islands making them exceptionally vulnerable. The Compacts of Free Association (COFA), codified by Congress, designated USAID as the main agency responsible for disaster response to all three Freely Associated States. With the demolition of USAID, no other US agency has the authority, expertise, capacity, or resources to respond to a natural disaster in the Pacific. Prior to recent events, USAID funded a network of warehouses with pre-positioned relief supplies and recovery materials. Pre-positioning supplies has proven to be much cheaper and more efficient than bringing resources after a disaster has struck. Given the extremely remote location of these islands and their outer-island populations, response planning must include preparedness, pre-positioning, and qualified and trained staff able to respond. This emergency assistance provided life-saving shelter, water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), and non-food items via the prepositioning. Having relief readily accessible and appropriate can make all the difference in a disaster life-saving response.
USAID’s three-pronged approach—to enhance emergency response systems, improve disaster preparedness, and strengthen first-responder capabilities—promoted self-reliance, enabling partner countries to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and respond more effectively to disasters. This approach has been largely abandoned. Two weeks ago, for the first time in three decades, three tropical cyclones ravaged through the South Pacific. If they had hit any of our Pacific Islands partners, the United States would have had no capacity to respond to the crisis if called upon. If it hits our Freely Associated States allies, the United States could potentially be in violation of the COFA agreement, and US law. The United States’ expertise and capacity to respond to humanitarian disaster was unrivaled – it was an invaluable tool of US leadership vis-a-vis China – where we clearly had unparalleled advantage. That is now all squandered.
Food Insecurity and Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing
Food insecurity remains a real challenge in the Pacific Islands as the region faces the triple burden of malnutrition, poverty, and climate change. Before its closure, USAID, in partnership with Australia and New Zealand, launched the Pacific Vision for Adapted Crops and Soils initiative, which would have built more climate-resilient food systems in Pacific island countries, in partnership with the Pacific Community and New Zealand. It supported regional Pacific efforts such as the Unlocking Blue Pacific Prosperity initiative to increase targeted investments in diverse, nutritious, and climate-adapted crops grown in healthy soils and sustainably managed landscapes. In partnership with the regional initiative, it also worked with the private sector to diversify supply chains in the region.
At the same time, USAID also ran a program that not only improved food security in the region, but also had direct and clear benefits for the US fishing fleet. Called the “Our Fish Our Future” initiative, USAID partnered with the University of Rhode Island to support the management of critical fisheries and ecosystems. The project sought to improve food security and maintain tuna stocks, a key economic resource for the United States fishing industry, processing plants, and other American businesses downstream. American consumers eat over 1 billion pounds of canned tuna every year.
Relatedly, USAID also helped combat threats to the sustainability of fish stocks, food security in the region, and, consequently, economies in the Pacific and beyond. For example, through programs to detect and counter illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUUF), an important factor in food insecurity. In general, IUUF costs the global economy between $26 and $50 billion annually, harming local and international economies. The tuna industry in the Pacific Islands, commercially generates 34% of PIC government revenue (with tuna-fishing access alone) and accounts for more than 45% of state revenues in most Pacific Island countries. For many Pacific Island countries, IUUF poses an existential threat to their populations, where people rely on fish for 30% of their diet and more than 50% of their protein.
Combatting IUUF in the Pacific Islands also helps protect their national sovereignty. For example, many Pacific Island countries do not have military capabilities to police their entire exclusive economic zones. Recent US Coast Guard ship rider agreements allow PIC country law enforcement to patrol and improve their countries’ enforcement capabilities. There is also a geopolitical dimension, as China’s deep-sea fleet is the largest, with almost 17,000 vessels, the majority of which operate in the Pacific. According to the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, China was ranked as the worst offender of IUU fishing. The United States will never be able to have enough US Coast Guard fleet to compete with the PRC’s fleet – however USAID and other environmental agencies have been supporting the civilian capacity of US partners so they can at least detect and counter IUUF. Take USAID’s “Our Fish Our Future” program which worked with the University of Rhode Island to address the factors of IUU fishing that degrade coastal biodiversity and impact food stability in the Pacific Island by working with local communities to design the security programming. USAID’s work in this crucial part of maritime security has now been gutted – potentially risking Pacific prosperity and security.
Conclusion
To be clear, there is nothing wrong with wanting to reform the US foreign assistance architecture – in fact, it is much warranted. However, dismantling the entire USAID system and terminating programs without an actual strategic review process is national security malpractice. It does not put America first. It puts the People’s Republic of China first — and Pacific prosperity and security last. We find ourselves tremendously weaker due to mistakes of the past few months – mistakes that will take a very long time to recover from and where it may only be possible to mitigate the damage if large parts are reversed as soon as possible — an area where Congress has both the power and the responsibility to act.