In early March, former USAID China Advisor Francisco Bencosme warned that withdrawing disaster relief and food aid risked undermining the United States’ power and influence in the Pacific Region. Indeed, over the last month, the United States’ strategic competitors have begun to fill the $54+ billion aid shortfall caused by that retreat.
While the humanitarian toll of the USAID withdrawal is severe – fueling preventable deaths, global health risks, conflict, and inequality – it also threatens US national security interests. The dissolution of USAID has created a soft power vacuum in East Asia and the Indo-Pacific for China to easily fill.
The Chinese government has long used foreign aid and investments via the Belt and Road Initiative to gain strategic influence in Africa, Asia, and South America. However, it had to navigate existing US investments and partnerships. Now, with US resources gone, China has the opportunity to bolster its geostrategic interests – and outcompete the United States.
The response to the recent 7.7 magnitude earthquake in Myanmar is a key case study of this phenomenon. In the wake of the disaster, while aid cuts significantly limited US response, Chinese and Russian teams were among the first to provide emergency response personnel and key supplies. Furthermore, although the United States initially promised up to $2 million in aid, on-the-ground assessment teams were days behind their Chinese counterparts, DC stakeholders coordinating the response were laid off, and US local partners were completely shattered by the foreign aid freeze – raising questions as to whether or not the United States had the capacity to support at all. On April 11th, the Chinese government pledged an additional 1 billion yuan ($137 million) to support relief and recovery efforts. While the United States has since increased its pledge to $9 million, NGO leaders remain skeptical that the money can be channeled without partners on the ground.
Beyond emergency assistance to Myanmar, China has begun to mirror the United States’ long-term humanitarian and development funding as well. While experts at Brookings and the Center for Global Development (among many others) have noted that China cannot – and has no strategic interest in – fully filling the void left by USAID, Beijing’s recent investments clearly showcase the co-benefits of supporting regional humanitarian efforts and competing with the West. Examples include:
- Cambodia: When the United States defunded local aid programs, China stepped in with new – and nearly identical – programs and funding. The United States has dedicated more than $1b in aid to the country since the 1990s, with the Biden Administration seeking to build stronger ties in the region as a counterweight to Chinese influence.
- Nepal: China has offered to fill aid gaps in “humanitarian aid, health, and education” and step up its broader investments via the Belt and Road Initiative. Nepal’s strategic location between India and China has ratcheted up its geopolitical importance in recent years, creating stiff competition between India, China, and the United States to bolster its power and influence with the government.
- Mongolia: The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the China International Development Cooperation Agency (CIDCA) recently announced a joint initiative dedicated to building climate resilience – their first in the region. In 2022, USAID had put $2.1 million into a similar project, part of over $20 million invested by the United States since 2001. While Mongolia has historically adopted an intentionally neutral foreign policy approach, rising tensions between its Russian, Chinese, and American partners, combined with its natural resources, have increased its geopolitical importance.
As the monsoon and typhoon seasons approach in East Asia and the Indo-Pacific, the cadence of extreme weather events, conflicts, and crises will continue to showcase the void left by USAID. By handing China these opportunities to step in as the leading provider of assistance, the United States is degrading its soft power in the region – and, therefore, its long-term ability to compete strategically.