The Role, Function and Prospects of Non-Governmental Organizations in the US Strategy Towards China

Abstract:Non-governmental organizations are one of the main tools used by the United States to implement its foreign policy. In the process of implementing its strategy towards China, American non-governmental organizations not only play a significant role in policy initiatives and public opinion guidance, but also actively participate in the full-domain competition of the United States against China. On one hand, these non-governmental organizations deeply engage in issues related to China, by providing financial support to specific organizations, guiding their activities, and even directly intervening in related violent activities, to promote subversive activities that undermine China's sovereignty. On the other hand, the non-governmental organizations supported by the United States actively participate in the economic and technological warfare against China by disrupting the construction of the "Belt and Road Initiative" and exaggerating the so-called "technological authoritarianism". In the context of the escalating confrontational nature of the US strategy towards China and the gradually diminishing strategic resources, the US government and Congress will adopt legislative measures to clearly define the position of non-governmental organizations in the implementation of the US strategy towards China, and will further enhance the role of non-governmental organizations in the ideological and geopolitical confrontation, as well as the economic and technological competition with China through measures such as increasing financial support. At the same time, some other non-governmental organizations in the United States have a certain positive influence in the field of promoting cooperation with China, which can create favorable conditions for maintaining and expanding the space for dialogue and cooperation between China and the United States.

One of the main characteristics of the globalized world is the increasing role of non-state actors, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are an important representative of such non-state actors. NGOs refer to organizations that operate independently of the government, although they may receive funding from government agencies, their specific operations are not subject to government supervision, and they are not representatives of the government. Based on the political and social system characteristics, the development of NGOs in some Western countries such as the United States has a profound historical tradition and plays an important role in social and political operations.Its NGOs play the role of connecting the government with the market, and the public sector with the private sector. They can cultivate social relationships, social capital and social trust. Therefore, NGOs can play many important roles in global charity, education, poverty alleviation, environmental protection, and rights protection. At the same time, NGOs are also one of the main tools used by the United States and other Western countries in their foreign strategies. This has led to a significant gap between the organizational visions proclaimed by many NGOs and their actual operational goals. Moreover, the openness, non-official nature and political neutrality of their activities have also been widely questioned. Although some NGOs with American background have played a beneficial role in international environmental protection and poverty alleviation, there are also many American or international NGOs and the local NGOs they support that have become the main tools for the United States to interfere in other countries' internal affairs and safeguard its narrow political and economic interests, and engage in activities that threaten the social and political stability of the host countries. In the US's China strategy, the initiative orientation, public opinion creation and activity implementation of some NGOs show their goal orientation of cooperating with the US government to curb the development of China, and this is fully reflected in their obstruction of the "Belt and Road Initiative" construction and suppression of the international development of Chinese technology enterprises. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the role of NGOs in the US's China strategy and the path through which the United States uses NGOs to achieve its policy goals towards China, and to explore its influence and development trends, in order to grasp the key points and methods of the US's future strategy towards China.

I. The Position and Role of NGOs in the US Foreign Policy and China Policy

Even during the Cold War, NGOs played a significant role in the US's strategy of peaceful evolution. After the end of the Cold War, especially in the second decade of the 21st century, the NGOs supported by the US have been increasingly playing an important role in China-related policy initiatives and in the information warfare targeting China.

(1) The Role of NGOs Represented by Foundations in the US Foreign Policy Strategy

International NGOs with an American background possess rich overseas knowledge, project experience, and talent reserves, and have established a mature cooperation network. During the Cold War era, American NGOs played a significant role in the country's foreign relations and carried out activities in areas where the government was unable to function. American NGOs entering the target country can influence the local society and government through their local development efforts, and may also have an impact on the interests of third countries in that region. During this process, many American NGOs have a distinct duality. On one hand, these NGOs' projects such as education and poverty alleviation help promote the development of the host country; on the other hand, these NGOs undertake the mission of exporting American external ideology and expanding American culture, and become tools for the US government to implement its foreign policies. It is worth noting that due to their close ties with Western countries in terms of region and funding sources, some international NGOs whose headquarters are not located in the United States often become agents of the United States, and the ambiguity of this affiliation relationship provides an unrecognizable cover for the US government to form "international NGOs" that serve its political interests and covertly exercise some of its political functions.

For a long time, as a special form of NGO and a pivotal organization within the NGO network, foundations have possessed tremendous political power both in the United States and worldwide. Moreover, the United States often utilizes political organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to establish connections with potential political opponents in target countries and other funded parties, with the aim of interfering in other countries' internal affairs or even overthrowing their regimes. In fact, the United States government established the National Endowment for Democracy precisely to use NGOs as a means to replace, assist, and cover up the actions of relevant institutions of the United States and other Western countries in conducting external interference.

In the early days of President Reagan's administration, the disgraceful actions and highly destructive scandals of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) around the world were made public. In November 1983, with the legislation and funding from the US Congress, the National Endowment for Democracy was officially established. Its mission was to support the so-called democratic movements overseas through NGO channels, promote American values, foster pro-American forces, and safeguard the global interests of the United States. The National Endowment for Democracy worked under the guidance of the US government and cooperated closely with relevant government departments including the US State Department and the CIA in implementing the US foreign strategy. After 1993, the funding sources of the National Endowment for Democracy mainly included four aspects: first, the main part of the funding provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID); second, since the late 1990s, it received funding through the implementation of the US Congress' foreign democracy projects; third, the grants from the State Department's Human Rights and Democracy Fund; and fourth, a small amount of donations from private foundations including the Smith Richardson Foundation. The National Endowment for Democracy allocated funds to its four affiliated institutions, aiming to contact and bribe the relevant groups and individuals in the target countries in a targeted manner. Through "third-party organizations" like the National Endowment for Democracy, the United States can exert influence and intervene in the politics and society of other countries and separate the US government from the parties it funds, groups it supports, and regime change actions it implements. Thus, the National Endowment for Democracy and its affiliated institutions, under the guise of NGOs, are all US foreign strategy tools tasked with instigating so-called democratic revolutions. Moreover, the National Endowment for Democracy has greater freedom than the CIA. At the same time, many private foundations in the United States also play an important role in the implementation of US foreign policies. This is because globalization has amplified the power of foundations, as many global institutions are created by foundations and continue to receive support from them, and private foundations support the military, political, and economic hegemony of the United States by sponsoring NGOs around the world.

In this context, a significant change in world politics during the post-Cold War era is that Western agents have almost unimpeded access to the management of national election processes worldwide. The overall goal of the US government in manipulating foreign elections has not changed; it has merely reduced its reliance on the CIA and relied more on the National Democratic Institute, the United States Agency for International Development, Freedom House, George Soros' Open Society Foundations (OSF), and other well-funded, globally-present (primarily American and serving American interests) public and private professional political organizations' networks. Unlike the CIA, the National Democratic Institute's large-scale activities overseas create opportunities for political activists who do not need to disguise their true identities. During this process, the National Democratic Institute, along with some American private foundations, funds so-called progressive organizations, movements, and policy "think tanks", influencing public opinion and political culture through projects related to the media and academic researchers, and recruiting activists and potential rebels in the target countries. Based on their resources and reputation, many foundations have close cooperative relationships with government departments, UN agencies, universities, and various public or secret NGOs. For example, to promote radical agendas in certain countries, the United States Agency for International Development established partnerships with individuals like Soros, making the Open Society Foundations the main executor of the Agency's foreign aid projects, and the Agency's funds have been used to support the Open Society Foundations or their affiliated organizations around the world. Moreover, after the end of the Cold War, "Freedom House" and other long-established American NGOs continued to play an important role in external political initiatives, values and human rights promotion, and were all supported, funded and executed by the US government with its assigned missions.

(2) The Role of NGOs in China Policy Initiatives and Public Opinion Guidance in the United States

During the process of formulating and implementing the China strategy in the United States, NGOs played a significant role in policy initiatives and public opinion guidance. Especially since 2017, American NGOs have become increasingly active in policy initiatives related to C and in the information warfare against China.

First, NGOs provide a basis for the adjustment of the US China policy. To support the transformation of the US strategy towards China, the National Democratic Institute in December 2017 came up with the "sharp power" theory, which holds that the so-called "soft authoritarian power" should be classified as "sharp power" that penetrates or penetrates the political and information environment of the target country. This is actually an upgraded version of the traditional "China threat theory". Subsequently, the US Congress held a hearing on the so-called "exporting authoritarianism through China" issue in the same month. Shanthi Kalathil, director of the International Forum for Democratic Studies at the National Democratic Institute, and Sophie Richardson, director of Human Rights Watch in China, as the main speakers, using the concept of "sharp power", criticized the "human rights situation" of China and China's external cultural dissemination activities. With intensive cross-departmental collaboration, the "sharp power theory" successfully entered the agenda-setting of international mainstream media and social media, and the term "sharp power" also rapidly became a hot topic of international public opinion. Moreover, this argument provided theoretical support and public opinion enhancement for the US government to upgrade its confrontation against China and make relevant policy adjustments.

Second, NGOs are the "pawns" of the US in its cyber information warfare.The US government has been continuously intensifying its "information war" against China, that is, fabricating and distorting facts about China and conducting corresponding international public opinion guidance and shaping.During this process, the US government adopted a "whole of society" approach towards China, involving the mobilization of various social sectors such as media, NGOs, enterprises, think tanks, universities, and individuals to jointly carry out actions with a common goal. In this process, US NGOs used methods such as publishing research reports and posting documents on social networks to influence the public opinion of the target countries and even the international community, aiming to tarnish China's national image and thereby undermining the international environment necessary for China's peaceful development.Based on this, since 2017, the competitive and confrontational nature of the US policy towards China has been continuously escalating and spreading across various fields. It not only uses NGOs to manipulate and escalate anti-China political activities regarding Hong Kong and Xinjiang issues both domestically and internationally, but also uses it to launch geopolitical and economic warfare against the "Belt and Road Initiative", and employs industry-specific and professional NGOs to conduct technological warfare against China with political goals, thereby causing negative impacts on China's international image, geopolitical and economic environment, and even the international development process of Chinese enterprises.

II. Using NGOs to Facilitate the "Underground War" of Politics between the United States and China

Since the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century, the United States has used issues such as those related to Hong Kong and Xinjiang as key entry points to curb China's rise and interfere in China's internal affairs. During this process, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from the United States and other Western countries, along with the various organizations they support, have become important tools for the United States to implement this strategy.

(1) The involvement of US NGOs in the Hong Kong constitutional amendment controversy and subsequent developments

Although the US's attempts to undermine China's governance of Hong Kong have completely failed, the role played by the NGOs supported by the US during this process still merits long-term vigilance. During the period of British colonial rule, Hong Kong established a special status as a "free port", making it a gathering place for Western NGOs. These NGOs, under the guise of promoting "democracy" and safeguarding "human rights", used "observing elections" and "social surveys" as excuses to infiltrate and exert influence. This created conditions for the United States to utilize NGOs to undermine "one country, two systems" and the stability of Hong Kong. Against this backdrop, the US government and the NGOs it supported implemented and escalated political "secret warfare" against China through means such as financial support, creating public opinion, and directly or indirectly causing chaos. This was fully demonstrated in the Hong Kong amendment disputes and subsequent events that occurred after June 2019.

First, the US Congress implemented interference by providing financial support to NGOs. The funds allocated by the US Congress were the main source of funds for NGOs to intervene. As early as 2003, the US Congress passed a funding resolution that allocated 42 million US dollars to the National Democracy Foundation, including expenses related to Hong Kong, with the amount exceeding 15 million US dollars. Second, during the amendment controversy, US NGOs supported anti-China and anti-Hong Kong organizations by publishing research reports and providing technical support for elections. The National Democracy Foundation, "Human Rights Watch", "Freedom House", "Amnesty International", and other Western NGOs published so-called "observation reports" to openly support the anti-Hong Kong rioters and "Hong Kong independence" rhetoric, and smear "One Country, Two Systems". Third, US NGOs established organizations for anti-China and anti-Hong Kong forces and helped them connect with the US political circle. They even directly participated in illegal street activities.

(2) The involvement of US-backed NGOs in the escalation and intensification of issues related to Xinjiang

Given that China has increasingly perfected its preventive measures against the malicious infiltration activities of Western NGOs, American NGOs, on the issue of Xinjiang, tend to create public opinion and incidents related to the Xinjiang issue from abroad (especially in the Central Asian region adjacent to China). In response to this, Indian historian Vijay Prashad pointed out that since the US finds it difficult to achieve its goal of containing China through technological competition, it is attempting to hinder China's progress through diplomatic and political power as well as information warfare. These factors constitute what is called "hybrid warfare".

The US government and the NGOs it supports have granted political recognition and funding to organizations that aim to split China. With the support of Western countries such as the US, since 2018, many human rights organizations with US backgrounds have released research reports on issues related to Xinjiang and interacted with Western mainstream media, in an attempt to shape the international community's perception of the relevant issues and the image of China. It is notable that, usually in international politics, Western industry-based NGOs that are relatively detached and prioritize commercial interests have also followed the US government's policy stance on issues related to Xinjiang. For example, the "Better Cotton Initiative" (BCI) mobilized its member enterprises to boycott Xinjiang cotton. In October 2020, BCI falsely accused Xinjiang of having "forced labor" and used this to suspend the approval of cotton purchases from Xinjiang. After the Biden administration took office, using "human rights" and other pretexts, it jointly with its allies strengthened sanctions and market blockades against Xinjiang products and enterprises, aiming to suppress the development of Xinjiang enterprises and undermine Xinjiang's economic development and social stability, and thereby promoting the development of "three forces". This was done to achieve its political goals.

III. Using NGOs to Assist in Geopolitical Games and Technological Warfare with China

With the advancement of the "Belt and Road" initiative, the NGOs supported by the United States have gradually intensified their obstruction of China's overseas investment projects under the framework of "Belt and Road". During the development of the technological war against China, many professional technical NGOs controlled by the United States also followed the sanctions imposed by the US government on Chinese enterprises. Of course, although the direct goals of these NGO actions are in the economic field, their indirect consequences are closely related to the US government's attempt to undermine China's geopolitical environment, obstruct China's rise in influence, and even align with its political goals related to China.

(1) The United States uses NGOs to obstruct the construction process of the "Belt and Road Initiative"

Due to the failure of the United States' strategy in Afghanistan, its "New Silk Road Initiative" proposed in 2011 was abandoned. Therefore, the US government increasingly regards blocking the construction of the "Belt and Road Initiative" as an important agenda of its foreign strategy, and attempts to use the rising extremist forces in Central Asia (since the 1980s, this issue has been to some extent driven by the United States) to cause trouble for its strategic opponents. In this process, the NGOs of Western countries, such as the United States, through financial and public opinion support, promote local NGOs in key countries along the route to fabricate and hype negative information about China, attempting to estrange the cooperative relationship between China and regional countries and disrupt the development process of the "Belt and Road Initiative" projects. The obstruction strategies of US NGOs and their local counterparts target key participating countries of the "Belt and Road Initiative" projects in China's surrounding areas, such as Central Asian countries and Myanmar. They attempt to estrange the friendly relations between these countries and China, and their obstruction tactics can be summarized as ecological, human rights and politicalization of economic cooperation issues. Especially in Central Asia, NGOs such as the Open Society Foundation have become the spokespersons of the United States in the region. They provide benefits such as material assistance and sending children abroad for study to the internal opposition groups in various countries, thereby expanding their network resources and establishing political and social foundations for implementing anti-China agendas through local NGOs. At the same time, US NGOs take advantage of the problems of political stability and insufficient governance capacity in some Central Asian countries, and establish numerous local NGOs in these countries. They exert influence through various projects funded directly by the US Congress.

In this context, since 2017, the Open Society Foundation, Human Rights Watch and the local NGOs they support have been using social media platforms to stigmatize China and disseminate videos and documents that mislead Central Asian people regarding the "Belt and Road" projects. They have also encouraged some local people to oppose their own leaders and governments, and to resist the leasing of land by Chinese citizens and Chinese-funded enterprises. At the same time, some US NGOs and the local NGOs they support have opportunistically supported and even directly participated in the creation of violence and chaos, in an attempt to disrupt the economic cooperation agenda and related projects between China and the countries along the route. As a result, the economic nationalism sentiments that have emerged in Central Asia and in a broader region have been compounded with ethnic and religious issues, causing disruptions and delays to the investment projects of relevant Chinese enterprises in the regional countries, and exerting a negative impact on the smooth progress of the "Belt and Road" initiative.

(2) Utilizing professional non-governmental organizations to assist the United States in its technological warfare against China

Since the second decade of the 21st century, as Western technology companies in the United States and other countries faced increasing competitive pressure from Chinese enterprises in the information industry, and as China's influence in areas such as information technology standards continued to grow, with the support of the US government, NGOs with American backgrounds have become the main drivers in concocting and exaggerating the so-called "technoauthoritarianism" and "digital authoritarianism" of China's technology exports, as well as in promoting the US government's policies to sanction Chinese technology enterprises. At the same time, during the process of the US initiating and continuously advancing the technological war against China, professional technical NGOs have also become an important force that the US government can rely on. Since May 2019, relevant professional technical industry standard organizations have cooperated with the US's sanctions measures and cancelled Huawei's membership. Subsequently, industry organizations led or influenced by the US followed the US government's policies and took sanctions measures against China's related industries and enterprises, causing obstruction to the stable external environment necessary for the economic and technological development of China in the short term. This shows that professional technical organizations, which should maintain political neutrality to the greatest extent, may follow the US's sanctions policy against China, and also shows that the US, considering strategic urgency and short-term policy goals, has increased the extent of its credit and soft power depletion.

IV. The Trend of the United States Utilizing NGOs to Implement Its Strategy towards China

(1) The role of NGOs in the United States within the process of implementing its strategy towards China will be further strengthened. 

In the view of some strategic researchers in the United States, the US can serve its interests through competition in non-governmental channels. Therefore, the US needs a comprehensive strategy to promote cooperation between the government and NGOs, social media influencers, scholars, and more groups, and thereby strengthen its competition against China. Thus, it can be seen that leveraging the role of NGOs and other civil forces and implementing ideological and influence suppression against China has become a consensus among the US and Western strategic researchers. The "Strategic Competition Act of 2021" emphasizes that China is using its political, diplomatic, economic, military, technological, and ideological power to become a global competitor similar in strength to the US. The measures proposed in Section 131 of this act to counter China mainly include: authorizing the allocation of 300 million US dollars to the "Countering Chinese Influence Fund" each fiscal year from 2022 to 2026 to counter China's influence globally; supporting "civil organizations" and "independent media" to raise awareness of the so-called "negative impacts" of the "Belt and Road Initiative" and promoting transparency. After this act or similar acts complete the legislative process, it will provide legal basis for the US to use NGOs to strengthen its containment of China. Although the overall allocation amount determined by the act is limited, considering the significant driving effect of official funds on the investment of private funds, the activity funds for US political NGOs regarding China-related affairs will increase significantly in the future. Correspondingly, the number and impact of interference activities by US NGOs and their associated Western NGOs, as well as those from developing countries supported or funded by them, targeting China's national image and overseas interests will also increase further.

(2) The upgrading of NGO's information warfare against China and their use to assist the US government in exerting pressure on China 

Through issues related to human rights, the information war targeting China with the aim of creating and guiding international public opinion and smearing China is one of the important measures taken by US NGOs to implement the US strategy towards China. Although it is impossible to achieve the desired "deal" by hyping various false statements about China, the US government will not give up, utilize human rights issues, or use the activities of many NGOs related to China to exert pressure on China. The US NGOs will still focus on creating public opinion, shaping issues and creating incidents abroad, and use this to assist the US government in implementing pressure policies towards China in the fields of human rights, economy and technology.

(3) The influence of NGOs supported by the United States, combined with other factors, has disrupted the construction of the "Belt and Road Initiative" 

In the direction of the "Maritime Silk Road", Myanmar's geographical location has led the United States to long attempt to influence and intervene in the political situation of the country. NGOs with Western backgrounds and local NGOs supported by them have significant influence on the social opinion and even government decisions in Myanmar. At the same time, under the situation where the United States has withdrawn troops from Afghanistan and the pandemic has impacted the economies and social stability of regional countries, the activities of the NGOs supported by the United States in Central Asia will have a negative impact on the construction of the "Silk Road Economic Belt". The various false statements about China fabricated by the NGOs supported by the United States and the local NGOs in Central Asian countries may intensify the ideological trends among some people in Central Asian countries regarding economic interests, ethnicity, and even religion that involve opposition to China. Under the mobilization and organization of the NGOs supported by the United States, the opposition, protests, and interference activities of the people in these countries against Chinese investment projects may further increase, thereby having a negative impact on the development process of the "Silk Road Economic Belt".

(4) Some non-governmental organizations can play a positive role in maintaining the stability of Sino-US relations. 

Although the ideas, public opinion guidance and activities carried out by many NGOs with American background have undermined the healthy development of Sino-US relations as well as the prosperity and stability of regional countries, some American NGOs still play a significant role in maintaining and expanding the channels of dialogue and exchanges between the two countries, and promoting practical cooperation on common concerns. The report jointly released by the Carter Center of the United States holds that NGOs have been the pillar of the continuously developing Sino-US relations over the past 50 years. Although the current relations between the two countries have deteriorated sharply, NGOs remain an important channel for cross-Pacific contacts. Due to the cooperation and trust among international counterparts over the years, although political frictions have affected communication, the cooperation foundation is still relatively intact. 

Against the backdrop of a significantly intensified confrontational nature of the US-China strategic relationship, the "second-track diplomacy" based on the dialogue and exchange activities between the two sides' social organizations and NGOs holds great significance for filling the gaps in the official communication channels. Especially in bilateral official talks, due to the high sensitivity of some issues or the existence of irreconcilable stance differences between the two sides, it is difficult to conduct in-depth and effective communication. However, the dialogue and in-depth exchanges between the two sides' social organizations and NGOs on these issues can help overcome the limitations of the official communication channels and enhance mutual understanding and comprehension. During this process, the non-official identities and the organizational characteristics focused on specific issues of many American business, technology-related industry organizations, as well as NGOs concerned with cultural exchange, charity, and other issues, to a large extent, help them transcend the constraints of domestic electoral politics and the competition between the two parties. Although some of these NGOs have a dual nature, in general, they can view the Sino-US relationship from a relatively pragmatic or pro-bilateral cooperation perspective, and thereby advocate and promote cooperation agendas in economic cooperation and other fields between the two countries. Under this situation, the dialogue and exchanges between social organizations and NGOs with the same and similar issue orientations on both sides of the US and China, can help enhance the effectiveness of bilateral communication and create favorable conditions for the stability of Sino-US relations. In terms of practical cooperation, the two countries have broad cooperation space in areas such as climate change and public health. In particular, the cooperation between China and the US in addressing climate change has a profound impact on global sustainable development.

Closing Remarks 

In the context where the gap in comprehensive national strength between China and the United States is continuously narrowing, and the differences between the two countries in terms of geopolitics and international order are difficult to bridge, the US government and Congress have strengthened the role of NGOs in their China strategy, reflecting the strategic inertia and cognitive inertia in the US political and bureaucratic circles regarding China policy. On one hand, based on its long-standing hegemonic logic and the "winning" experience during the Cold War, in the face of a relative decline in its strength, the US attempts to gain a competitive advantage over China by leveraging its "soft power" advantages. On the other hand, in the face of the US's ineffective domestic epidemic control and economic recovery, the political circles, social elites, and even a broader group in the US, disregarding the existing problems in the US system and the reality of domestic governance failure, instead, based on the superiority of their values, attempt to exert influence on China in issues related to "human rights", in order to divert domestic attention and maintain its hegemonic position. Under the situation where the US uses NGOs to obstruct China's development, how China responds to the negative impact of this strategic orientation of the US will be a long-term test. (Author: Sun Haiyong, Associate Researcher at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies)

(AI translation, with omissions)