The US House of Representatives approved, by a bipartisan majority of 351 votes in favor and 36 against, a budget of 1.6 billion dollars for the next five years to fund media and civil society sources around the world to attack the “malign influence” of ChinaAccording to the digital magazine Responsible Statecraft, this is a huge expense that represents, for example, almost double the annual operating costs of the news network CNN.
Resolution 1157 still needs to pass through the Senate, but if it becomes law it would represent a significant increase in federal spending on so-called “international influence operations”While it is difficult to estimate all spending on such operations across all U.S. federal agencies, the main coordinating agency for information efforts, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC), has an annual budget of less than $100 million.
Against “China’s malignant influence”
According to Responsible Statecraft, the resolution that bears the long name of “Fund to counter the malign influence of the People’s Republic of China” could be used in some cases to subsidize covert anti-Chinese messages, similar to the way Washington accuses Russia of funding supposedly anti-Ukrainian messages from influential figures in the American media. If this law is passed, Anti-China messages could cover a wide range of political issues that are commonplace in other countries.
The draft’s definition of “malign influence” is very broad and vague. The resolution uses that concept to refer to entities that seek to “undermine a free and open international order”; “promote an alternative, repressive international order that strengthens Chinese hegemonic ambitions”; “undermine the national security or sovereignty of the United States or other countries”; and “undermine the economic security of the United States or other countries, including by promoting corruption and promoting coercive economic practices.”
According to the resolution, The program’s funds could support any effort to highlight the “negative impact” of Chinese economic investment in a foreign country.or it could fund political messages against Chinese contractors involved in the construction of a port, a road or a hospital. It would also target Confucius Institutes, even though these nonprofit institutions have virtually disappeared from American campuses.
According to Responsible Statecraft, a publication affiliated with the Quincy Institute think tank, another problem with this legislation is the possibility that anti-China propaganda funded by this program could flow into the American media space and influence its audiences without revealing the initial source of funding. The online magazine explains that protections against US government influence and attacks on domestic audiences are already weak, and those that exist are almost impossible to enforce in an interconnected world.
“They blame Beijing for all the problems”
For the American media, The legislative offensive is not so much a strategic forecast, but rather a pre-election stanceWith presidential elections looming in November, lawmakers are looking to take center stage and demonstrate their tough stance on China, an issue that could prove useful in rallying votes.
According to the official Xinhua news agency, “Washington is splitting its personality between a group of politicians who talk about avoiding a new cold war and urging China not to misunderstand Washington’s policy toward Beijing, while another group is producing legislation against the Asian country.”The White House has already signaled its opposition to reviving the Trump administration’s controversial “China Initiative”and as Congress is running out of time, projects like this will most likely be forgotten.
But according to Xinhua“For certain American politicians, the simple act of introducing anti-China legislation is a victory in itself.a way to show they are doing something about China, even if that something amounts to little more than inflammatory and toxic rhetoric.” In their two-step strategy to show “responsible leadership” and win elections, the first is to “confuse the public with the message that China is a major threat” and the second is to “blame Beijing for all the problems affecting the country.”
Last year, when he made his presidential candidacy official, Trump announced his plan to curb the “influence” of Xi Jinping’s government in the US, including banning Chinese citizens from buying farmland or owning telecommunications companies, energy and medical supplies. During the presidential debate, Democratic candidate Kamala Harris said Trump “sold us out” to China by “offering American chips to help them improve and modernize their military.” On the campaign trail The current vice president gave few details about how her China policy would differ from that of President Joe Biden.
