新美国安全中心-美国使用强制性经济治国法（英文）-2020.12-11页_636kb

Summary of America's Use of Coercive Economic Statecraft

Core Content

This report from the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) Task Force on the Future of U.S. Coercive Economic Statecraft provides an in-depth analysis of the evolving use of coercive economic tools by the United States. It outlines the strategic importance of these tools in U.S. national security and foreign policy, while also highlighting the challenges and considerations that policymakers must address.

Main Points

1. Growing Use of Coercive Economic Tools

• The U.S. has significantly expanded its use of coercive economic tools, including tariffs, sanctions, export controls, and investment restrictions.
• These tools are increasingly used to address a wide range of policy objectives, such as countering cyber threats, intellectual property theft, and human rights violations.
• The Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as CFIUS review processes, have been key components of this expansion.

2. Shift in Strategic Focus

• Coercive economic statecraft has moved from targeting WMD proliferation, terrorism, and human rights abuses to addressing technological and economic competition, especially with China.
• The U.S. has imposed export controls on strategic technologies such as artificial intelligence, aiming to limit China's access to critical U.S. technologies.

3. Diplomatic Challenges

• The use of coercive tools has often created tensions with U.S. allies, particularly in Europe, where the Trump administration's sanctions and tariffs have been met with resistance.
• Multilateral cooperation is crucial, but bipartisan and national interests can complicate alignment on economic coercion strategies.

4. Clear Objectives and Effectiveness

• Policymakers must articulate clear objectives for coercive economic measures to ensure they are effective and avoid unintended consequences.
• The effectiveness of these tools is mixed, with success in some cases (e.g., reducing Iran’s oil exports) and limited impact in others (e.g., not persuading North Korea or Venezuela to change policies).

5. Economic Costs and Trade-offs

• The costs of coercive measures have risen significantly, including tariff-related losses and market disruptions caused by sanctions.
• For instance, Trump’s steel tariffs cost U.S. consumers and businesses $900,000 per job created, and Huawei’s exclusion from U.S. markets has led to a $11 billion loss for U.S. tech firms.

6. China as a Complex Challenge

• China is seen as the most complex challenge for U.S. coercive economic statecraft due to its large economy and global influence.
• The U.S. must balance economic interests with security concerns, as China is a key market and supplier for many U.S. allies.

7. Need for Balanced Economic Statecraft

• The report emphasizes the importance of positive tools such as domestic economic renewal, international development incentives, and trade liberalization.
• A balanced approach is needed to ensure that coercive tools are not overused and that the U.S. maintains a comprehensive and effective economic statecraft strategy.

Key Trends

• Sanctions and tariffs have become more unilateral and expansive, with a greater extraterritorial impact.
• Export controls are now a central tool in the U.S.-China rivalry, especially for strategic technologies.
• CFIUS reviews have been expanded to include more investments, including those already completed.
• Diplomatic tensions with allies have increased due to the aggressive use of economic pressure, particularly in transatlantic relations.
• China's response to U.S. coercion, such as new national security laws, has shown its resilience and strategic depth.

Recommendations

• Policymakers should focus on clear objectives and measure the effectiveness and costs of coercive economic measures.
• Bipartisan attention should be given to positive tools of statecraft to complement coercive measures.
• Multilateral cooperation is essential, but unilateral actions may be necessary in some cases.
• Economic coercion should be used carefully and strategically, with a long-term view on its impact and sustainability.

Conclusion

The U.S. continues to rely on coercive economic statecraft as a key component of its national security and foreign policy strategy. While these tools have proven effective in certain scenarios, they also come with significant costs and diplomatic risks. As the U.S.-China competition intensifies, the U.S. must refine its approach to ensure the tools are used wisely and effectively. A balanced and comprehensive economic statecraft strategy is necessary for long-term success.