美国开发金融公司未能与中国抗衡（英）-18页_391kb

Summary of "The U.S. Development Finance Corporation Is Failing to Counter China"

Core Content

The U.S. Development Finance Corporation (DFC), established in 2019 under the BUILD Act, was intended to serve as a strategic counterweight to China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, despite the significant emphasis placed on countering China during the legislation's passage, the DFC has not prioritized projects that align with U.S. national security and foreign policy goals, particularly in sectors where China has been most active.

Main Points

• Purpose of the DFC: The DFC was created to replace the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and streamline U.S. development finance. It was marketed as a tool to counter China's growing economic influence through the BRI and to promote U.S. foreign policy and security interests.

• Legislative Intent: While the BUILD Act did not explicitly mention China, it was framed as a response to China's economic expansion and its state-directed investments. The DFC was expected to focus on sectors such as energy, infrastructure, and mining—areas heavily targeted by the BRI.

• Project Focus: Analysis of DFC projects from 2020 to 2021 shows a continued emphasis on low-income and lower-middle-income countries, similar to OPIC. However, the DFC has not significantly increased its focus on infrastructure and energy projects, which are the primary targets of the BRI.

• Sectoral Comparison: China's BRI investments are heavily concentrated in energy (especially fossil fuels) and infrastructure, while the DFC has shifted toward climate-related and social development projects. This divergence undermines the DFC's ability to effectively compete with Chinese investments.

• Need for Congressional Oversight: The DFC has not been directed by law to prioritize countering China or U.S. adversaries, and it lacks specific advisory councils focused on foreign policy and national security. As a result, it has not demonstrated a clear strategic shift to counter China's influence.

Key Recommendations

To ensure the DFC fulfills its intended role in countering China's influence, the authors recommend:

• Mandate a third of DFC projects to focus on countering Chinese or other adversarial investments that threaten U.S. national security and foreign policy interests.

• Prioritize energy, transportation, infrastructure, mining, and other sectors targeted by the BRI, while still supporting development initiatives in agriculture, education, and microfinance.

• Limit DFC investments in upper-middle-income and high-income countries to projects that directly support U.S. foreign policy and security objectives.

• Establish a Foreign Policy and National Security Advisory Council to advise the DFC on how to better counter adversarial influence.

• Require annual reports to Congress assessing the strategic impact of each active project on U.S. foreign policy and national security interests.

• Link increases in DFC’s contingent liability to evidence of effectiveness in advancing core U.S. foreign policy and security interests, particularly in countering China.

Critical Projects

The authors highlight several projects that align with U.S. strategic interests:

• Subic Bay Shipyard: A project in the Philippines aimed at preventing Chinese control and supporting a free and open South China Sea.

• Submarine Fiber-Optic Cable from Singapore to the U.S.: A project that counters Chinese undersea cable expansion and reduces security risks.

• Partnership with India's National Investment and Infrastructure Master Fund: A $54 million investment in India's infrastructure, supporting U.S. strategic ties in the region.

• Meridiam Infrastructure Africa Fund: A $50 million initiative in Africa aimed at countering Chinese influence through infrastructure development.

• Dolphinus Gas Supply Agreement: A $250 million insurance commitment supporting a natural gas pipeline from Israel to Egypt, countering Russian influence.

Conclusion

The DFC, despite its expanded capacity and resources, has not fulfilled its intended role in countering China's economic and strategic influence. It remains largely focused on development rather than national security. To ensure it serves as an effective counterweight to China, Congress must impose clear directives and oversight to align the DFC's priorities with U.S. strategic interests.