____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Strategic Competition with the PRC
DATE: July 30th, 2024
OVERVIEW: The Senate of Foreign Relations Committee discussed bipartisan concerns about competition with China. Mr. Campbell urged filling 15 ambassadorship vacancies in developing countries where China's influence has grown. Delayed by limited floor time for over two years, the Committee plans to prioritize these approvals.
HEARING RECORDING LINK: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/strategic-competition-with-the-prc-assessing-us-competitiveness-beyond-the-indo-pacific
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Witnesses
- Kurt Campbell, Deputy Secretary of State
Key Themes & Highlights
- Republican Concerns:
- Ambassadorship Vacancies: Republicans expressed frustration over the large number of unfilled ambassadorships in countries where China is expanding its diplomatic influence. They emphasized the need to expedite the approval process to strengthen U.S. presence abroad.
- Strategic Competition and Sanctions: Republicans highlighted that the U.S. is not doing enough to counter China's global ambitions, particularly in areas like microelectronics, energy, and technology. They advocated for more aggressive sanctions against China, especially regarding its relations with Iran and Russia.
- Military and Economic Competitiveness: Concerns were raised about China's dominance in industries such as electric vehicles, nuclear energy, solar panels, and steel. Republicans stressed the importance of enhancing U.S. military innovation and economic strategies to compete effectively.
- Democratic Concerns:
- Human Rights and Values: Democrats emphasized the importance of promoting human rights and democracy in U.S. foreign policy to distinguish it from China. They discussed the need to balance strategic interests with ethical commitments, particularly in developing countries.
- Global Engagement and Alliances: Democrats highlighted the necessity of deepening engagement with allies and partners, especially in the Indo-Pacific, Africa, and the Global South. They stressed that supporting Ukraine is crucial for maintaining global alliances and countering China's influence.
- Policy Implementation and Diplomacy: Democrats supported filling ambassador vacancies and potentially reforming the approval process. They advocated for increased U.S. soft power, diplomacy, and development initiatives to counter China's economic coercion and infrastructure investments in developing nations.
- Witness Testimonies:
- Kurt Campbell (Deputy Secretary of State): Emphasized that strategic competition with China is a global challenge requiring bipartisan support. Advocated for filling ambassadorship vacancies to enhance U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Africa and the Global South. Highlighted the importance of working with allies, investing in technology partnerships, and promoting U.S. values abroad.
- Contentious Points:
- Republicans: Focused on the potential overreach of diplomatic delays, economic drawbacks of not filling ambassadorships, and perceived regulatory burdens hindering U.S. competitiveness against China. Expressed concern that the administration's actions have been more rhetorical than substantive.
- Democrats: Emphasized the importance of managing strategic competition with China through increased global engagement, protecting human rights, and legitimizing collaborative efforts to promote democracy. Highlighted the urgency of filling diplomatic positions to project U.S. influence and counter China's global ambitions.
- Key Discussions:
- Ambassadorship Vacancies: Both parties agreed on the critical need to fill ambassadorships in countries where China is expanding its influence. Discussions considered reforming the nomination and approval process to expedite appointments.
- Global Influence and Soft Power: The Committee discussed strategies to increase U.S. competitiveness, including enhancing soft power through diplomacy, development aid, and building stronger alliances, particularly in Indo-Pacific and African regions.
- Economic and Technological Competition: Members addressed the need to bolster U.S. industries, such as microelectronics and renewable energy, to compete with China's dominance. They emphasized investing in technological and innovative partnerships.
- Human Rights and Democratic Values: There was a focus on promoting human rights and democracy as a means to differentiate the U.S. from China, balancing strategic interests with ethical considerations in foreign policy.
In-Depth Notes
- Mr. Cardin: Delivers opening comments. Mentions Venezuelan election —“Very disappointing.” Maduro is holding onto power despite election results. Mr. Cardin endorses speaking with partners in the region (specifically, Brazil and Columbia) to “make clear” U.S. priorities. The topic for today is the PRC’s influence. From Kenya railroad to the sale of armored vehicles in Venezuela, to Saudi-Iran deals, etc. China is competing for every sphere of influence. Economic coercion in Lithuania and South Korea. Decade-long track record of abusing human rights. Very angry at China. “Most significant challenge today.” China has the resources and intent to reshape the international order. Cardin supports the Biden-Harris approach to China. It's not clear that we’re committing adequate resources to win our ideology in the Global South. The United States should invest more in economic and diplomatic tools rather than purely military resources. Keep creating rhetoric but haven’t passed a policy to address it. There is a large willingness for bipartisanship cooperation. Willing to compromise, just wants to reach a finish line. Focus on clean energy, AI, human rights, and nominations—over 20 countries with Chinese ambassadors and no US ones. 25 ambassadors are pending in the committee.
- Mr. Risch: Committee is wrongfully insisting that it’s winning in competition against China. In Europe, the administration has not improved transatlantic policy. China is by far winning. 90% of Chinese microelectronics are from China. We need to aggressively sanction China. In Iran, we haven’t seen enthusiasm to sanction China. The US hasn’t gone far enough to solicit climate promises from China. China has not demonstrated sufficient reciprocity—we are pandering. Again, a call for bipartisanship. The administration hasn’t taken any concrete action beyond rhetoric.
- Mr. Cardin: introduces witness Kurt Campbell—who works as the Deputy Director of State.
- Mr. Campbell: Notes committee work has been largely bipartisan. The most intense region for competition is the Indo-Pacific, though this challenge is global. We need to work with allies and partners. Fully supports Venezuela (has been involved and notes deep anxiety). Deep engagement with European partners means a lot. We need to take more steps with financial organizations, and the most meaningful thing we can do is involve EU partners in that movement. Need to step up game development substantially in development in Africa. This is especially important when it comes to rare earth minerals that exist in those countries. The greatest vehicle, in his opinion, is global partnership through technology. The China conflict will never end.
- Mr. Cardin: our foreign policy distinguishes us from China. We promote human rights and democracy. How do we balance commitment to values with the realities of regimes that are prepared to do objectionable tasks?
- Mr. Campbell: There are challenges occasionally. We cannot return to a time when we elevate strategy over values and ethics. We try to bend the trajectory of other countries' trajectories through partnerships.
- Mr. Cardin: How high a priority is it to take up empty positions in the State Department?
- Mr. Campbell: Politics is a tough game. Says that we do need more members confirmed, and that ambassador nominations must take precedence. Diplomats have high importance, especially in small countries in Africa.
- Mr. Risch: Inviting China into the Ukraine process—where are we protesting this?
- Mr. Campbell: The dominant arena of engagement is on the battlefield. We should not rush to the negotiating table too soon. That conversation is premature.
- Mr. Risch: Congress has passed bipartisanship oil sanctions against China. The administration has not been enthusiastic.
- Mr. Campbell—Sanctions are complex.
- Mr. Coons: How relevant is it to global competition with China that we maintain a commitment to Ukraine both perceptually and tangibly?
- Mr. Campbell: Europe and the Indo-Pacific are strategically aligned. Ukraine's results matter deeply to allies in the Indo-Pacific. We must do more in Africa. Even congressional visits matter deeply.
- Mr. Coons: China’s trade with African countries has increased tenfold recently. Ours has barely grown. Talks about the new Appropriations bill, which has certain provisions designed to counter Chinese foreign policy.
- Mr. Campbell—in Senegal two weeks ago. Most African financing is projects from China (very corrupt). This project was all Senegal-based workers designed to create capacity building. Financing the DFC is important.
- Mr. Young: We need to get floor time for ambassador approvals. Maybe we can amend the laws relating to ambassador nominations. China has continually been defined as a developing country, which makes things difficult for us and allows them to get out of doing the right work. How do we deal with this hypocrisy?
- Mr. Campbell: He loves to flatter senators at the start of every speech. Have sought to reform certain issues in the multilateral development of banks.
- Mr. Young: We need critical minerals. We should look to Africa. Accidentally asks how we can “exploit” Africa for these minerals. Quickly corrects with the word “explore.” … Okay, senator.
- Mr. Campbell: There are a lot of minerals we need that are strictly controlled by China. We have an agreement with Japan, Australia, and several African countries (a.k.a. Botswana) to increase resourcing efforts.
- Mr. Young: We need to wrestle with the ethical mission of exploiting rare earth minerals to fight climate change.
- Mr. Merkeley: What is the State Department doing to help countries resist Chinese threats? Especially with Chinese nationals?
- Mr. Campbell: A lot of countries don’t understand many of these challenges, so education is deeply important. This is a challenge even developed countries are facing. We need to compare notes with each other across countries.
- Mr. Merkeley: Large sphere of influence within the United Nations. Human rights review recently was tampered with by them. No universal human right. What do we do about this general threat?
- Mr. Campbell: The biggest arena is the global south. The partnership with India is great and robust, but the global south!
- Mr. Dubio: They are a technological, industrial competitor. Dominate EVs, which are creating a threat, are dominant in nukes and solar panels, ships, steel, cement, etc. Still the world’s largest polluter. How do we meld tech priorities into our strategic policy?
- Mr. Campbell: Cold War rhetoric is too monochromatic. We are wildly interdependent and deeply uncomfortable with it. Naval shipbuilding and submarine building are so important. The Navy and Air Force must be more innovative.
- Mr. Schatz: Surveillance and the Internet of Things—what is our answer to this?
- Mr. Campbell: What model are they promoting? They are supporting vulnerable elites in power. Provide a great value contribution. We need to be able to effectively promote democracy, elections, etc. Their model is domestically unpopular, so we need to be able to get on the ground.
- Mr. Schatz: Belt and Road was an overreach that we can take advantage of because it didn’t achieve everything it needed.
- Mrs. Shaheen: We need to spend more time on approving our diplomatic nominations. It is a direct affront that these countries do not have diplomats. These are career ambassadors.
- Mr. Campbell: Ambassadors require a thank you for their service. Career people deserve the ability to serve. We need more people in the field.
- Mrs. Shaheen: What is China going to do in the Middle East? Hezbollah?
- Mr. Campbell: China's engagement has been largely shallow. They are likely worried about conflict escalation but haven’t engaged much.
- Mr. Barrasso: Iran is exporting so much oil to China and Russia. We haven’t done enough to prevent energy transfer, right?
- Mr. Campbell: Ukraine is the best place to contest this. We need more sanctions around financial institutions, too. NATO is also stronger than ever before. The relationship between Russia and China is complex, imperfect, and distrustful. There is a very complex diplomacy between them.
- Mr. Murphy: Misinformation is a big problem. What do we do if funding expires?
- Mr. Campbell: We need to do a better job of just contesting missing.
- Mr. Murphy: What do we do about gulf countries? Are Gulf countries going to keep playing China and the United States?
- Mr. Campbell: We may need to force choice moving forward.
- Mr. Kaine: We are reducing military investment in Africa. It’s not good politics. We’re going backward in the global south. What do we do about China and fentanyl?
- Mr. Campbell: It’s been an incomplete relationship. China has not done its part to stop fentanyl, but they have made small steps. Synthetic opioids are affecting China, Europe, etc. too.
- Mr. Boomer: We need to leverage competition the most whenever we can. People are looking for strong partnerships.
- Mr. Campbell: The demand for American engagement is high. Sincerity means a lot. We underestimate our value proposition. We need to have confidence.
- Mr. Boomer: The lack of ambassadors is deeply frustrating. The DFC is also deeply important.
- Mr. Hollen: Ambassadors are important. We need to fill vacancies.