ON
← Back to feed
United StatesBusiness3 days ago

GAO faults State, USAID for poor oversight of $1.2 billion China counter-influence effort

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) criticized the U.S. State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for poor oversight of a $1.2 billion program aimed at countering Chinese influence globally. The GAO found that the interagency working group managing the initiative lacked reliable data on the projects and had not evaluated their effectiveness.

NEWS AND ANALYSIS:

The State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development spent $1.2 billion on programs designed to counter Chinese influence around the world but failed to evaluate whether the programs were effective, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Congress in late 2019 provided State and USAID with $1.6 billion for programs to counteract China’s economic coercion, military exports and other malign activities seen in programs such as Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.

The money was part of a Countering Chinese Influence Fund that was directed at blunting activities of the Chinese government, the Chinese Communist Party and affiliated entities acting on their behalf globally.

However, GAO stated that an interagency working group overseeing the project failed to rely on key stakeholders or regional experts and failed to assess if the programs were effective, the report said.

The GAO reviewed an estimated 470 projects funded by State and USAID valued at about $1.2 billion from 2020 to 2023. Auditors found that “working group officials do not have readily available and reliable data on the types and status of these projects,” the agency stated in a report made public this week.

“The working group has not assessed the results of efforts to counter Chinese influence across the portfolio of projects,” the report stated.

Officials told GAO that bureaus and overseas government posts involved in managing the projects provided incomplete data and reports with errors.

Among the 470 projects, officials were unable to provide the time frame for when money was spent for 129 projects and 38 “lines of effort.” Data was also absent from nearly one-third of the approved proposals.

“As a result, working group officials lack critical information to track how funds were used and determine whether the funding ultimately supports the activities described in approved proposals,” the report said.

The program was launched over concerns that China is attempting to become the world’s most powerful military and economic power, the report said.

Projects included U.S. efforts to prevent China from controlling the United Nations, countering Chinese economic coercion such as so-called debt trap diplomacy, and efforts to prevent China from promoting its communist system around the world.

State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs spent $3 million in 2023 to provide security screening technology for port security authorities in four countries. The goal was to prevent China from gaining further control of port security operations in the countries.

Other funded projects sought to counteract China’s overseas nuclear energy projects, limit Chinese military exports and prevent China from developing military technology.

One program spent $600,000 in seeking to educate European academic institutions about the risks of illicit technology transfer to Chinese military and defense-affiliated research facilities.

Another spent $475,000 trained journalists in Western Hemisphere nations that have diplomatic relations with Taiwan to detect Chinese propaganda.

The counter-influence program also used $2.3 million to teach awareness of malicious Chinese cyberattacks in East Asia, South Asia and the Pacific islands. Intelligence training worth $3 million was also provided to some foreign nations to help counter malign Chinese activities.

All funding for the program was cut off in February 2025 under the Trump administration’s revamping of all foreign aid.

USAID was largely dismantled and its functions moved to the State Department as a result of what the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have said is the misuse of billions of federal funds, including providing money to domestic liberal political groups.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has accused Democrats of turning USAID into a “personal slush fund, funneling billions into left-wing propaganda” including climate activism and diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

The State Department told GAO in a written response to the report that its office of China coordination is working to set up a unit to track funding on the counter-influence projects.

“The Department is committed to decision-making based on the best available information and ensuring accountability in how funds are spent to counter Chinese malign influence,” the statement said.

State is also working to develop a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system for assessing the efficacy of funds spent on countering Beijing influence, the statement said.

Indo-Pacific Command back to Pacific Command

The Pentagon announced on Tuesday that it is renaming the Indo-Pacific Command, the military command in charge of all forces throughout the Asia-Pacific region, back to its original name, the Pacific Command.

The name change “honors the command’s deep historical roots, fostering a sense of pride and collective spirit among all who serve…

Read the full article at The Washington Times
Source document: Government Accountability Office Report

1 reports

The Washington TimesIndependentCenter3 days ago
GAO faults State, USAID for poor oversight of $1.2 billion China counter-influence effort

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) criticized the U.S. State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for poor oversight of a $1.2 billion program aimed at countering Chinese influence globally. The GAO found that the interagency working group managing the initiative lacked reliable data on the projects and had not evaluated their effectiveness.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual summary of the GAO report without overtly favoring any political side. It reports on the findings of an independent watchdog body and does not include subjective commentary or biased language. The framing remains neutral, focusing on the lack of evaluation and data, as

Official sources cited

Go to the primary sources (1)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.