In recent years, the United States has reaffirmed its position as a “Pacific power,” emphasizing the critical importance of the Pacific Islands region to its national security. …
This increase in engagement toward the Pacific began during President Donald Trump’s first administration and maintains bipartisan support as a security priority. …
As the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second administration drew to a close, notable rhetoric was echoed amidst this trend during Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s visits to Guam and Hawaii, where he underscored the significance of U.S. territories in the Pacific for deterrence. …
Despite these proclamations, Pacific leaders have expressed a consistent expectation for concrete actions rather than mere words to substantiate a nation’s commitments. …
However, recent budget cuts to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), suspension of U.S. foreign assistance programs, tariffs on small island economies, and deprioritization of climate change — a primary concern for the region — have raised significant alarms. …
Regardless of U.S. intentions, the prevailing perception across the Pacific Islands is that the United States appears disinterested and unpredictable, which diminishes its capacity to establish meaningful partnerships. …
This perception simultaneously opens pathways for China to extend its influence throughout this strategically vital region. …
As the Pacific Islands have quietly transformed into a focal point for great power competition, this narrative of U.S. disengagement contributes to an emerging story: China is viewed as a more committed partner and protector of international norms. …
Although it may be premature to evaluate the comprehensive ramifications of the United States’ recent actions, preliminary observations within the Pacific suggest that the trend is counterproductive to U.S. interests. …
Reversing this course necessitates prompt, genuine engagement, along with innovative diplomatic strategies. …
The historical context of U.S. involvement in the Pacific Islands is vital for understanding current dynamics. …
For trade, access to Asia, and security concerns, the U.S. has maintained involvement in the Pacific Islands for decades. …
While U.S. engagement peaked during World War II, when its strategic importance was highlighted, this involvement predates the conflict and has evolved over time. …
Strong relationships with the diverse nations of the Pacific have always served U.S. interests; however, consistently demonstrating the value of this partnership is crucial. …
Yet, in the post–World War II landscape, the attention of Washington has been sporadic, often focusing on defense and security agreements. …
In the past decade, China has intensified its focus on the Pacific Islands, viewing the region as highly strategic, making U.S. presence even more critical. …
In response to this shift, the United States ramped up its engagement during Trump’s administration by hosting Pacific leaders and renegotiating Compacts of Free Association (COFA) with the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), and the Republic of Palau. …
These agreements provide the U.S. with unilateral defense access across the North Pacific, extending from the Philippines to Hawaii. …
The Biden administration continued this pattern, hosting Pacific Islands Forum leaders and launching comprehensive strategies for engagement with the Pacific Islands. …
Increased U.S. embassy presence and USAID activities underscored a commitment to foster partnerships. …
A key feature of this renewed engagement has been relationship building, recognizing the Pacific’s emphasis on consensus, mutual respect, and dialogue, often referred to as the “Pacific Way.” …
However, genuine relationship maintenance—an essential prerequisite for influence—requires not only sincere engagement but also committed follow-through. …
As 2024 came to a close, many commitments from U.S.-PIF summits remained unfulfilled, leading to skepticism about the true level of U.S. commitment among Pacific nations and their comparison of U.S. engagement against China’s consistent presence. …
The approach to utilizing soft power to achieve hard power objectives is crucial when considering the U.S. role in the Pacific. …
Despite not being the largest donor in the region, recent understanding highlights the importance of coordinated efforts not just by the United States but also by other like-minded nations to effectively counter China’s growing influence. …
Between 2008 and 2022, the U.S. was the fifth-largest aid provider to the Pacific Islands, spending $3.4 billion and committing $4.4 billion, predominantly through COFA agreements. …
While the assistance has played a significant role, particularly in development areas like education and infrastructure, the overall impact of U.S. aid is overshadowed by the contributions from countries like Australia and China. …
USAID historically implemented a wide range of development assistance programs, but recent policy shifts have significantly affected its operations. …
On June 30, USAID ceased its independent operations, transferring development responsibilities to the Department of State under President Donald Trump’s administration. …
Plans to cut 90 percent of USAID programs, affecting over 5,800 multi-year contract awards globally, have raised considerable concerns regarding U.S. commitment to the region. …
Programs addressing climate change—the foremost national security threat for Pacific Island nations—are particularly vulnerable to elimination. …
For instance, grants focused on climate initiatives and disaster management have already faced termination, thereby undermining U.S. credibility as a global leader on these pressing issues. …
The impact of cuts is especially pronounced for small island nations that rely heavily on USAID assistance, leading to significant losses per region. …
The Center for Global Development estimates these funding reductions have completely curtailed USAID programming in countries like Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, Palau, Fiji, and the Solomon Islands. …
Even in COFA states, critical non-COFA funding has faced reductions that directly affect local operations. …
Local project managers in affected regions have expressed devastation over the suspension of crucial health-related projects due to the enforcement of these budgetary cuts. …
The consequences of U.S. actions threaten to diminish the influence of the United States and simultaneously elevate China’s narrative as a responsible and stable partner. …
Amidst the suspension of programs, China has intensified its diplomatic engagements throughout the Pacific, reframing its role as a more reliable partner compared to the U.S. …
Statements from Chinese officials following U.S. tariffs have framed China as the “most reliable partner” for nations like Papua New Guinea and Fiji, promising consistent trade despite external pressures from the U.S. …
Total trade between China and Fiji has notably increased, with major projects planned through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, further entrenching China’s presence in the region. …
In 2025, the establishment of direct flights between Shanghai and Nadi, Fiji, symbolizes deepening ties amidst growing economic cooperation. …
This amalgamation of diplomatic initiatives alongside increased aid for climate projects stands in stark contrast to the U.S. trajectory and investments in the region. …
As a recent U.S. House Committee on Armed Services hearing highlighted, the solid relationships forged with Pacific nations are a source of anxiety for China, as they seek to maintain their own influence. …
In strategic terms, the Pacific Islands present an economically advantageous region for China, allowing them to achieve significant geopolitical gains with minimal investments. …
In this context, the U.S. must recognize the urgency to counteract the prevailing perception and reassert its commitment to the region. …
Prioritizing diplomacy—grounded in genuine partnerships—will be vital in reclaiming narrative control and fostering long-lasting relationships in the Pacific. …
Proposed strategies to counteract these perceptions include emphasizing soft power for achieving hard objectives. …
As the State Department completes its review of foreign assistance, prioritizing alignment with Pacific nations’ needs is crucial in fostering essential partnerships. …
Maintaining a business-oriented, transactional approach risks growing a zero-sum mentality, ultimately hampering diplomatic relationships essential for U.S. influence. …
Developing a unified strategy that aligns U.S. national security interests with Pacific priorities is paramount to avoiding further isolation. …
Senior U.S. officials have noted that America’s engagement often embodies “soft power in the service of hard power,” affirming that cultivating trust in the Pacific is intertwined with broader strategic objectives. …
The importance of following through on existing commitments is another critical element to restore faith in U.S. intentions in the region. …
As concerns persist regarding the pending USAID review, it is crucial to ensure that significant agreements—such as the COFA agreements and Tuna Treaty—are fully implemented and supported. …
Additionally, ensuring the establishment of new embassies in key Pacific nations must remain a diplomatic priority, despite global reductions in diplomatic presence. …
Given that China often outnumbers U.S. diplomats in the region, maintaining a robust presence is essential. …
Reconstructing a realistic trade agenda and broadening economic growth opportunities in the Pacific could also strengthen ties. …
Despite their size, Pacific nations provide unique market opportunities that remain largely untapped, necessitating enhanced trade representation and support for business interactions with the U.S. …
There is a pressing need for the establishment of a representative dedicated to advocating for Pacific nations within the United States. …
Additionally, the Development Finance Corporation (DFC) should be reformed to better align with strategic needs, enabling U.S. industrial engagement while countering China’s dominance. …
Pursuing new opportunities in line with administration priorities—such as combatting drug trafficking—can create avenues for engagement across the region, tapping into existing U.S. resources and expertise. …
Strengthening maritime security initiatives that enhance monitoring capabilities in the Pacific also aligns with mutual U.S. and regional security interests. …
Collaboration with partners and allies is vital in addressing pervasive challenges throughout the Pacific. …
Many nations now view the Pacific Islands as interconnected with their strategic interests, enhancing opportunities for cooperative engagement. …
Bolstering multilateral partnerships, like the Quad, enables collective efforts in health, infrastructure, and connectivity—key priorities for the Pacific nations. …
Following through on initiatives like the Indo-Pacific Maritime Domain Awareness program could further assist Pacific nations in ensuring their security and interests are protected. …
Moreover, the trilateral U.S.-Australia-Japan partnership has the potential to identify critical infrastructure projects vital for strategic success in the region. …
Congress also plays a pivotal role in reaffirming the importance of Pacific Islands during the ongoing initiatives. …
Despite the partisan nature of contemporary politics, bipartisan support for the Pacific remains strong, as demonstrated by the recent passage of COFA funding legislation. …
Utilizing this momentum, Congress can build upon the commitment to ensure the administration continues to maintain engagement, signaling the significance of U.S. partnerships and actions in the region. …
In light of recent comments by leaders of Pacific nations regarding their desire for fair and equitable trading relations with various countries, including China, the urgency for the U.S. to reclaim its standing in the Pacific has never been clearer. …
Genuine influence in the Pacific is built on meaningful relationships forged through partnership, mutual respect, and shared objectives. …
While unilateral decisions on foreign policy may seem less complex, crafting long-term relationships yields greater returns in building trust. …
Moving forward, the conclusion of the State Department’s foreign assistance review should catalyze new initiatives aimed at revitalizing U.S. presence in the Pacific. …
The time for impactful action is now, requiring a dedicated commitment to reestablish and reinforce the United States’ influence and reach in this strategically pivotal region.
image source from：csis
