< Back to Current Version

U.S. Assistance Programs in China

Changes from May 18, 2007 to January 28, 2008

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.


Order Code RS22663 May 18, 2007Updated January 28, 2008 U.S.-Funded Assistance Programs in China Thomas Lum Specialist in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary United States foreign operations appropriations forassistance to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) primarily support supports democracy-related programs, particularly rule of law training, and support and assists Tibetan communities. The U.S. Congress has played a leading role in providing funding for suchdemocracy programs, which has grown from $10 million in FY2002 to an estimated $23 million in FY2006FY2007. Major fundingprogram areas include legal training, legal aid, criminal defense, labor rights, and non-governmental organization (NGO)civil society development in China, monitoring human rights conditions in the PRC from outside China, and preserving Tibetan culture. This report will be updated annually. Overview United States foreign operations appropriations forassistance to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) primarily fund supports democracy-related programs and supportassists Tibetan communities both inside , from both inside and outside of China. USAID does not have a presence or mission in the PRC, due in part to the PRCChinese government’s reported human rights abuses. However, the Peace Corps Corps has been involved in English language and environmental education in China since 1993, and USAID and the State Department have directly funded or administered programs in China and Tibet since 2000. Tibet since 2000. The U.S. Congress has played a leading role in promoting democracyrelated programs in the PRC. In the past five years, annual congressionalforeign operations appropriations for democracy programs in China and Tibet have more than doubled,grown from $10 million in FY2002 to to approximately $23 million in FY2006FY2007. Major recipients of U.S. grants for China programs include Temple University (rule of law), the International Republican Institute (village elections), the Asia Foundation (civil society), and the Bridge Fund (Tibet). The Department of State’s East Asia and the Pacific (EAP) Bureau and the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) have allocated funding from two accounts, the Economic Support Fund (ESF) and the Democracy Fund (FY2006FY2007),,1 primarily for U.S.-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in China, which in turn have provided some funding to Chinese NGOsnon-governmental organizations. The East Asia Regional Democracy 1 Also referred to as the Human Rights and Democracy fund (HRDF). CRS-2 Regional Democracy Fund also has provided some ESF for rule of law and Tibet programs. In FY2006, Congress earmarked Development Assistance (DA) for U.S. universities to conduct educational exchanges programs. Since 2006, Congress has appropriated Development Assistance (DA) to American educational institutions for exchange programs related to democracy, rule of law, and the environment in China. For FY2008, the Administration requested $7.8 million from the Child Survival and CRS-2 Health Account, mostly for HIV/AIDS programs in China, and $1.3 million in ESF for rule of law programs. The U.S. Congress has played a Commonly Used Acronyms leading role in promoting democracy-related programs in the ABA: American Bar Association PRC. Because of the late enactment DA: Development Assistance of the Continuing Appropriations DRL: Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor ESF: Economic Support Funds Resolution for FY2007,1 support for HRDF: Human Rights and Democracy Fund many foreign operations programs in NED: National Endowment for Democracy FY2007 have not yet been specified, NGO: Non-Governmental Organization but can be expected to remain near TAF: The Asia Foundation FY2006 levels. Major recipients of U.S. grants for China programs include Temple University (rule of law), the International Republican Institute (village elections), and the Asia Foundation (civil society). Some experts argue that legal reform efforts in China have produced limited benefits due to the lack of judicial independence, weak enforcement of laws, constraints on lawyers, and political corruption. Others contend that U.S.-funded rule of law programs in China have helped to build foundations for democratic change — more professional judicial personnel, more transparent lawmaking processes, and more sophisticated laws — and have bolstered reform-minded officials in the Chinese government. Many foreign and Chinese observers have noted that awareness of legal rights in many areas of PRC society is growing. Foreign Operations Appropriations Between 1999 and 2006, the United States government made available or authorized roughly $110 million for democracy-related programs in China. In FY2006, total funding for U.S. assistance programs in China represented about 7% of total U.S. foreign aid to East Asia.2 law, and the environment in China. In 2007, the U.S. government began funding HIV/AIDS programs in China using Child Survival and Health (CSH) account funds. Some experts argue that legal reform efforts in China have produced limited benefits due to the lack of judicial independence, weak enforcement of laws, constraints on lawyers, and political corruption. Others contend that U.S.-funded rule of law programs in China have helped to build foundations for democratic change — more professional Commonly Used Acronyms judicial personnel, more transparent lawmaking processes, and more sophisticated laws — and ABA: American Bar Association have bolstered reform-minded officials in the CSH: Child Survival and Health Chinese government. Many foreign and Development Assistance DA: Chinese observers have noted that awareness of DRL: Bureau of Democracy Human legal rights in many areas of PRC society is Rights and Labor growing. FY2008 Appropriations ESF: Economic Support Funds HRDF: Human Rights and Democracy Fund NED: National Endowment for Democracy NGO: Non-Governmental Organization OECD:Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development For FY2008, the Bush Administration requested a total of $9.2 million for China, primarily CSH account funds for HIV/AIDS programs ($7.2 million).2 Economic Support Funds ($2 million) are to support rule of law programs, judicial independence, and the role of NGOs in Chinese society. Tibetan programs include public health efforts, education, environmental conservation, and job skills training in Tibetan communities. In addition, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 (P.L. 110-161) provides $15 million for democracy and rule of law programs in the PRC, Hong Kong, and Taiwan out of the Democracy Fund.3 The FY2008 appropriations measure also mandates $5 million from the ESF account for activities that preserve cultural traditions and promote sustainable development and environmental conservation in Tibetan communities in China, and $250,000 to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) for human rights and democracy programs related to Tibet. In addition, $10 million in Development Assistance is to be provided to American educational institutions and NGOs for programs and activities in the PRC related to democracy, rule of law, and the environment. 2 3 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. Since 2004, the annual congressional authorizations for democracy funds for China have included Hong Kong and Taiwan. Funding for legal and political reforms in Taiwan shall only be made available to the extent that they are matched from sources other than the United States government. Taiwan receives approximately $500,000 annually to develop its export control system and combat trafficking in persons. Hong Kong receives assistance for strengthening political parties and supporting democratization ($840,000 in FY2007). CRS-3 Foreign Operations Appropriations, 1999-2007 Between 1999 and 2007, the United States government made available or authorized roughly $133 million for democracy-related programs in China. In FY2007, total funding for U.S. assistance programs in China represented about 7% of total U.S. foreign aid to East Asia.4 In other comparative terms, the Ford Foundation, which does not receive U.S. government support, provides grants for projects in several areas, including rule of law, civil society, rural development, education, and public health ($220 million during 19882006). European aid efforts, particularly in the area of PRC legal reform, reportedly have 1 P.L. 110-5, the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, FY2007 amends the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, FY2007 (P.L. 109-289, division B, as amended by P.L. 109-369 and P.L. 109-383). 2 For FY1999-FY2003, totals are taken from General Accounting Office, “Foreign Assistance: U.S. Funding for Democracy-Related Programs,” February 2004. For FY2004-FY2006, totals are taken from congressional foreign appropriations laws. Some of the money that was provided or authorized by Congress during these periods may not have been allocated. A small portion of funding for FY2006 will be obligated in FY2007. In FY2004-FY2006, although most foreign operations funding for China would pass through the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, DRL reported $55 million for China programs compared to $67 million in funds appropriated or authorized by Congress. For further information, see CRS Report RL31362, U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients, by Thomas Lum. CRS-3 far surpassed those of the United States in terms of funding, with greater emphasis on commercial rule of law.3 far surpassed those of the United States in terms of funding, with greater emphasis on commercial rule of law.5 According to OECD data, the top donors of bilateral official development assistance (ODA) to China (2006) are Japan ($1.5 billion), Germany ($441 million), and France ($186 million). However, some major aid donors, such as Japan and Germany, provide a large share of their foreign assistance in the form of loans rather than grants.6 Some policy makers in these countries have advocated reducing their development aid to China, due largely to China’s rise as an economic power. FY2000-FY2003 Appropriations. Prior to 2000, China received only Peace Corps assistance. The consolidated appropriations actConsolidated Appropriations Act for FY2000 (P.L. 106-113) provided $1 million for U.S.-based NGOs (to preserve cultural traditions and promote sustainable development and environmental conservation) in Tibet as well as $1 million to support research about China, and authorized ESF for NGOs to promote democracy in Chinathe PRC. For FY2001 (P.L. 106- 429), Congress authorized up to $2 million for Tibet. In In FY2002 (P.L. 107-115), Congress made available $10 million for assistance for activities activities to support democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in China, and Hong Kong, including up to $3 million for Tibet. In FY2003 (P.L. 108-7), Congress provided $15 The FY2003 foreign operations funding measure (P.L. 108-7), provided $15 million for democracy-related programs in China, including up to $3 million for Tibet and $3 million for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). FY2004-FY2006FY2007 Appropriations. In 2004, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor became the principal administrator of China democracy programs. The FY2004 appropriations measure (P.L. 108-199) made available $13.5 million for China, and Hong Kong, and Taiwan, including $3 million for NED. Appropriations for FY2004 provided a special earmark for Tibet ($4 million). In FY2005 (P.L. 108-447), Congress provided $19 million for China, including $4 million for NED, and authorized $4 million for Tibet and $250,000 for NED in Tibet (P.L. 108-447). The FY2005 appropriations measure authorized the use of Development Assistance to American universities for educational exchange programs related to democracy, rule of law, and the environment. The conference agreement (H.Rept. 109-265) on the FY2006 foreign operations appropriations bill (H.R. 3057, signed into law as P.L. 109-102) authorized $20 million for China and Hong Kong. In addition, Congress recommended $3 million to NED. For Tibet, P.L. 109-102 authorized $4 million for Tibet and Tibetan communities in China and $250,000 to NED in Tibet. The FY2006 appropriations measure also appropriated $5 million in Development Assistance to American educational institutions for legal and environmental programs in the PRC.4 (See Table 1.) Foreign Aid Restrictions. Many U.S. sanctions on the PRC in response to the Tiananmen military crackdown in 1989 remain in effect, including some foreign aidrelated restrictions, such as “no” votes or abstentions by U.S. representatives to international financial institutions regarding loans to China (except those that meet basic human needs).5 The Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for FY2002 lifted the restrictions (effective since FY2000) requiring that ESF for China democracy programs 3 The European Union reported “co-operation projects” worth $325 million (250 million Euros) during 2002-2006, including legal and judicial assistance, social reform, education, the environment, and economic development. See Delegation of the European Commission to China, available at [http://www.delchn.cec.eu.int/en/Co-operation/General_Information.htm]. 4 S.Rept. 109-96 on H.R. 3057, the FY2006 foreign operations appropriations bill, recommended Vermont Law School, the University of Louisville, and the University of Western Kentucky as possible recipients of these funds. 5 Pursuant to Section 902 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1990-91 and Section 710(a) of the International Financial Institutions Act. For further information, see CRS Report RL31910, China: Economic Sanctions, by Dianne E Rennack. CRS-4 4 For FY1999-FY2003, totals are taken from General Accounting Office, “Foreign Assistance: U.S. Funding for Democracy-Related Programs,” February 2004. For information on U.S. assistance to Asia, see CRS Report RL31362, U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients, by Thomas Lum. 5 The European Union reported “co-operation projects” worth $325 million (250 million Euros) during 2002-2006, including legal and judicial assistance, social reform, education, the environment, and economic development. See Delegation of the European Commission to China, available at [http://www.delchn.cec.eu.int/en/Co-operation/General_Information.htm]. 6 Approximately 90% of Japanese ODA to China has come in the form of loans, according to some sources. See The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, “Overview of Official Development Assistance to China” [http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/region/e_asia/china/index.html]. German aid to the PRC reportedly also includes a substantial loan component. See “As China Booms, Germany Politicians Question Continuing Aid,” Deutsch Welle, July 27, 2007. CRS-4 for Tibet and $250,000 for NED in Tibet. In addition, the FY2005 appropriations measure authorized the use of Development Assistance for American universities to conduct U.S.-China educational exchange programs related to democracy, rule of law, and the environment. The conference agreement (H.Rept. 109-265) on the FY2006 foreign operations appropriations bill (H.R. 3057, signed into law as P.L. 109-102) extended $20 million for China. For Tibet, P.L. 109-102 authorized $4 million for Tibet and Tibetan communities in China and $250,000 to NED in Tibet. The FY2006 appropriations measure also provided $5 million in Development Assistance to American educational institutions for legal and environmental programs in the PRC. Because of the late enactment of the Continuing Appropriations Resolution for FY2007 (P.L. 110-5), many U.S. foreign aid programs for the year were not specified but funding continued at or near FY2006 levels. Table 1. Selected U.S. Grant Assistance to China, 2000-2006 (thousand dollars) Account FY07 est. FY08 est. FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 CSH — — — — — — — 4,800 7,290 DA — — — — — — 4,950 5,000 10,000d ESF a 1,000 28,000b 10,000 15,000 13,500 19,000 20,000 19,000 17,000d ESFTibet — — — — 3,976 4,216 3,960 3,960 5,250d 1,435 1,298 1,559 977 863 1,476 1,683 1,886 1,953 — — 6,400 — — — — — — 2,435 29,298 17,959 15,977 18,339 24,692 30,593 34,646 41,493 Peace Corps Laborc Total Sources: U.S. Department of State congressional budget justifications for foreign operations; congressional foreign operations appropriations legislation. a. Not specified in State Department annual budget justifications. b. Compensation for the accidental NATO bombing of the PRC Embassy in Belgrade. c. Department of Labor programs to promote workers’ rights, greater awareness of labor laws, legal aid services to women and migrant workers, and health and safety standards in China, pursuant to P.L. 106-286 (granting China permanent normal trade relations status, or PNTR). d. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 (P.L. 110-161) provides $10 million for U.S.-China educational exchanges (DA), $15 million for China/Hong Kong/Taiwan democracy programs (ESF), and $5.25 million for Tibetan community assistance (ESF). Foreign Aid Restrictions. Many U.S. sanctions on the PRC in response to the Tiananmen military crackdown in 1989 remain in effect, including some foreign aidrelated restrictions, such as “no” votes or abstentions by U.S. representatives to international financial institutions regarding loans to China (except those that meet basic human needs).7 The Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for FY2002 lifted the 7 Pursuant to Section 902 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1990-91 and Section (continued...) CRS-5 restrictions (effective since FY2000) requiring that ESF for China democracy programs be provided only to NGOs located outside the PRC. Tibet programs are still restricted to NGOs. Congress has required that U.S. representatives to international financial institutions support projects in Tibet only if they do not encourage the migration and settlement of non-Tibetans (the Han Chinese majority) into Tibet or the transfer of Tibetan-owned properties to non-Tibetans, which some fear may erode Tibetan culture and identity. Since FY2002, foreign operations appropriations measures have barred U.S. assistance to The U.S. government suspended funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in 2002 because of the UNFPA’s funding to family planning programs in China, whichwhere the State Department has determined retain coercive practices.6 Table 1. Selected U.S. Grant Assistance to China, 2000-2006 (thousand dollars) Account FY2000 P.L. 106113 FY2001 P.L. 106429 FY2002 P.L. 107115 FY2003 P.L. 108-7 FY2004 P.L. 108199 FY2005 P.L. 108447 FY2006 P.L. 109102 — — — — — — 4,950 ESF (est.) a 1,000 28,000b 10,000 15,000 13,500 19,000 23,000 ESF-Tibet — — — — 3,976 4,216 3,960 1,435 1,298 1,559 977 863 1,476 1,785 — — 6,400 — — — — 2,435 29,298 17,959 15,977 18,339 24,692 33,695 DA Peace Corps Labor Total Sources: U.S. Department of State congressional budget justifications for foreign operations; congressional foreign operations appropriations laws. a. ESF for democracy-related programs are based upon congressional appropriations laws. The State Department’s annual budget reports do not provide totals of ESF- DRL spending in China. b. Compensation for damages to the PRC Embassy in Belgrade.that coercive family planning practices had occurred. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 makes funds available again to the UNFPA, if they are determined to be eligible under the terms of the Kemp-Kasten amendment, but forbids such funds from being used for any UNFPA programs in China.8 Key Actors Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. In the past decade, Congress has supported increased funding for DRL’s Human Rights and Democracy Fund (HRDF). Appropriations for HRDF grew from a yearly average of $13 million in FY2001-FY2002 to $33.7 million in FY2003-FY2005. Congress provided $63 million for HRDF in FY2006. China programs account for about 25% of spending from its Democracy Fund. Most DRL funding $13 million in FY2001 to $71 million in FY2007 (a total of $261 million between 2001 and 2007). In addition, the U.S. government provided a total of $65 million for National Endowment for Democracy (NED)-administered HRDF programs between 2003 and 2007. China programs account for about 25% of allocations from the Democracy Fund. Most DRL funding to China goes to U.S.-based NGOs, including universities, while some subgrantssub-grants go to PRC “partner NGOs.”7 69 National Endowment for Democracy. The National Endowment for Democracy is a private, non-profit organization that promotes democracy around the world. NED was created by and obtains nearly all of its funding from the United States government. The Endowment’s China programs receive grants through three channels: the annual foreign operations earmark for NED — the “core fund” — ($50 million in FY2007), out of which approximately $2 million is devoted to China programs each year; the annual congressional earmark for democracy-related programs in the PRC ($2.9 7 (...continued) 710(a) of the International Financial Institutions Act. For further information, see CRS Report RL31910, China: Economic Sanctions, by Dianne E. Rennack. 8 The “Kemp-Kasten” amendment to the FY1985 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 99-88) bans U.S. assistance to organizations that support or participate in the management of coercive family planning programs. For further information, see CRS Report RL33250, International Population Assistance and Family Planning Programs: Issues for Congress, by Luisa Blanchfield. 79 For a listing of HRDF projects, see U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, HRDF Projects, 1998-Present [http://www.state.gov/g/drl/c12440.htm]. Because of political sensitivities, DRL does not disclose the names of its grant recipients. CRS-5 National Endowment for Democracy. The National Endowment for Democracy is a private, non-profit organization that promotes democracy around the world. NED was created by and obtains nearly all of its funding from the United States government. The Endowment’s China programs receive grants through three channels: the annual foreign operations earmark for NED — the “core fund” — ($74 million in FY2006), out of which approximately $2 million is devoted to China programs each year; the annual congressional earmark for democracy-related programs in the PRC ($3.256 million to NED in FY2006FY2007); and DRL grants to NED’s “core institutes.”810 During the FY1999-FY2003 period, about 38% of U.S. government funding for democracy-related programs in China was allocated through the Endowment.911 NED began awarding grants to U.S.-based organizations supporting democracy in China in the mid-1980s and funded significant in-country programs in the 1990s (worth nearly $20 million). Through its grant-making program and core institutes, NED supports pro-democracy organizations in the United States and Hong Kong, helps to advance the rule of law, promote the rights of workers and women, and strengthen village elections in China, and assists in the development of Tibetan communities.10 Major12 Selected U.S.-Funded Programs and Grantees Rule of Law. In 1997, President Clinton and PRC President Jiang Zemin agreed to establish a “Rule of Law Initiative.” Rule of Law. Since 2001, the State Department and USAID have provided $12 million for the Temple University rule of law program in China, launched in 1999 in collaboration with Tsinghua University in Beijing and two U.S. partners or sub-grantees — New York University and Brigham Young University.11 13 Temple University’s Master of Laws (LLM) program in China is the first and only of its kind, educating over 600 Chinese legal professionals, the majority of whom are officials in the executive (State Council), legislative, and judicial branches of government.12 In 14 In 2006, USAID administered a grant of $1.1 million for a rule of law program bringing together two U.S. universities (University of the Pacific and American University) and three Chinese universities. 8 three Chinese universities. Since 2002, the American Bar Association (ABA) has conducted several rule of law programs in China with the support of USAID, including the China Environmental Governance Training Program and the China Legal Aid project. Office of American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA). During the past eight years, USAID’s ASHA has supported the construction and equipping of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai. ASHA has also assisted the Hopkins-Nanjing Center for Chinese and American Studies in Nanjing and provided a grant to Project Hope to support training for the Shanghai Children’s Medical Center. 10 NED’s core institutes or grantees are: the International Republican Institute (IRI); the American American Center for International Labor Solidarity (ACILS); the Center for International Private Enterprise Enterprise (CIPE); and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI). 9 11 General Accounting Office, “Foreign Assistance: U.S. Funding for Democracy-Related Programs,” February 2004. 10 12 Eric T. Hale, “A Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation of the National Endowment for Democracy, 1990-1999” (Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University, 2003), pp. 173-4. For a listing of NED projects, see National Endowment for Democracy, Grants — 2005 Asia Programs. 1113 DRL supports eight U.S. universities conducting rule of law programs in China. Approximately 150 U.S. law schools operate programs in China, mostly offering courses and short-term programs for American students to study PRC law; about one dozen U.S. law schools have developed exchange programs. See National Committee on United States-China Relations at [http://www.ncuscr.org]. 12 Temple University Beasley School of Law, Rule of Law Projects in China: 2005-06 Annual Report; Adelaide Ferguson, Temple’s Rule of Law Programs in China, March 2006. CRS-6 Since 2002, the American Bar Association (ABA) has conducted several rule of law programs in China with the support of USAID, including the China Environmental Governance Training Program and the China Legal Aid project. The environmental program, in cooperation with China’s State Environmental Protection Agency, has provided environmental policy training to local and regional governmental officials, lawyers, academics, NGOs, and industry representatives in several Chinese cities. In 2002, the ABA implemented a training program in the United States for a delegation of Chinese legal aid practitioners. Department of Labor. The Department of Labor’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs has sponsored programs in China pursuant to P.L. 106-286 (granting China permanent normal trade relations status, or PNTR). In October 2002, the Department of Labor awarded a four-year, $4.1 million grant to Worldwide Strategies, Inc., with the Asia Foundation and the National Committee on United States-China Relations as subcontractors, to help the PRC government develop laws and regulations that protect internationally recognized workers’ rights, promote greater awareness of the law among Chinese workers and employers, strengthen industrial relations, and improve legal aid services to women and migrant workers. The Department of Labor also awarded a fouryear, $2.3 million grant to the National Safety Council to help improve safety and health conditions in Chinese coal mines. Office of American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA). During the past eight years, USAID’s ASHA has supported the construction and equipping of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai. ASHA has also assisted the Hopkins-Nanjing Center for Chinese and American Studies in Nanjing and provided a grant to Project Hope to support training for the Shanghai Children’s Medical Center. Tibet. Since FY2000, the U.S. government has provided foreign aid funding to the Bridge Fund, a private, non-profit organization that implements community development projects in Tibetan areas of China. The Bridge Fund has created programs in the spheres of economic development, healthcare, education, cultural preservation, and environmental conservation in Tibet and Tibetan communities in five western provinces of China. Other U.S.-based and U.S.-funded NGOs in Tibet include Winrock International and The Mountain Institute. The Department of State’s Bureau of Population and Refugee Migration has provided Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) to the Tibet Fund for Tibetan refugee communities in India and Nepal. The Asia Foundation. The Asia Foundation (TAF) is a private, non-profit organization that sponsors civil society, democracy, and economic development programs in Asia. TAF receives an annual congressional earmark ($13.8 million in FY2006) as well as DRL grants for several projects in China, including the following: strengthening local non-governmental networks and organizations; empowering communities and civil society organizations; promoting government transparency, public participation, and public interest law; and developing grassroots mediation processes. TAF’s activities “complement U.S. Government efforts to advance U.S. national interests in the AsiaPacific region.”13 13 U.S. Department of State, International Affairs Function 150, Fiscal FY2007 Budget Request. 14 Temple University Beasley School of Law, Rule of Law Projects in China: 2005-06 Annual Report; Adelaide Ferguson, Temple’s Rule of Law Programs in China, March 2006.