The 2025 annual report of the National Endowment for Democracy — funded largely by the United States Congress — identifies China as a key area of funding, a move analysts say could further strain US-China relations.

Experts warn that long-standing US interference under the guise of promoting democracy has fueled global instability.

The organization said it supported more than 1,500 projects across dozens of countries last year, with China, Russia, Iran and Cuba among its key areas of focus.

Its priorities closely mirror the so-called "global threat landscape" outlined in the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Cheng Hongliang, director of the Center for People-to-People Exchanges Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said this overlap is no coincidence, but reflects the organization's close alignment with the US government.

"The NED was established in 1983 under US government auspices, and its primary mission has been to serve US foreign strategy and target perceived opponents. Nearly 90 percent of its funding comes from congressional appropriations," Cheng said.

The organization is not just closely connected to the US government but is, in fact, a strategic tool advancing Washington's hegemonic ambitions, he said. "It operates under the guise of promoting democracy while serving broader US strategic interests."

Data from USAspending.gov show the NED was authorized to spend $315 million from federal funds in fiscal year 2026.

Zhang Guoqing, an associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Institute of American Studies, said the organization's reliance on government appropriations indicates it is not an independent NGO but effectively the US government's "white gloves".

The NED uses promotion of democracy as a pretext to suppress sovereign nations that do not align with US interests and to consolidate US hegemony, Zhang said. "Democracy is just a facade — the essence is maintaining US dominance. The (1983) NED Act explicitly defines the organization's purpose as serving the US government's objectives."

The annual report shows the NED invested more than $53 million in Asia last year, with over $13 million allocated to China-related programs — the largest share in the region. It notes that such programs remain the organization's "single largest area of investment".

Experts said that increased funding for China-related activities will have a detrimental effect on US-China relations in both the short and long term.

'Unfriendly actions'

"The increase in NED funding for China-related programs suggests Washington still plans to take unfriendly actions toward Beijing," Cheng said.

Issues such as human rights and democracy — frequently invoked by the NED — will remain major factors disrupting bilateral ties, he said.

"With mutual trust already less than ideal, continued NED activities could further complicate efforts to build a sustainable foundation of trust between the two sides," he said, warning of potential long-term implications for the health and stability of relations.

Beyond regional investments, the report notes that Congress has granted the organization "flexible contingency funding", allowing it to "seize the moment" and "surge resources" when perceived windows of opportunity arise, such as political shifts in Syria or elections in Bolivia.

It also repeatedly frames overseas interventions as serving US economic interests and benefiting domestic workers, companies and long-term security.

Cheng said the expanded contingency funding enhances the NED's operational autonomy and flexibility, increasing hidden risks for other countries. "Even the risk of color revolutions could rise," he said.

"Continued US support for NED activities further demonstrates a failure to shoulder the responsibilities expected of a major power," he said. "Instead of interfering in other countries' internal affairs and destabilizing the world, the US should focus more on contributing to global stability."

Zhang of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences warned that framing foreign intervention as an extension of domestic interests is deeply harmful to the international order.

"This approach essentially instrumentalizes and weaponizes democracy, exacerbates global confrontation, and undermines peaceful development," he said.