Actually the US dues are 22% now - they re-adjusted a few years back, and promised to pay if they did. And they *still* ain't paying. A bit of background about the US reneging on their debts here. (OK, it's Wikipedia so use your own judgement.)

For comparison of who pays what, perhaps a comparison of who has how much money would be worthwhile.

World GDP 2003

So the US has 21% of the world's GDP and pays (or actually "is supposed to pay") 22% of the UN budget. If we suppose that poorer nations need to use proportionally more of their GDP for essentials, that ain't too far out of whack, is it?

As far as peacekeeping not being effective, you could get a whole lot of peacekeeping for 607 million dollars. And you could do a whole lot of work providing fresh water and hospitals for the other 607 million which they don't even *intend* to pay. I wonder, what's more likely to get you some friends? 1 billion dollars on cruise missiles and bombs to invade a country and start a civil war? Or 1 billion dollars on peacekeeping (*real* peacekeeping, not deposing governments we don't like) and hospitals? Hmmm...

Graham.