BS: Peace?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jan 06 - 09:27 PM

http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/pko/due2005.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jan 06 - 09:21 PM

Ringer--

It breaks my heart to have to tell you that this is the only UN we have. There is room for improvement--what a revelation. Nobody has claimed improvements could not be made---as a sage once said, please try to keep up.

No organization is perfect--no person either--perhaps not even your good self.

But the burden is on you to establish that the UN, even without improvements, does more harm than good. If you don't think that UNICEF, WHO, UNESCO, and the UN's function as an investigative body (e.g. Lebanon) and as an honest broker (do I have to explain what that is?) (e.g. Iraq)---mean the UN does more good than harm---you need to do a lot more reading--and watching something other than Fox News for a change.

If you think the UN can solve a country's internal problems or solve a problem requiring military intervention, you are distressingly naive.

The oil for food scandal, in which, by the way, US firms are also implicated, is a handy club to beat the UN. The General Assembly has made pointless anti-Israel declarations. But to extrapolate from this that the UN is useless--or does more harm than good--is throwing the baby out with the bathwater--a reaction of the frustrated and impotent, as I pointed out.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Jan 06 - 12:10 AM

This link is quite clear.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/pko/due2005.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:42 PM

Methinks Curly is very drunk or stoned. Hope he doesn't drive when he leaves the bar.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:37 PM

He's a dumb shit with nowt for brains, Even he didn't read it. It has big words in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:35 PM

Did anyone read all that? You should get a prize of some kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:35 PM

Stop wasting band width.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Curly
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:33 PM

Link

November 2, 1999: In an address to the National Press Club, Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke says that the UN must reduce its reliance on any single member for financial support and make its expectations of members' contributions more "equitable". At the same time he recognizes that such reform will not proceed unless the US pays its dues. "As I stand here today, the U.S. owes over $1 billion dollars to the United Nations. This amount is well over half of the total money owed to the organization. These are not extra funds that the UN is asking for. It is money we're legally obligated to provide. And we should pay it," he says.
October 27, 1999: Richard Holbrooke says that he has received a phone call over the weekend from Bernard Kouchner, the UN civil administrator in Kosovo, raising an alarm and pleading for help. Four months after the establishment of the Kosovo mission, the United States has contributed only $4 million to a voluntary start-up trust fund of $27 million. Washington has yet to pay any of the $39 million it has been assessed for regular contributions to the mission, and a larger bill looms next year.
October 24, 1999: A New York Times article reports that the financial crisis at the UN has prevented urgently needed renovations to the Headquarters building from being undertaken, so much so, that only diplomatic immunity spares the building from being shuttered for violations of New York city building regulations!
October 19, 1999: In a speech on his acceptance of the World Federalist Association's Norman Cousins Global Governance Award, former CBS broadcaster Walter Cronkite champions the cause of world government through a stronger United Nations. As the first of three measures that he advocates for strengthening the UN, he says "Americans overwhelmingly want us to pay our UN dues, with no crippling limitations. We owe it to the world. In fact, we owe it as well to our national self-esteem."
September 30, 1999: The United States accounts for 65% of all unpaid assessments owed by members and 81% of unpaid dues for the organization's regular budget. The next biggest debtors, Brazil and Argentina, together account for 9% of the arrears on the regular budget.
September 24, 1999: Referring to the UN financial crisis, Sweden's Foreign Minister Lena Hjelm-Wallén, in a speech to the General Assembly in the General Debate, says, "The UN cannot be reformed under the threat of political and financial crisis. It is simply not acceptable that Member States set conditions for fulfilling Charter obligations. The Swedish Government urges all debtors - including the main debtor, the United States - to settle their accounts before the end of this year and to pay their assessed contributions in full, on time and without conditions. Securing a sound and viable financial basis must be an integral part of reform efforts. The idea of establishing a revolving credit fund could be considered as an emergency step. We should also enact measures to reverse the current trend of late payment. Article 19 should be applied more strictly. It is time to agree on a new scale of assessment based on capacity to pay. A realistic proposal has been presented by the European Union."
September 23, 1999: US Secretary of State Madeline Albright expresses her frustration at the continuing US debt, saying that the accumulated arrears, which the United Nations estimates at $1.6 billion, have made it particularly difficult to recruit allies for the kind of structural reforms that Congress demands as a condition of paying the back dues and other assessments. "What is happening up here is that they see us as making certain demands that undercut a bureaucracy that they have some interest in, while not paying any money," Albright says.
September 22, 1999: A Chicago Tribune editorial calls the US debt to the UN "humiliating, shameless, ludicrous, needless and intolerable" and describes the world's last superpower as "the UN's foremost deadbeat."
September 21, 1999: In his address to the 54th session of the General Assembly, President Clinton acknowledges the responsibility of the US "to equip the UN with the resources it needs to be effective. As I think most of you know, I have strongly supported the United States meeting all its financial obligations to the United Nations, and I will continue to do so. We will do our very best to succeed this year," he says.
September 7, 1999: A Boston Globe editorial calls risking banishment from the General Assembly "a shameful act of international arrogance."
August 31, 1999: The US runs up $1.739 billion in unpaid dues and other assessments, according to Joseph E. Connor, the UN Under Secretary General for Management.
August 16, 1999: In a speech at the 100th Meeting of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the 86th Meeting of the Ladies' Auxiliary in Kansas City, Missouri, President Clinton states that paying US dues to the UN "is a legal and a moral responsibility. It ought to be reason enough to do so. If we fail to do so soon, the United States will actually lose its vote in the General Assembly." Commenting on these remarks, the Los Angeles Times describes Clinton as a "weak friend of the UN."

June 22, 1999: The Senate, by a vote of 98 to 1, confirms payment of $961 million of the US's longstanding debt to the UN. However, the US attached several conditions to the payment, among which are explicit drops in the US share of the regular UN budget, from 25% to 20%, and of peacekeeping operations, from 31% to 25%. The bill will face strong opposition in the House of Representatives, where Rep. Christopher Smith (Republican) of New Jersey has vowed to reinsert the controversial anti-abortion provisions that have been instrumental in holding up the bill thus far. There are reports that the bill is a result of negotiations between Senator Jesse Helms (Republican) and US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who agreed to the legislation in order to secure the confirmation of Richard Holbrooke as US Ambassador to the UN. National Public Radio reporter Tom Gjelten maintains that the timing of the Senate's vote and Holbrooke's confirmation hearings are pivotal because "the Unites Nations is right back at the center of things internationally, the United States needs the UN to carry out a helpful role in Kosovo right now, and it would be very important to have an ambassador in that position and have the US paid up in its dues." However, the conditions outlined in the bill make it unlikely that it would be accepted by the UN.
June 14, 1999: The Washington Post reports that the US Congress is making a drive towards a payment of up to $1 billion on its debt to the UN. However, many in the US government maintain that Congressional approval will be tied to several US-backed reforms of the UN.
May 19, 1999: The UN Foundation announces $21 million for UN programs.
April 30, 1999: The UK has paid its full 1999 dues leaving the US, Japan, Germany, Brazil and Argentina as the last major payers with outstanding debts to the UN. By this time, total US debt has swelled to $1.638 billion and accounts for 62% of the total debt owed to the UN.
April 13, 1999: First Lady Hillary Clinton urges the US to pay their dues to the UN by saying in a speech to the Campaign to Preserve U.S. Global Leadership: " So if we do go forward with the kind of leadership that we are in a position to demonstrate in our country, then we have to do it here at home by paying our dues to the U.N., paying our share, doing our part. And with development assistance, we know that we are far behind most of our allies and friends in Europe in terms of the amount -- percentage wise -- that we provide."
April 6, 1999: The UN Foundation announces an emergency $1 million grant for UN relief efforts in the Kosovo region.
March 31, 1999: Spain has completed payment of its full 1999 dues to the UN. Still notable exceptions are the UK and the US.
March 25, 1999: There is a good deal of legislative activity in Washington D.C. which centers around the question of UN funding. There is a proposal (H.R. 1355) in the House of Representatives aimed at paying the US arrears. On the other hand, both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed legislation limiting funding for international organizations.
March 18, 1999: The Spokesman for the Secretary General responds to a New York Times article which quotes U.S. Senator Jesse Helms as claiming that the SG had agreed to a 20% assessment for the United States. The Spokesman stresses that the SG has always held that the U.S. must work out any changes in assessments with other member-states, not with the Secretariat. Furthermore, in his view the U.S. may be able to arrange for a reduction in assessments to 22% while 20% would be a long-shot. Also today, the Better World Fund of the UN Foundation runs a call by five former Secretaries of State to the U.S. Congress to pay U.N. arrears, stating that this is a "basic international responsibility." On the same day, in his press briefing on the U.N. Financial Situation, Under-Secretary-General for Management Joseph E. Connor stresses three positive indicators. Total cash reserves are higher than in previous years, unpaid assessments are lower, and amounts owed to member states are lower, partly because the U.S. has made larger regular budget cash payments at the end of '98 and because 117 member states had paid in full by the end of the year. Connor also states, however, that unstable conditions such as the unknown level of the U.S.' payment of current and former dues and ongoing debts to member states for troops and equipment are "holding the United Nations financial situation hostage."
March 15, 1999: As of March 15, 51 countries have paid their 1999 dues in full. China, Belgium, and the Republic of Korea are notable new additions to this list.
March 9, 1999: Secretary General Kofi Annan says that it is U.S. politicians in Washington who are to blame for the piling up of U.S. arrears to the U.N., not the American people.
March 8, 1999: The United Nations Foundation has announces that it has allocated $12 million to go towards the United Nations Association-USA campaign to persuade U.S. policy-makers to pay U.S. arrears to the U.N.
February 25, 1999: Secretary General Kofi Annan concludes his two-day visit to Washington D.C. where he met with many Congressmen and Administration Officials. The SG says he is encouraged by the attention given to the issue of United Nations funding in these meetings.
February 19, 1999: Australia and Italy are among the new countries to have paid their UN dues as the total number of countries reaches 35.
February 5, 1999: A letter from Secretary General Kofi Annan to the President of the General Assembly lists 42 member states who are in arrears under Article 19 of the UN Charter. The states are listed along with the amount they must pay in order to retain their vote in the GA.
February 1, 1999: The White House releases its budget proposal allocating $921 million to pay United Nations arrears. Few expect it to gain Congressional approval. Last year, budget requests for UN arrears were stalled with anti-abortion amendments.
January 31, 1999: As of January 31, 32 countries have paid their 1999 dues in full. Canada, France, the Russian Federation, Sweden, and the Netherlands have paid. Notably absent from the rolls were Japan, Brazil, Germany, and the three remaining members of the security council, the UK, the US, and China.
January 19, 1999: President Bill Clinton mentions the United Nations in his State of the Union Address, stating his desire to work with the new Congress to pay the US's "dues and debts".
January 1, 1999: The United States enters the New Year with $1.29 billion in arrears to the United Nations.
July 6, 1998: Germany makes a payment of $51 million, the second installment of its regular budget assessment for 1998. Germany becomes the 81st country to have paid in full for the year, compared to only 73 on the same date last year.
July 13, 1998: The "Group of 77" developing nations and China, tells the Economic and Social Council that the tragic shortfall between the growing demands of the UN system for operational activities and the diminishing level of available financial resources is the central dilemma facing the entire development cooperation process. Unless the bleak situation is rectified, it says, the goals and objectives of the UN development programmes will have to be drastically reduced. On the same day, the Spokesman for the Secretary General, Fred Eckhard, discusses Sierra Leone and the possible approval of a seventeenth concurrent UN peacekeeping mission there. In past years, the peak deployment for United Nations forces was 78,744 troops in 17 missions, in July 1993. The budget for peacekeeping at that time was over $3 billion, compared with the current 15,000 troops and a budget of less than $1 billion.
July 15, 1998: A House Appropriations Committee report says that arrears payments for $475 million cannot be released unless reforms are undertaken reducing US contributions to the regular budget to 22%. The UN currently assesses the US at 25% based on its share of the world economy. A recently-available copy of a Senate bill makes payment contingent on an even greater reduction to 20%. Based on the current session of the UN General Assembly's budget committee, these reforms are not likely to go into effect in the near term, making the payment of arrears even more unlikely. On the same day, in a speech to the Uruguayan Parliament, the Secretary General cites the contributions of small states to the UN regular budget. "The big Powers may seem to be the only important players, with the top eight contributors accounting for nearly three quarters of the budget. But quite a different picture emerges when one considers the regular budget and UN system funding in per capita terms…[where many small states] give well out of proportion to their size."
July 20, 1998: In a report to the Security Council regarding the UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, the Secretary General draws attention to the serious shortfall in funding for the 4,480-member Force. Unpaid assessments amounted to $103.5 million, he said, appealing to all Member States to pay their assessments promptly.
July 21, 1998: The Senate Appropriations Committee approves its version of the FY1999 foreign assistance appropriations bill recommending US contributions at $270 million, $44 million less than the Clinton administration's request and $24.5 million less than last year. The latest figures from the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations recommends $57 million below the President's request and $34 million less than last year. The House Subcommittee would delete $25 million that the Administration requested for the UN Population Fund, presumably because of resumed programs in China. The Senate bill also approves cuts in regional peacekeeping contributions recommending $69 million, in comparison to a requested $83 million. The cuts are a result of reduced contributions to the African Regional Peacekeeping account.
July 23, 1998: The Senate passes the FY 1999 State Department Appropriations bill (S.2260) after deleting a potentially damaging provision that would have reduced US-UN peacekeeping arrears by 25% of the total expenditure for US military mobilization in support of UN weapon's inspections in Iraq. Senator Joseph Biden worked with Senate leadership and the support of the Clinton Administration to strike the provision. Commenting on the funding that was passed in the bill, for contributions to the UN and other international organizations, the Clinton Administration notes that it "significantly underfunds, by about $75 million, the annual assessed contributions to these [international] organizations [and peacekeeping]."
July 27, 1998: A Spokesman for the Secretary General announces that the United States has made a payment of $23 million toward its peacekeeping assessment, leaving $72 million due for 1998 out of a total $943 million due including peacekeeping arrears
July 29, 1998: The London-based Financial Times begins a series on dubious financial practices in the UN's High Commissioner for Refugees, a major humanitarian assistance agency. The series documents a number of dubious financial practices that have resulted in waste of millions of dollars. In the days to come, UNHCR vigorously defends its practices, but the series shows the lack of tight financial controls and the problem of responding to multiple emergencies in a way that is sufficiently fiscally sound.
Late August 1998: Secretary General Kofi Annan issues his annual report on the work of the UN. The report notes, among other things, the elimination of close to 1,000 posts and a budget "that has been reduced to less than that of the previous biennium."
August 5, 1998: Two amendments to FY 1999 State Department appropriations, seeking to strike payments of $475 million toward UN arrears are voted down in the House of Representatives. The amendments are based on the notion that the US does not owe the amounts claimed by the UN. Rosco Bartlett, who sponsored the amendments, proclaims that the amount owed to the US for peacekeeping operations heavily outweighs that owed by the US to the UN.
September 2, 1998: Sens. Rod Grams (R-MN) and Joseph R. Biden (D-DE) are appointed to serve as US delegates for the 53rd Session of the UN General Assembly, which runs from 9 September through mid-December, 1998. In a statement released by his office, Grams outlines "reform goals" for the UN. He says he plans to work with the UN in developing a no-growth budget and eliminating or consolidating "ineffective management structures." Grams also reaffirms the US role as a world power in the international organization, and says he plans to continue his work with the Senate and the Administration to pursue repayment of US arrears due to the UN.
September 21, 1998: President Bill Clinton, speaking at the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York, largely avoids the financial issue. He affirmed US "strong support" for UNDP, the UN High Commissioners for Human Rights and Refugees, UNICEF and the World Food Program and he refers in passing to "the importance of all countries, including the US, in paying their fair share" of UN dues. Clinton is welcomed by delegates with warm applause, but his presidency is seriously weakened by scandal and possible impeachment proceedings. On the same day the New York Times runs a story by UN columnist Barbara Crossette entitled "Darkest Hour at U.N. for Biggest Deadbeat."
September 22, 1998: The Chicago Tribune runs an editorial entitled "The World's Biggest Deadbeat." The situation is embarrassing and intolerable," the editors write. Concluding: "both Clinton and Congress, before it recesses next month, had better figure out a way to pay our bills, or the U.S. will be sitting on the sidelines."
September 30, 1998: Eleven former officials in Republican administrations call on Congress and the Clinton administration to set aside differences and pay the US back dues to the UN. Former Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci and former Attorney General Richard Thornburgh are among the signatories of a statement and presented it at a news conference in Washington. Other signatories include former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. A survey issued at the news conference by Wirthlin Worldwide polling organization shows broad public support for paying the dues.
October 7, 1998: Press Briefing on the UN Financial Situation by USG Connor
October 15, 1998: The US Congress finally agrees on its budget for the 1999 fiscal year, but "not a penny" is earmarked for the $1.6 billion debt owed to the UN. CNN: UN Budget Plan Excludes Money for UN Debt
October 16, 1998: Kofi Annan, in a speech to Empower America, said that the US will likely "squeak by" with the minimum contribution required to maintain their vote in the General Assembly, but that the US was undermining its claim to international leadership by not paying its UN debt. Annan did, however, praise the decision to fully fund the IMF with a $17.9 billion allotment.
October 21, 1998: As expected, US President Bill Clinton vetoes a measure to pay $1 billion in back dues to the UN because the bill contains an amendment that would have barred Federal spending for international family-planning organizations that address abortion policies. In a statement, Secretary General Kofi Annan comments bitterly on how the US Administration has failed once again to deliver on funding for arrears owed to the UN -- despite all of the reforms the UN has undertaken to comply with Congress.
October 22, 1998: The New York Times reports on the Clinton veto of the $1 billion UN arrears legislation. In an article placed next to that report, the Times runs a story entitled "Big Cash Infusion Aims to Rebuild Anemic C.I.A." about how the CIA budget will be increased by about $2.5 billion. Reporting on a speech by CIA Director George Tenet recently made public, the Times reports that "He pledged 'to mount increasingly complex and expensive operations' to steal secrets. He vowed to build up the agency's clandestine service of spies, open more overseas stations, undertake more covert operations, hire more in-house experts, buy faster and better computers, and bring in a new generation of recruits." So much for Washington's priorities!
October 23, 1998: The Third Worldwide Vigil takes place in 43 cities worldwide, protesting against the UN's financial crisis. At the vigil in New York City, across from UN Headquarters, Assistant Secretary General Gillian M. Sorensen delivers a message from the Secretary General, while at the Vigil in Washington, held in Lafayette Park across from the White House, Actor Michael Douglas is one of several prominent speakers. Vigils are held in Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Calcutta, Accra, Santo Domingo, eight cities in Canada and many cities across the United States.
October 28, 1998: The UN Fifth (Budget) Committee considers requests by Bosnia Herzegovina, Congo and Iraq for exemption to UN Charter Article 19 due to their inability to pay their dues. On discussions over the assessment scale for apportioning expenses, speakers point to the importance of considering a country's true ability to pay. Suggestions to shorten the base period for case by case assessments are made, while the contrary opinion maintains that this would cause many more states to fall under article 19.
November 4, 1998: Under Secretary General Joseph Connor gives a Press Briefing in which he reviews the financial situation. He announces that the United States today paid $197 million, and that its total payments to both regular and peacekeeping budgets for the year have amounted to $586 million. Though it still owes $1.28 billion, the US will now not fall under Charter Article 19, that would deny it a vote in the General Assembly. As a result of the US payment, Connor makes a revised estimate of the UN's regular budget deficit at yearend: from the previous estimate of $287 million to a new estimate of $50 million.
November 6, 1998: The United States is defeated for the second consecutive year in its bid for a seat in the ACABQ (UN Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions). The main reason for this result is clearly the US refusal to pay its debt to the UN. Considering that the US mounted a vigorous election campaign, the vote is very lopsided. With four candidates running for two seats in the "Western Europe and Other" group, the US manages to garner only 55 votes, vs. 105 for the high-vote-getter, the candidate of the United Kingdom. The German and Italian candidates both get 92 votes. (The Italian eventually wins in a runoff with 105 votes.) The total valid votes were 177 in these elections.
December 21, 1998: UNA-USA Chairman Luers and Vice Chairman Whitehead write a letter urging President Clinton to include funds for the UN's Educational, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in his budget. The two point to the importance of this body in promoting tolerance and peace and in preventing religious and ethnic war.
January 14, 1998: At a conference in Bonn organized by the prestigious Development and Peace Foundation, participants sharply criticize US failure to pay its dues, saying that this is harming the UN reform process. Several participants call for Germany to take a more active role on this issue in the international arena.
January 16, 1998: Amb. Bill Richardson, U.S. Delegate to the UN, gives a speech at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He says: "Today, America is a debtor nation at the United Nations -- to the tune of one billion dollars. It is a fact that I am often reminded of by my colleagues in New York. I believe that if America is to remain the world's 'indispensable nation' this unacceptable situation must be rectified." Later in the speech, Richardson says: "When I go to my fellow Ambassadors and ask for their support on resolutions or agenda items, by position is weakened by America's debtor status. And on a number of substantive issues . . . America's national interests and objectives are being compromised by thefailuree to pay our dues.
January 22, 1998: A members of the Council of Organizations of the United Nations Association-USA meet with Secretary General Kofi Annan at UN Headquarters and discusses at length the UN financial crisis. US Ambassador Richardson, also present, affirms that the administration will push for full funding of the US debate and tells the NGO leaders present that the Helms-Biden deal to pay the debt with many conditions is now "dead" and that a new (and presumably more UN-favorable agreement) will be negotiated in 1998.
January 27, 1998: President Clinton in his State of the Union Address calls on Congress to vote for funds to pay the UN arrears, saying: "it's long post time to make good on our debt to the United Nations. More and more, we are working with other nations to achieve common goals. If we want America to lead, we must set a good example. . . In this new era, our freedom and independence are actually enriched, not impoverished, by our increasing interdependence with other nations."
January 31, 1998: All UN member states are required to pay their assessment in full by this date, but only 27 out of 185 have done so -- the same number as in 1997. By comparison with a year earlier, the January income declines to $279 million from $405 million the previous year.
February 2, 1998: The Clinton Administration submits a supplemental 1998 budget request to Congress that proposes paying $1.021 billion in arrears to international organizations, including the UN. About $800 million of this request would go to the UN and slightly more if all the UN system organizations are taken into account. However, according to the administration's own reckoning, the US owes the UN $1.5 billion and specialized agencies another $250 million, for a total of $1.75 billion, or less than half of the payment proposed, with many attached conditions. Further, most of the payout would not take place until 1999 and 2000. According to well-informed observers, however, there remains serious doubt whether the Congress will agree to even this meager concession before it adjourns for elections (approximately 90 days remain). At the same time, the Administration submits other "supplementals" to Congress including a request for $18 billion for special funds for the International Monetary Fund to increase its lending during the Asian financial crisis and a further request for funding military operations in Bosnia. FY1999 Budget The Administration also submits its 1999 budget, which includes "near-full" funding for the UN and a number of its agencies, plus a small $231 million for peacekeeping that will keep downward pressure on the PKO budget.
Week of February 9, 1998: US Secretary of State Albright testifies at Congressional hearings on budget matters, urging that UN arrears be paid, along with funds for the IMF. She points out that "the US ranks dead last among industrialized nations" on spending for international affairs. Conservative Senators and House members accuse the Administration of blocking the special funding legislation, with its attached amendment to block abortion. Each side accuses the other of responsibility in the deadlock. At the UN in New York top business officials from the International Chamber of Commerce and UN leaders announce a new partnership, including greater business input into UN decision-making on economic matters. They issue a joint statement setting out goals for work in the future.
February 11, 1998: A two-page political ad appears in the New York Times, the Washington Post and other major outlets calling, among other things, for the US payment of its UN arrears. The ad is signed by dozens of powerful figures including former presidents and cabinet members, as well as many corporate CEOs and it opens with a short statement that says "We are concerned about a dangerous drift towards disengagement from the responsibilities of global leadership. This kind of modern isolationism seriously damages American interests." The ad presents a package of four actions including expanded funding for the IMF, flexible use of the Exchange Stabilization Fund of the Treasury Department, and "fast track" authority for the President to negotiate trade pacts. It is interesting that UN arrears is mentioned in this otherwise very business-oriented policy package. The actual organizers of the initiative are shrouded by a post office box address, but according to reliable sources two Wall Street heavyweights -- Maurice Greenberg of the American International Group and Peter Peterson of Blackstone Group -- were the key figures.
February 13, 1998: Secretary General Annan appoints Miles Stoby, one of the chief architects of the UN reform process as head of UNFIP, the U.N. International Partnership Trust Fund, an entity that will screen project for support from the Ted Turner gift of $100 million per year. The Turner money will be administered by the U.N. Foundation, headed by Timothy Wirth and currently headquartered in Washington DC. Stoby, who is from Guayana, will have the rank of Assistant Secretary General. On the same day Russia pays in full is 1998 UN dues of $28,636,251.
February 14, 1998: In a background article on the Winter Olympics in Nagano, Japan, the New York Times notes that tipping is not customary in Japanese restaurants. One restaurant owner, the article says, has decided to accept tips of Olympics visitors and then send them on to the United Nations. It is a touching reminder of the international concern for the UN financial crisis.
Late February 1998: In a State Department memorandum, the Clinton administration states that the Helms-Biden accord of 1997, making arrears payment contingent on more than three dozen conditions, must be renegotiated to take account of objections by other countries at the UN. The memorandum also calls for a higher total amount of arrears to be paid. And it urges that the US accept an assessment of 22% (vs.20% proposed in Congress), so as to remain the highest payer above Japan. Also Secretary of State Albright, in testimony on Capitol Hill, urges arrears payment. In one hearing she says: "Let me tell you frankly that, if we are not able now -- in the next few months -- to approve funding for our UN arrears, our legs truly will be cut out from under us at the UN. We are told daily, by our best allies and friends, that US credibility will be sadly diminished."
February 26, 1998: In a letter of this date, addressed to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, Sen. Jesse Helms sharply criticizes the Administration's effort to change the previous agreement on UN funding, charging that the Administration has "presented [us] with a list of 27 new demands for drastic changes in our carefully negotiated package, including a demand for more money..."
March 2, 1998: In a briefing to NGOs at the US Mission to the UN, Amb. Richard Sklar makes unusually frank comments about the US failure to pay its UN dues. "US failure to pay has seriously undermined our ability to work in all kinds of areas," he tells NGOs. The NGOs also hear that "all the world sees it as a treaty obligation" and "some in Congress see advantage in non-payment." These statements seem to reflect a new, somewhat more vigorous Administration strategy to win appropriations from Congress, though Washington insiders continue to report that IMF funding and other legislation have far higher Administration priority.
March 5, 1998: The Banking Committee of the US House of Representatives approves a bill to authorize contributions of $18 billion to the IMF, though there is no further action on UN funding. It begins to appear that the IMF funding will be passed separately, but probably with many conditions for IMF reform, recalling the reform conditions imposed on UN funding.
March 10, 1998: UN Undersecretary General Joseph Connor, at a press briefing in New York, says that the UN's cash position is "weak and getting weaker, its unpaid assessments are "slowly decreasing" and its ability to cross-borrow from the peacekeeping funds are "drying up." Connor also notes that $152 million of funds appropriated by Congress in November 1997 have yet to be paid to the UN regular budget, due to various Congressional restrictions, thus adding to the UN's financial woes. At a meeting of the UN's Fifth Committee, where Connor also spoke, Mr. Nick Thorne, speaking for the UK Presidency of the European Union, says that the EU favors "tightening the rules for implementation of Article 19 of the Charter and their application to ensure that the disincentive envisaged by the founders is properly implemented." On the same day a group of NGOs headed by the Emergency Coalition for US Financial Support of the United Nations issues an urgent memorandum calling on citizens to send letters urging members of Congress to pass legislation supporting payment of UN arrears.
March 11, 1998: The Republican leadership in the US House of Representatives announces it will link anti-abortion provisions to a funding package for the IMF and UN arrears and the White House immediately announces it will veto any linked legislation. Shortly afterwards, debate on UN arrears legislation is cancelled, in the face of intense pressure from a group of conservative legislators. -- Rep. James Leach (R-Iowa) asks to be removed from a committee working on the legislation because, according to his staff, he has "grave reservations about allowing the bill to go out of committee with the dismal UN conditions in the legislation." At the same time the Congress begins considering proposals for the FY1999 budget submitted by the Clinton administration. Committees of both houses are substantially reducing the sums for assessed and voluntary contributions.
March 11, 1998: UN Secretary General Kofi Annan meets with President Clinton at the While House, reportedly encouraging the President to be "more aggressive" in seeking the payment of US arrears. The President is said to have asked Annan when the UN Charter's Article 19 might affect the United States and take away its voting rights.
March 12, 1998: State Department Spokesperson James Rubin is asked at a press conference whether the United States might lose its voting rights at the UN if it fails to pay its dues and arrears. He states that "there are some major, major problems that we face in the coming months if the Congress does not allow us to pay back the money we owe." Also, at a briefing at the National Press Club, Secretary General Annan indicates that the US would have to pay $600 in this calendar year so that this provision would not go into effect. He says: "By withholding the funds, I think the United States is offending friends and foes alike." He also says: "I'm sure that the United States Government would not want to be in that situation, nor would the people of America . . . where the US loses its vote in the United Nations because of lack of payment." Annan also meets with Senator Jesse Helms and other legislators.
March 16, 1998: In a press briefing at the White House, the question of whether the US might lose its voting rights at the UN again arises. Press Spokesman Mike McCurry answers: "we have not yet gotten to the point where the General Assembly provision on voting rights triggers, but we could conceivable come to that point in the months ahead. And that's another reason why Congress needs to act on that urgent supplemental request we've made ... "
March 17, 1998: The Senate Appropriations Committee drops legislation to fund UN arrears, while moving ahead on funding for the IMF, funding for contingency operations in Bosnia and Iraq, and domestic disaster relief. The same day State Department officials brief NGOs on UN funding. Asst. Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Princeton Lyman comments on the conditions in the Helms-Biden agreement, urging that legislation should be passed, however objectionable: "We need a piece of legislation," he says, "even if it's imperfect." Lyman also notes that existing legislation capping US assessments at 25% for peacekeeping and other withholdings now total $488 million and are growing at the rate of $50 million per year -- leading to ever-greater arrears.
March 24, 1998: The Appropriations Committee of the US House of Representatives considers the "supplemental" legislation on UN and other funding for international organizations, cutting out all funds owed as arrearages to 45 organizations, including a number of UN-system agencies. An amendment offered by Rep. David Obey (D-Wisconsin) to raise the funding level and eliminate some conditions was defeated. According to State Department sources, the United States owes $105 million to the FAO, $38 million to the ILO, $36 million to the WHO and $75 million to other UN agencies, for a total of $254 million.
March 25, 1998: During debate on a bill from which UN funding had been cut, the US Senate approves by 90-10 an amendment by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-North Carolina) "expressing the sense of the Senate that the UN should recognize the generous support of US taxpayers toward international peace and security." The amendment, which is non-binding, also calls on the UN to "immediately reduce" the US share of peacekeeping assessments from 30 percent to 25 percent. In introducing the amendment, Helms says: "While the UN crybabies whine about not receiving enough of the American taxpayers' money, the real truth is that the US volunteered more than three times what we were asked to pay." The Senate also calls for a tally of the money the United States has spent for enforcement of UN resolutions, an amount that some Senators say should be offset against US arrears.
March 26, 1998: During debate in the House of Representatives on UN funding legislation, Rep. Gerald Solomon (R-New York) says: "I have a great deal of trouble with paying these so-called arrears to the UN, given its history of waste and abuse and, frankly, its lack of gratitude for all the expenses and danger on our troops that we incur in support of UN resolutions." But Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-Indiana), a senior Democrat, comments that the proposed legislation "creates more US arrears to the UN. We are not going forward, we are creating larger arrears. And it fails to provide sufficient funds even for our current dues. It does not pay what we acknowledge we owe to the UN." While Rep. John Porter (R-Illinois) points out that the bill "conditions this money on unilateral reforms that run in direct opposition to the spirit under which the UN was created."
April 2, 1998: In remarks before the Association of Newspaper Editors in Washington DC, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright speaks of the importance of paying "long overdue" UN arrears. In a note of humor, she adds: "I know there are some who believe the UN is a sinister organization. They suspect that it operates a fleet of black helicopters, which may, at any moment, swoop down and steal our lawn furniture. They say it is bent on world domination, which is absurd, and that we can not trust it because it is full of foreigners -- which, frankly, we can't help." She goes on to say that payment of US dues is a "matter of honor."
April 15, 1998: Timothy Wirth, President of the newly-formed United Nations Foundation, speaks at a special event at the United Nations. He tells a large audience of NGOs, diplomats and UN staff about the plans of the organization, set up to channel the Ted Turner gift of $100 million per year for ten years in support of UN programs. The foundation will channel much of its program funding to girls' education/population, climate change/sustainable environment, and children's health. In addition, there will be support for "telling the story" of the UN and broadening its financial support from other private donors. He is warmly received, and Turner's gift highly praised, but some difficult questions arise during the question period: will this mean further "privatization" of the UN, what influence will it wield over multilateral decision-making?
April 23, 1998: Secretary General Annan, on a trip through the United States to drum up support for the UN, speaks to a crowd of 4,000 at Rice University in Houston, Texas. He tells his audience that the US failure to pay its UN dues is hurting UN peacekeeping. "US behavior is destroying trust among nations," he said, in an unusually frank speech. "By withholding payments, the US is provoking friend and foe alike." On the same day in Washington, US representative to the UN Bill Richardson warned the House Appropriations Subcommittee that the US could lose its vote at the UN if it does not pay its arrears. He stated that "Our friends and partners in the UN will not agree to lower our assessment or meet our benchmarks if we can't pledge to pay our full arrears throughout the UN system." At the same hearing, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Princeton Lyman said that the US would be $11-40 million short of the threshold needed to retain its vote in the UN General Assembly in 1999 unless additional monies are appropriated.
April 24, 1998: The US Senate debates the measure to repay some of the UN arrears. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) said: "Unfortunately, the amount authorized here falls far short of what we owe, and it is encumbered with too many restrictions." The bill, which would authorize payment of about half the US arrears, carries more than two dozen conditions that the UN must meet, it disburses the sum over three years, and it carries an amendment on family planning that President Clinton has vowed to veto. On the same day: a Washington-based polling institute issues a study of US public attitudes on UN funding. The Program on International Policy Attitudes finds that 60% of the US public favor paying UN dues in full, with 32% strongly in favor. By contrast, 27% told the pollers they oppose payments, with 16% strongly opposed.
April 27, 1998: Five Republican members of the House of Representatives send a letter to colleagues in the US Congress arguing that the US does not legitimately owe the UN money for peacekeeping operations the US government undertook on its own, in support of UN resolutions. The letter points out that other nations do the same and that they cannot claim reimbursement either. The letter seeks to counter the argument of Congressional conservatives who claim that the US does not owe any money to the UN -- instead that the UN is in debt to the US. "There is a difference between UN-run operations (reimbursable) and non-UN operations (non-reimbursable)," the letter points out.
April 28, 1998: The Senate adopts a conference report on the State Department authorization bill, setting the stage for final passage of the controversial package of payments for the UN and its agencies.
April 29, 1998: At a consultation at the UN organized by Global Policy Forum and the International Student and Youth Movement for the UN, participants discussed "Innovative Financing for Development: global taxes, frees and charges." Amb. Hans Dahlgren of Sweden led off the discussion and Kevin Baumert of GPF and the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs presented a summary of the current debates. Some 40 NGO delegates, attending the Commission for Sustainable Development, attended.
April 30, 1998: The Boston Globe runs an editorial calling on Congress to stop "playing foolish games" and pay the US debt to the United Nations. The editorial quotes Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy as having told Globe editors the previous week that Congress "'is becoming the bane of existence of all good friends of the US.'" The editorial concludes: "Most Americans, whether they favor or oppose abortion, do not like deadbeats. Congress' refusal to pay the UN harms itself and the nation." On the same day, the Chicago Tribune runs an editorial calling Congress' action on the UN arrears bill "boneheaded."
May 1, 1998: President Clinton signs the FY1998 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill (H.R. 3579) which includes funding for domestic disaster relief and for US troops in Bosnia and the Persian Gulf. Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Samuel Berger, at a speech to the Brookings Institution, says that the bill "left out two critical parts of the President's original request - satisfaction of our long overdue debt to the United Nations and payment of our share of support to the International Monetary Fund." The same day President Clinton calls on Congress to pass "new legislation quickly, with workable terms, so that the United States is able to maintain its position as a world leader and to meets its obligations to the IMF and the UN."
May 3, 1998: The ABC national network program "Good Morning America" runs a segment on the Ted Turner gift to the UN. Turner's new United Nations Foundation is set to begin funding UN programs in the month of May. The report is supportive of the UN and generally positive about the Turner funding, but interviews with GPF Executive Director James Paul and WEDO Executive Director Susan Davis raise questions about a UN supported by private philanthropy.
May 5, 1998: President Clinton, speaking at the dedication of the new Ronald Reagan building in Washington, calls on Congress to "maintain our leadership by paying for our support to the IMF and settling our dues to the United Nations." He goes on to say that "In 1985, Ronald Reagan said that the UN stands as a symbol of the hopes of all mankind for a more peaceful and productive world. We must not, " he says, "disappoint those hopes."
May 13, 1998: In Washington, D.C. Ted Turner announces the composition of the Board of Directors of his United Nations Foundation -- the organization established to execute his $1 billion pledge in support of United Nations. In addition to Turner, its members are Ruth Cardoso, Graca Machel, Emma Rothschild, Maurice Strong, Timothy Wirth, Andrew Young and Mohammad Yunus.
May 15, 1998: "We're $50 million richer today" says Fred Eckhard, Spokesman for the Secretary General, in reference to the US payment of $50 million. US debt to the regular budget still equals $569 million and total arrears including peacekeeping and tribunals equals $1.535 billion. $100 million was made available by Congress for payment of US dues for FY1998. The $50 million payment, half of the available funds, is made over a year after the $100 million was due for 1997 calendar year assessments. The second half of the payment may be made in the later part of the summer, though this depends on the UN's adherence to the budget caps imposed by the US.
May 20, 1998: In a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Rod Grams questions Assistant Secretary of State Princeton Lyman on the UN's adherence to an already constricting $2.53 billion budget for 1998/99. Grams raises questions about additional spending and says he will "be pushing for a reduction in the number of authorized [staff] persons." On the same day the President of the new United Nations Foundation, Timothy Worth, announces the first set of grants made from the Turner donation. 22 grants in all totaling $22,181,000. The UN Population Fund receives the largest amount $7,885,000. UNICEF, UNDP (including UNIFEM), WFP, UNEP and the UN Drug Control Programme are among other beneficiaries.
May 27, 1998: At the weekly meeting of the UN Senior Management Group, a report is given on Ted Turner's contribution to the United Nations. A member of the Cabinet comments that, to his knowledge, the Turner donation is the one source of money in the United Nations system that pulls it together because United Nations funds, programmes and agencies are asked to work together in planning fund distribution.
May 28, 1998: At a press briefing, a Spokesman for the Secretary General says that "At this moment we have no high hopes of seeing any significant payment of arrears out of the legislation that is now in Congress."
June 1, 1998: John C. Whitehead, Chairman of UNA-USA sends a letter to all Members of Congress on the necessity and benefits of paying US dues and arrears to the Untied Nations, and the potential consequences if these legal obligations are not met.
June 10, 1998: Senator Jesse Helms invites European diplomats from ten countries to coffee at the Capitol for a briefing led by James W. Nance on the Senator's stance on the State Department authorization bill. Senator Helms prepared a three-page memorandum outlining his position. "The Administration has refused any compromise and is demanding total capitulation," the document says. "Helms now blames the Administration's intransigence for the current impasse." Helms tries unsuccessfully to persuade the Europeans to lobby the Administration on behalf of his bill
June 15, 1998: To date, 78 countries have paid their dues to the UN regular budget in full for the year, compared to 65 on the same date last year. However, regular budget assessments owed the UN currently exceed $977 million, compared to $738 million on the same date last year. The total outstanding balance to the UN is $2.4 billion.
June 16, 1998: Secretary of State Madeleine Albright testifies before the Senate Appropriations Committee stating that "we've been given an unacceptably low allocation" of funds for international affairs for FY1999. The Clinton administration had requested $14 billion, while the House would provide only $12.48 billion and the Senate $12.65 billion, even less than FY1998 allocation of $13 billion. About 20 UN voluntary programs, voluntary peacekeeping operations and around a dozen multilateral development banks would be affected.
June 19, 1998: The UNA-USA Board of Directors sends a letter to President Clinton urging him to veto H.R. 1757, the State Department Authorization bill for FY 1998-99, because of the legislation's terms for payment of arrears to the UN and other international organizations.
June 22, 1998: At a press briefing, Fred Eckhard, Spokesman for the Secretary General, is asked if the SG is planning to go to Washington and Capitol Hill to lobby personally for the United States debt. Eckhard says that, at this time, the Secretary General has no intention of getting personally involved in securing the United States funding and that he feels it is very much a domestic matter that has to be sorted out between the executive and legislative branches of that Government.
June 24, 1998: A new report from the General Accounting Office says that the US is in danger of losing its vote in the General Assembly. The report says the US will have to come up with $211 million to $241 million more than it currently expects to pay in order to keep its vote. Interestingly, the report endorses the United Nations numbers on how much the United States actually owes the UN, opposing the position held by many members of Congress that the US owes less than the UN has claimed. See GPF News Bulletin for more details.
June 25, 1998: The Senate Appropriations Committee recommends funding for US assessed contributions to around fifty international organizations for FY1999 at $877.7 million, about $53 million below the Clinton Administration's request of $930.7 million and $29.2 million less than the FY1998 spending level. For peacekeeping, the Senate Committee recommends $210 million, $20 million less than the Administration's request of $231 million, but equivalent to the FY1998 spending level. The bill also recommends arrears payments, but it remains uncertain whether or not they will be funded, depending on the fate of the controversial Helms-Biden accord.
June 26, 1998: The House Subcommittee, along the lines of the Senate, also recommends spending levels below those requested by the Clinton Administration. Funding for international organizations is recommended at $915 million, $15.7 million below the Administrations request and $13.8 million below spending for FY1998. Peacekeeping spending is recommended at $220 million, $11 million less than requested. House recommendations are higher than those made by the Senate Committee.
June 29, 1998: UNA-USA releases an article by Jeffrey Laurenti, Executive Director, Policy Studies, titled "Losing America's Vote at the United Nations." It examines, in depth, the prospects and consequences of the application of Article 19 of the UN Charter.
June 30, 1998: The end of June status report on contributions shows disappointing performances compared to last year. $517.9 million has been collected against this year's assessment, less than half the total amount (47.7 per cent) due for 1998. At mid-year in 1997, more than $709.7 million (63.9 per cent of the assessment) had been collected.
July 16, 1997: Secretary General Annan announces major new reform package that includes budget and staff reductions as well as restructuring. He also proposes a $1 billion reserve fund, to be subscribed by member states on a voluntary basis. Conservatives in the US Congress complain that the plan does not go far enough, but most member states react favorably.
July 18, 1997: The UN releases a brief report by the Secretary General on alternative sources of financing. The report, requested as the basis of an ECOSOC debate scheduled for 23 July, is dated 23 June. The report was expected to be a test of US Congressional pressures on the Secretariat and the UN as a whole to avoid discussions of global taxes. The report, in fact, states flatly that "ideas or schemes for charges or taxes on international transactions do not appear viable" and it goes on to emphasize private initiatives and national-level taxes. In light of the broad international interest in global public finance, including support from the EU, the report reflects a big setback.
July 23-24, 1997: ECOSOC holds its debate on alternative finance. Speakers chide the Secretariat for the lateness of the report, but they seem to have little enthusiasm for challenging the United States. In fact, not a single government speaker mentions taxes or fees, though a group of NGOs joins an ISMUN statement that criticizes the Secretariat for self-censorship in the face of US pressure and pushes for global taxes.
July 29, 1997: Rep. Lee Hamilton makes a three-part proposal in US Congress Conference Committee to increase funding for US arrears to international organizations, but the initiative fails. Hamilton's proposal would allow the UN to credit US$ 107 million that it owes the US for peacekeeping operations to its funds. Secondly, an additional $95 million would have been payable toward ongoing assessed contributions. Finally, Hamilton's proposal would have limited a proposed contested arrears account to $390 million, the difference between the UN's calculation on amounts owed and the Administration's arrears request. Sen. Joseph Biden's attempt to allow $107 million to be credited toward US arrears failed, too.
August 1, 1997: A call for a Second Worldwide Vigil for the UN on October 23 is issued by Global Policy Forum Executive Director James Paul, World Federalist Movement Executive Director William Pace and World Federation of United Nations Associations Acting Secretary General Horace Perera. The vigil will protest the UN's financial crisis and demand a stronger and more effective UN. The vigil in 1996 took place in 32 cities. This time, the organizers hope to reach 50 cities or more with the event.
September 4, 1997: During debate on the House version of the foreign aid appropriations bill, Rep. Benjamin Gilman accepted that no funds would be available to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) unless the President makes several certifications on its program activities in China. Currently, UNFPA has no program in China. If a program is restarted, all funds to the UNFPA could be cut off. This action, typical in recent years, is one of the many conditions the Congress places on UN funding.
September 15, 1997: The UN's Committee on Contributions reports that it has been unable to decide on a revised scale of assessments. The Committee's report to the GA's 5th Committee reviews some eight different proposals for revising the scale of assessments. An agreement on a ninth proposal, reflecting a consensus on all the major elements, was not reached. The US proposal to establish an eventual 20% ceiling on the US contribution to the UN's regular budget has received almost no support. The US has proposed raising China's and Japan's assessments to cover its own reduction. On the same day General Assembly President Razali raps the US for its non-payment in his final news conference. UN members, he says, should consider "very seriously" whether to accept the "half loaf" Washington is offering. "There is no reason why a special arrangement has to be made for the most powerful country in the world, in terms of what it has to pay, which is actually part of its legal obligations. And I don't think, given the present state of flux, that any country will come to the rescue to try to pick up the tab as a result of the United States inability or unwillingness to pay its arrears in full." President Razali also says in his farewell speech to the GA that "The financial crippling of the United Nations continues to obstruct the momentum for reform, preventing constructive negotiations for genuine reform of the Organization. " And he warns that "Blind unilateralism will be the undoing of the United Nations."
September 19, 1997: CNN founder Ted Turner, whose net worth has grown from $2.2 billion on Jan. 1 to $3.2 billion today, announces that he is making a donation of US$ 1 billion to benefit United Nations agencies, the largest charitable donation ever. The money is to be used to set up a not-for-profit foundation to support United Nations programs aiding refugees and children, clearing mines and fighting diseases. In a speech, Mr. Turner urges the US Government to pay its $1.5 billion arrears to the United Nations.
On the same day, Under-Secretary-General Joseph Connor meets with Mr. Turner's aides for a preliminary discussion of how the gift could be structured.
September 22, 1997: In his speech to the 52nd General Assembly, U.S. President Bill Clinton says: "for the first time in my presidency, the US government has the opportunity to end the question of debts and dues once and for all". He states that he has made it a priority to work with Congress on comprehensive legislation to pay off the arrears and assure full financing of America's assessment in the coming years. He also calls on other member states to adopt a "more equitable" scale of assessments for the United States. Other speakers that follow are sharply critical of the U.S. non-payment and skeptical about the President's promises. The Prime Minister of Pakistan warns that "The UN today stands at the brink of bankruptcy."
On the same day, Secretary-General Kofi Annan reminds the Member States in a speech to the General Assembly of their legal obligations: "Some of you I ask to do what your legal obligations require, to liquidate your arrears and to pay your future assessments in full, on time and without conditions."
On the same day NGO's issue a press release titled "Clinton's Empty Rhetoric: citizens respond with a worldwide vigil." The release points out that in spite of the President's positive statements in his speech to the GA, US debts to the UN have reached unprecedented heights under his administration.
September 23, 1997: In a CNN interview, Britain's foreign secretary Robin Cook says that it is time for Congress to authorize the money to pay off the US debts to the United Nations. "We would very much like Congress to recognize ... that countries like Britain, which pays full and pays on time, does not feel it's fair when other countries - whether it's the U.S. or anybody else - does not pay in full and does not pay on time," Cook states.
As the General Debate at the GA continues, Norwegian Foreign Minister Bjoern Godal, says he is willing to discuss lowering the U.S. scale of assessments, but insists that Washington pay its debts first.
September 24, 1997: In the GA General Debate, criticism of US arrears is a common theme. France's Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine says "it is a shocking situation that the U.N. should be living precariously and therefore under a system of financial and budgetary dependence with respect to its debtors."
September 25, 1997: As the GA General Debate continues, there are many strong statements about the financial crisis. Erik Derycke, Foreign Minister of Belgium says: "It is and remains unacceptable that Member States do not pay their dues in full and attach conditions to payment of dues." And Italian Foreign Minister Lamberto Dini says, "the Organization has to be able to rely on adequate resources. Assessed contributions must be paid in full, on time and without conditions by Member States." Mexico's Foreign Minister Angel Gurria says: "We do not believe . . . that the objective of cutting costs should guide the reform process. . . The road to dealing with [the financial crisis] is full, timely and unconditional payment of the assessments the General Assembly assigns to Member States."
September 26, 1997: The US House of Representative defeats an amendment, 242 to 165, by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett to strike the $100 million for U.S. payment of UN arrears in the FY98 appropriations. Rep. Barlett and his supporters argue that the UN owes money to the US, not the other way around. In late-night debate, Rep. Chistopher Smith of New Jersey states that spending for UN agencies and programs is "out of control." The $100 million is part of a larger package to pay part of US arrears to the UN. But both the arrears package and the regular funding appropriation remain stalled as the new fiscal year loom

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:19 PM

Three words: Department of Peace...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:19 PM

Couldn't you just do a link instead?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Curly
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 10:16 PM

1994: Because of large Russian arrears in peacekeeping the US is second to Russia in overall arrears ($469 million vs. $507 million).


April 7:2005 While promoting the reform recommendations of his report "In Larger Freedom," Secretary General Kofi Annan drew attention to the fact that the UN allocates just 2 percent of its regular budget to its human rights program. Annan called for increased funding to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to "expand its conflict prevention and crisis response machinery."

April 6: To increase Washington's negotiating stance at the UN, the US Senate voted to decrease US payments to the UN peacekeeping budget. The Republican-backed measure will reduce the cap on the US share of peacekeeping costs from 27.1 percent of the total peacekeeping budget to 25 percent. Those senators who supported the plan hope it will augment Washington's bargaining power in promoting UN reform and lowering peacekeeping dues.

March 21: Secretary General Kofi Annan releases his report "In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All." While the report extensively covers UN reform, the report fails to mention UN's shortage of funds or how the UN will finance the reforms.

February 25: The state and city of New York agreed to supply a $1.2 billion federal loan to the United Nations to renovate its headquarters, despite some resistance from local politicians. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan sought independent advice on outside loan interest rates and determined that the UN cannot obtain a lower fixed rate than what the US has offered.

January 13: 2005 Despite the fact that Washington turned a blind eye to the illegal oil smuggling that took place under the Oil-for Food program, the US threatened to withhold funding to the UN if the organization does not fully comply with the Volcker investigation into the scandal.

December 10 2004: The US appropriated $1.182 billion for international organizations in its 2005 spending budget, FY2005, including $490 million for UN peacekeeping assessments. US dues for peacekeeping, however, are estimated at $1.3 billion and there are no measures in the bill to make up for the discrepancy between actual and estimated dues. In September of 2004, the Senate version of FY2005 also suggested the privatization of peacekeeping forces. The Senate panel was quick to criticize the UN, claiming that "private companies can carry out effective peacekeeping missions for a fraction of the funding the United Nations requires."
November 24: United Nations Controller Jean-Pierre Halbwachs tells the General Assembly Fifth Committee that verbal commitments to the UN's international criminal tribunals cannot take the place of financial contributions, as member state arrears for the tribunals have led to ineffectiveness and hiring freezes. Tribunal judges have also complained that the financial crisis has a "devastating effect" on the judicial process.
November 2: Secretary General Kofi Annan proposes a $97 million unified security plan, which would include $28 million for security renovations in the New York headquarters and $35 million for UN field offices. Member states were concerned about who would bear the costs of the plan, estimated at $300 million over two years.
October 27: The UN Office of Internal Oversight Services says it saved $26 million by formally reviewing budgets such as peacekeeping mission spending for cases of fraud or poor financial planning, but wants more independence from the UN to better monitor financial crises and staff issues. The auditing office reports it saves an average $31 million per year.
October 22: Under Secretary General for Management Catherine Bertini tells the Fifth Committee in regards to the UN financial situation that "We have progress, but we also still have problems and concerns based on the fact that we still do not have enough Member States paying in full and on time." Though she commented that the situation had improved from 2003, it was far from fixed.
July 16, 2004: For the third consecutive year, the Bush administration is withholding $34 million appropriated for the UN Population Fund(UNFPA). The White House contends that UNFPA programs violate the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, a 20-year-old law forbidding US aid to any agency that "supports or participates in the management of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization." To date, the US has failed to uncover any evidence of "coercive practices" by UNFPA.

July 8, 2004: UN Under Secretary General Jose Antonio Ocampo announces the launch of a study looking into global taxes as an alternative source of development aid funding. Proposals include a carbon tax on fuel use, a 'Tobin tax' on currency transactions, and a levy on international sales of weapons. Ocampo will present conclusions and recommendations to the UN General Assembly in September 2004.
June 18, 2004: The General Assembly adopts a $2.8 billion UN Peacekeeping budget for 2004-2005, reflecting no significant growth compared with the approved appropriation for 2003-2004.

May 27, 2004: The "Group of 77" developing countries, along with China, introduce a draft resolution providing financing for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) from July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005. However, the US and Israel oppose the resolution, claiming that Israel should not pay $1.12 million resulting from the incident at Qana on April 18, 1996.

May 21, 2004: Under Secretary General for Management Catherine Bertini notes that "while the situation of the regular budget remained precarious, the news had been generally positive." Bertini reports that more Member States were paying their dues in the year in which they were owed. Some shortages in a few peacekeeping missions existed, meaning that debt to troop and service contributors would increase. She adds that the UN may have to borrow funds to meet the UN Regular Budget obligations for the current year.

April 28, 2004: The US appropriated $362.2 million in its budget for 2005 to pay the 2004 contributions owed to the UN Regular Budget.

March 9, 2004: Canada pledges $25 million towards the UN Secretary General's special projects. The contribution includes more than $4 million for the UN University for Peace, $2 million for a local community development program for the rural poor and $1 million for the Millennium Development program.

February 4, 2004: The US proposes loaning $1.2 billion to fund the UN Capital Master Plan for renovation of the New York Headquarters. Terms of the loan include a 30-year payback period at an interest rate of 5.54 percent, resulting in the loan totaling almost $2.5 billion.

January 27, 2004: The US appropriates $105 million for US dues to the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the UN Population Fund (UNFPA). The Bush administration cut-off funding to UNFPA in 2001, citing "controversial charges that the organization provides indirect support for China's family-planning program, which anti-abortion activists claim uses forced abortions and sterilizations."

December 23, 2003: The General Assembly adopts a $3.16 billion budget for 2004-2005, reflecting a real growth of a mere 0.5% from 2003-2004. However, Member States contend that the budget reflects a continued effort towards reforming the UN, including the reform of the budgetary cycle as well as entrusting the Secretary General with wider power for redeploying staff on an experimental basis.

December 18, 2003: The Fifth Committee recommends an appropriation of $235.32 million for the International Tribunal for Rwanda and $298.23 million for the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, falling below the requests of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. The Committee also recommends against increasing the current level of funding for consultants and experts to the tribunals.

November 21, 2003: According to Under Secretary General for Management Catherine Bertini, unpaid contributions by member states for international tribunals topped $117 million as of September 30, 2003. The General Assembly noted Bertini's "concern," urging Member States to "make payments on time, in full and without conditions."

November 20, 2003: Under Secretary General for Management Catherine Bertini gives an update on UN Member States payments. At the end of October 2003, dues owed by Member States for peacekeeping missions were $1,188 million in arrears. Bertini adds that the UN Regular Budget would end the year with a deficit of $12 million.

October 30, 2003: The Fifth Committee reviews the proposed UN budget for 2004-2005. The draft envisions a budget of $3.058 billion, a 0.5% increase real growth of the budget. However, several delegates argue that the nominal vs real increase in resources amounts to 5.8% or $150 million.

August 11, 2003: Secretary General Kofi Annan expects that the Bush administration will back a $1.2 billion interest-free loan financing the renovation of the UN headquarters in New York. However, the plan must still pass through the US congress, "where there is no shortage of people who would punish the organization for real and imagined sins," including its lack of support for the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

July 23, 2003: The US House of Representatives approves the FY2004 appropriations bill that includes funds for the UN and UN specialized agencies. The bill includes $71.4 million in dues to rejoin UNESCO after a 19-year hiatus, as well as $550.2 million in payments to the UN Peacekeeping Operation budget - a decrease of $119 million from FY2003.

June 4, 2003: The General Assembly adopts a $2.17 billion UN Peacekeeping budget for 2003-2004, reflecting a decrease of approximately $430 million compared to the 2002-2003 appropriations.
May 8, 2003: Under Secretary General for Management Catherine Bertini gives her first Press Briefing on the UN's financial position. She reported that the UN's aggregate cash balance at the end of 2002 was the highest ever, the level of unpaid contributions had dramatically decreased and debt to Member States had been reduced. Overall, she said 2002 could be considered a financially good year. Despite this, only 117 Member States paid their regular budget contributions in full, the second year in a row that this figure has dropped.
March 11, 2003: The General Assembly's Fifth Committee welcomes Under-Secretary General Catherine Bertini to the UN Secretariat's top management position. Bertini, the executive director of the World Food Program for the past 10 years, has been credited for efforts to modernize the Programme's administration and assist hundreds of millions of victims of war and natural disasters all over the world.
March 10, 2003: Lack of funds severely hampers UN contingency plans to feed starving Iraqis during the impending Iraqi war. The UN appealed for $120 million but western governments have contributed less than a quarter of this amount.
February 20, 2003: The Netherlands triples its annual contribution to the United Nations Settlement Program (UN-HABITAT), praising the UN agency for its good work. Lack of funds has been a major contraint for the UN organization since its inception so the donation is crucial to the program's success.
January 16, 2003: Senior Policymakers in Tokyo want to reduce Japan's 20% contribution of the total UN budget. The proposal reflects growing disenchantment with Japan's failure to become a permanent member of the Security Council or to eliminate the "enemy nation" clause in the UN Charter.
January 1, 2003: Four "least developed nations" are among 10 countries to pay their 2003 contributions to the UN in full on New Year's Day. Developed nations will need to mirror this commitment from poorer countries to effectively combat the UN financial crisis which has caused cutbacks in many areas.

December 13, 2002: The General Assemblies' fifth committee (administrative and budgetary) recommend a capital master plan to raise an estimated $1.05 billion for refurbishing of the UN's New York headquarters. The UN complex has been outdated and deficient for many years, especially its IT support base, but refurbishment has been postponed due to lack of funds.
December 11, 2002: Ted Turner announces that he will pay the remaining $500 million he pledged to the UN over the next 10 years, rather than the 5 years he originally planned, after watching his fortune dwindle from $8 billion to $1.6 billion.
December 9, 2002: The proposed UN budget for 2004-2005 reaches 2.92 billion, reflecting real growth of $47.8 million compared with the approved appropriation for 2002-2003. The US criticised the budget, calling it a "step backward in what should be an evolving process to make the organization more effective and efficient in the use of its resources".
November 4, 2002: The General Assemblies' fifth committee (administrative and budgetary) questions how to finance the $620 000 required to strengthen the Secretariat's Terrorism Prevention Branch. The UN's contingency fund, designed for unexpected expenditure, is severely strained and may not be able to cover the cost.
October 21, 2003: Under Secretary-General Joseph Connor says the UN's financial stability is "under pressure." Connor predicted higher unpaid assessments and higher debt to member states at the end of 2002 as compared to the previous year.
October 9, 2003: The US pays $46 million of its UN debt under the Helms-Biden legislation. This bill demands that each UN organization owed money by the US implement reforms before receiving payment.
September 30, 2003: The US Congress adopts a bill authorizing the final $244 million UN arrears payment under the Helms-Biden legislation to be made. This payment only comes after the WHO, FAO and ILO complied with US demands to reduce US assessments for their respective budgets from 25% to 22%.
August 28, 2003: The cost of the Johannesburg Summit provokes a large debate on the raison d'etre of UN conferences. The US, critical of these "gab-fests for their cost and their lack of achievements," makes an unconvincing case for abandoning UN conferences, and instead, holding Special Sessions of the General Assembly in New York "as a way of avoiding expensive junkets."
July 10, 2003: Repesentatives of the Afghan government, neighbouring countries and UN agencies meet to discuss the $838 million funding shortfall for humanitarian aid in Afghanistan.
July 3, 2003:The UN appeals for $142 million to assist 2 million Angolans who depend on international aid to survive. According to the UN, "most aid agencies are already working at full capacity and [...] further expansion is dependent on a significant increase in funding."

June 3, 2002: United Nations efforts to respond to humanitarian emergencies worldwide are severely hampered by lack of funds, leaving half of all projects without resources. Humanitarian efforts in Afghanistan, Angola and Sudan are particulary hamstrung due to funding shortfalls.
May 27, 2002: UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan calls for developed nations to contribute $2 billion dollars to the Global AIDs Fund, designed to curb the effect of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria across Africa.
April 24, 2002: The Bush Administration pledges $618 million in arrears to the UN and its affiliate agencies in the federal budget for 2003. The question still remains: when will it pay?
April 4, 2002: The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) faces a financial crisis due to President Bush's decision to suspend US contributions of $34 million to the fund. The UN agency seeks support from US religious groups to help explain that UNFPA programs do not promote abortion, as the President claims.
March 15, 2002: The EU fifth committee representative responds to Joseph Connor's assessment of the UN's financial position. The EU cited US arrears as the major reason for the UN's current financial situation, which Connor described as "very fragile." The representative called for all member states to pay their dues on time to help prevent "cross borrowing," which is still occurring across budget areas.
March 13, 2002: Under Secretary General for Management Joseph Connor described the UN's financial situation as "overall better" but still "very fragile." Cash on hand, the level of unpaid assessments and debt owed by the UN to Member States had all improved in 2001. Despite such progress, the number of member states to pay their assessments in full dropped from 141 to 135. With the projected 2002-2003 budget $75 million lower in real terms, this worrying trend will have to be reversed.
March 12, 2002:The Bush administration withholds $34 million in contributions to the UN population fund (UNFPA) on the grounds that their programs promote abortion. UNFPA denies this claim and emphasizes the importance of the money to reduce maternal deaths, infancy mortality rates and unwanted pregnancies.
February 2, 2002: Twenty developing nations are barred from voting in the General Assembly for non-payment of dues. Afghanistan, one of the countries to lose its vote, owes just $4,600 to the UN despite being ravaged by war for over 20 years. Such a response seems disproportionate as the US has never lost its voting rights, despite its large outstanding debt.

June 3, 2002: United Nations efforts to respond to humanitarian emergencies worldwide are severely hampered by lack of funds, leaving half of all projects without resources. Humanitarian efforts in Afghanistan, Angola and Sudan are particulary hamstrung due to funding shortfalls.
May 27, 2002: UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan calls for developed nations to contribute $2 billion dollars to the Global AIDs Fund, designed to curb the effect of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria across Africa.
April 24, 2002: The Bush Administration pledges $618 million in arrears to the UN and its affiliate agencies in the federal budget for 2003. The question still remains: when will it pay?
April 4, 2002: The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) faces a financial crisis due to President Bush's decision to suspend US contributions of $34 million to the fund. The UN agency seeks support from US religious groups to help explain that UNFPA programs do not promote abortion, as the President claims.
March 15, 2002: The EU fifth committee representative responds to Joseph Connor's assessment of the UN's financial position. The EU cited US arrears as the major reason for the UN's current financial situation, which Connor described as "very fragile." The representative called for all member states to pay their dues on time to help prevent "cross borrowing," which is still occurring across budget areas.
March 13, 2002: Under Secretary General for Management Joseph Connor described the UN's financial situation as "overall better" but still "very fragile." Cash on hand, the level of unpaid assessments and debt owed by the UN to Member States had all improved in 2001. Despite such progress, the number of member states to pay their assessments in full dropped from 141 to 135. With the projected 2002-2003 budget $75 million lower in real terms, this worrying trend will have to be reversed.
March 12, 2002:The Bush administration withholds $34 million in contributions to the UN population fund (UNFPA) on the grounds that their programs promote abortion. UNFPA denies this claim and emphasizes the importance of the money to reduce maternal deaths, infancy mortality rates and unwanted pregnancies.
February 2, 2002: Twenty developing nations are barred from voting in the General Assembly for non-payment of dues. Afghanistan, one of the countries to lose its vote, owes just $4,600 to the UN despite being ravaged by war for over 20 years. Such a response seems disproportionate as the US has never lost its voting rights, despite its large outstanding debt.

November 12, 2001: The United States makes another payment of $475 million towards its peacekeeping arrears. This payment is $107 million less than the $582 million that the US pledged to release towards its peacekeeping arrears in October of 2001. The US asserts that this is the amount owed to the US by the UN, for troop and equipment contributions. Washington continues to owe nearly $800 million for peacekeeping, $265 million for the regular budget, and $14.6 million for the international criminal tribunals.
October 17, 2001: At a meeting of the Fifth Committee, many delegates express cautious optimism about the UN's improved financial situation. However, some diplomats, such as Cheong Ming Foong of Singapore, question whether the recent payments truly solve the UN's cash-flow problem. Bagher Asadi, speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77," expresses concern over late and irregular reimbursements to the troop contributing countries, noting that this places a financial strain on the developing countries.
October 15, 2001: The US decision to release previously withheld dues, along with a better payment record of other members, brings financial stability closer for the UN. In a press briefing , Under Secretary-General for Management Joseph Connor states that "the United Nations has funds in excess of current requirements." Member states were expected to contribute more to the UN than in any prior year, with an aggregate $4.716 billion in projected payments compared to $2.893 billion last year, the increase due to larger peacekeeping operations. As Connor points out, though, the UN's financial situation is still tenuous, due to the fact that the organization has "no reserves, no capital, and no borrowing capacity."
October 12, 2001: A long-awaited US payment of $625 million arrives at the UN. While this includes peacekeeping payments of $571 million and $23 million for the International Criminal Tribunals, the US still owes nearly $1.3 billion for peacekeeping and $265 million for the regular budget for 2001. A second payment of $582 million for peacekeeping arrears is scheduled to arrive before December 31 and the US expresses its intention to pay the full amount of the 2001 regular budget assessment.
October 6, 2001:In a gesture towards anti-terrorism coalition-building, President Bush signs a Senate bill authorizes the payment of US back dues, and cites his desire for the money to facilitate a "close bond" between the US and the UN.
September 25, 2001: To aid the President's diplomatic efforts, Republican House leader Tom DeLay drops his opposition to a payment of US back dues to the UN.
September 19, 2001: The new US Permanent Representative, John Negroponte, joins Kofi Annan in welcoming American media mogul Ted Turner. Turner presents the US with a check for over $31 million to help cover US dues to the UN. Last fall, Turner's pledge to donate funds was helped complete a deal to reduce US dues.
August 22, 2001: Jessie Helms' announced departure from the US Senate may bode well for the UN, as he has been one of the staunchest anti-UN Republicans. Despite promise by the US to pay its UN dues after winning payment reduction, the US now owes the UN the highest debt ever.
August 19, 2001: In direct response to proposed legislation in the US House of Representatives UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan calls on the US to allow payment of UN arrears, and "continue to pay its dues in full and on time, without conditions, as every member state is expected to do."
August 16, 2001: Republican leaders in the US House of Representatives threaten to hold UN arrears hostage once again, unless the bill releasing overdue payments is accompanied by a measure to exempt US military personnel from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
August 16, 2001: The UN projects a cash deficit of $75 million by the end of the month, as numerous countries have failed to pay their regular budgetary assessments. Of the 189 member countries, 86 have paid partially or not at all. The deficit may force the UN to dip into peacekeeping funds in order to pay day-to-day salaries and bills. The biggest debtor is the United States, which owes $463 million in current and previous dues to the UN's regular budget, or 64% of the total.
May 11, 2001: The US Congress withholds the final arrears payment of $244 million to the UN due next year, making release of the sum conditional to the re-election of the US to the Human Rights Commission in May 2002.
May 11, 2001: Iraq asks the UN to be allowed to pay "dues" from oil-for-food revenue. The Security Council Resolution 1320 allows the withdrawal of money from Iraq's oil-for-food account to pay the UN membership dues, but it has not been implemented.
May 6, 2001: The United States loses its seat at the United Nations Human Rights Commission, where it has held membership since the human rights panel was created in 1947. For many US Congressmen, this blow is a welcome excuse to reinvigorate discussion of the cancellation of UN dues.
March 29, 2001: Member states agree that the UN financial crisis is the result of the non-payment of US arrears and urge the US to pay its debt on time, in full and without conditions.
March 26, 2001: The Fifth Committee begins discussion of alternatives to current arrears calculation under Charter's Article 19. The representative of Venezuela said that trying to solve UN's problems by changing Article 19 was like trying to save a heart patient by giving him a facelift. The cause of the problem is the failure of the United States to pay.
February 12, 2001: The US Senate agrees to release more than a half-billion dollars to the UN. However, the complete payment of US arrears to the UN (which after this payment will still be over US $700 million) is still locked into Congress' "conditions" on UN policy.
January 9, 2001 Helms applauds Holbrooke's "browbeating" of the UN 5th Committee to lower US dues, by graciously allowing a partial payment of $500 million of arrears – just $1 billion to go.

December 23, 2000: The UN agrees to reduce US dues for the first time in more than a quarter century. On the regular budget, the US share is cut to 22 percent from 25 percent, and the peacekeeping scale of assessment drops from 26.5 percent from 30.6 percent. It still exceeds the 25 percent level set by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Concessions from a number of nations, many of them prospering, are the key to striking a deal.
Japan gets a cut of one percentage point, to 19.5 percent of the regular budget. The UN will have to find new sources to provide 4 percent of the operating budget. Russia and China voluntarily increase their payments, though marginally. The dues of Britain, Denmark, Greece and Ireland go up, although in total the European Union adds only 0.3 percentage points to its bill. A number of countries voluntarily give up discounts immediately. Others agree to give them up in the future.
The agreement is also based on the premises that the US would, in future, pay the full amount of all its assessed contributions, settle its arrears to the UN by 2003, and pay $582 million of its arrears immediately. Member nations leave open the possibility of reversing today's decision if there is reason to do so at the next review.
December 22, 2000: UN members reach a tentative deal to substantially reduce American dues to the world body, after media magnate Ted Turner offered $34 million to help Washington out of its political impasse. The purpose of the funds is to help make up the gap in the administrative budget next year, a direct result of the US dues reductions. Many nations will be allowed to stagger their respective increases over three years.
Instead of a six-year base period to measure a country's economic growth, the UN will now use 4.5 years, which gives some countries, such as Britain, whose economy has thrived, a substantial increase. The exception to the ability to pay would be the US. Japan, now paying some 20.5 percent of the budget, is to get a rate decrease to just under 20 percent. The Japanese parliament would not be able to swallow nearly the same rate as Washington with an economy less than half the size of that of the US.
December 19, 2000: A Mexican proposal links the peacekeeping discount more closely to a nation's wealth. Nations are divided into nine groups instead of the current four, with discounts ranging from 90 percent of the regular budget assessment for the poorest nations, to 20 percent for the wealthier ones. Dozens of nations will not receive any discount.
The P5 would pay premiums on top of their regular budget assessments. Other wealthy nations likely to have their shares increased have agreed informally to the Mexican proposal. However, it is a not clear whether the proposal would reduce the US contribution for peacekeeping to 25 percent, as Washington demands.
December 19, 2000: The US delivers $217 million in back dues. The payment will put the UN back in the black and avert any need to raid peacekeeping accounts this month in order to meet regular budget bills. What has been received is payment of more recent, but still overdue, assessed contributions.
December 13, 2000: Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the highest-ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee put himself in the middle of the conflict over the level US dues at the UN. He says (link to "A High-Ranking Democrat Lobbies for a Dues Break From UN, New York Times") that a reduction to 22 percent in regular dues by the General Assembly is an absolute requirement. Without that, diplomats can forget the whole package.
December 8, 2000: The Swedish Ambassador to the UN writes a letter to New York real estate mogul Donald Trump proposing that he help finance the renovation of UN Headquarters in New York.
December 8, 2000: Ambassador Jean-David Levitte makes a statement expressing that Europe will not pay higher UN dues to offset any reduced payments by the US.
November 27, 2000: In a speech to the Fifth Committee US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke admits that there are deep concerns about US arrears and how they will affect UN peacekeeping operations. He says that the US is committed to resolving the financial crisis this calendar year and that over $200 million is available next year if the necessary changes in the current system are made. He is speaks also of the US' "generosity" in support of many UN activities financed on a voluntary basis.
November 26, 2000: Japan plans to ask the UN to reduce its budget contribution to 17 percent of the total budget from the current 20.573 percent. Liberal Democratic Party members feel Japan's share should be less than 15 percent, considering that its bid to become a permanent member of the Security Council has not been realized.
November 11, 2000: Former deputy US representative to the UN William Vanden Heuvel suggests that the best way to stem the "increasingly destructive" US influence on the UN is to decrease US financial obligations and correspondingly US dominance. The EU could then step in to lead the way on wide-ranging UN reforms.
October 31, 2000: The UN, its agencies and the diplomatic and consular corps contribute $3.2 billion a year to the economy of the New York City area alone, according to mayor Rudolph Giuliani. This has generated 30,600 jobs, yielding $1.2 billion in annual earnings.
October 24, 2000: According to the DPI, the extent of the financial crisis is "increasingly serious." As of today, member states owe the UN about $ 2.7 billion, including $1.6 billion from the United States.
October 3, 2000: US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke asks the Fifth Committee to re-evaluate the assessment scale for the financing of peacekeeping missions.
October 2, 2000: "We seek a reduction in the ceiling not to shirk our commitments, but to strike a more appropriate balance," US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke states in the Fifth Committee.
October 2, 2000: The EU rejects an US request to have its UN dues reduced. This statement gets support from a number of other countries that deny a reduction in dues for the US. The EU agree that the scale needs reworking, but only to reflect real changes in the world economy.
"We consider that the ceiling of 25 percent is already a great privilege because the United States represents 29 percent of the world G.N.P.," Ambassador Jean-David Levitte said in an interview after his speech. Japan is also opposed to a reduction of American dues when the Japanese, with just below 15 percent of world G.N.P. is assessed 20.6 percent of the regular budget.
October 2, 2000: French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte speaks to UN Budgetary Committee and enumerates the principles on which European Union's proposals are bases:
-Each Member State's contributions must reflect their real ability to pay as closely as possible in the light of the current economic situation.
-The methods used to define the scale must be simple, equitable and transparent.
-A Member State's ability to contribute to the Organization's expenditure should depend first of all on its recent macro-economic performance and on currency movements. These two factors determine each Member State's "purchasing power" in the currency in which we pay our contributions today: the United States dollar.
October 2, 2000: Secretary-General Kofi Annan and UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Sadako Ogata warn of critical funding shortages for the Organization's relief activities.
September 18, 2000:The United States Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (Maryland) says that the US does not owe anything to the UN for peacekeeping, but that the UN does, in fact, owe the US another $17 billion.
September 13, 2000: The US let it be known that further payments on its arrears are contingent on a revision of its assessment scale, a reduction of the US obligation to 22 percent and 25 percent for regular dues and peacekeeping dues, respectively.
France, speaking for the European Union, insists that "the principle of 'capacity to pay'" is the benchmark for member states' contributions. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright says she expects an agreement on a revised scale by this fall and that UN members, including the US, "must do a better job of making payments on time," while also looking at cost allocations.
September 7, 2000: In a statement during the Millennium Summit, the leaders of the P5 commit themselves to a "fairer" system of financing UN peacekeeping operations. Madeleine Albright says the meeting calls for modernizing the system of calculating financial dues to the UN to provide "a more stable and fair foundation for United Nations operations."
A statement from the P5 says the leaders "recognize the need to adjust the existing peacekeeping scale of assessments in light of changed circumstances, including countries' current capacity to pay."
August 18, 2000: The UN reduces Moldova's debt in membership dues from $3.5 million to $2.5 million. This allows the country to regain its right to vote in the General Assembly. The remaining $1 million will have to be repaid over a longer period.
August 16, 2000: Brazil informs the US that it cannot afford to increase its contribution to the budget of the UN. The US wants to increase the contribution of other countries, among them Brazil, and decrease its own. The Latin American countries' total assessments, which is currently 1.5% of the UN burget, would be raised to 2.5%.
August 8, 2000: The International Atomic Energy Agency faces a financial crisis and may soon have to cease key operations. It has already curtailed some aid projects and defaulted on $1 million in travel expenses. The US covers about a quarter of the agency's $300 million annual budget. IAEA Director General Mohammed Baradei cannot understand why "Congress is considering building an NMD system--at a cost of more than $60 billion--that would attempt to shield the country from missile attacks by countries as North Korea, which the Agency monitors closely."
July 26, 2000: The UN faces a major funding shortfall in tackling humanitarian crises from Congo to North Korea, with donors so far providing only a third of the $2.5 billion the organization has sought for this year.
July 22, 2000: The UN plans to announce ambitious proposals to renovate its headquarters in new York. Funding for this project could reach $1 billion and has yet to be secured. The United States may be asked to pay a significant amount of the bill.

July 14, 2000: The European Union calls on 20 newly rich countries to increase contributions to the UN. French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte, representing the EU, says "the essential criteria is what you are able to pay." The EU has identified Singapore, Israel, Argentina, Slovenia, and other countries as able to pay more since their economies are now affluent.
July 13, 2000: The US makes a minimal contribution of $135 million to the regular budget, but it remains the UN's largest debtor, owing more than $1.5 billion dollars overall.
July 3, 2000: German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder indirectly criticizes U.S. proposals to reduce its contributions to the United Nations. Following talks in Berlin with United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, Schroeder tells reporters no state had the right to unilaterally reduce its material support for the UN.
June 15, 2000: On the recommendation of the Fifth Committee, $1.67 billion in resources is approved in the General Assembly for peacekeeping projects. The Assembly also adopts recommendations on the finance of support activities at United Nations Headquarters, on audits of peacekeeping operations and other aspects of the UN's administration.
May 17, 2000: Cyprus, Estonia, Israel, Hungary and the Philippines agree to increase their share of the peacekeeping budget. Israel and Hungary state they are willing to give up 80% discounts on their peacekeeping assessments, figures based on their countries economic status in 1973. Secretary of State Madeline Albright commends these member states on their "commitment to UN peacekeeping."
May 16, 2000: The Washington Times reports that discussions begin to reconsider the allocation of peacekeeping costs with an eye to reducing the American contribution. The discussion - which will likely last until the General Assembly adjourns in December - was called by the United States in an effort to reduce its current level of assessment. U.S. ambassadors have tried to sell such a plan to the United Nations for the last decade. But this year, for the first time, more than 30 nations have agreed at least to open discussions.
May 8, 2000: UNHCR faces serious cutbacks in its programs due to US$150 million in delays in receiving pledges from donor countries. UNHCR is at its lowest funding level in a decade. South Eastern Europe will be hardest hit by the cuts, especially UN sponsored transport and business links between Serb, Muslims, and Croatian towns in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Operations in Africa however, traditionally under funded, will escape the axe this time.
March 30, 2000: Fifteen Ambassadors of the UN Security Council receive a US civics lesson from Senator Jesse Helms, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Helms stressed the US Senate's "unique" role in American Foreign policy. The Ambassadors, mostly allies of the US, listen politely but said that there was no excuse for the high debt of the US to the UN, now at $1.7 billion. Senator Helms had addressed the Security Council in January, threatening the withdrawal of the US unless the UN "respects the sovereign rights of the American people and serves them as an effective instrument."
March 23, 2000: US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, in his statement to the Fifth Committee on reassessment of peacekeeping arrears for the US, terms the UN "indispensable but flawed." He says that the US government wants to "fix it to save it." Holbrooke emphasizes that immediate financial reform, i.e., a reevaluation of the peacekeeping assessment, is necessary if the UN is to keep pace with the growing peacekeeping demands, especially in Africa. Other members of the US delegation to the UN have warned that failure to revise the peacekeeping assessments would seriously jeopardize the UN's peacekeeping efforts.
The same day, Under-Secretary General for Management Joseph Connor delivers an assessment of the UN's financial situation at the end of 1999. Cash balances were up at the end of last year, unpaid assessments down and debts to Member States also down he reported. At the end of the year the UN had nearly $1.1 billion in cash balances. This figure is up from a total of $736 million at the end of 1998. Unpaid assessments by year's end stood around $1.7 billion, which is less than the more than $2 billion owed at the end of 1998.
March 13, 2000: The Assembly's Fifth Committee begins a three-week session today. Before the Committee is the issue of the scale of assessments for apportioning the expenses of the UN. The Committee must agree on the elements of the methodology which will be used in preparing future scales reassessments for the regular budget.
March 12, 2000: According to the New York Times, the US wants its assessment lowered from 25% to 22% of the regular budget. Congress has already passed a bill reducing the US percentage of the peacekeeping budget from 30.4% to 25%. Sources say that US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's task of convincing other member states to pay more so that the US can pay less will be difficult. Resentment is mounting among many of the US's closest European allies as well as Canada. They contend that no nation can make demands on the organization that violate treaty obligations to pay dues on time, in full and without conditions.
March 9, 2000:After a daylong debate, the Security Council stressed the importance of financial support for the success of the UN's humanitarian assistance efforts. The early dispersal of funds, members say, is critical for providing effective humanitarian assistance. But cutbacks in funding for emergencies have been the pattern among most large donors.
March 2, 2000:Representative Harold Rogers, chair of the House Subcommittee, which oversees the US State Department budget, told a key Washington lawmaker that the $739 million for peacekeeping that the Clinton administration requested would be used in supporting missions which "offer little hope for success." Rogers told US Secretary of State Madeline Albright that the funding proposal for UN missions in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, and East Timor "has the potential to derail what progress we've been able to achieve in settling accounts with the UN and advancing UN reform."
February 16, 2000: Those member states, numbering forty plus, which paid their full dues by Jan 31st are awarded "honor roll" status.
February 7, 2000: UN faces a funding crisis in Kosovo. The UN urgently needs US$102 million, a sum equal to the amount Sweden spent on sending 860 of its soldiers to Kosovo. UN administrator Bernard Kouchner, speaking at the Tokyo Press Club, regretfully admits that the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) is "facing an emergency period. We have to pay the civil servants." Kouchner explains that the most urgent need is payment for public servants. However, donors, such as the EU, have preferred to fund capital projects instead of current needs.
Several US senators have criticized the lack of European support for the UN operations in the Balkans. Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat explains "I am mystified why our own NATO allies have not provided more police for service in their own backyard." Levin adds that the EU has not provided any of the $35 million promised for reconstruction efforts. "On my scorecard, the European nations and the European Union are flunking the test."
February 1, 2000: 52 countries are in danger of losing their vote in the General Assembly after failing to pay their dues on time. 7 are allowed to retain their vote because of extenuating financial circumstances, while 45 lose their voting rights. The UN is owed $3.47 billion, two-thirds of which is for peacekeeping. The US remains by far the largest debtor, owing more than 50% of the UN Core Budget.
January 28, 2000: Canada, Iceland and South Africa pay their dues. Only 36 of the 188 members have paid their dues in full. The others have until midnight 31 January to pay their dues before falling into arrears.
January 25, 2000: In the wake of the meeting of Senator Jesse Helms and the Security Council, US Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright states that "only the President of the United States can speak for the American people." Insisting that the Clinton administration and most American people view the UN quite differently from Senator Helms, she says "we strongly support the United Nations Charter and the organization's purpose."
January 22, 2000: A Boston Globe editorial disputes Helms' claim to speak for "the American people" and reiterates that the overwhelming majority of Americans support the UN. It also cautions against permitting a plurality of voices to speak for a member state, explaining that the UN would not be able to function if "voices from the legislatures or the political oppositions in various nations proposed to speak for their countries."
January 21, 2000: Addressing a field hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Manhattan, US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke concedes that it will be difficult to convince the rest of the UN membership to permit a reduction of the US share of the UN budget. He informs the Committee that the legislature in Japan, which pays 19 percent of the UN regular budget, has taken up a bill similar to the Helms - Biden legislation. Unilateral reassessments of member states' contributions to the UN budget promise to plunge the UN into even greater financial uncertainty.
January 20, 2000: Senator Helms addresses the Security Council, becoming the first legislator from any country to do so. He claims that figures from the US General Accounting Office reveal that in 1999, "the American people" contributed a total of more than $1.4 billion to the UN system in assessments and voluntary contributions. "American taxpayers" also spent an additional $8.8 billion from the US military budget to support UN resolutions and peacekeeping operations around the world. This meant in 1999 a total of $10.2 billion to support the work of the UN. These figures are disputed the next day by Steven Dimoff, Vice President of the United Nations Association of the United States, who says in an interview with the New York Times, that the sum "really does stretch reality," because it includes military activities planned and executed by the United States without any input from the United Nations. Helms concludes his blunt address by threatening that the consequence of "a United Nations that seeks to impose its presumed authority on the American people, without their consent" would be "confrontation and eventual U.S. withdrawal."
Responding to Senator Helms' speech to the Security Council, Dutch Ambassador van Walsum asserts that a member state cannot attach conditions to its willingness to pay its assessed contributions to the UN.
French Ambassador Dejammet reminds Senator Helms that the 15 members of the EU pay 36% of the UN budget, although they account for only 31% of the world economy.
Malaysian Ambassador Hasmy says "the U.S. enjoys currently unprecedented wealth and economic growth, and we fail to see why, from the perspective of the developing world, the United States will not be able to do what we all do - or most of us do - to pay our dues in full, on time, and without conditions."
January 5, 2000: Belarus, Finland, Gabon, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Lesotho, Marshall Islands, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines begin the new year by paying their annual dues to the UN in full on the first working day, with Finland making the first and largest full payment of $5.7 million.
July 14, 2000: The European Union calls on 20 newly rich countries to increase contributions to the UN. French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte, representing the EU, says "the essential criteria is what you are able to pay." The EU has identified Singapore, Israel, Argentina, Slovenia, and other countries as able to pay more since their economies are now affluent.
July 13, 2000: The US makes a minimal contribution of $135 million to the regular budget, but it remains the UN's largest debtor, owing more than $1.5 billion dollars overall.
July 3, 2000: German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder indirectly criticizes U.S. proposals to reduce its contributions to the United Nations. Following talks in Berlin with United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, Schroeder tells reporters no state had the right to unilaterally reduce its material support for the UN.
June 15, 2000: On the recommendation of the Fifth Committee, $1.67 billion in resources is approved in the General Assembly for peacekeeping projects. The Assembly also adopts recommendations on the finance of support activities at United Nations Headquarters, on audits of peacekeeping operations and other aspects of the UN's administration.
May 17, 2000: Cyprus, Estonia, Israel, Hungary and the Philippines agree to increase their share of the peacekeeping budget. Israel and Hungary state they are willing to give up 80% discounts on their peacekeeping assessments, figures based on their countries economic status in 1973. Secretary of State Madeline Albright commends these member states on their "commitment to UN peacekeeping."
May 16, 2000: The Washington Times reports that discussions begin to reconsider the allocation of peacekeeping costs with an eye to reducing the American contribution. The discussion - which will likely last until the General Assembly adjourns in December - was called by the United States in an effort to reduce its current level of assessment. U.S. ambassadors have tried to sell such a plan to the United Nations for the last decade. But this year, for the first time, more than 30 nations have agreed at least to open discussions.
May 8, 2000: UNHCR faces serious cutbacks in its programs due to US$150 million in delays in receiving pledges from donor countries. UNHCR is at its lowest funding level in a decade. South Eastern Europe will be hardest hit by the cuts, especially UN sponsored transport and business links between Serb, Muslims, and Croatian towns in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Operations in Africa however, traditionally under funded, will escape the axe this time.
March 30, 2000: Fifteen Ambassadors of the UN Security Council receive a US civics lesson from Senator Jesse Helms, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Helms stressed the US Senate's "unique" role in American Foreign policy. The Ambassadors, mostly allies of the US, listen politely but said that there was no excuse for the high debt of the US to the UN, now at $1.7 billion. Senator Helms had addressed the Security Council in January, threatening the withdrawal of the US unless the UN "respects the sovereign rights of the American people and serves them as an effective instrument."
March 23, 2000: US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, in his statement to the Fifth Committee on reassessment of peacekeeping arrears for the US, terms the UN "indispensable but flawed." He says that the US government wants to "fix it to save it." Holbrooke emphasizes that immediate financial reform, i.e., a reevaluation of the peacekeeping assessment, is necessary if the UN is to keep pace with the growing peacekeeping demands, especially in Africa. Other members of the US delegation to the UN have warned that failure to revise the peacekeeping assessments would seriously jeopardize the UN's peacekeeping efforts.
The same day, Under-Secretary General for Management Joseph Connor delivers an assessment of the UN's financial situation at the end of 1999. Cash balances were up at the end of last year, unpaid assessments down and debts to Member States also down he reported. At the end of the year the UN had nearly $1.1 billion in cash balances. This figure is up from a total of $736 million at the end of 1998. Unpaid assessments by year's end stood around $1.7 billion, which is less than the more than $2 billion owed at the end of 1998.
March 13, 2000: The Assembly's Fifth Committee begins a three-week session today. Before the Committee is the issue of the scale of assessments for apportioning the expenses of the UN. The Committee must agree on the elements of the methodology which will be used in preparing future scales reassessments for the regular budget.
March 12, 2000: According to the New York Times, the US wants its assessment lowered from 25% to 22% of the regular budget. Congress has already passed a bill reducing the US percentage of the peacekeeping budget from 30.4% to 25%. Sources say that US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's task of convincing other member states to pay more so that the US can pay less will be difficult. Resentment is mounting among many of the US's closest European allies as well as Canada. They contend that no nation can make demands on the organization that violate treaty obligations to pay dues on time, in full and without conditions.
March 9, 2000:After a daylong debate, the Security Council stressed the importance of financial support for the success of the UN's humanitarian assistance efforts. The early dispersal of funds, members say, is critical for providing effective humanitarian assistance. But cutbacks in funding for emergencies have been the pattern among most large donors.
March 2, 2000:Representative Harold Rogers, chair of the House Subcommittee, which oversees the US State Department budget, told a key Washington lawmaker that the $739 million for peacekeeping that the Clinton administration requested would be used in supporting missions which "offer little hope for success." Rogers told US Secretary of State Madeline Albright that the funding proposal for UN missions in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, and East Timor "has the potential to derail what progress we've been able to achieve in settling accounts with the UN and advancing UN reform."
February 16, 2000: Those member states, numbering forty plus, which paid their full dues by Jan 31st are awarded "honor roll" status.
February 7, 2000: UN faces a funding crisis in Kosovo. The UN urgently needs US$102 million, a sum equal to the amount Sweden spent on sending 860 of its soldiers to Kosovo. UN administrator Bernard Kouchner, speaking at the Tokyo Press Club, regretfully admits that the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) is "facing an emergency period. We have to pay the civil servants." Kouchner explains that the most urgent need is payment for public servants. However, donors, such as the EU, have preferred to fund capital projects instead of current needs.
Several US senators have criticized the lack of European support for the UN operations in the Balkans. Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat explains "I am mystified why our own NATO allies have not provided more police for service in their own backyard." Levin adds that the EU has not provided any of the $35 million promised for reconstruction efforts. "On my scorecard, the European nations and the European Union are flunking the test."
February 1, 2000: 52 countries are in danger of losing their vote in the General Assembly after failing to pay their dues on time. 7 are allowed to retain their vote because of extenuating financial circumstances, while 45 lose their voting rights. The UN is owed $3.47 billion, two-thirds of which is for peacekeeping. The US remains by far the largest debtor, owing more than 50% of the UN Core Budget.
January 28, 2000: Canada, Iceland and South Africa pay their dues. Only 36 of the 188 members have paid their dues in full. The others have until midnight 31 January to pay their dues before falling into arrears.
January 25, 2000: In the wake of the meeting of Senator Jesse Helms and the Security Council, US Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright states that "only the President of the United States can speak for the American people." Insisting that the Clinton administration and most American people view the UN quite differently from Senator Helms, she says "we strongly support the United Nations Charter and the organization's purpose."
January 22, 2000: A Boston Globe editorial disputes Helms' claim to speak for "the American people" and reiterates that the overwhelming majority of Americans support the UN. It also cautions against permitting a plurality of voices to speak for a member state, explaining that the UN would not be able to function if "voices from the legislatures or the political oppositions in various nations proposed to speak for their countries."
January 21, 2000: Addressing a field hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Manhattan, US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke concedes that it will be difficult to convince the rest of the UN membership to permit a reduction of the US share of the UN budget. He informs the Committee that the legislature in Japan, which pays 19 percent of the UN regular budget, has taken up a bill similar to the Helms - Biden legislation. Unilateral reassessments of member states' contributions to the UN budget promise to plunge the UN into even greater financial uncertainty.
January 20, 2000: Senator Helms addresses the Security Council, becoming the first legislator from any country to do so. He claims that figures from the US General Accounting Office reveal that in 1999, "the American people" contributed a total of more than $1.4 billion to the UN system in assessments and voluntary contributions. "American taxpayers" also spent an additional $8.8 billion from the US military budget to support UN resolutions and peacekeeping operations around the world. This meant in 1999 a total of $10.2 billion to support the work of the UN. These figures are disputed the next day by Steven Dimoff, Vice President of the United Nations Association of the United States, who says in an interview with the New York Times, that the sum "really does stretch reality," because it includes military activities planned and executed by the United States without any input from the United Nations. Helms concludes his blunt address by threatening that the consequence of "a United Nations that seeks to impose its presumed authority on the American people, without their consent" would be "confrontation and eventual U.S. withdrawal."
Responding to Senator Helms' speech to the Security Council, Dutch Ambassador van Walsum asserts that a member state cannot attach conditions to its willingness to pay its assessed contributions to the UN.
French Ambassador Dejammet reminds Senator Helms that the 15 members of the EU pay 36% of the UN budget, although they account for only 31% of the world economy.
Malaysian Ambassador Hasmy says "the U.S. enjoys currently unprecedented wealth and economic growth, and we fail to see why, from the perspective of the developing world, the United States will not be able to do what we all do - or most of us do - to pay our dues in full, on time, and without conditions."
January 5, 2000: Belarus, Finland, Gabon, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Lesotho, Marshall Islands, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines begin the new year by paying their annual dues to the UN in full on the first working day, with Finland making the first and largest full payment of $5.7 million.
December 21, 1999: The US saves its General Assembly vote with a payment of $51 million, barely a week before its deadline.
December 17, 1999: Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a vociferous critic of the UN, accepts an invitation to speak to the Security Council in January.
December 15, 1999: Deputy Director of the US Office of UN system administration, George Abrahams, announces that the US "expects any day now to make the first $100 million payment" of its UN arrears. He stresses that further installments will be contingent on certain reforms, especially a reassessment of the US share of the budget. "We believe that changes in the geopolitical and economic landscape over the past years have called for it to be time to make these relatively modest reductions, and we plan to achieve that goal", he says.
November 23, 1999: After having cut off all funding to the UNFPA for the fiscal year 1999, the US resumes funding in the next fiscal year with a $25 million contribution. The sudden volte-face is indicative of the insecurity of UN initiatives funded solely by voluntary contributions.
November 19, 1999: Diplomatic reactions to the US proposal to pay back dues over 3 years, range from the cynical to the cautiously optimistic. The Los Angeles Times quotes one European diplomat as saying "Right. The check is in the mail, and it will take three years to get here. Maybe by then America will have convinced the rest of us that it's a good deal." Canadian Ambassador Robert Fowler says "The taxpayers of the U.S. owe this money to taxpayers in other countries. This money belongs to people, and in many cases these other countries are among the poorest in the world."
November 17, 1999: A report concludes that the NetAid concerts held in October and sponsored by the UN Development Programme in association with Cisco Systems succeed in raising only $1 million from online contributions and concert revenues, despite reaching over 1 billion people worldwide through radio and TV broadcasts and registering 2.3 million hits on the NetAid website. Compared with the $64 million for hunger relief projects raised by the "We are the World" hit single in 1985 and the $120 million for famine relief raised by a concert starring Led Zeppelin, the Who and U2 also in 1985, this result disappoints the hard-pressed UNDP that has seen its core budget decline sharply.
November 16, 1999: US Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke launches a campaign to persuade the UN's other 187 members to accept payment of $926 million as full payment of the $1.52 billion US debt to the UN. Sources at the UN suggest little enthusiasm for giving the richest country a $600 million discount. In an interview, Holbrooke says that he will ask the developed countries of Europe as well as those with fast growing economies such as China, to increase their share of UN finances.
November 14, 1999: Congress and the White House strike a deal on paying back $926 million in US arrears to the UN. In return, the White House agrees to an anti-abortion amendment proposed by Rep. Smith (Republican), that will prohibit grants to international family planning organizations for any purpose if they promote abortion rights. The $926 million is payable over 3 years and each payment is conditional on certain reforms being implemented at the UN. Among these are a reduction of the US

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 09:24 PM

And a more complete pic here for anyone interested.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 09:19 PM

Might want to give this a read.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Curly
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 09:12 PM

Should the US pay when other members do not pay?

The us was paid up untill 1980. Evidently Reagan sadi to heel with it. Wa are only going to pay the same percentage that others pay. The US underpayment is in lockstep with other nations.

Is that unfair? This policy has continued through the Clinton administration so evidently Bubba thought it was fair.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ringer
Date: 04 Jan 06 - 06:27 AM

Ron Davies, 01 Jan 06 - 09:41 PM : "...all the UN critics have somehow not found time to answer whether they think the world would be better off without the UN--and why"

Do try and keep up, Ron; in my post of 30 Dec 05 - 07:26 AM I said that I do, and gave 5 reasons.

My only qualification was that the world would be better off without the UN in its current form. As someone else said, above, "Nice idea, shame about the reality." The trouble is, all trans-national entities (without exception) such as the UN, EU, WTO etc sound good in theory but are abysmal in practice. And always will be, I guess. Which is not to say that nothing they do is ever good, only that on balance they do more harm than good.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: open mike
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 07:19 AM

i just saw a t.v. show (on link t.v.) about a fellow who
worked with world leaders, Nobel peace prize recipients
and others to get the UN to declare a universal day of
cease fire. unfortunately the ceremony to announce this
day of peace was interrupted by the sept. 11, 2001 events.
the gathering to commemorate it was being held outside the
U.N. building as the trade towers were hit, and the UN
ceremony was disbanded. The day of cease fire was set at
Sept. 21 each year, which is the day the UN convenes , i
think.
http://www.worldlinktv.org/
www.worldlinktv.org/programming/programDescription.php4?code=peaceoneday
http://www.peaceoneday.org/

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 05:40 AM

El Greko,

Thank you for your comments.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 05:37 AM

Rin,

"BB, Ringer, and other giant intellects criticizing the UN------"

Only compared to some of the comments being made by you.





"5) BB et al.---with your customary razor-sharp logic, you have managed to miss the point---again.   Well done. Good job. I'm not risking my life to bring progress to the Mideast. But I'm also not criticizing the UN, which has members now doing exactly that.

Frustrated, impotent people--pun not aimed at you, BB--- criticize those who help."


Ron, I see you criticising the US all the time, yet YOU are not risking your life...




"6) BB---Cut and paste , when accompanied by thinking, is acceptable. You unfortunately fall down on the last part. "


Care to give any examples, or are you claiming that bring up a point for discussuion, to hear OTHER points of view, is NOT worthwhile?


Have a good new year.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 02:20 AM

Yes, War, I agree. The U.N. would function much better if the U.S. paid their debts and supported the U.N. In fact, if the U.S. (Canada, too) were more functional, the U.N. would also be more functional. Lets face it, most nations are slightly dysfunctional - it is hoped that by uniting, they might be a little more functional as a whole.

The U.N. is our best hope and continues to play the role of peacekeeper, world-wide. They are limited only by their resources and the support they receive.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,War
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 10:05 PM

I think we would be better off with a functioning UN

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 09:43 PM

True, Ron. The year is young.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 09:41 PM

Interesting that all the UN critics have somehow not found time to answer whether they think the world would be better off without the UN--and why.

Well, let's give them a little more time.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 04:04 PM

Peace as a condition of a group, whether company or nation, requires the eternal alertness and agility to create new answers in the flow of changing times. It requires management skills, PR skills, deft administration, good justice, smart financial insight and good economics.

It is unfortunate that our Administration lacks so many of these. Even their PR is constantly being compromised by its incessant dupicity.

But given some degree of these abilities, war is not necessary. If they are used to head situations off before they explode, it will be unusual.

Where it isn't, you can find glaring failures in the integrity and ability of leaders to maintain that alertness and those skills.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 03:34 PM

6--

Would you prefer no UN?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 10:20 AM

Peace is not the ultimate goal for me, not by itself. It does not satisfy hunger, or correct injustice, or make up for loss of human rights.

Neither is "statistical peace" (better than xxx, smaller percentage of the world involved in armed conflict etc) absolute peace. "We have peace" is an absolute statement that implies no conflict anywhere - and we are a long way from that today.

But above all, peace without freedom (however one wants to define this) is a beautifully wrapped present that contains nothing.

So - no, I do not feel that we are entering 2006 in any better state as a species.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: number 6
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:59 AM

The UN .... fantastic, great idea ... to bad it didn't work out.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:56 AM

But, I know where to get some. LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Jihadist
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:54 AM

Well in that case keep on talking your anarchist bullshit, I am with you brother.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:43 AM

Have no weapons. Haven't felt the need.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Jihadist
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:40 AM

What's wrong? Has the tide of war turned against you? How's your weapons stash?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:15 AM

You sure?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Jihadist
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:14 AM

No shit

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:55 PM

No shit!

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST,Jihadist
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:54 PM

Better shut up. NSA is listening.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:06 PM

I would imagine anything to do with the US Government on the www has cookies for everyone who visits. Lotsa cookies.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:03 PM

Do they have cookies?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 10:18 PM

Office of Global Communications (OGC)

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 10:08 PM

BB, Ringer, and other giant intellects criticizing the UN------


1) Please point out to me where I said the UN was perfect. It's even possible--perish the thought---that the current US administration has room for improvement.



2) Did the UN function as honest broker in Iraq, --do I have to explain what that is?-- thus making possible an Iraqi face on the opposition to the insurgency?

Yes or no?



It was asked to do so, by the way by the Bush regime, which desperately needed its chestnuts hauled out of the fire---and before November 2004.)




3) Is the UN now conducting an investigation of Harari's death--and facing death threats as a result?

Yes or no?



4) If my hypothesis as to Bush's 2004 election is wrong, exactly why?



5) BB et al.---with your customary razor-sharp logic, you have managed to miss the point---again.   Well done. Good job. I'm not risking my life to bring progress to the Mideast. But I'm also not criticizing the UN, which has members now doing exactly that.

Frustrated, impotent people--pun not aimed at you, BB--- criticize those who help.


6) BB---Cut and paste , when accompanied by thinking, is acceptable. You unfortunately fall down on the last part.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 06:27 PM

I think Canada might have had something to do with the UN vote that 'ratified' the State of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Once Famous
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 05:57 PM

True, there wouldn't be an Israel if not for the UN. What a stupid statement. There wouldn't be an Israel if not for the holocaust, either.

The UN has outlived it's usefullness in most respects for the U.S. Go have another cup of Koffe or something.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 04:02 PM

Martin, there wouldn't even be an Israel if it weren't for the U.N.

According to UN resolution 181 (1947) the Palestinian Arabs (70% of the population) who owned 92% of the land, were allocated 47% of the country.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!

Yes, some decisions have been misguided and sometimes the UN has lacked the resources needed to prevent atrocities but all in all, the UN has done more to promote peace than any other organization.

You would rather the U.S. accept responsibility for world peace?

World peace will never be accomplished by the U.S. warmongers.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Once Famous
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:39 AM

Excellent statement, Ringer. Most thoughtful and couragous post here.

In other words, the UN sucks, and we know it. We tried with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:17 AM

Our personal 'Peace' depends solely on our attitude to God and Jesus.
We all however have our own choices so please make yours.......Best wishes anyway. Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ringer
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 07:26 AM

How can anyone take the UN seriously?

• It is answerable to nobody.
• It is impotent.
• It is corrupt. Its Secretary General is implicated in the oil-for-food scandal via his son, Kojo. He provides no answers to questions such as "What happened to the Mercedes?" but blusters, calling the enquiring journalist "cheeky" and "an overgrown schoolboy" for even posing the question. Neither Kofi Annan, his aide Lamin Sise, nor his assistan Wagaye Assebe, can recall what happened, and the original documents have disappeared -- what a surprise!
• It gives murderous states such as Sudan and Zimbabwe equal weight to the world's democracies.
• Its personnel, supposedly on humanitarian missions, are accused of buying sex with the food they were distributing.

The world would be a better place without the UN in its current form.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 06:51 AM

"RAMADI, Iraq -- U.S. Marine airstrikes targeting insurgents sheltering in Iraqi residential neighborhoods are killing civilians as well as guerrillas along the Euphrates River in far western Iraq, according to Iraqi townspeople and officials and the U.S. military.

Just how many civilians have been killed is strongly disputed by the Marines and, some critics say, too little investigated. But townspeople, tribal leaders, medical workers and accounts from witnesses at the sites of clashes, at hospitals and at graveyards indicated that scores of noncombatants were killed last month in fighting, including airstrikes, in the opening stages of a 17-day U.S.-Iraqi offensive in Anbar province.

"These people died silently, complaining to God of a guilt they did not commit," Zahid Mohammed Rawi, a physician, said in the town of Husaybah. Rawi said that roughly one week into Operation Steel Curtain, which began on Nov. 5, medical workers had recorded 97 civilians killed. At least 38 insurgents were also killed in the offensive's early days, Rawi said."



Ron,

"I haven't noticed you laying your life on the line for Mideast progress."

Nor have you. If that is the criteria you insist on, who here is even entitled to talk about the issue?




"It would be good if you developed another skill than copy-pasting---to pick a purely theoretical suggestion-----how about thinking? "

So, anyone who does not agree with you is not thinking? Seems ad hominim to me- I guess you really DON'T have any information that would contribute to the discussion.



Let me see- If I state my opinion, I am criticised for not having sources. When I state sources, I am criticised for "cut and paste".

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 05:15 AM

michaelr,

Try reading what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.


"US military spokesman Major Christopher West said they had acted on information that a suspected terrorist was at a house near the city of Ghazni.

Ground forces later found the body of the intended target along with those of the children nearby, he said. "


I will not deny that there have been mistakes in targeting- But which side is it that TARGETS innocent civilian ON PURPOSE?



...blow up children's birthday parties KNOWING there are only innocent civilians present.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Dec 05 - 10:40 PM

BB-

"the UN's pointless posturing on the issue of the Middle East"--wrong, as usual .

In fact there is more than one "issue of the Middle East" even if you are not aware of this.

As I have pointed out more times than once, starting in spring 2004, without UN participation there would have very likely been no Iraq government at all by now. The UN's willingness to be honest broker between the various antagonistic Iraqi factions is what made possible an Iraqi face on the opposition to the insurgency.

And have you thanked the UN yet today for Bush's 2004 election? I suspect not.

Also, pray tell, who is investigating the murders of Lebanese politicians--fingering Syria?

In fact, per the Wall St. Journal today (29 Dec 2005) "A pro-Syria group threatens to kill the head of a UN probe of the Harari killing in Lebanon".

I haven't noticed you laying your life on the line for Mideast progress.

And who has just certified the recent Iraq election as fair?--again the UN.

Last time I checked, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq were all considered in the Mideast.

It would be good if you developed another skill than copy-pasting---to pick a purely theoretical suggestion-----how about thinking?

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: michaelr
Date: 29 Dec 05 - 04:18 PM

one

two

three

Plenty more to be found, if you bother to look.

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Dec 05 - 03:10 AM

robomatice - Good point!

"I'm more in favor of having the United States participate and engage with and in the UN more rather than less."

Thats when I felt the safest!

Subject: RE: BS: Peace?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Dec 05 - 01:17 AM

Blogs and Geocities sites are not considered reputable sources when refuting someone else's argument," BB.