United Nations Association – USA Annual Meeting

In an address delivered in New York on June 6, United Nations Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown critiqued U.S. policy towards the UN in his speech “Power and Super-Power: Global Leadership in the Twenty-First Century.” The Deputy Secretary challenged the United States to sustain “inside-the-tent diplomacy at the UN” and to drop its attitude of “take it or leave it,” as well as its “red-line demands thrown in without debate and engagement.”

The next day, as if on cue, the United Nations Association of the United States of America commenced its annual meeting in Washington, D.C. First on the agenda, members met with elected officials on Capitol Hill to discuss US-UN relations, oversight and accountability, voting records, and proposed legislation. Next, members convened for three days of issue sessions. Experts, such as Dr. Joxel Garcia, Mark Lagon, Ambassador William H. Luers, Dr. Johanna Mendelson, and Ruth Wedgwood, spoke on the challenges facing the UN and the world, including UN reform, global health, the future of nuclear weapons, and international law.

Photo

Day on Capitol Hill

UNA-USA chapter members from across the United States met in Senate and House offices of the 109th Congress for spirited dialogue and presentations to champion and ask support for a three-prong agenda on Capitol Hill: 1) UN funding, 2) UN reform, and 3) Millennium Development Goals.

Senator Paul Sarbanes and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mark Lagon gave remarks at the lunch briefing, which I only partly heard due to the scheduling of various office visits. At the end of the day, Representative Betty McCollum reflected on UN Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown’s speech, calling it a “brave” and “accurate” speech.

During the rest of the day, chapter members divided into constituent groups for scheduled appointments with Congressional members and their legislative aids. Generally, the discussions were straightforward and productive, including in the offices of Senator Norm Coleman, a co-sponsor of legislation to withhold UN funding, and Representative Sam Farr, a supporter of US-UN cooperation to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Chapter members also had cordial visits in the offices of Senator Hillary Clinton, a supporter of legislation for a stronger response to the genocide of Darfur, and Representative Cathy McMorris, a supporter of UN reform through the restricting of mandatory funding.

1. UN Funding

UNA-USA advocates for constructive engagement through adequate financing of the UN’s regular and peacekeeping budgets. Accordingly, the organization opposes any legislation that would prevent the U.S. from meeting these mandatory financial obligations to the U.N.

• Funding the Regular Budget
UN member states fund the regular budget of the UN through mandatory UN dues, also known as assessed contributions. The budget covers the regular activities, staff, and infrastructure of the UN. Under Article 17 of the UN Charter, the General Assembly determines the scale of assessment based on the capacity to pay, which broadly considers a countries share of the world’s economy, national economic indicators, and other factors.

In 1973, the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly established both a floor and a ceiling. The least developed countries pay .001%, which amounted to a minimum of $17,795 per country in 2005. At the high end, the Fifth Committee established a maximum assessment of 25% beginning in 1974 and reduced it to 22% in 2001.

The United States, the only country affected by the maximum, pays a discounted rate of 22% while accounting for 34% of the world’s economy. The U.S. negotiated the maximum rate based on a firm commitment to pay its longstanding debt.

Assessed Member State Contributions to the UN Regular Budget in 2005

Country	Percent*	Total $
United States	22.00%	$439,611,612
Japan	19.40%	$346,434,802
Germany	8.66%	$154,141,065
United Kingdom	6.13%	$109,030,513
France	6.03%	$107,304,389
Italy	4.89%	$ 86,929,012
Canada	2.81%	$ 50,057,586
Spain	2.52%	$ 44,843,626
China	2.05%	$ 36,533,318
Mexico	1.88%	$ 33,508,154
181 Other Countries	23.56%	$491,605,923**
TOTAL	100%	$1,900,000,000**
Source: United Nations, 22 December 2005 * Percent of UN Budget. UN General Information ** Estimated. UN General Information

UN Charter – Article 17
1. The General Assembly shall consider and approve the budget of the Organization.

2. The expenses of the Organization shall be borne by the Members as apportioned by the General Assembly.

3. The General Assembly shall consider and approve any financial and budgetary arrangements with specialized agencies referred to in Article 57 and shall examine the administrative budgets of such specialized agencies with a view to making recommendations to the agencies concerned.

• Funding the Peacekeeping Budget
The UN Charter also requires countries to pay peacekeeping contributions in fulfillment of the member states’ collective responsibility to maintain international peace and security under Article I. Peacekeeping assessments are based on the scale of assessed contributions to the regular UN budget, national economic factors, and peacekeeping authorizing power. The permanent members of the UN Security Council, which yield veto power over peacekeeping missions, pay additional contributions to compensate for less economically developed countries.

The U.S. unilaterally caps its contribution at 25% when the UN assessed level is 27%. For historical background on the U.S. cap, see Section 404(b)(2) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) and President Clinton’s signing statement for his opposition to the cap and concern about potential treaty violations. Without Congressional authorization to spend more than 25%, the U.S. will continue to accrue new arrears.

• Contributing Voluntary Funds
In addition to mandatory dues and peacekeeping budgets, UN member states are asked to contribute voluntary funds for certain programs, such as UNICEF, the UN Development Programme, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and the UN World Food Programme. While legislative assaults to voluntary funds, through reduced overall funding in appropriations bills, are expected in the upcoming Congressional session, they were not the primary focus of the day’s lobbying.

2. UN Reform: Opposition to Withholding Funds

At the lunch briefing, Senator Paul Sarbanes identified one of the greatest challenges on Capitol Hill in the next few months to be the legislation requiring the withholding of mandatory UN dues based on UN reform. In 2005, two bills to withhold UN funds were introduced in Congress, one in the House of Representatives and one in the Senate. Both permit the withholding of mandatory dues to the UN but differ on which branch of government gets to make the decision.

• House Legislation
The House bill, known as the Henry J. Hyde United Nations Reform Act of 2005 (H.R. 2745), requires Congress to withhold UN funding, pursuant to Congress’ budgetary powers under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, unless 32 of 40 UN reforms specified in the bill are implemented by 2007. The State Department opposed the bill in testimony before the House Committee on International Relations. The House bill passed by a vote of 221-184, with the support of 213 Republicans and 8 Democrats (Barrow, Berkley, Costello, Green, Marshall, McIntyre, Mollohan, and Taylor).

• Senate Legislation
In contrast, the Senate bill (S.R. 1394) assigns discretionary budgetary power to withhold UN funds to the executive branch, deferring to the President’s constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs under Article II powers. The Senate Bill is consistent with the “unitary executive theory,” which argues for a single and consistent message on foreign relations as vested in the President. Critics of the bill question the purpose and need for the legislation in the absence of a request from the President or U.S. Department of State.

• Alternative Proposals
Two alternative proposals, one advocated by House Democrats and one introduced by Senate Republicans, combine the reform benchmarks of the House bill with the Senate bill’s assignment of decision control to the Executive Branch.

House Democrats proposed “The Democratic Alternative,” which allows, but does not require, the Executive Branch to withhold 50% of mandatory dues upon failure by the UN to adopt 32 of the 40 reforms identified by Congress. The House proposal also creates a waiver for peacekeeping operations in the event that a new mission is “essential” to U.S. interests. Otherwise, the withholding of dues would prevent the U.S. from funding peacekeeping missions, even to prevent genocide.

Republican Senators Norm Coleman and Richard Lugar co-sponsored the United Nations Management, Personnel, and Policy Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1383). Like the Democratic Alternative, the Senate bill authorizes the Executive Branch to withhold 50% of U.S. contributions where the UN fails to meet reform target goals, as determined by the U.S. President. Withheld funds remain available to the President to authorize at a future time.

• Consequences of Non-payment
Opponents to any UN-withholding legislation argue that attempts by the U.S. to influence the UN through such funding mechanisms are counterproductive to U.S. interests, inefficient, and bad economics. One potential consequence of non-payment, under Article 19 of the UN Charter, is the inability to vote in the General Assembly if the amount in arrears equals or exceeds dues from the preceding two years. This sanction, if imposed, would undermine U.S. influence and credibility at the UN. Currently, nine countries in arrears cannot vote in the 60th session of the UN General Assembly. Furthermore, the U.S. risks alienating other nations from cooperating on urgent transborder issues, including terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, environmental degradation, drugs, and disease. Lastly, the U.S. benefits financially through cost-sharing with other nations, particularly on peacekeeping missions, and through the impact on U.S. corporations. In 2005, U.S. corporations benefited from more than 25 percent of UN Headquarters procurement and provided $527 million in goods and services to the UN.

UN Charter – Article 19
A Member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The General Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the Member.

3. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

The UN Millennium Development Goals served as the path of least political resistance and provided an easy opportunity to thank many members of Congress for supporting the UN.

The Senate unanimously adopted the International Cooperation to Meet the Millennium Development Goals Act of 2005 (S. 1315) sponsored by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Dick Lugar.

In the House, Representative Betty McCollum sponsored the Millennium Development Goals Resolution (H. Con. Res. 172), a concurrent resolution in support of sustained U.S. commitment to attain the MDGs by 2015. The resolution attracted 100 cosponsors. The concurrent resolution awaits further evaluation before the Committee on International Relations, which was across the hallway from the Gold Room of the Rayburn Office Building where Rep. McCollum addressed the open meeting of the UNA-USA board of directors at the end of the day. Even if the resolution moves forward, a concurrent resolution is not presented to the President and does not have the binding force of law.

Issue Sessions

Several of the powerpoint presentations are available online through the UNA-USA website.

Speakers who provided their presentations include:

Dr. Joxel Garcia, Deputy Director, Pan American Health Organization
Susan Fox, Program Manager, HERO Campaign, UNA-USA
Zach Hudson, Program Manager, Adopt-A-Minefield, UNA-USA
Steven Kull, Director, Program on International Policy Attitudes, University of Maryland
Laura Rogers, Vice President, Communications Consortium Media Center
Leonard Spector, Deputy Director, Center for Nonproleferation Studdies, Monterey Institute of International Studies
Sultana Ali, Vice Chair, UNA-USA YPIC Leadership Council; UNA-USA Greater Orlando Chapter
Stephanie Rossi, Communications Associate, UNA-USA
Leslie Elder, Senior Maternal & Child Health & Nutrition Advisor, FANTA Project, Academy for Educational Development
Dr. Sofialeticia Morales, Senior Advisor, MDGs and Health Targets, Pan American Health Organization

Resources

UNA-USA Annual Meeting Links

Comparative Viewpoints on US-UN Relations

United States Government

United Nations – Main “Organ” Bodies and Courts

United Nations Programs and Agencies