U.S. Funding for United Nations

The Times’ editorial on the congressionally caused (and with many members, plainly intended) imminent bankruptcy of the United Nations (Feb. 12) overlooked the fact that the U.N. has been adopting reforms--eight zero-growth budgets in a row, a current budget 5% smaller with $92 million worth of programs eliminated and $36 million in efficiency measures, an inspector general to combat fraud and waste, a 25% reduction of high-level posts. But reforms are unlikely to take full effect in an organization paralyzed by financial instability.

The United Nations Assn. of the U.S.A. (UNA-USA) recognizes that withholding funds may have provided the shock that galvanized the U.N. into reforming itself. But the reform process is underway. The U.N. believed that the U.S. would come across with its money as reform progressed. Instead, the United States has proved itself incapable of honoring its commitment to restore funding in return for reform. In ratifying the U.N. Charter, every member state assented in law to the financial obligations of U.N. membership (which comes out, per capita, to $7 for each American as opposed to almost $1,000 to the Pentagon.)

America’s leaders must recommit this nation to full and timely payment of assessed contributions, including prompt retirement of the $1.2 billion in arrears, should press for assessment scales that fairly reflect nations’ capacity to pay, and, if they have to withhold, do so only on a selective basis (as opposed to these wildly indiscriminate and politically motivated cuts, and others being contemplated).

JOHN W. OSBORN JR.

Member, Board of Directors

Orange Co. Chapter, UNA-USA