U.S. Unpaid Dues Owed to U.N.

Re “There’s More Than Politics at Stake in Unpaid U.N. Dues,” Commentary, March 4:

It is reasonable that the United States honors its financial obligations to the United Nations. It is also reasonable that we use this as leverage to force reform of the U.N. bloated bureaucracy. What doesn’t seem reasonable is that the United States doesn’t charge the military costs incurred by the U.S. taxpayer that finance the muscle behind the diplomacy, of which the U.N. is so proud of, against the U.N. membership dues obligation.

Perhaps when the line items are compared it will be found that the U.N. actually should be paying us! The United Nations seems to be using America’s assets at no cost to itself.

LELAND P. HAMMERSCHMITT

Ojai

*

Richard Gardner correctly says, “If nations were free to treat their U.N. assessments as voluntary, the financial basis of the organization would quickly dissolve.” Yet, by failing to pay our debt of $1.4 billion, that is exactly the way the United States treats the U.N. This debt could easily be paid if Congress simply had the will to do so.

As U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has pointed out, “On a per capita basis (this $1.4 billion) represents less than $6 per American to repay a debt built up over a decade. . . . It is important to understand that most of the amount in question is owed . . . to countries which have provided troops to United Nations peacekeeping--most of them poor ones such as Bangladesh, Fiji and Tunisia. We can only reimburse them if countries like the United States pay up.”

Ironically, the U.S. government seeks the approval of the U.N. Security Council to bomb Iraq, but it virtually forfeits its U.N. membership by failing to observe a vital treaty obligation--to pay its dues. If the United States were a fully paid-up U.N. member, it might be better respected by the Security Council.

JAMES C. MOSLEY

Laguna Hills