U.S. policy toward the United Nations has recently been wrapped in demands for its reform, and that is likely to continue. Retiring Secretary General Kofi Annan made institutional reform a goal of his administration, but frequently clashed with official Washington over the ways and means of doing so. Suggestions from the United States tend to sound like super-power demands, upsetting other member states who have ideas of their own. Unfortunately, "demands" are too often our approach to all international relations, and that is not a tactic that promises much cooperation. The rest of the world is tired of being lectured to by the United States on how it should behave, and there is rebellion in the air.
Uzbekistan RPCV John Smart writes: Where do U.S.-UN relations now stand?
Where do U.S.-UN relations now stand?
A commentary by John Smart
The Daily Press
Monday, December 04th, 2006 10:52:01 AM
To those of us who consider ourselves to be internationalists, the prospect of Democratic Party control of the U.S. Congress poses some tantalizing possibilities.
To be sure, George W. Bush will be the president for two more years, and his ability to wage war, among other things, will not be severely impaired. Unfortunately, he seems to be as intransigent as ever, despite his public relations overtures to incoming Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid.
For example, he re-nominated John Bolton to be our ambassador to the United Nations, even though it should be clear to everyone that Bolton is not the person for that sensitive position, and there is no liklihood of his confirmation anyway.
The talk around Washington is that the president would be wise to abandon Bolton and nominate the widely respected Representative Jim Leach, R-Iowa, who just lost his bid for re-election in the Democratic sweep. The Senate would likely be well disposed to confirm him.
Another question to be re-examined is the United States' support, or lack of support, for the UN Millennium Development Goals, a set of eight goals that the 191 member states vowed in 2000 to make every attempt to achieve within 15 years. They range from the eradication of poverty, hunger and HIV/AIDS to reducing child mortality, promoting maternal health and gender equality and ensuring environmental sustainability.
While the United States does give large amounts of foreign aid, it is nowhere near the .7 percent of GNP that was promised. And, at the World Summit in September of 2005, Ambassador Bolton tried to push through a series of amendments to the Goals that would have significantly weakened their thrust. He even tried, for some arcane reason, to get the UN to scrap the use of the word millennium! Due to the weight that the United States carries in the UN, some of his amendments did pass, but fortunately he was unable to do as much damage as he sought to do.
Why is another question: it almost seemed like the Bush administration went out of its way to obviate anything that was accomplished during the preceeding Clinton administration, like the Millennium Goals and the Kyoto Accords. I suspect that psychologists would have a good time with that!
The Democratic congress will now, of course, have much to say on foreign policy. Representative Tom Lantos, D-Calif., will be the new chairman of the House International Relations Committee, and our own Dave Obey, D-Wis., will chair the Appropriations Committee. They have both expressed considerable support in the past for international institutions, and will have much control over policy and what gets funded.
Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the new Speaker of the House, has a long history of supporting programs like the UN Children's Fund, the Population Fund and the UN Development Program, among others.
Senator Joe Biden, D-Dela., will take over the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which should guarantee that we will again catch up with our arrears payments to the United Nations. Back in the 90s, Biden was responsible for legislation pushing payment of nearly $1 billion in UN back dues and assessments left over from the Reagan-Bush years. There are those who would starve the UN to death by withholding U.S. payments, and this congress should correct that.
Biden is also on record as opposing the existing 25 percent cap put on U.S. expenditures for UN dues and peacekeeping operations by the congress. The current assessment is over 27 percent, and the legislative cap may be preventing us from being involved in quelling the horrific crisis in Darfur. UN assessments are based on ability to pay (like the progressive income tax), on the size and strength of a nation's economy, so ours is, logically, the highest. We do contribute more to the UN than any other nation, and that seems appropriate. We can afford it, or should be able to.
The election of the new United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon of South Korea, also challenges the United States to a reassessment of our policy toward the world body. Mr. Ban is expected to make an official call on President Bush and congressional leaders soon after he takes office the first of the year.
U.S. policy toward the United Nations has recently been wrapped in demands for its reform, and that is likely to continue. Retiring Secretary General Kofi Annan made institutional reform a goal of his administration, but frequently clashed with official Washington over the ways and means of doing so. Suggestions from the United States tend to sound like super-power demands, upsetting other member states who have ideas of their own.
Unfortunately, "demands" are too often our approach to all international relations, and that is not a tactic that promises much cooperation. The rest of the world is tired of being lectured to by the United States on how it should behave, and there is rebellion in the air.
Secretary General-Elect Ban is a seasoned diplomat, most recently the South Korean foreign minister, and speculation abounds as to how well he'll be able to handle the United States, the elephant in the world's room.
The new congress should provide a much-needed leveling influence. It is hoped that moderate Republicans, the few that have survived, will work in cooperation with Democrats to move this agenda. The UN can and should be a world forum and a means of putting an end to the genocidal ugliness happening in Darfur, and helping us deal with the raging civil war in Iraq, to name but two of many international issues before us. The UN is not the problem, but it could be the solution.
John Smart, of Park Falls, is a member of the Wisconsin Governor's Commission on the United Nations, the UN Association of the USA and Citizens for Global Solutions. He was a Peace Corps volunteer in Uzbekistan from 1995 through 1998 and chairs the Democratic Party of Price County.
