Continued from page 1

U.N. supporters say that when the candidates bash the world organization, they are simply playing to the most conservative Republicans: the primary voters and caucus-goers needed early in the electoral contest.

“My sense is that if any of them were to be elected president, they would quickly realize that the U.N. serves American interests,” said Peter Yeo, vice president for public policy of the U.N. Foundation, a nonprofit organization that supports the world body’s work.

“They would find a way to constructively work within the U.N. system,” Yeo added.

Detractors say that the candidates are just being truthful.

“I wouldn’t call it U.N. bashing; I’d call it U.N. realism,” said Bolton. “I think the issue for the United States is what to do to make the U.N. more effective, and the answer to that has to lie in how it is funded.”

Contributions to the U.N.’s regular budget are assessed on a scale based primarily on a country’s ability to pay. Additional contributions to U.N. entities such as the children’s agency UNICEF are voluntary.

The U.S. assessment is the highest — 22 percent of the total U.N. operating budget. By comparison, China pays 3 percent.

In the 2010 budget year, the U.S. provided $7.7 billion to the U.N. for its regular budget, peacekeeping and other programs, up from $6.1 billion the previous year.

House Republicans recently introduced legislation to force the U.N. to adopt a voluntary funding system. The administration opposes it and it is unlikely to become law.



U.N. Foundation: