Wednesday, April 6, 2005


The Senate voted yesterday to reduce the United States’ share of the cost of U.N. peacekeeping missions by tens of millions of dollars.

The vote reflected congressional criticism of the United Nations amid accusations of corruption and mismanagement in the oil-for-food program for Iraq, sexual abuses by peacekeepers and other scandals.

U.S. dues are capped at 27.1 percent of the peacekeeping budget. Under a 1994 law, that cap will be reduced to 25 percent.

The Bush administration — with the support of Democrats — asked that the cap be maintained at 27.1 percent. A Democratic proposal to keep the higher cap was defeated in a 57-40 vote, mostly along party lines.

The United States is expected to spend about $1 billion on peacekeeping operations this year, with much of the money for activities in Sudan and Haiti. The administration is seeking about the same amount for next year.

If the cap were reduced, that could result in an estimated $75 million peacekeeping cut.

The vote came as an amendment to a bill authorizing $34 billion in spending on foreign aid and State Department operations for 2006. The figure generally reflects Mr. Bush’s spending request and is about 13 percent more than current spending.

Prospects for the overall bill becoming law are not clear. No foreign-aid authorization bill has been passed since 1985, according to Senate staff, largely because of disputes related to abortion policies and other issues. The funding for foreign aid has come from separate spending bills.

In arguing to allow the 25 percent cap to become law, Republican senators said this would strengthen the hand of US. diplomats as they negotiate the U.S. share of peacekeeping expenses and push for reforms at the United Nations.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, warned that if the Democratic proposal were adopted, “we will make that job more difficult by conceding our willingness to live with the status quo.”

But Delaware Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the 25 percent cap could lead to the United States’ falling behind in its U.N. dues, as it did in the 1990s. He said it would compound problems caused by Mr. Bush’s nomination of John R. Bolton, a sharp critic of the United Nations, to become the new U.N. ambassador, he said.

“The double whammy of sending Bolton to the U.N. and cutting our commitment … would be a very serious problem,” he said.

The House has not taken up its version of the bill. It is expected to include provisions calling for greater openness and other changes at the United Nations.

Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide

Sponsored Stories