|
House Mulls UN Reform
As this is an international forum, I thought this would be an interesting topic of discussion. UN Reform.
The House International Relations Committee passed out of Committee two weeks ago the Henry Hyde UN Reform Act of 2005, which lays out 39 areas of reform that the United States proposes to mandate. If the UN doesn't enact all 39 of these exact reforms by FY 2007, then this law will mandate the reduction of US funding to the UN by 50%. Since the US donates roughly 20% of the funding to the UN, this move would reduce overall funding to the UN by 10% or so.
Most of the reforms contained in the Act are funding-related or appropriations-related. Since according to UN by-laws, any money-related reforms of the United Nations must be agreed to unanimously by each member state of the GA, unless every single country in the world (yes, including North Korea, Syria, and Iran) agrees to the particular reforms submitted by Mr. Hyde of Illinois, the UN will face a 10% reduction in funding.
There have been several amendments proposed that would lower how much funding would be reduced but to the best of my knowledge none have been adapted (the Democrat alternative, making the funding reduction optional and not a mandate, failed by one vote in Committee).
Anyway, it seems that Republicans in the House have proposed a law that in essence would doom the UN to operating on a much lower budget. Is this the first step in a piece-meal dismantlement of the UN, or US withdrawal from the UN?
And here's the kicker. The law would also mandate a US veto to any further peace-keeping operations funded by the UN. So if Rwanda or somewhere else flairs up again in 2007, and there is no current peacekeeping operation undergoing in that country, poor beans, the US is vetoing it, so no one will be allowed to help.
I don't think it has a real chance in the Senate, where more moderate tempers seem to have some say in things. But the Republicans are energized by the seeming possibility of enacting real damage on the UN, a body they have continued to villainize for some time. However, it's an interesting choice of villains. Republicans focus on the GA for most of their voiced concerns. However, the GA composes less than 5% of overall UN funding. Most of the funding goes into bodies like the WHO, UNICEF, etc., programs that I don't think anyone can make the allegations that they are 'evil' or overtly 'anti-US' like those that Republicans continue to make.
UN reform may be needed. But I'm under the impression that international organizations probably shouldn't be reformed unilaterally. That may just lead to a few more problems.
Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8259559/
The money quote:
“I can’t believe that when our men and women are fighting in Iraq, that we would move forward with legislation like this when we need to draw countries together,” said Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., who cosponsored the Lantos alternative.
___________________
|
