Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Helms-Biden Bill Imposes Harsh Payback (June 17, 1997) News Bulletin (June 17, 1997)
Helms-Biden Bill Imposes Harsh Payback Conditions
The United States Senate today passed a finance bill that cuts US funding appropriations to the UN, sets new conditions on that funding and imposes extensive conditions on future payments of arrears due to the United Nations. The bill passed by a vote of 90-5. Earlier in the day, the Senate defeated an important amendment that would have provided an unconditional payback by a vote of 73-25. The amendment, offered by Indiana Republican Richard Lugar, proposed to pay $819 million of arrears over two years -- an amount that the United States says it now owes the UN in arrears. According to UN reckoning, the US owes over $1.7 billion for current and past assessments, plus assessments owed to other UN agencies.The Clinton administration did not support the Lugar payback amendment and instead gave its support to the Helms-Biden bill. As Sen. Biden announced, the administration "has signed off on every element of this un package and supports the proposal." Had the administration given its full backing to Lugar and his largely-Democrat backers, it is possible that the amendment would have passed. But the UN payback plan was part of complex budget negotiations between the White House and Capitol Hill and it suffered from the Clinton administration's delicate relations with Sen. Jesse Helms, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the administration's longstanding reluctance to take a strong position in defense of the UN.
The Senate bill places an unprecedented number of conditions on the payback of arrears, slated to be paid off in fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000. Over three dozen conditions are named. Calling for "certifications" from the administration, these conditions are seen by UN officials as unrealistic or requiring the assent of the UN's other member states.
The House of Representatives version of the finance bill does not contain language about UN reform. Observers on Capital Hill expect that when the two versions of the bill are reconciled in conference, the Senate's language will be adopted in the final version.
In the Senate debate, Sen. Lugar said that member states of the UN would interpret US actions as those of "a bully, as a country operating totally outside international norms, as a country that did not recognize its obligations." Sen. John Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island said "we should simply pay our dues and move on." Sen. Biden, the bill's co-sponsor, admitted in debate that he was not comfortable with the way the bill was framed. "I would like to pay the arrears, not make it conditional and negotiate our dues because this is a little bit heavy handed," Biden said, "but I am a realist . . . I recognize that no plan to pay our UN arrearages can get through a Republican-controlled Congress without some of the conditions that are on here."
But the Republican leadership stated clearly its views that only harsh conditions would force reform on the UN. Minnesota Republican Senator Rod Grams said "I believe the UN needs the discipline of actual benchmarks tied to the arrears to provide the imputus for fundamental change." On the matter of whether or not the full payment is a treaty obligation, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee report commented that the UN Charter does not create a "legal obligation" on the US Congress to authorize and appropriate the assessment sums as determined by the UN.
The Senate bill authorizes only $200 million in peacekeeping for FY1998, which pays for the UN's 1997 budget year. This obviously places a very low ceiling on UN peacekeeping operations, which according to UN formulas are funded 31% by US peacekeeping assessments.
Coming only a month before the expected announcement of Secretary General Annan's major statement on UN reform, the draconian Senate action is likely to further complicate and empoison the reform atmosphere at the UN. Whatever the outcome of the reform proposals, it seems certain that the future of the UN remains hobbled by conservative forces in the United States.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C ß 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
