The United Nations (UN) has always liked portraying that they are the arbiters of morality to the entire world. They’ve never had a problem placing blame on the U.S. on more than one occasion for the Western way it handles its affairs — unless they need money.
According to France 24, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres arrives in Washington D.C. on Wednesday for talks on Thursday with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton. The talks are reportedly taking place so that Guterres can ask for more money from the U.S. to make up for the almost three-and-a-half percent cut in the UN’s peacekeeping budget that the U.S. said in December it will no longer pay.
France 24 reported:
The US, which is the number one financial contributor to the UN, said in December that it would cover no more than 25 percent of the UN's multi-billion-dollar peacekeeping budget, down from 28.47 percent[…]
On Thursday, the UN chief heads to Congress for meetings on the budget, hoping to make allies in his campaign to keep the world's peacekeeping operations afloat.
The US cost-cutting has created a hole of about $220 million in this year's $6.7 billion budget, but the shortfall has been compounded by arrears that have pushed peacekeeping finances further into the red.
When they need more money, the U.S. is a great place. The UN is comprised of 193 countries, and yet, the U.S. — even after cutting it’s contribution — still funds a quarter of the UN’s peacekeeping budget. If you divide the number of remaining countries by the percent left to fund the budget, each country would only have to contribute 2.56 percent compared to the U.S.’s 25 percent. Obviously, the smaller countries can't always provide their share of the expenses. But, there are enough wealthy countries in the world - that are members of the UN - who could easily come up with the difference.
How does the UN actually determine who pays what percentage?
France 24 also reported:
Peacekeeping financing is determined by a complicated formula that takes into account a country's wealth, whether or not it is a permanent Security Council member and other factors.
The permanent Council members, which have veto power, generally pay more than others.
Washington has been trying to convince several countries to reduce the special discounts allocated to them under this formula in order to cover the $220 million annually which it no longer wants to pay.
It has knocked on the doors of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Singapore, Brunei, Brazil, Mexico and India, but to no avail.
I would say the UN should hold their hands out somewhere else, but other countries don’t really seem interested in paying what the socialists love to call their “fair share.”