The United Nations In Submission

By: Leroy A. Binns Ph.D.

The United Nations was created following World War II in 1945 with the intent to maintain world peace, develop resourceful relations among nations and encourage respect for human rights. Unlike its predecessor the League of Nations which was short lived (1920-1946) and had a membership of only sixty states the UN is an alliance of 190 countries plus political entities most notably Vatican City and the Palestinian Liberation Organization that has been in existence for the past fifty seven years.

In the past this body has established a record of good fortune. In contrast to the League of Nations which demonstrated incompetence to oppose aggression by Japan and Germany in the 1930s resulting in the commencement of World war II and ultimately its demise, its successor’s success includes the withdrawal of Soviet troops from the Azerbaijan province, the removal of French servicemen from Syria and Lebanon and the prevention of North Korea’s invasion of South Korea. In addition UN cooperation is also partly responsible for the disposition of Italian colonies and the independence of Indonesia and Israel.

By the early 1970s multilateral collaboration at times was substituted with fragmentation as American disenchantment grew regarding the adoption of a left wing philosophy at the UN. The nonaligned developing countries gained the sympathy of the Soviet Union and waged an ideological and tactical campaign undercutting the influence of the United States in the General Assembly. In response to anti-imperialist overtones American frustration likewise involved its financial obligations which it sought to cap via the Kassebaum-Solomon Amendment of 1985 at 20% of the UN’s annual contribution. Nonetheless the tables turned with the momentous collapse of the Soviet Union and the communist Bloc during the 1990s enabling the United States to reverse the socialist trend and as the world’s lone superpower re-invent the organization’s agenda to articulate its foreign policy.

The following are reflections of catastrophes under US direction of the UN

Somalia

In 1991 the world organization failed to capitalize on the opportunity presented by the Egyptian and Italian governments to mediate peace between the warring factions. Besides the government of Djibouti in its 1991 reconciliation meeting also requested the support of the UN but such efforts were futile.

The establishment’s inability to define collective decisions in relation to issues of intervention versus sovereignty included the deployment of a peace keeping force lacking the size and readiness to secure and effect a cease fire and the efficient flow of aid.

Burundi

Upon request the UN refused to provide a large security contingent to protect the government and restore order. With Somalia serving as a constant reminder of the death of eighteen US soldiers there was anxiety of heavy casualties in Burundi. Instead the UN favored limited responsibilities thus encouraging the deployment of inexperienced OAU troops to crush the debacle.

Rwanda

Despite support for action by America’s ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright, State Department African Bureau head ambassador George Moose and the Bureau’s Central Africa office representative Arlene Render made a disingenuous decision. The US disregarded its obligation to the UN by vehemently opposing the use of UN personnel in Rwanda in favor of ill-prepared OAU troops. Uncooperative behavior attributed to US action within the UN likewise includes voting to reduce UNAMIR, postponing the voting process required to approve UNMIR II and reneging on promises to supply equipment to the OAU on the battlefield.

Bosnia

The United States circumvented the issue by threatening air strikes at the expense of European ground troops. In fact the UN sponsored trade sanctions against the Serbs and the implementation of an arms embargo to curtail the Moslems overlooked the plight of the latter and encouraged a domestic insurgence. In the end the UN was ill equipped to protect designated safe havens.

Many observers are of the opinion that the federation that climaxed at approximately 80,000 employees (excluding consultants and military personnel) in 1993 lacks proper management and therefore succumbs to inefficiency, unwieldy bureaucracy and redundant programs within its many existing agencies. A New York Times report published in early 1996 underscored anecdotal evidence.

The UN Children’s Fund lost close to $10 million due to mismanagement in Kenya

Nearly $497,000 was allocated for a two-week conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Development states in Barbados of which $15,000 was subtracted for flying expenses of an unrelated national liberation movement, Polisaro from Western Sahara.

In Somali $4 million in cash was stolen from the UN headquarters and $369,000 was paid to a contractor for the services of fuel distribution which were never rendered.

A project director for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency deposited $100,000 of the outfit’s money to his private account. Furthermore his dishonesty entailed failure to disclose a personal stake in the irrigation project in progress.

In Nairobi a staff member of the United Nations Center for Human Settlements arranged loans worth $98,000 for a company in which she had a partner and close association with its director.

A New York travel assistant working for the special commission that supervises the dismantling of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program misappropriated $28,000 in traveler’s checks.

Nevertheless its inability to address peacekeeping efforts is largely ascribed to budgetary restrictions and conditional leadership. In 1995 the Under Secretary General of the UN Joseph Connor mindful of the need to acquire an annual budget of over $3.3 billion disclosed the state of fiscal affairs by revealing that over 116 member states were in arrears to the tune of $2.3 billion. Two years later the debt rose beyond $3 billion of which the American government was held accountable $1.5 billion.

A Partial Chronology of the UN’s Financial Crisis in 1998

July, 1998

The UN’s peacekeeping budget was $1 billion (a third of 1993)

The US peacekeeping contribution was $23 million (a shortfall of $72 million)

October, 1998

Congress fails to earmark funding to reduce its debt of $1.6 billion to the UN

November, 1998

US payments to regular and peacekeeping budgets amounted to $586 million but its balance was $1.28 billion

The UN’s budget deficit for the year in question was estimated at $50 million

To date UN’s concessions to Washington which endorsed a reduction in security contribution to 25% by 2004 and the White House sponsorship of disbursement of $1 billion in 1999 have been in conflict with Republican maneuvers within Congress spearheaded by Senator Jesse Helms and a transition in presidential leadership thus precipitating the curtailment or termination of operations at the UN.

Contrary to conventional wisdom America’s deportment on dominion took precedence over humanitarianism in response to widespread bloodshed in Somalia, Burundi, Rwanda and Bosnia and instigated a debate concerning the relevance of US led UN military exercises. Condemnation of US inaction was appropriately aired by the outgoing Secretary General Boutrous Boutrous-Ghali who said, “When the United Nations was allowed to do its job without substantial US involvement as in Mozambique the operation succeeded. But when the United States wanted to appear actively involved while in reality avoiding hard decisions as in Bosnia, Somali, Rwanda and Burundi the United Nations was misused, abused or blamed by the United States and the operations failed tragically and horribly.”

As the UN remains at the mercy of the United States it duplicates US foreign policy. Under its aegis sovereignty and likened proclamations namely UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 of 1967 and 1973 respectively and the Oslo Accords initiated in 1993 in favor of Israeli return of Palestinian territory are ignored and UN sanctions against Libya and Iraq are sustained in attempts to destabilize the Gadafi and Hussein regimes. Such flagrant transgressions solicit a response to an inquiry posed by Denis Halliday, a former humanitarian coordinator, “Why should the Iraqis comply with the carrot of suspension when they know the bottom line for Washington is not military disarmament but the removal of Saddam Hussein?”

In this rapidly changing environment an unbiased UN is required to fulfill the mission of peace and social justice. To this end the elevation of Germany and Japan to the Security Council, an increase in donations from affluent nations, a surcharge on international airline tickets or fee on foreign currency exchange estimated in excess of $1.5 billion per day and lean and proficient management void of unwarranted cost and service would aid in restoring credibility to an institution of ideals.