Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, introduced an extreme bill (HR 2829) that holds UN funding, as well as U.S. leadership, prestige, and influence at the U.N., hostage if her outrageous demands aren't met. Ros-Lehtinen is willing to sacrifice the benefits of U.S. leadership at the UN right at a time when the U.S. is successfully promoting its national security and foreign policy priorities on the world stage.
This is not the first time Rep. Ros-Lehtinen has introduced extreme anti-UN legislation. But this time she has strategically timed the debate on the bill to occur in September during the UN General Assembly's vote on the recognition of Palestine. Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen is blatantly attempting to hijack Americans' support for Israel in the hopes of derailing the United States' relationship with the UN. She is misusing and distorting the high emotions around the Palestine vote to promote her longstanding and extreme anti-UN agenda.
Ros-Lehtinen's bill aims to punish the United Nations as an institution for allowing its members to vote on a symbolic recognition of a Palestinian state. Resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict and the continuing United States' engagement on the world stage are separate issues that Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen is erroneously conflating for cheap political points. Funding for the United Nations should not be cut based on the actions of some of its members. It's like blaming Madison Square Garden for the New York Knicks losing a game.
Ros-Lehtinen's irresponsible bill would slash 50% of the United States' contributions to the UN's regular budget if her unrealistic demands aren't met. It will also weaken United States' influence at the UN and sends the wrong message to our partners. The United States' influence with other nations depends on playing by the rules and meeting our obligations. If the United States doesn't follow the rules of the game, what's to stop others from doing the same?
The American people understand that maintaining our relationship with the UN is important. A recent poll found that a majority of Americans support the United Nations, with 85% of voters saying that it is important for the U.S. to maintain an active role in the UN. Democrats, Republicans and Independents support paying U.S. dues to the UN and UN peacekeeping on time and in full. Ros-Lehtinen, along with her other colleagues supporting the bill, are clearly out of touch with the American people.
Here are only a few of the things that will be held hostage if we withhold contributions to the UN's regular budget: immunizing children from infectious diseases, halting the spread of pandemics like SARS and swine flu, and the sanctioning of nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
Contributions to U.N. peacekeeping fund 15 peacekeeping missions around the world, providing stability in conflict-ridden nations, disarming former soldiers, and monitoring of elections. These missions allow the U.S. to promote our foreign policy interests while sharing the costs among partners. Ros-Lehtinen's bill would force the United States to veto new peacekeeping missions or the expansion of existing ones. The need for peacekeepers won't be affected by Congress withholding necessary funding, but the ability of the UN to effectively protect civilians will be.
Threats ranging from nuclear war, terrorism, and the spread of pandemics don't observe borders, and the United States is facing global challenges that even a nation as powerful as ours cannot face alone. National security priorities will suffer for not paying what is owed to the U.N. United States' leadership and contributions have helped to freeze the assets and halt the travel of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, win international condemnation and sanctions against Iran, and thwart efforts to combat terrorism and the spread of WMDs. International cooperation is essential in building a safer, more secure world.
Ros-Lehtinen's bill also prohibits the U.S. from providing funding for the Human Rights Council and bars United States' membership on the Council. The United States is well-equipped as a member of the Human Rights Council to oppose unbalanced resolutions against Israel and our leadership on the Council has kept the spotlight on nations who violate human rights.
Ros-Lehtinen's bill is the absolute wrong approach to promoting changes at the UN. The United States has been most effective at improving how the United Nations operates by staying fully engaged through the payment of contributions on time and in full and using leadership and influence to promote the United States' agenda. This bill is a thinly veiled attempt by Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen to promote an go-it-alone foreign policy and it should be vehemently opposed by the Members of Congress, the Obama administration, and all Americans.
Don't get me wrong: I do not call for UN's dissolution. As long as these dictators remain in power (hopefully not for long) it's useful to have a forum for the minimal necessary dialogue with them. But that's where UN's utility ends -- and USA should fund it BASED ON THAT LEVEL OF UTILITY.
Children do indeed die in the 3rd world -- and they shouldn't. But UN is NOT necessary for that -- in fact other, leaner organizations can make better use of the aid funds. UN "peacekeeping" forces are notoriously ineffective, not just in the Middle East, but in Africa as well.
What mankind REALLY needs is not the UN pretense, but a League of Democratic Nations, to provide the much needed moral leadership. LDN membership (subject to strict criteria) would become not just a coveted symbol, but an incentive for democratization.
Fund the UN based on its worth. Establish & transfer the funds to LDN.
Research her background and you'll have a thorough picture of Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
My organization, Citizens for Global Solutions, works for a more effective, democratic and empowered UN system. The UN is still very much a work in progress. But withholding funds and threatening other nations to "do what we say or else" is the very worst way to obtain positive results.
"It's like blaming Madison Square Garden for the New York Knicks losing a game."
====================================
That has to be one of the worst analogies I've ever seen. A more apt analogy would be blaming the Knicks' management for the team repeatedly losing games, brawling with fans, and refusing to play other teams in the league.
While the original mission of the UN was indeed admirable, it has strayed so far from that mission so as to have become a cartoonish caricature of itself. While I don't think we should pull out of the organization as it's wise to at least keep tabs on and remain in communication with other member states, there's no reason we should continue to foot nearly a quarter of the bill for the continued idiocy. Frankly, I don't think that should be contingent on any one action the UN takes, but we should insist that other nations pay their fair share regardless. It's clear our money--both in funding the UN and with many of our foreign aid recipients--is buying us neither influence nor goodwill. We can find better ways to spend our money here at home.
I vote AGAINST the proposal to IGNORE the negative role. I vote in favor of modifications.
Those mods to include: Human rights improvements in the UN, whereby only nations with free speech and a free press can vote (on anything); I also advocate the USA giving our money DIRECTLY to the needy populations and bypassing the UN. The downtrodden would be better off and so would the USA. Lastly, the USA should not pay 20+% of the UN Budget. What does China pay?
THE USA IS SIMPLY ACTING AS AN ALLY OF ISRAEL!
THE USA IS ACTING THE SAME WAY WHEN IT COMES TO ANY OTHER US ALLY: GERMANY, UK, ITALY,ETC...
It removes all context and sense from your comment.
I think the Palestinians would be better off not worrying about being "recognized" as equal people by the UN and in the longrun would be better off without the aid as well.
...to provide a cover to a bunch of autocratic regimes and sponsors of terrorism
laughable...just like cantor isn't it...
for who? she does know perhaps that she is not knesset member, right?
I think the UN needs reform - badly. Various programs need complete overhauls, as they are barely functioning. But some programs are successful and essential.
With the way our government is going, I wouldn't be surprised if she finds support for this. What are the odds of it passing?
Basically, sour grapes back and forth until a compromise can be reached. Think 2012.
http://www.jpost.com/Features/InThespotlight/Article.aspx?id=200662
Really? Are you sure about that? Are the Palestinians aware that this whole charade is just symbolic? If that is the case, what's the big deal? Should I answer my own question for you, or do you want to answer it for yourself? Let's see if you show up here like Chris Gunness did on his thread.
Clear things up for you at all?