Order Code RL33611
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues
August 10, 2006
Marjorie Ann Browne
Specialist in International Relations
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues
Summary
The congressional debate over United Nations funding focuses on several
questions, including: (1) What is the appropriate level of U.S. funding for U.N.
system operations and programs? (2) What U.S. funding actions are most likely to
produce a positive continuation of U.N. system reform efforts?
The U.N. system includes the United Nations, a number of specialized or
affiliated agencies, voluntary and special funds and programs, and U.N. peacekeeping
operations. Participating states finance the system with assessed contributions to the
budgets of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. In addition, voluntary
contributions are made both to those agencies and to the special programs and funds
they set up and manage. For more than 60 years, the United States has been the
single largest financial contributor to the U.N. system, supplying in recent years 22%
of most U.N. agency budgets. (See Appendix B for an organizational chart that
illustrates the components of the U.N. system.)
Both Congress and the executive branch have sought to promote their policy
goals and reform of the United Nations and its system of organizations and programs,
especially to improve management and budgeting practices. In the 1990s, Congress
linked payment of U.S. financial contributions and its arrears to reform.
This report, which will be updated, tracks the process by which Congress
provides the funding for U.S. assessed contributions to the regular budgets of the
United Nations, its agencies, and U.N. peacekeeping operation accounts as well for
U.S. voluntary contributions to U.N. system programs and funds. It includes
information on the President’s request and the congressional response as well as
congressional initiatives during this legislative process. Basic information is
provided to help the reader understand this process.
This report replaces CRS Issue Brief IB86116, United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues, by Marjorie Ann Browne and Vita Bite.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Funding Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
U.N. System Financing: Brief Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Assessed Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Voluntary Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Current U.S. Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
FY2007 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Assessed Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Voluntary Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Peacekeeping Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
FY2006 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Assessed Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Voluntary Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
U.N. Peacekeeping Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Tables on U.S. Contributions: FY2004-FY2006 and FY2007 Request . . . . . . . . 7
Scale of Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Arrearages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Congress and Funding the U.N. System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
U.S. Withholding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Contributions Reporting Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
United Nations Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Kassebaum-Solomon Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Office of Internal Oversight Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
The Helms-Biden Agreement and Payment of Arrears . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Task Force on the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Congress and U.N. Reform: 2005-2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Reform Initiatives in the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix A. Congress and Funding the U.N. System: FY2004-FY2005 . . . . . 21
Assessed Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
FY2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
U.N. Voluntary Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
FY2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
U.N. Peacekeeping Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
FY2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix B. The United Nations System; An Organizational Chart. . . . . . . . . 26

---

List of Tables
Table 1. U.S. Contributions to Recent U.N. System Assessed Regular
Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 2. U.S. Voluntary Contributions to U.N. Programs Financed
Through the Foreign Assistance Act (International Organizations
and Programs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Table 3. Top Ten U.N. Regular Budget Contributors for 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Table 4. U.S. Assessment Levels: U.N. Specialized Agencies and IAEA . . . . . 11

---

United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues
Most Recent Developments
On February 6, 2006, the President requested $1,268,523,000 for payment of
U.S. assessed contributions to international organizations (CIO account) of which
$922,970,000 was for assessed U.N. system organizations, including $422,761,000
for the U.N. regular budget. He requested $1,135,327,000 for U.S. assessed
contributions to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA account), and $289 million for
U.S. voluntary contributions to the international organizations and programs (IO&P
account). An additional $50 million was requested for a U.S. contribution to
voluntary IAEA programs. The House, on June 9, 2006, passed H.R. 5522, the
Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, providing $327,570,000 to the IO&P
account. On June 29, the House passed H.R. 5672, including State Department
appropriations that provided $1,151,318,000 for the CIO account and the requested
amount for the CIPA account. On July 10, 2006, the Senate Appropriations
Committee reported H.R. 5522, providing $1,151,318,000 for the CIO account,
$1,135,327,000 for the CIPA account, and $306,125,000 for the IO&P account.
Current Funding Information
Introduction
The United States has been, and remains, the single largest financial contributor
to the United Nations (U.N.) system. For calendar year (CY) 2003, U.S.
contributions to the U.N. system totaled $3.9 billion.1 This included $571,910,675
in assessed contributions to the regular budgets of the United Nations and its
specialized agencies and $57,043,423 in assessed contributions to the two war crimes
tribunals. In CY2003, the United States contributed $633,239,487 in assessed
contributions to U.N. peacekeeping operations. Finally, U.S. voluntary contributions
to U.N. system special programs and funds totaled $2,695,019,000. In recent years,
however, Congress has been pressing to reduce U.S. funding for many U.N. system
programs. Congressional debate over U.N. funding has focused on several questions:
1) What is the appropriate level of U.S. funding for U.N. system operations and
programs? 2) What U.S. funding actions are most likely to produce a positive
1 The CY2003 figures in this paragraph are from two U.N. documents: Budgetary and
Financial Situation of Organizations of the United Nations System. Note by the Secretary-
General transmitting the Statistical Report of the United Nations System Chief Executives
Board for Coordination.... U.N. document A/59/315, dated September 1, 2004 and Status
of Contributions as at 31 December 2003. U.N. document ST/ADM/SER.B/619.

---

CRS-2
continuation of U.N. system reform efforts? and 3) How should the United States
address its accumulated arrearages?
This report tracks the process by which Congress provides the funding for U.S.
assessed contributions to the regular budgets of the United Nations, its agencies, and
U.N. peacekeeping operation accounts as well for U.S. voluntary contributions to
U.N. system programs and funds. It includes information on the President’s request
and the congressional response as well as congressional initiatives during this
legislative process. Basic information is provided to help the reader understand this
process.
U.N. System Financing: Brief Overview
The United Nations (U.N.) system is made up of variously interconnected
components including specialized agencies, voluntary funds and programs,
peacekeeping operations, and the U.N. organization itself.2 The system is financed
by contributions from member and/or participant states. The contributions are
usually made in two ways: assessed contributions — required “dues” at percentages
established by the membership of each organization involved — and voluntary
contributions, which represent more than half of the total aggregated funds received
by the U.N. system.
Assessed Contributions. Assessed contributions finance the regular
budgets of the United Nations, the specialized agencies, and the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA). Payment of the assessed contribution is one of the legal
obligations accepted by a country when it joins the organization. In this way, the
organization has a regular source of income for staffing and implementation of
authorized programs. Most U.N. peacekeeping operations are also funded through
special assessed accounts.
U.S. assessed contributions are funded from the State Department’s budget.
Congress authorizes these funds as part of the “Foreign Relations Authorization Act”
and appropriates the money in the “Science, Departments of State, Justice,
Commerce, and related agencies” appropriations legislation.3 The regular assessed
budgets of U.N. system organizations as well as regional and other non-U.N.
organizations are included in the Contributions to International Organizations (CIO)
account, while peacekeeping contributions are funded in the Contributions to
International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account.
Voluntary Contributions. Voluntary contributions finance special programs
and offices created by the U.N. system, such as the United Nations Development
Program (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the United
2 See Appendix B for organizational chart of The United Nations System, taken from the
U.N. website: [http://www.un.org/aboutun/chart.html].
3 Currently, the House Appropriations Committee recommends appropriation of these funds
in the Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act while the Senate Appropriations Committee recommends appropriation
of these funds in the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act.

---

CRS-3
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA).
Payment of these contributions is entirely up to each individual country; no country
is legally obliged to contribute to these programs.
U.S. voluntary contributions are financed through the foreign assistance
authorization and appropriation legislation, primarily through the International
Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account of the Foreign Operations Act.4
Current U.S. Funding
FY2007 Funding
Assessed Contributions. On February 6, 2006, the President requested
$1,268,523,000 for payment of U.S. assessed contributions to international
organizations (CIO account) of which $922,970,000 was for assessed U.N. system
organizations including $422,761,000 for the U.N. regular budget. In addition, the
President requested $1,135,327,000 to pay U.S. assessed contributions to U.N.
peacekeeping activities (CIPA account). On June 29, 2006, the House passed H.R.
5672, including State Department appropriations for 2007, and providing
$1,151,318,000 for the CIO account.5 On July 10, 2006, the Senate Appropriations
Committee reported H.R. 5522, to provide appropriations for the State Department,
including $1,151,318,000 for the CIO account.6
Voluntary Contributions. The appropriate level of funding for U.N.
voluntary programs continues to be a congressional concern. For FY2007 the
Administration requested $289 million for U.S. voluntary contributions to programs
in the international organizations and programs (IO&P) account. In addition, $50
million was requested in another account for IAEA voluntary programs. On June 9,
2006, the House passed H.R. 5522, the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act,
providing $327,570,000 for the IO&P account.7 The Committee recommended the
requested $50 million for IAEA voluntary programs, which is found in the
Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs account. On July
10, 2006, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 5522, providing
$306,125,000 for the IO&P account.
4 The House recommends funding through a separate Foreign Operations Appropriations
Act. See CRS Report RL33420, Foreign Operations (House)/State, Foreign Operations,
and Related Programs (Senate): FY2007 Appropriations by Larry Nowels, Connie Veillette,
and Susan B. Epstein.
5 H.R. 5672, Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2007; reported June 22, 2006, H.Rept. 109-520.
6 H.R. 5522, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations
Bill, 2007; reported July 10, 2006, S.Rept. 109-277.
7 H.R. 5522, Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations
Bill, 2007; reported June 5, 2006, H.Rept. 109-486.

---

CRS-4
Peacekeeping Accounts. Issues relating to U.S. support for U.N.
peacekeeping operations including financing of such activities have been the source
of particular congressional concern. In 1994, Congress enacted legislation (Section
404 of P.L. 103-236) which limited U.S. assessed peacekeeping contributions after
October 1, 1995, to 25% of total U.N. peacekeeping assessments. P.L. 107-228
amended this provision for calendar years 2001-2004, allowing U.S. assessments of
28.15% in 2001, 27.9% in 2002 and 27.4% in 2003 and 2004. P.L. 108-447 raised
the cap to 27.1% for calendar year 2005. On December 13, 2005, Senator Biden
introduced S. 2095, to raise the U.S. peacekeeping cap to 27.1% for calendar years
2005 and 2006. On June 22, 2006, the Senate passed S. 2766, the Defense
Authorization Act for FY2007, including an amendment that would set the cap for
U.S. contributions at 27.10% for assessments made for U.N. peacekeeping operations
for CY2005, 2006, and 2007. (For detailed discussion, see CRS Issue Brief IB90103,
United Nations Peacekeeping: Issues for Congress, by Marjorie Ann Browne.)
On February 6, 2006, the Administration requested $1,135,327,000 for U.S.
assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA account). On February
16, 2006, President Bush, in a FY2006 supplemental, requested an additional $69.8
million for CIPA, including funds for U.N. peacekeeping in the Sudan. On June 15,
2006, H.R. 4939, providing $129.8 million for CIPA, was sent to the President, who
signed it the same day.8 On June 29, 2006, the House passed H.R. 5672, including
in State Department appropriations for 2007, the requested amount for the CIPA
account. On July 10, 2006, the Senate Appropriations Committee, in H.R. 5522,
reported appropriations for the State Department that included the same requested
amount for the CIPA account.
FY2006 Funding9
Assessed Contributions. On February 7, 2005, the Administration
requested $1.296 billion for U.S. assessed Contributions to International
Organizations (CIO) of which $931,362,000 was for assessed U.N. system
organizations including $438,952,000 for the U.N. regular budget. The President
requested $1.035 billion for U.S. assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping
activities (CIPA). Another $780 million was requested for U.N. peacekeeping
operations in supplemental FY2005 appropriations.
On June 16, 2005, the House, by a vote of 417 to 7, passed H.R. 2862, which
would appropriate $1.166 billion for U.S. assessed contributions to CIO. This was
more than $130 million below the Administration request. In addition, by a voice
vote, the House agreed to an amendment offered by Representative Garrett which
increased funding for state and law enforcement grants by $22 million that was made
available by reducing U.S. contributions to the United Nations by that amount. An
amendment offered by Representative Paul prohibiting any U.S. contribution to the
United Nations or any affiliated agency was defeated by a vote of 65 to 357.
8 H.R. 4939, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on
Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006; signed June 15, 2006, P.L. 109-234.
9 See CRS Report RL32919, Foreign Operations (House)/State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs (Senate): FY2006 Appropriations.

---

CRS-5
H.R. 3057, as passed by the Senate on July 20, 2005, included $1.166 billion for
U.S. assessed CIO (more than $130 million below the Administration’s request), and
$1.035 billion for assessed peacekeeping activities.10 The Senate also agreed to an
amendment expressing the sense of the Senate that the use of funds for any loan to
the United Nations for the renovation of its headquarters in New York not exceed
$600 million. The Senate Committee on Appropriations requested a number of State
Department reports during its consideration of the legislation: information on
assessment rates and other economic data on the 15 U.N. member countries with the
greatest gross domestic products; an evaluation of U.S. participation in non-treaty
obligated international organizations; and information on changes in the World
Tourism Organization (WTO) since U.S. withdrawal and potential benefits of any
future U.S. participation in the WTO.11
On March 10, 2005, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations reported S.
600, authorizing appropriations for foreign relations for FY2006 and FY2007
(S.Rept. 109-35). This bill authorized $1.296 billion for U.S. assessed contributions
to international organizations (CIO), and $1.035 billion for U.S. assessed
contributions to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA) account. On June 9, 2005, the
House Committee on International Relations voted to report H.R. 2601, to authorize
appropriations for the Department of State for FY2006 and 2007 (H.Rept. 109-168).
The House passed H.R. 2601 on July 20, 2005. The Hyde United Nations Reform
bill, H.R. 2745, had been added to H.R. 2601 on July 19, 2005, prior to its passage.
Congress did not complete action on a Foreign Relations Authorization Act for
FY2006-2007.
H.R. 2862, appropriating funds for Science, the Departments of State, Justice,
and Commerce for FY2006, was signed on November 22, 2005 (P.L. 109-108). It
included $1.166 billion for assessed contributions to international organizations
(CIO), and $1,035,500,000 for assessed contributions to international peacekeeping
activities (CIPA). The Secretary of State, at the time of the President’s budget
submission to Congress, is to transmit to the Appropriations Committees the most
recent biennial U.N. budget and notify the same committees of any U.N. action to
increase funding for any U.N. program without identifying an offsetting decrease
elsewhere in the U.N. budget and cause the U.N. budget for the 2006-2007 biennium
to exceed the revised U.N. budget level for the 2004-2005 biennium.
Voluntary Contributions. On February 7, 2005, the Administration
requested $281,908,000 for voluntary contributions for the International
Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account including $114 million for UNICEF
and $95 million for UNDP. Fifty million dollars for IAEA voluntary programs was
requested in another account.
10 H.R. 3057 was passed by the House as the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act but the
Senate used this bill, H.R. 3057, as its vehicle for appropriating funds for Foreign
Operations and for the State Department.
11 In this instance, the WTO is the World Tourism Organization, not the World Trade
Organization.

---

CRS-6
On June 28, 2005, the House passed H.R. 3057, including $328,958,000 for
voluntary contributions for FY2006 for the IO&P account as had been recommended
by the House Committee on Appropriations in its report, H.Rept. 109-152. The
Committee also recommended that of the amounts appropriated in the account, not
less than $110 million be for the U.N. Development Program (UNDP), not less than
$127 million for the U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF), $5 million for the U.N.
Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) (of which $3.5 million for the Fund and
$1.5 million for the Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence Against
Women), and noted the importance of the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) work
in the Palestinian territories.
H.R. 3057, as passed by the Senate on July 20, 2005, included a total of $330
million for FY2006 for U.S. voluntary contributions to programs in the International
Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account as had been recommended by the
Senate Committee on Appropriations in its report, S.Rept. 109-96. The Committee
also recommended that of the amounts appropriated in the account, $128 million be
for UNICEF, and $110 million for UNDP. The Committee recommended $10
million for the proposed U.N. Democracy Fund in another account, and
recommended that $10 million for the World Food Program (WFP) come from funds
for USAID’s Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance.
On March 10, 2005, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported on S. 600
(S.Rept. 109-35), authorizing $281,908,000 for voluntary contributions for the
International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account. An authorization bill was
not passed.
The Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act for FY2006,
H.R. 3057, signed November 4, 2005, P.L. 109-102, included $329,458,000 for U.S.
voluntary contributions to the International Organizations and Programs (IO&P)
account. The conference report (H.Rept. 109-265) recommended that $127 million
be for UNICEF and $110 million for UNDP; $50 million was recommended form
another account for IAEA voluntary programs.
U.N. Peacekeeping Accounts. The Administration requested
$1,035,500,000 for FY2006 for U.S. assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping
activities (CIPA). P.L. 109-108 included the requested $1,035,500,000 for FY2006
U.S. assessed peacekeeping activities.

---

CRS-7
Tables on U.S. Contributions: FY2004-FY2006 and
FY2007 Request
Table 1. U.S. Contributions to Recent U.N. System Assessed
Regular Budgets
(in millions of $)
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
United Nations
340.472
362.193
438.952
422.761
U.N. Capital Master Plan
—
6.00
10.595
22.101
U.N. — War Crimes Tribunals
32.656
35.039
31.620
33.201
Food and Agriculture
Organization
72.457
89.716
83.981
89.332
International Atomic Energy
Agency
68.462
79.829
77.447
83.192
International Civil Aviation
Agency
12.629
12.650
14.894
15.180
International Labor
Organization
68.055
63.107
59.866
63.338
International Maritime
Organization
1.366
1. 479
1.435
1.565
International
Telecommunications Union
7. 976
7.655
7.370
7.656
United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural
Organization
84.138
76.754
68.191
69.599
Universal Postal Union
1.697
1.770
1.629
1.690
World Health Organization
93.615
96.110
96.111
101.421
World Intellectual Property
Organization
1.058
1.137
1.0761
1.121
World Meteorological
Organization
9.963
12.143
10.399
10.804
Total
794.542
845.598
903.566
922.970

---

CRS-8
Table 2. U.S. Voluntary Contributions to U.N. Programs
Financed Through the Foreign Assistance Act
(International Organizations and Programs)
(in millions of $)
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007

Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
U.N. Development Program (UNDP)
101.398
108.128
108.900
94.500
U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
119.292
124.000
125.730
123.000
U.N. Development Fund for Women
0.994
1.984
3.218
0.950
(UNIFEM)
UNIFEM Trust Fund
—
0.992
1.485
—
International Contributions for
Scientific, Educational, & Cultural
1.889
0.837
0.990
1.000
Activities
WMO Voluntary Coop. Program
1.988
1.984
1.881
1.900
U.N. Environment Program (UNEP)
10.935
10.912
10.159
9.524
Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund
20.876
21.328
21.285
19.000
International Conservation Programs*
6.362
6.349
5.890
5.906
(CITES, ITTO, IUCN, Ramsar, CCD)
U.N. Voluntary Fund Torture Victims
5.468
6.944
6.517
4.750
Climate Stabilization Fund (IPCC,
5.567
5.952
5.940
5.320
UNFCC)
ICAO Aviation Security Fund
0.994
0.992
0.941
0.950
U.N. Voluntary Fund for Advisory
1.491
1. 488
1.485
1.425
Services & Technical Cooperation
IAEA Voluntary Programs**
52.687
52. 576
49.500
50.000
Center for Human Settlements
0.746
0.149
0.149
0.400
IMO Maritime Security Programs
—
0. 099
0.396
0.400
Reserve — To Be Allocated
—
—
22.275
—
U.N. International Democracy Fund***
—
[10.000] [7.920]
10.000
(UNIDF)
U.N. Office for Coordination of
—
—
0.805
1.000
Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA)
Total
355.540
344.714
367.546
330.025
Note: Does not include U.S. contributions to U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
Programs ($255 million in FY2002) and to U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees
in the Near East (UNRWA) ($119 million in FY2002), financed through the Migration and Refugee
Assistance Account; World Food Program commodities donations; WHO Special Programs; U.N.
Volunteers; and U.N. International Drug Control Program.
* Only CITES is a U.N. system program.
** Requested and Appropriated under Non-Proliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining and Related
Programs account.
*** Funded from other accounts in FY2005 and FY2006.

---

CRS-9
Scale of Assessments
Article 17 of the U.N. Charter requires each U.N. member state, including the
United States, to contribute to the expenses of the organization, as assessed by the
General Assembly.12 The U.N. General Assembly has adopted a scale of assessments
— which is based generally on a country’s capacity to pay — that requires the United
States to pay the maximum or 22% of the U.N. regular budget, while 48 members
pay the minimum or 0.001%. If there were no maximum and minimum assessment
levels for the U.N. regular budget and assessments were based exclusively on a ratio
of a country’s gross national product, the United States would be assessed about 30%
and some very small and poor countries might be assessed less than 0.001%.
The U.S. assessment for CY2005 was $439,612,000. Regardless of the size of
assessment, each member has one vote on U.N. budget decisions, although budgets
since 1988 have been adopted by consensus.13 For calendar year 2006, the top three
contributors (United States, Japan, and Germany) were assessed a total of 50.13% of
the U.N. regular budget. The top 10 contributors, which include four of the five
permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, pay 76.44% of the total to the
regular U.N. budget according to the scale of assessments adopted by the General
Assembly for CY2006.
Table 3. Top Ten U.N. Regular Budget Contributors for 2006
Assessments for 2006 in
Member State
Percent of Budget
U.S. $
United States*
22.00
423,465,855
Japan
19.47
374,727,900
Germany
8.66
166,729,663
United Kingdom*
6.13
117,934,962
France*
6.03
116,067,867
Italy
4.89
94,028,446
Canada
2.81
54,145,756
Spain
2.52
48,505,975
China*
2.05
39,516,971
Mexico
1.88
36,244,742
*Permanent members of the U.N. Security Council
12 The United Nations Charter was ratified by the United States August 8, 1945 and entered
into force October 24, 1945. There are currently 192 members of the United Nations.
13 Article 18 of the U.N. Charter: “Each member of the General Assembly shall have one
vote.” Paragraph 2 of this article states that “Decisions of the General Assembly on
important questions shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the members present and
voting. These questions shall include ... budgetary questions.”

---

CRS-10
For 2006, the other permanent member of the Security Council, the Russian
Federation, was assessed at 1.10%, or $21,173,243.14
Some experts have maintained that the General Assembly budget decision, by
one nation, one vote, that commits a few member states to pay a major percentage of
that budget, is unfair and that other principles should replace one nation, one vote on
budget issues.15 When this issue came up between 1985 and 1988, the Assembly
decided that every effort would be made to adopt the U.N. regular budget by
consensus. In this way, any member state, including the major contributors, might
prevent consensus on a budget resolution. The intention was to give major
contributing nations a stronger voice in budget matters.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton has suggested that the U.N.
General Assembly consider the use of different economic data, in forming the scale
of assessments. Ambassador Bolton suggested that the scale of assessments be based
on
purchasing power parity (PPP) in our calculation of gross national income. PPP
is the numbers of units of a country’s currency needed to buy in the country the
same amounts of goods and services in a different country. At this time, the
assessment is based on Gross National Income (GNI) as determined by Gross
Domestic Product. ... The World Bank currently uses PPPs as an analytical tool,
but not for income comparisons.16
In its July 10, 2006 report, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended “that
the current rate of assessment should not be increased, and that the United Nations
consider economic factors such as purchasing power parity and foreign currency
rates.”17

The U.N. Committee on Contributions is a standing committee of 18 members
selected by the Assembly on the basis of broad geographical representation, personal
qualifications and experience. This Committee advises the Assembly on the scale
of assessments, recommending assessment levels for new member states, reviewing
appeals for a change of assessment, and examining applications of Article 19 against
countries in arrears on payment of their assessed contributions. Each third year, the
Committee reviews the scale and, based on instructions from the Assembly,
recommends revisions in the scale for the next three-year period. The Committee
14 See Assessment of Member States’ Advances to the Working Capital Fund for the
biennium 2006-2007 and Contributions to the United Nations Regular Budget for 2006.
U.N. document, ST/ADM/SER.B/668, pages 7-10.
15 Some have suggested weighted voting in the Assembly, based on population or other
criteria.
16 Statement to House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Science, State, Justice
and Commerce, April 5, 2006, p. 3, at [http://www.un.int/usa/06_067.htm]
17 Senate Report 109-277, p. 33.

---

CRS-11
met June 5 to 30, 2006, to carry out this review and to recommend a scale for the
period 2007-2009.18 A U.S. national is a member of this committee.
Specialized agencies, while linked to the United Nations, are autonomous
organizations, with their own executive, legislative, and budgetary powers. Some
agencies follow the U.N. scale in making assessments; other agencies use their own
formulas, which often result in lower U.S. assessments. The U.S. assessment levels
for these agencies for CY2005 and CY2006 are as follows:19
Table 4. U.S. Assessment Levels:
U.N. Specialized Agencies and IAEA
Agency
CY2005
CY2006
International Labor Organization
22 %
22 %
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
22 %
22 %
Nations
U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
22 %
22 %
Organization
International Civil Aviation Organization
25 %
25 %
World Health Organization
22 %
22 %
Universal Postal Union
5.69 %
5.69 %
International Telecommunication Union
8.88 %
8.759 %
World Meteorological Organization
21.64 %
21.64 %
International Maritime Organization
3.48 %
3.44 %
World Intellectual Property Organization
6.6 %
6.59 %
International Atomic Energy Agency
25.877 %
25.954 %
Arrearages
Under Article 19 of the U.N. Charter, countries with arrears totaling more than
the member’s assessments for the two preceding years lose their vote in the U.N.
General Assembly. As of March 24, 2006, 15 countries were in that status. By May
18 Its report, issued on August 4, 2006, does not recommend a scale for 2007-2009 (see U.N.
document A/61/11).
19 The CY2005 percentages are from the U.N. System Chief Executives Board for
Coordination, Budgetary and Financial Situation of Organizations of the United Nations
System. Note by the Secretary-General.... , U.N. document, A/59/315. The CY2006 figures
are from information transmitted to Congress by the Department of State in the
Congressional Budget Justification, for FY2007.

---

CRS-12
9, 2006, that number had been reduced to nine countries, all of which had been
permitted by the U.N. General Assembly to vote during its 60th session.
According to the United Nations, despite U.S. arrears payments, the United
States, as of December 31, 2005, owed assessed contributions of $1,110,924,811.
These arrearages broke out in the following way:
$251,851,905 for the U.N. regular budget;
$12,022,205 for International Tribunals;
$3,916,440 for the Capital Master Plan; and
$843,134,251 for peacekeeping assessed accounts.
Congress and Funding the U.N. System
Congress has, over the years, sought to influence the direction of the United
Nations and U.S. policy at the United Nations and in its agencies. A variety of tools
has been used, from “sense of Congress” resolutions to restrictions placed in
authorization and appropriations legislation. Congressional committees have held
hearings to educate and to carry out their oversight functions. U.S. nominees to be
ambassadors at the United Nations or its agencies have been queried on various
aspects of U.S. policy and U.N. activity. Congress has reduced or increased
executive branch funding requests, has withheld funding of the U.S. proportionate
share that would finance particular programs or tied release of U.S. contributions to
executive branch certifications once certain policy goals had been met.
U.S. Withholding
Beginning in 1980, Congress prohibited contribution of the U.S. proportionate
share for a number of U.N. programs and activities of which Congress did not
approve, including the Special Unit on Palestinian Rights, for projects benefitting the
Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the South West Africa People’s
Organization (SWAPO), construction of a conference center in Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia, the Second Decade to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, and for
implementation of General Assembly Resolution 3379 (XXX) (Zionism equals
racism). In addition, the Administration withheld the U.S. proportionate share of
funds for the Preparatory Commission for the Law of the Sea and funds relating to
taxes paid by U.S. citizens employed by the United Nations.
In addition, beginning in 1993, the United States recognized a lower
peacekeeping assessment level than that applied by the United Nations, and since
October 1, 1995, was limited by U.S. law (sec. 404 of P.L.103-236) to a 25%
peacekeeping assessment level. Section 402 of P.L.107-228, signed into law on
September 30, 2002, raised the 25% cap on U.S. peacekeeping assessments allowing
payment of U.S. current peacekeeping assessments in full. The only current U.S.
withholding for the U.N. regular budget is for programs relating to the Palestinians.
In addition, since no waiver of the 25% cap on U.S. contributions for U.N.
peacekeeping was enacted for CY2006, the United States may also be withholding
from its contributions for U.N. peacekeeping the difference between the U.N.
assessment of about 26.5% and the U.S. statutory limit of 25%. On December 13,

---

CRS-13
2005, Senator Biden introduced S. 2095 which would raise the U.S. peacekeeping
cap to 27.1% for calendar years 2005 and 2006.20 On June 22, 2006, the Senate
passed S. 2766, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2007, including an
amendment that would set the cap for U.S. contributions at 27.10% for assessments
made for U.N. peacekeeping operations for CY2005, 2006, and 2007.
Contributions Reporting Requirement
On June 22, 2006, the Senate passed S. 2766, the National Defense
Authorization Act for FY2007. Section 1213 would require the President to submit
to Congress an annual report on all U.S. government contributions, both assessed and
voluntary, made during each fiscal year (FY) to the entire U.N. system. The report
would include (1) the total amount of all U.S. assessed and voluntary contributions
to the United Nations and U.N. affiliated agencies and related bodies; (2) the
approximate percentage of U.S. contributions to each U.N. affiliated agency or body
in such FY when compared with all contributions to such agency or body from any
source; and (3) for each contribution, the amount, a description of the contribution
(including whether assessed or voluntary), the department or agency responsible for
each contribution, the purpose of each contribution, and the U.N. or U.N. affiliated
agency or related body receiving such contribution. This provision was an
amendment proposed by Senator Warner for Senate Inhofe, was agreed to by
Unanimous Consent, and received little, if any, debate.
On June 28, 2006, during House consideration of H.R. 5672, the State
Department Appropriations Act, Representative Scott Garrett offered an identical
amendment. Representative Garrett pointed out that Congress cannot make decisions
on funding the United Nations without knowing the “total amount of money that we
are spending for the U.N. and its programs and its services.” After a point of order
was raised, that the amendment “constituted legislation in an appropriation bill,”
Representative Garrett withdrew his amendment.
Over the years, two or three reporting requirements have provided data on
annual U.S. contributions to international organizations; some of them still exist
while one has been terminated. An annual report on U.S. contributions to
international organizations for a fiscal year has been issued by the State Department
since the first one, which covered FY1952, was transmitted to Congress in January
1953. This report is required by P.L. 81-806, September 21, 1950 (64 Stat. 902),
section 2 which requires the Secretary of State to report annually on the extent and
disposition of all U.S. contributions (assessed and voluntary) to all international
organizations in which the United States participates. The report does not include
the international financial institutions, organizations with fewer than three members,
the cost to the U.S. government of salaries and expenses of U.S. employees detailed
to such organizations, loans which are to be repaid, and two-party contractual or
other arrangements between an U.S. agency and the organization.
20 “A bill to ensure payment of United States assessments for United Nations peacekeeping
operations in 2005 and 2006.”

---

CRS-14
The report was last published, as a House document or State Department
publication, in July 1993, for FY1991. The final published report was 170 pages and
included three tables of special interest: U.S. Contributions to International
Organizations, FY 1946-1991; U.S. Contributions to the United Nations, Specialized
Agencies, International Atomic Energy Agency, Calendar Years 1946-1991; and
United Nations, Specialized Agencies, Special Programs, and the International
Atomic Energy Agency: Total Program (Expenditures or Authorizations), Calendar
Years 1946-1991. As issued for FY2004, this 10-page report might be viewed as a
minimum response to the reporting requirement and the absence of the last three
charts means that information on U.S. contributions to the U.N. system in an
organized fashion no longer exists.
Another reporting requirement, adopted in 1980 (P.L. 96-533, Title VII, section
703) and terminated in 1998 (P.L. 105-362, section 1301 (b)(2)), required a
semiannual report on all U.S. government voluntary contributions to international
organizations. One weakness of the resulting reports was that they were just sheets
of paper from any U.S. government agency involved in the exercise, provided
without organization or analysis.
A third report required annually on U.S. participation in United Nations
peacekeeping operations (22 U.S.C. 287b (c)) was added to the United Nations
Participation Act. It includes data on U.S. assessed and voluntary contributions to
U.N. peacekeeping operations on a calendar year basis and was originally required
from the President (now the State Department). This report is not published but is
transmitted to the appropriate committees. The 2005 Annual Report to the Congress
on United Nations Peacekeeping was received in the Senate and referred to the
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on July 12, 2006. The same report was
received and referred to the House Committee on International Relations on July 11,
2006.21
United Nations Reform
Reform of the United Nations has been a persistent issue over the history of the
organization. The drafters of the Charter anticipated that changes might be required
and provided, in Article 109 of the Charter, for the convening of a conference of U.N.
member states to review the Charter at least at the ten-year mark of its entry into
force. That conference was never convened. Article 108 of the Charter provided for
formal amendment of the Charter which has occurred on three occasions. One
involved enlargement of the Security Council and two involved enlargement of the
Economic and Social Council. Congress has also sought change at the United
Nations. Recent congressional efforts, especially in the post-Cold War era, have
been directed toward a more effective and efficient organization that works within
budgetary constraints.
Kassebaum-Solomon Provisions. Between 1985 and 1988, a number of
factors combined to create concern among some in Congress over the use of regular
21 EC-7491, cited in Congressional Record [daily edition] July 12, 2006: S7414; EC 8437,
cited in Congressional Record [daily edition] July 11, 2006: H5044.

---

CRS-15
budget funds and the direction of voting in the U.N. General Assembly. Some in
Congress viewed many U.N. member states as voting “against” the United States in
the Assembly. In 1985, Congress adopted the Kassebaum-Solomon amendment
(Section 143, Foreign Relations Authorization Act, FY1986-1987, H.R. 2068, P.L.
99-93, August 17, 1985) that reduced U.S. assessed contributions by 20% unless
steps were taken by the United Nations to give the major contributors to the U.N.
regular budget an influence on budget questions proportionate to their rates of
assessment.22
In December 1985, in response to the issues raised by the Kassebaum-Solomon
amendment and accompanying congressional debate, the U.N. General Assembly
established a Group of High-Level Intergovernmental Experts to “review the
efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning” of the United Nations and
to offer recommendations for streamlining the organization. This Group of 18
proposed 71 recommendations, most of which were approved by the 1986 Assembly
session. In addition, the 1986 Assembly adopted a revised “planning, programming
and budgeting process” that sought to ensure an influential role for major
contributing countries by, among other changes, using consensus as a basic decision-
making mechanism.
On December 22, 1987, Congress recognized that both the U.N. membership
and the U.N. Secretary-General had started to respond to its concerns. Title VII of the
State Department Authorization Act, FY1988-1989, H.R. 1777, P.L. 100-204,
created a new payment schedule that tied full funding of U.S. contributions to the
U.N. regular budget to further progress toward reform by providing that:
— 40% of the contribution could be paid on October 1, of each year;
— a second 40% could be paid when the President certified that progress was
being made in implementing U.N. reform in three areas:
1) consensus decision-making on budget questions,
2) reductions in U.N. secretariat staffing, and
3) reductions in the number of Soviet U.N. employees on fixed-term
contracts.
— the remaining 20% could be paid 30 days after Congress had received the
certification, unless Congress passed a joint resolution prohibiting the
payment.
Although no deadline was given for submission of the President’s certification report,
release of up to 60% of the funds appropriated for the U.N. regular budget was
dependent on submission of the report and its acceptance by the Congress.
On September 13, 1988, President Reagan certified that progress had been
made, and announced release of an initial $44 million in calendar year 1987 regular
22 This amendment applied to the United Nations and to any specialized agencies for which
the United States was assessed more than 20% in regular budget contributions. For
specialized agencies, 1987 legislation revising the original provision required a Presidential
determination to Congress that each affected agency made substantial progress toward
adoption and implementation of reform budget procedures before any contribution over 20%
could be paid.

---

CRS-16
budget contributions to the United Nations; a later certification resulted in release of
$144 million in calendar year 1988 regular budget funds. Reagan also called on the
State Department to develop a plan to pay over $500 million in arrears to the entire
U.N. system over the next three to five years. It would take several years, however,
for the U.S. arrears built up over time to be paid to the United Nations.
Office of Internal Oversight Services. In 1993, Congress provided that
10% of the U.S. assessed contribution to the U.N. regular budget be available only
when the Secretary of State had certified to Congress that “the United Nations has
established an independent office with responsibilities and powers substantially
similar to offices of Inspectors General authorized by the Inspector General Act of
1978....” 23 Many in Congress believed that an independent mechanism was needed
to reduce and eliminate instances of “waste, fraud, and abuse” at the United Nations.
On November 16, 1993, U.S. ambassador Madeleine Albright proposed that the
United Nations establish such a post. On July 29, 1994, the General Assembly
established an Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) headed by an
Under-Secretary General appointed by the U.N. Secretary-General with the approval
of the General Assembly.24 Eleven annual reports on the activities of the Office
through June 30, 2005, have been submitted to the General Assembly, and the Office
has undertaken an increasing number of monitoring, auditing, and investigative
activities.25
The Helms-Biden Agreement and Payment of Arrears. The U.S.
government pressed for U.N. reform in the 1990s, linking payment of past arrears to
reforms. These arrears, to both the United Nations, U.N. specialized agencies, and
a few non-U.N. organizations originated from the non-payments of the mid-1980s;
others derived from the placement of a cap on U.S. contributions to U.N.
peacekeeping account contributions. High-level negotiations between the Clinton
Administration and congressional leaders led to agreement on an arrearage payment
plan linked to reform “benchmarks,” popularly known as the Helms-Biden
agreement. The 106th Congress enacted P.L. 106-113 including the Helms-Biden
agreement conditioning arrears payments on U.N. reforms.26
P.L. 106-113 incorporated the Helms-Biden agreement and authorized
appropriations for payment of some U.S. arrears to international organizations
provided certain conditions were met and certified by the Secretary of State. The
agreement authorized payment of $819 million ($100 million of FY1998 funds, $475
million of FY1999 funds, and $244 million of FY2000 funds), and authorized $107
million owed by the United Nations to the United States for peacekeeping to be
23 Department of State Appropriations Act, 1994, H.R. 2519, P.L. 103-121, October 27,
1993.
24 U.N. General Assembly Resolution A/RES/48/218B.
25 See OIOS website at [http://www.un.org/Depts/oios] for links to annual reports to the
Assembly and to other reports issued publicly.
26 Title IX, The United Nations Reform Act of 1999, in the State Department Authorization
Act, FY2000-2001, as part of an Omnibus Appropriations Act, FY2000, P.L. 106-113,
signed November 29, 1999.

---

CRS-17
forgiven provided the United Nations applied the $107 million to reduce U.S.
peacekeeping account arrears.
Among the U.S. conditions was reduction of U.S. regular budget assessments
to 22% (from 25%) and reduction of U.S. peacekeeping assessments to 25% (from
about 30%). In December 2000, the U.N. General Assembly agreed on a financial
restructuring of both the regular and peacekeeping assessment structures. As a result
the U.S. share of the regular budget was reduced from 25% to 22% and for
peacekeeping from about 30.4% to 28.14%, initially, and falling in subsequent years
to about 26.5% currently.
Task Force on the United Nations. Appropriations legislation (P.L. 108-
447) for FY2005 included a provision directing that $1.5 million of the money
appropriated for the U.S. Institute for Peace be used for the expenses of a Task Force
on the United Nations. The Institute was directed to create a task force consisting of
no more than a total of 12 experts to study U.N. efforts to meet the goals of its
Charter and recommend an actionable agenda for the United States on the United
Nations. The Task Force was co-chaired by former Speaker of the House of
Representatives, Newt Gingrich, and former Senate majority leader, George Mitchell.
The Task Force report was released on June 15, 2005.27 Among its
recommendations, the Task Force suggested: creation of an Independent Oversight
Board and a Chief Operating Officer; authorizing the U.N. Secretary-General to
replace top officials without Assembly approval; sunset provisions for all programs
and activities; disclosure standards for top officials; greater independence for the
Department of Peacekeeping; and improvement of the U.N. capacity to stop genocide
and mass killing.
Congress and U.N. Reform: 2005-2006. On June 17, 2005, the House,
by a vote of 221 to 184, passed H.R. 2745, the Henry J. Hyde United Nations Reform
Act of 2005. The wide-ranging and complex measure would require numerous State
Department certifications and reports. The measure would withhold 50% of U.S.
assessed dues to the U.N. regular budget beginning with calendar year 2007 (financed
from U.S. FY2008 funds), if 32 of 40 changes were not in place, including 15
mandatory reforms. Among the changes sought by the legislation were: changing
funding for 18 U.N. programs to be totally voluntary; creation of an independent
Oversight Board; establishment of a U.N. Office of Ethics; barring membership on
human rights bodies to countries under U.N. investigation for human rights abuses;
reduction in funding for U.N. General Assembly Affairs and Conference Services as
well as for public information; and reform in U.N. peacekeeping and establishment
of a Peacebuilding Commission. No new or expanded peacekeeping operations
would be allowed until the Secretary of State had certified that U.N. peacekeeping
reforms had been achieved.
During floor debate on H.R. 2745 in 2005, a number of additional provisions
were adopted including limiting U.S. contributions to the U.N. Relief and Works
27 See [http://www.usip.org/un/index.html] for home page of the Task Force and links to its
June 2005 report: American Interests and UN Reform and its December 2005 update: The
Imperative for Action: An Update.

---

CRS-18
Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA); calling for zero nominal
growth in the assessed budgets of the United Nations and its specialized agencies;
requiring the Independent Oversight Board to evaluate the final report of the
Independent Inquiry Committee on the Oil for Food Program; requiring the U.S.
Office of Management and Budget to provide Congress with a report on all U.S.
contributions to the United Nations; and calling for lifting the prohibition on use of
gratis military personnel. The Bush Administration expressed reservations about the
House legislation because of its withholding provisions and because it would infringe
on the President’s authority to carry out foreign affairs. H.R. 2745, as passed by the
House, was included in H.R. 2601, Foreign Relations Authorization for FY2006 and
2007 as passed by the House on July 20, 2005.
A U.N. reform measure was also introduced in the Senate, S. 1383. The Senate
measure would allow the President to withhold 50% of U.S. contributions to the
United Nations if the President determined that the United Nations was not making
sufficient progress on reforms. No Foreign Relations Authorization Act was passed
in 2005.
Reform Initiatives in the United Nations.28 In 1997, Kofi Annan, after
being elected U.N. Secretary-General on a reform platform, announced a two-track
reform program. The first track included immediate managerial changes within the
Secretary-General’s authority to execute, while the second track included reform
measures requiring consultation and/or approval by U.N. member governments.
Among the first track initiatives were: reducing the budget, staffing levels, and
documentation; creating a code of conduct for U.N. staff; reorienting the Department
of Public Information; consolidating administrative, financial, personnel,
procurement and other services; consolidating economic and social departments;
streamlining technical support; and improving integration of development activities
at the country level.
Second track proposals focused on U.N. core missions and on improving
management and efficiency. They included creating a new management and
leadership structure by establishing a Deputy Secretary-General, a Senior
Management Group, and a Strategic Planning Unit; overhauling human resources
policies and practices including changing the management culture, eliminating 1,000
jobs and reducing administrative costs; and promoting sustainable development as
a central U.N. priority. The proposals also called for improving peacekeeping and
strengthening post-conflict peace-building capacity; bolstering international efforts
to combat crime, drugs and terrorism by consolidating activities in Vienna;
establishing a Department for Disarmament and Arms Regulation; enhancing
humanitarian activities by replacing the Department of Humanitarian Affairs; and
revamping public information functions. The proposals also called for the following:
refocusing the work of the General Assembly on priority issues and reducing the
length of sessions; establishing a ministerial-level commission to review the U.N.
Charter and specialized agency constitutions; and designating the General Assembly
session in the year 2000 as “a Millennium Assembly” to focus on preparing the
United Nations for the 21st century.
28 See [http://www.un.org/reform]. From this site, see Useful links and Key Documents.

---

CRS-19
The U.N. General Assembly in 1997 affirmed many policy formulations and
management changes proposed by Secretary-General Annan including establishing
a Deputy Secretary-General post.29 In December 2000, the U.N. General Assembly
authorized implementation of results based budgeting for the 2003-2003 biennium
budget. On June 29, 2001, Secretary-General Annan was elected to a second five-
year term, to start January 1, 2002. Urging the United Nations to align its activities
to doing what matters in the 21st century, in September 2002, Secretary-General
Annan submitted a report, Strengthening of the United Nations: An Agenda for
Further Change, calling for additional reforms.30
On December 2, 2004, a group appointed by the Secretary-General, called the
High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change, issued its report, A More
Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility.31 The report acknowledged failures and
shortcomings in the organization and offered many recommendations for significant
changes including enlarging the Security Council, creating a Peacebuilding
Commission, and strengthening the role of the Secretary-General. Many of these
recommendations required implementation by U.N. member states. Drawing on
some of the proposals in the High-level Panel’s report, the Secretary-General on
March 21, 2005, issued his own report, In Larger Freedom: Towards Development,
Security and Human Rights for All.32 The Secretary-General hoped that these reform
proposals would form the basis for discussion and final decision at a U.N. summit,
scheduled for September 2005.
This meeting, at the start of the 60th session of the General Assembly, also
commemorated the organization’s 60th anniversary.33 The 2005 U.N. Summit,
meeting September 14-16, 2005, agreed, without a vote, to the 2005 World Summit
Outcome resolution which included some reform measures, but the details of such
measures were mainly left for continued discussions during the 60th and into the 61st
(to start September 2006) session of the U.N. General Assembly.34
The Bush Administration also expressed support for U.N. reforms. It called for
measures to improve internal oversight and accountability, to identify cost savings,
29 Louise Frechette of Canada was Deputy Secretary-General from March 2, 1998 through
March 31, 2006. British national Mark Malloch Brown started as Deputy on April 1, 2006.
30 U.N. document A/57/387.
31 [http://www.un.org/reform/high-levelpanel.html].
32 [http://www.un.org/largerfreedom]
33 See [http://www.un.org/summit2005/]
34 U.N. General Assembly Resolution 60/1 [A/RES/60/1]. Additional changes include the
following: In May 2005, the Secretary-General appointed Christopher Burnham to be U.N.
Under Secretary-General for Management. (Burnham had previously been at the U.S.
Department of State in a similar capacity). This U.N. position has been held by Americans
in recent years. Burnham’s predecessor, Catherine Bertini, had been preceded by Joseph
Connor. The number of U.N. Secretariat staff had been cut from about 12,000 in 1985 to
about 9,000 today. The U.N. regular budget for the 2000-2001 biennium was $2.562 billion
(or a little less than $1.3 billion per year). The regular budget for 2002-2003 was $2.891
billion; and the regular budget for 2004-2005 was $3.608 billion.

---

CRS-20
and to allocate resources to high priority programs and offices. It expressed support
for creation of a Peacebuilding Commission, for replacement of the Commission on
Human Rights with a smaller action-oriented Human Rights Council, and support for
a Democracy Fund (originally proposed by President Bush in September 2004). The
U.S. government expressed its openness to Security Council reform and expansion,
but not at the expense of effectiveness.35
As of August 9, 2006, several reform measures have been put into place. These
include creation of the Peacebuilding Commission, establishment and operation of
a new U.N. Human Rights Council to replace the U.N. Commission on Human
Rights, U.N. Democracy Fund, U.N. Ethics Office, strengthened financial disclosure
requirements and whistleblower protections, and Central Emergency Response Fund.
In addition, the General Assembly has held at least 20 meetings of an Informal
Plenary on Mandate Review. This review involves 9,000 mandates that are five
years or older, with the goal of eliminating or reducing those tasks no longer relevant.
No decisions have been taken as a result of this review.
35 See U.S. Mission to the United Nations website at [http://www.un.int/usa/reform-un.htm
for] statements, fact sheets, and reports on U.N. reform.

---

CRS-21
Appendix A. Congress and Funding the U.N.
System: FY2004-FY2005
Assessed Budgets
FY2004. For FY2004, President Bush requested $1,010,000,000 for the CIO
account, of which $745.8 million was for assessed contributions to U.N. system
organizations (of which $340.7 million was for the U.N. regular budget), and $550.2
million for assessed contributions to the CIPA account.
On September 5, 2003, the Senate Appropriations Committee, reporting in
S.Rept. 108-144 on S. 1585, making appropriations for the Departments of
Commerce, Justice, and State, recommended $921,888,000 for the CIO account and
$482,649,000 for the CIPA account. The Committee deleted $71,429,000 requested
funding for a U.S. return to membership in the U.N. Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO), noting that the Committee did not consider
UNESCO reformed. The Committee directed that the Inspector General of the
Department of State conduct an annual audit of UNESCO to determine the status of
reform, the qualifications of UNESCO’s staff, its procedures for hiring and
promoting personnel, a detailed breakdown of expenditures, and how U.S.
membership would advance the goals of the UNESCO and U.S. priorities.
The Senate Appropriations Committee also deleted $11,779,000 from requested
funding for the U.N. regular budget because the Committee did not want to provide
funding for the U.N. Commission on Human Rights which, in its view, had too long
been dominated by known human rights violators. In addition, of the funds made
available for the U.S. contribution to the U.N. regular budget, $10 million was to be
used to reimburse New York City for unanticipated costs in providing protection to
foreign officials associated with the United Nations in the aftermath of September 11,
2001. The Committee also expressed its views on war crimes tribunals, directing the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to complete its work by 2004 and
the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to complete
its work by 2006. The Committee also expressed its support for the Special Court
for Sierra Leone and Directed the U.N. Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) to
provide the necessary support for the Court.
On July 23, 2003, the House, by a vote of 400 in favor, to 21 against, passed
H.R. 2799, making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State for FY2004, providing the requested $1.010 billion for assessed contributions
to international organizations (CIO) and $550.2 million for assessed contributions to
U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA). In its report (H.Rept. 108-221) on this
measure, the House Committee on Appropriations had included the full amount
requested by the President for a U.S. return to membership in UNESCO. The
Committee noted that it expected the Department of State to work aggressively to
ensure that UNESCO employs more Americans, especially at senior levels. The
Committee also noted that if the 2004-2005 UNESCO budget is increased, that
increase should focus on management and administrative reforms identified by the
General Accounting Office. The Committee urged the Department of State to
consider the appointment of a single representative with the rank of ambassador to

---

CRS-22
represent the United States at UNESCO and at the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, both at Paris, France. During floor debate on H.R.
2799, an amendment offered by Representative Ron Paul to strike funding for
UNESCO was defeated by a vote of 145 in favor of the amendment to 279 against
the amendment.
P.L. 108-199 (H.R. 2673, signed January 23, 2004), the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY2004, included $1,010,463,000 for U.S. contributions to
international organizations (CIO) account, and $550,200,000 for U.S. contributions
to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA) account, as requested by the President. The
measure included a requirement that non-defense spending be cut by 0.59% across
the board.
FY2005. On February 2, 2004, the Bush Administration requested $1.194
billion for U.S. assessed Contributions to International Organizations (CIO), of
which $819 million was for assessed U.N. system organizations including $362.2
million for the U.N. regular budget and $6 million for the U.N. Capital Master Plan,
a loan subsidy relating to the renovation of the U.N. headquarters complex in New
York. In addition, he requested $650 million for assessed contributions to U.N.
peacekeeping activities (CIPA).
On July 1, 2004, the House Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 4754
as an original measure. The Committee recommended full funding of the request for
CIO and CIPA. The Committee expressed its support for the U.S. policy of zero
nominal growth budgets for international organizations and noted that if the United
Nations proposed exceeding its $3.16 billion biennial budget, the Committee should
be notified before consideration and adoption of such a proposal. While
recommending full payment of U.S. assessed U.N. budget dues, the Committee
expressed concern about allegations of corruption in the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program.
It noted that the United Nations needed to do more about the crises in Sudan. It also
expressed concern over charges of sexual abuse of minors by some associated with
U.N. peacekeeping operations. The Committee included $6 million for costs of a
direct loan of up to $1.2 billion to the United Nations for renovating U.N.
headquarters in New York.
On July 8, 2004, the House, by a vote of 397 to 18, passed H.R. 4754,
appropriating $1.194 billion for U.S. assessed Contributions to International
Organizations (CIO) and $650 million for U.S. assessed contributions to U.N.
peacekeeping activities (CIPA). During House floor consideration of the bill, a
number of amendments were offered to reduce or cut CIO funding. On July 7, 2004,
Representative Ron Paul’s amendment to prohibit funds for UNESCO failed by a
vote of 135 to 333, and his amendment to prohibit U.S. contributions to the United
Nations or U.N. affiliated agencies failed by a vote of 83 to 335. The next day,
Representative Smith’s (Michigan) amendment to reduce CIO funding by $20
million to express concern about the alleged corruption in the U.N. Oil-for-Food
program failed by a vote of 129 to 291.
On September 15, 2004, the Senate Committee on Appropriations reported
(S.Rept. 108-344) on S. 2809, funding the Departments of Commerce, Justice and
State for FY2005. The Committee recommendation of $1.020 billion for U.S.

---

CRS-23
assessed Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) was $173,380,000 below
the amount requested by the Administration; and the $574 million recommended for
assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA) was $76 million below
the amount requested by the Administration. The Committee recommended
allocation of $70 million for the IAEA, $12.7 million for the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), $1.35 million for the International Maritime
Organization (IMO), and $1.1 million for the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO). The Committee also recommended $6 million to subsidize
the cost of a $1.2 billion loan to the United Nations for renovation of its
headquarters. The Committee also recommended that the Department of State urge
the United Nations to make available to congressional committees investigating the
Oil-for-Food program all relevant documents, and ensure that the Volcker Inquiry
was conducted rigorously.36
The conference committee in H.Rept. 108-792, expressed concern that the U.N.
Oil for Food Program was marred by allegations of corruption and that it abetted a
tyrannical regime and undermined the international community’s good will. It
directed the Department of State to bring all necessary resources to bear on
investigation of the Oil for Food Program and provide all requested documents to the
U.S. Congress and to provide any requested assistance to the U.N. Secretary-
General’s Independent Inquiry Committee.
P.L. 108-447, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2005 included $1.182
billion for U.S. assessed contributions to international organizations (CIO) account
of which up to $6.0 million may be used for the cost of a direct loan of up to $1.2
billion to the United Nations for renovating U.N. headquarters in New York; and
$490 million for assessed contribution to U.N. peacekeeping activities (CIPA)
account. The Secretary of State was to provide the Appropriations Committees with
a copy of the most recent U.N. biennium budget and to notify the Committees of any
United Nations action to increase funding for any U.N. program without identifying
an offsetting decrease elsewhere in the U.N. budget. This caused the United Nations
to exceed its adopted biennium budget for the 2004-2005 of $3.16 billion. The
measure included a rescission of 0.54% for any discretionary account in the act.
As already discussed, the measure directed that $1.5 million of the money
appropriated for the U.S. Institute for Peace be used for the expenses of a Task Force
on the United Nations. The Institute was to create the task force consisting of no
more than a total 12 experts drawn from the American Enterprise Institute, Brookings
Institution, Council on Foreign Relations, Center for Strategic and International
Studies, Hoover Institution, and the Heritage Foundation. The task force was to
study U.N. efforts to meet the goals of its Charter and submit its report within 180
days of enactment.
36 Following press accounts of serious allegations, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in
April 2004 set up the “Volcker” Independent Inquiry Committee. Endorsed by the U.N.
Security Council, the mandate of the Committee was to investigate the administration and
management of the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program in Iraq. Paul Volcker chaired the Committee
of three. See [http://www.iic-offp.org] for further information.

---

CRS-24
U.N. Voluntary Programs
FY2004. President Bush requested $314.6 million for FY2004 for voluntary
contributions to the International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account. An
additional $50 million was requested for IAEA voluntary contributions in another
account.
On July 23, 2003, the House, by a vote of 370 to 50, passed H.R. 2800, making
appropriations for foreign operations including $194,550,000 for voluntary
contributions to the IO&P account. H.R. 2800 included $120 million for UNICEF
and $52.9 million for voluntary IAEA programs in other accounts. During House
consideration, an amendment by Representative Nadler to withhold funds for the
U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)
failed when a point of order was sustained against it.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2004 (P.L. 108-199, signed January
23, 2004) included $321,650,000 for voluntary contributions to the International
Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account, including $120 million for UNICEF
and $102 million for the U.N. Development Program (UNDP). Appropriated in
another account was $53 million for voluntary contributions to the IAEA.
FY2005. The Administration requested $304.45 million for voluntary
contributions for the International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account for
FY2005. In addition, $53 million was requested for voluntary contributions to IAEA
in another account.
On July 13, 2004, the House Appropriations Committee reported (H.Rept. 108-
599) H.R. 4818 as an original measure. The Committee recommended $323.45
million for voluntary contributions to the international organizations and programs
(IO&P) account, $19 million more than requested by the Administration. The
Committee recommended not less than $107 million for UNDP; not less than $7
million for the U.N. Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture; not less than $125
million for UNICEF; and $3 million for UNIFEM (of which $1 million would be for
a first time contribution to the Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate
Violence Against Women).
On July 15, 2004, the House, by a vote of 365 to 41, passed H.R. 4818,
including $323.45 million for U.S. voluntary contributions to the international
organizations and programs (IO&P) account. The bill included $53 million for a
voluntary contribution to the IAEA in another account. During House floor debate
on H.R. 4818, Representative Buyer introduced an amendment that prohibited any
funds appropriated by this measure to be used by any U.S. government official to
request the United Nations to assess the validity of elections in the United States.
The amendment was agreed to by a vote of 243 to 161.
P.L. 108-447 included for FY2005, $319,494,000 for voluntary contributions
to the International Organizations and Programs account (IO&P) as well as $53
million for voluntary contributions to IAEA appropriated in another account.

---

CRS-25
U.N. Peacekeeping Operations
FY2004. P.L. 108-199, appropriating funds for the State Department, included
$550.2 million for FY2004 U.S. assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping
activities (CIPA), the amount requested by the President.
FY2005. The Administration requested $650 million for FY2005 for U.S.
assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping operations. Another $780 million was
requested for U.N. peacekeeping in supplemental FY2005 appropriations. H.R.
1268, signed May 11, 2005, as P.L. 109-13, included $680 million. The State
Department Appropriations Act, FY2005, P.L. 108-447, included $490 million for
FY2005 U.S. assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping activities.

---

CRS-26
Appendix B. The United Nations System; An
Organizational Chart
See [http://www.un.org/aboutun/chart.html].

---