link to page 1  link to page 2  link to page 2 
 
Updated April 20, 2022
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping 
The United States is the single largest financial contributor 
their own governments, which are reimbursed by the United 
to United Nations (U.N.) peacekeeping activities. Congress 
Nations at a standard rate determined by the Assembly 
authorizes and appropriates U.S. contributions, and it has an 
(about $1,428 per soldier per month).  
ongoing interest in ensuring such funding is used as 
The U.N. peacekeeping financial year runs from July 1 to 
efficiently and effectively as possible. The United States, as 
June 30; the Assembly usually adopts resolutions to finance 
a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, plays a 
peacekeeping missions in late June. The total approved 
key role in establishing, renewing, and funding U.N. 
budget for the 2021-2022 peacekeeping year is $6.38 
peacekeeping operations. For 2022, the United Nations 
billion. Operations with the highest annual budgets are 
assessed the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping at 26.94%; 
MINUSMA (Mali), at $1.17 billion; UNMISS (South 
however, since 1994 Congress has capped the U.S. payment 
Sudan), at $1.11 billion; and MONUSCO (Democratic 
at 25% due to concerns that U.S. assessments are too high. 
Republic of the Congo), at $1.04 billion. 
Congress appropriated $1.5 billion to most U.N. 
peacekeeping activities for FY2022 (up to the 25% cap). 
U.S. Policy 
Most recently, President Biden’s FY2023 budget proposes 
Background and Context: The Enacted U.S. Cap 
full U.S. funding for U.N. peacekeeping, including the 
payment of U.S. peacekeeping arrears.  
In the early 1990s, the U.S. peacekeeping assessment was 
over 30%, which Congress found too high. In 1994, 
U.N. Peacekeeping Funding 
Members capped U.S. funding at 25% of the peacekeeping 
The United Nations currently operates 12 U.N. 
budget for all fiscal years after 1995 (P.L. 103-236). Over 
peacekeeping missions worldwide, with more than 80,000 
the years, the gap between the actual U.S. assessment and 
military, police, and civilian personnel from over 100 
the cap led to funding shortfalls. The State Department and 
countries. The Security Council adopts a resolution to 
Congress often covered these by raising the cap for limited 
establish each operation and specifies how it will be funded. 
periods and/or by allowing the application of U.N. 
Historically, the Council has authorized the U.N. General 
peacekeeping credits (excess U.N. funds from previous 
Assembly to create a separate assessed account for each 
missions) to fund outstanding U.S. balances. For many 
operation to be supported by member states contributions. 
years, these actions allowed the United States to pay its 
In recent years, due to concerns about budget shortfalls, the 
peacekeeping dues in full. However, since FY2017 
General Assembly has pooled peacekeeping funding to 
Congress has declined to raise the cap, and in mid-2017, the 
allow for increased financial flexibility.   
Trump Administration allowed for the application of 
peacekeeping credits up to, but not beyond, the 25% cap—
The General Assembly adopts the scale of assessments for 
which led to the accumulation of over $900 million in U.S. 
U.N. member contributions to peacekeeping operations 
arrears from FY2017 to FY2020. In early 2021, President 
every three years. The peacekeeping scale is based on a 
Biden reversed the Trump Administration policy and 
modification of the U.N. regular budget scale, with the five 
allowed for the applications of peacekeeping credits beyond 
permanent council members assessed at a higher level than 
the cap.  
for the regular budget. For example, the United States is 
Key Accounts and Recent Funding Levels  
assessed at 22% of the regular budget; however, its current 
peacekeeping assessment is 26.94%. Other top contributors 
U.S. assessed contributions to U.N. peacekeeping 
include China, Japan, and Germany (Table 1). In December 
operations are provided primarily through the Contributions 
2021, the General Assembly adopted the assessment rates 
for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account, 
for the 2022-2024 time period.  
which is funded through annual State Department-Foreign 
Operations (SFOPS) Appropriations Acts. CIPA funds 10 
Table 1. Top Financial Contributors to U.N. 
of the 12 U.N. peacekeeping operations, as well as the U.N. 
Peacekeeping, 2022, by Assessment Rate 
criminal tribunals and mission monitoring activities (Figure 
Country 
Percent 
Country 
Percent 
1). 
1. United States 
26.94 
6. France 
5.28 
In addition to CIPA, the Contributions to International 
2. China 
18.68 
7. Italy  
3.18 
Organizations (CIO) account funds two observer missions, 
3. Japan 
8.03 
8. Canada 
2.62 
UNTSO (Israel and the Palestinians) and UNMOGIP (India 
4. Germany 
6.11 
9. S. Korea 
2.57 
and Pakistan), through U.S. contributions to the U.N. 
5. United Kingdom 
5.35 
10. Russia 
2.28 
regular budget. The Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) 
Rest of Membership, Total Percent: 81.04 
account, which funds most non-U.N. peacekeeping and 
Source: U.N. document, A/76/296/Rev.1/Add.1, December 28, 2021. 
regional stability operations, provides assessed 
Note: Italics represent permanent Security Council members. 
contributions to the U.N. Support Office in Somalia 
(UNSOS), a U.N.-authorized logistics mission that supports 
U.N. members voluntarily provide military and police 
the African Union Mission in Somalia. 
personnel for each U.N. mission. Peacekeepers are paid by 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping 
For FY2023, President Biden requested $2.33 billion for 
substantial payments on its outstanding dues. In 1999, 
CIPA (a nearly $830 million increase over enacted FY2022 
Congress and the Administration negotiated what is known 
funding of $1.50 billion). The request is significantly higher 
as the “Helms-Biden Agreement,” which established 
than recent CIPA funding levels; it includes full funding for 
conditions under which some U.S. arrears, including 
U.N. peacekeeping operations, as well as $620 million to 
peacekeeping arrears, were paid. Since the enactment of 
pay arrears accrued from FY2017 to FY2020 due to the 
Helms-Biden, some U.S. arrears remain. Arrears 
25% cap and $110.3 million to pay arrears from the 2021-
accumulated prior to 2001 for both open and closed 
2022 peacekeeping year (also due to the cap). In the 
peacekeeping operations total about $328 million. (Most of 
FY2022 budget request, President Biden proposed the 
these are from the gap between the 25% U.S. cap and the 
payment of some peacekeeping arrears but Congress did not 
U.N. assessment pre-2001, while others are the result of 
appropriate such funding as part of the FY2022 SFOPS Act.  
congressional policy holds.) As previously noted, the 
United States also accumulated over $900 million in 
Figure 1. CIPA Account Funding, FY2017-FY2022 
additional cap-related arrears from FY2017 through 
(Actual funding unless otherwise indicated) 
FY2020. Some U.S. policymakers disagree about the status 
of peacekeeping arrears and argue that they should be paid, 
$2
$ in billions
while others do not recognize them as arrears and claim the 
1.9
1.38
1.53
United States is under no obligation to pay them. Some 
1.5
1.55
1.46
have also raised concerns about the impact of U.S. arrears 
$1
on the effectiveness of U.N. peacekeeping operations.  
Sexual Abuse & Exploitation by U.N. Peacekeepers 
Congress has sought to link U.S. peacekeeping funding to 
$0
the issue of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by U.N. 
FY17
FY18
FY19
FY20
FY21
FY22
peacekeepers. For example, SFOPS Acts since FY2008 
(enact.)
have prohibited the obligation of U.N. peacekeeping 
 
Source: Congressional budget justifications, annual SFOPS bil s. 
funding unless the Secretary of State certifies that the 
United Nations is implementing effective policies and 
procedures to prevent U.N. employees and peacekeeping 
U.S. funding may fluctuate annually depending on several 
troops from human trafficking or acts of illegal exploitation 
factors, including differences between the U.S. and U.N. 
or other violations of human rights. Since FY2017, SFOPS 
peacekeeping fiscal years (the U.S. fiscal year is from 
bills have also prohibited assistance to any unit of the 
October 1 to September 30, while the U.N. peacekeeping 
security forces of a foreign country if there is credible 
fiscal year is from July 1 to June 30), and discrepancies 
information that such unit has engaged in SEA until the 
between the peacekeeping assessment and the enacted U.S. 
Secretary of State certifies the country is taking steps to 
cap. Payments may also be affected by changes to 
hold the unit accountable. The Department of State 
assessment rates, the application of peacekeeping credits, 
Authorities Act, FY2017 (P.L. 114-323) also requires 
and changes to individual operations. In some years, the 
reporting on U.N. efforts to hold perpetrators accountable 
timing of State Department reports to Congress (which are 
for SEA prior to renewing or establishing a mission. 
required by SFOPS Acts) have delayed U.S. payments.  
U.N. Peacekeeping Financial Situation 
Selected Policy Issues 
Some experts have expressed concern regarding the 
Funding and Growth of U.N. Peacekeeping  
financial status of U.N. peacekeeping operations. In 2019, 
U.N. Secretary-General (SG) António Guterres noted an 
Debates over U.N. peacekeeping funding often occur 
increase in the number of peacekeeping missions that were 
against the backdrop of broader concerns regarding the 
frequently cash constrained. Causes included payment 
changing nature of U.N. peacekeeping. The concept of 
patterns and arrears, and “structural weaknesses” in 
peacekeeping has evolved since the first mission was 
established in 1948. “Traditional” peacekeeping involves 
peacekeeping budget methodologies, including inefficient 
payment schedules and borrowing and funding restrictions. 
implementing cease-fire or peace agreements; however, in 
Such issues led to cash shortages and delays in 
recent years, the Security Council has increasingly 
reimbursements to some troop contributing countries (see 
authorized operations in complex and insecure 
U.N. document A/73/809). To help address these issues, in 
environments where there is little peace to keep and no 
July 2019 the General Assembly approved the management 
clear outcome. Peacekeepers may be required to protect 
of cash balances of all active peacekeeping operations as a 
civilians, disarm violent groups, monitor human rights 
pool (while maintaining the balances in separate funds for 
violations, or assist in delivering humanitarian assistance. 
each mission), and requested that the SG issue assessment 
Such activities can place additional financial demands on 
letters for the full budget period approved by the Assembly 
U.N. members. Some experts argue that current 
(Assembly resolution 73/307). The United States supported 
peacekeeping funding cannot effectively support some of 
these efforts. As of October 19, 2021 (most recently 
the broad mandates authorized by the Council.  
available information), U.N. officials report that due in part 
The United States and Peacekeeping Arrears 
to these reforms, the overall liquidity of active 
In the mid-1990s, the United States accumulated significant 
peacekeeping operation continues to improve. 
U.N. peacekeeping and U.N. regular budget arrears. Many 
U.S. policymakers were concerned that the United States 
Luisa Blanchfield, Specialist in International Relations   
could lose its vote in the General Assembly unless it made 
IF10597
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping 
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10597 · VERSION 19 · UPDATED