United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping
link to page 1 
Updated April 9, 2024
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping
The United States is the single largest financial contributor
own governments, which are reimbursed by the United
to United Nations (U.N.) peacekeeping activities. Congress
Nations at a standard rate determined by the General
authorizes and appropriates U.S. contributions, and it has an
Assembly (about $1,428 per soldier per month).
ongoing interest in ensuring such funding is used as
efficiently and effectively as possible. The United States, as
The peacekeeping financial year runs from July 1 to June
a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, plays a
30; the Assembly usually adopts resolutions to finance
key role in establishing, renewing, and funding U.N.
missions in late June. The approved budget for the 2023-
peacekeeping operations. For 2024, the United Nations
2024 peacekeeping fiscal year is $6.1 billion. Costs vary
assessed the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping at 26.94%;
considerably among operations, with three of the missions
however, since 1994 Congress has capped the U.S. payment
in Africa constituting over 50% of the budget (UNMISS in
at 25% due to concerns that U.S. assessments are too high.
South Sudan, MINUSCA in the Central African Republic,
Congress appropriated $1.37 billion to most U.N.
and MONUSCO in the Democratic Republic of Congo).
peacekeeping activities for FY2024 (up to the 25% cap).
Due to the gap between the U.N. assessment and the 25%
U.S. Policy
cap, the United States has accumulated over $1.1 billion in
Background and Context: The Enacted U.S. Cap. In the
arrears since FY2017. President Biden’s FY2025 budget
early 1990s, the U.S. peacekeeping assessment was over
request would fund the U.N. peacekeeping operations up to
30%, which Congress found too high. In 1994, Members
the 25% cap.
capped U.S. funding at 25% of the peacekeeping budget for
Overview of U.N. Peacekeeping
all fiscal years after 1995 (Section 404 of P.L. 103-236).
Over the years, the gap between the actual U.S. assessment
The United Nations currently operates 11 U.N.
and the cap led to funding shortfalls. The State Department
peacekeeping missions worldwide, with more than 70,000
and Congress often covered these by raising the cap for
military, police, and civilian personnel from over 100
limited periods and/or by allowing the application of U.N.
countries. The Security Council adopts a resolution to
peacekeeping credits (excess U.N. funds from previous
establish each operation and specify how it will be funded.
missions) to fund outstanding U.S. balances. For many
Historically, the Council has authorized the U.N. General
years, these actions allowed the United States to pay its
Assembly to create a separate assessed account for each
peacekeeping dues in full. However, since FY2017
operation to be supported by member states’ contributions.
Congress has declined to raise the cap, and in mid-2017, the
In recent years, due to concerns about budget shortfalls, the
Trump Administration allowed for the application of
General Assembly has pooled peacekeeping funding to
peacekeeping credits up to, but not beyond, the 25% cap—
allow for increased financial flexibility.
which has led to the accumulation of over $1.1 billion in
The General Assembly adopts the scale of assessments for
U.S. arrears since FY2017. In early 2021, President Biden
U.N. member contributions to peacekeeping operations
reversed the policy and allowed for the applications of
every three years. The peacekeeping scale is based on a
peacekeeping credits beyond the cap.
modification of the U.N. regular budget scale, with the five
Key Accounts and Recent Funding Levels. U.S. assessed
permanent council members assessed at a higher level than
contributions to U.N. peacekeeping are provided mostly
for the regular budget. For example, the United States is
through the Contributions for International Peacekeeping
assessed at 22% of the regular budget; however, its current
Activities (CIPA) account, which is funded through annual
peacekeeping assessment is 26.94%. Other top contributors
State Department-Foreign Operations (SFOPS)
include China, Japan, and Germany (Table 1). In December
Appropriations Acts. CIPA funds the majority of U.N.
2021, the General Assembly adopted the assessment rates
peacekeeping operations, as well as the U.N. criminal
for the 2022-2024 time period. Assessment rates for 2025-
tribunals and mission monitoring activities.
2027 will likely be adopted in December 2024.
In addition, the Contributions to International
Table 1. Top Financial Contributors by Assessment
Organizations (CIO) account funds two observer missions,
Country
Percentage
Country
Percentage
UNTSO (Israel and the Palestinians) and UNMOGIP (India
1. United States
26.94
6. France
5.28
and Pakistan), through U.S. funding to the U.N. regular
2. China
18.68
7. Italy
3.18
budget. The Peacekeeping Operations account, which funds
3. Japan
8.03
8. Canada
2.62
most non-U.N. peacekeeping and regional stability
4. Germany
6.11
9. S. Korea
2.57
operations, provides assessed funding to the U.N. Support
5. U.K.
5.35
10. Russia
2.28
Office in Somalia, a U.N.-authorized logistics mission that
Source: U.N. document, A/76/296/Rev.1/Add.1, December 28, 2021.
supports the African Union Mission in Somalia.
Some U.N. members, often referred to as troop contributing
The FY2024 SFOPS Act (Division F of the Further
countries (TCCs), voluntarily provide military and police
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024; P.L. 118-47)
personnel for each mission. Peacekeepers are paid by their
provides $1.37 billion to the CIPA account (up to the
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping
enacted 25% cap) (Figure 1). President Biden’s FY2025
were paid. Since the enactment of Helms-Biden, some U.S.
CIPA budget request is $1.23 billion (also up to the 25%
arrears remain. Arrears accumulated prior to 2001 for both
cap). This represents a departure from the Administration’s
open and closed peacekeeping operations total about $328
FY2024 request, which would have fully funded U.S.
million. (Most of these are from the gap between the 25%
peacekeeping assessments and included partial payment of
U.S. cap and the U.N. assessment pre-2001, while others
U.S. arrears.
are the result of congressional policy holds.) As previously
noted, the United States has also accumulated over $1.1
Figure 1. CIPA Account Funding, FY2018-FY2024
billion in additional cap-related arrears since FY2017.
(Actual funding unless otherwise indicated)
Some policymakers disagree about the status of
peacekeeping arrears and argue that they should be paid,
while others do not recognize them as arrears and claim the
United States is under no obligation to pay them. Some
have also raised concerns about the impact of U.S. arrears
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
the issue of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by U.N.
peacekeepers. For example, SFOPS Acts since FY2008
have prohibited the obligation of U.N. peacekeeping
funding unless the Secretary of State certifies that the
United Nations is implementing effective policies and
procedures to prevent U.N. employees and peacekeeping
Source: Congressional budget justifications, annual SFOPS acts.
troops from human trafficking or acts of illegal exploitation
or other violations of human rights. Since FY2017, SFOPS
U.S. funding may fluctuate annually depending on several
bills have also prohibited assistance to any unit of the
factors, including differences between the U.S. and U.N.
security forces of a foreign country if there is credible
peacekeeping fiscal years (the U.S. fiscal year is from
information that such unit has engaged in SEA until the
October 1 to September 30, while the U.N. peacekeeping
Secretary of State certifies the country is taking steps to
fiscal year is from July 1 to June 30), and discrepancies
hold the unit accountable. The Department of State
between the peacekeeping assessment and the enacted U.S.
Authorities Act, FY2017 (P.L. 114-323) also requires
cap. Payments may also be affected by changes to
reporting on U.N. efforts to hold perpetrators accountable
assessment rates, the application of peacekeeping credits,
for SEA prior to renewing or establishing a mission.
and changes to individual operations. In some years, the
U.N. Peacekeeping Financial Situation. Some observers
timing of State Department reports to Congress (which are
required by SFOPS acts) have delayed U.S. payments.
have expressed concern regarding the financial status of
U.N. peacekeeping operations. In 2019, U.N. Secretary-
Selected Policy Issues
General (SG) António Guterres noted an increase in the
Funding and Growth of U.N. Peacekeeping. Debates over
number of peacekeeping missions that were frequently cash
constrained. Causes included payment patterns and arrears,
U.N. peacekeeping funding often occur against the
and “structural weaknesses” in peacekeeping budget
backdrop of broader concerns regarding the changing
nature of U.N. peacekeeping. The concept of peacekeeping
methodologies, including inefficient payment schedules and
borrowing and funding restrictions. Such issues led to cash
has evolved since the first mission was established in 1948.
“Traditional” peacekeeping involves implementi
shortages and delays in reimbursements to some TCCs
ng cease-
fire or peace agreements; however, the Security Council has
(U.N. document A/73/809). To address these issues, the
General Assembly approved the management of cash
increasingly authorized operations in complex and insecure
balances of all active peacekeeping operations as a pool
environments where there is little peace to keep and no
clear outcome. Peacekeepers may be required to protect
(while maintaining the balances in separate funds for each
mission), and requested that the SG issue assessment letters
civilians, disarm violent groups, monitor human rights
for the full budget period approved by the Assembly
violations, or assist in delivering humanitarian assistance.
Such activities can place additional financial demands on
(Resolution 73/307). U.N. officials report that due in part to
these reforms, the overall liquidity of active peacekeeping
U.N. members. Some experts argue that current
operations continues to improve. The United States
peacekeeping funding cannot effectively support some of
generally supported these efforts. Congress has
the broad mandates authorized by the Council.
demonstrated an interest in the effects of such funding
U.S. Peacekeeping Arrears. In the mid-1990s, the United
shortfalls; for example, the FY2023 SFOPS Act required
States accumulated significant U.N. peacekeeping and U.N.
the State Department to report to Congress on overdue
regular budget arrears. Many U.S. policymakers were
payments to TCCs, including any operational impacts.
concerned that the United States could lose its vote in the
General Assembly unless it made substantial payments on
Luisa Blanchfield, Specialist in International Relations
its outstanding dues. In 1999, Congress and the
Administration negotiated what is known as the “Helms
IF10597
-
Biden Agreement,” which established conditions under
which some U.S. arrears, including peacekeeping arrears,
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 23 · UPDATED
Updated April 9, 2024
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping
The United States is the single largest financial contributor
own governments, which are reimbursed by the United
to United Nations (U.N.) peacekeeping activities. Congress
Nations at a standard rate determined by the General
authorizes and appropriates U.S. contributions, and it has an
Assembly (about $1,428 per soldier per month).
ongoing interest in ensuring such funding is used as
efficiently and effectively as possible. The United States, as
The peacekeeping financial year runs from July 1 to June
a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, plays a
30; the Assembly usually adopts resolutions to finance
key role in establishing, renewing, and funding U.N.
missions in late June. The approved budget for the 2023-
peacekeeping operations. For 2024, the United Nations
2024 peacekeeping fiscal year is $6.1 billion. Costs vary
assessed the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping at 26.94%;
considerably among operations, with three of the missions
however, since 1994 Congress has capped the U.S. payment
in Africa constituting over 50% of the budget (UNMISS in
at 25% due to concerns that U.S. assessments are too high.
South Sudan, MINUSCA in the Central African Republic,
Congress appropriated $1.37 billion to most U.N.
and MONUSCO in the Democratic Republic of Congo).
peacekeeping activities for FY2024 (up to the 25% cap).
Due to the gap between the U.N. assessment and the 25%
U.S. Policy
cap, the United States has accumulated over $1.1 billion in
Background and Context: The Enacted U.S. Cap. In the
arrears since FY2017. President Biden’s FY2025 budget
early 1990s, the U.S. peacekeeping assessment was over
request would fund the U.N. peacekeeping operations up to
30%, which Congress found too high. In 1994, Members
the 25% cap.
capped U.S. funding at 25% of the peacekeeping budget for
Overview of U.N. Peacekeeping
all fiscal years after 1995 (Section 404 of P.L. 103-236).
Over the years, the gap between the actual U.S. assessment
The United Nations currently operates 11 U.N.
and the cap led to funding shortfalls. The State Department
peacekeeping missions worldwide, with more than 70,000
and Congress often covered these by raising the cap for
military, police, and civilian personnel from over 100
limited periods and/or by allowing the application of U.N.
countries. The Security Council adopts a resolution to
peacekeeping credits (excess U.N. funds from previous
establish each operation and specify how it will be funded.
missions) to fund outstanding U.S. balances. For many
Historically, the Council has authorized the U.N. General
years, these actions allowed the United States to pay its
Assembly to create a separate assessed account for each
peacekeeping dues in full. However, since FY2017
operation to be supported by member states’ contributions.
Congress has declined to raise the cap, and in mid-2017, the
In recent years, due to concerns about budget shortfalls, the
Trump Administration allowed for the application of
General Assembly has pooled peacekeeping funding to
peacekeeping credits up to, but not beyond, the 25% cap—
allow for increased financial flexibility.
which has led to the accumulation of over $1.1 billion in
The General Assembly adopts the scale of assessments for
U.S. arrears since FY2017. In early 2021, President Biden
U.N. member contributions to peacekeeping operations
reversed the policy and allowed for the applications of
every three years. The peacekeeping scale is based on a
peacekeeping credits beyond the cap.
modification of the U.N. regular budget scale, with the five
Key Accounts and Recent Funding Levels. U.S. assessed
permanent council members assessed at a higher level than
contributions to U.N. peacekeeping are provided mostly
for the regular budget. For example, the United States is
through the Contributions for International Peacekeeping
assessed at 22% of the regular budget; however, its current
Activities (CIPA) account, which is funded through annual
peacekeeping assessment is 26.94%. Other top contributors
State Department-Foreign Operations (SFOPS)
include China, Japan, and Germany (Table 1). In December
Appropriations Acts. CIPA funds the majority of U.N.
2021, the General Assembly adopted the assessment rates
peacekeeping operations, as well as the U.N. criminal
for the 2022-2024 time period. Assessment rates for 2025-
tribunals and mission monitoring activities.
2027 will likely be adopted in December 2024.
In addition, the Contributions to International
Table 1. Top Financial Contributors by Assessment
Organizations (CIO) account funds two observer missions,
Country
Percentage
Country
Percentage
UNTSO (Israel and the Palestinians) and UNMOGIP (India
1. United States
26.94
6. France
5.28
and Pakistan), through U.S. funding to the U.N. regular
2. China
18.68
7. Italy
3.18
budget. The Peacekeeping Operations account, which funds
3. Japan
8.03
8. Canada
2.62
most non-U.N. peacekeeping and regional stability
4. Germany
6.11
9. S. Korea
2.57
operations, provides assessed funding to the U.N. Support
5. U.K.
5.35
10. Russia
2.28
Office in Somalia, a U.N.-authorized logistics mission that
Source: U.N. document, A/76/296/Rev.1/Add.1, December 28, 2021.
supports the African Union Mission in Somalia.
Some U.N. members, often referred to as troop contributing
The FY2024 SFOPS Act (Division F of the Further
countries (TCCs), voluntarily provide military and police
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024; P.L. 118-47)
personnel for each mission. Peacekeepers are paid by their
provides $1.37 billion to the CIPA account (up to the
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping
enacted 25% cap) (Figure 1). President Biden’s FY2025
were paid. Since the enactment of Helms-Biden, some U.S.
CIPA budget request is $1.23 billion (also up to the 25%
arrears remain. Arrears accumulated prior to 2001 for both
cap). This represents a departure from the Administration’s
open and closed peacekeeping operations total about $328
FY2024 request, which would have fully funded U.S.
million. (Most of these are from the gap between the 25%
peacekeeping assessments and included partial payment of
U.S. cap and the U.N. assessment pre-2001, while others
U.S. arrears.
are the result of congressional policy holds.) As previously
noted, the United States has also accumulated over $1.1
Figure 1. CIPA Account Funding, FY2018-FY2024
billion in additional cap-related arrears since FY2017.
(Actual funding unless otherwise indicated)
Some policymakers disagree about the status of
peacekeeping arrears and argue that they should be paid,
while others do not recognize them as arrears and claim the
United States is under no obligation to pay them. Some
have also raised concerns about the impact of U.S. arrears
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
the issue of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by U.N.
peacekeepers. For example, SFOPS Acts since FY2008
have prohibited the obligation of U.N. peacekeeping
funding unless the Secretary of State certifies that the
United Nations is implementing effective policies and
procedures to prevent U.N. employees and peacekeeping
Source: Congressional budget justifications, annual SFOPS acts.
troops from human trafficking or acts of illegal exploitation
or other violations of human rights. Since FY2017, SFOPS
U.S. funding may fluctuate annually depending on several
bills have also prohibited assistance to any unit of the
factors, including differences between the U.S. and U.N.
security forces of a foreign country if there is credible
peacekeeping fiscal years (the U.S. fiscal year is from
information that such unit has engaged in SEA until the
October 1 to September 30, while the U.N. peacekeeping
Secretary of State certifies the country is taking steps to
fiscal year is from July 1 to June 30), and discrepancies
hold the unit accountable. The Department of State
between the peacekeeping assessment and the enacted U.S.
Authorities Act, FY2017 (P.L. 114-323) also requires
cap. Payments may also be affected by changes to
reporting on U.N. efforts to hold perpetrators accountable
assessment rates, the application of peacekeeping credits,
for SEA prior to renewing or establishing a mission.
and changes to individual operations. In some years, the
U.N. Peacekeeping Financial Situation. Some observers
timing of State Department reports to Congress (which are
required by SFOPS acts) have delayed U.S. payments.
have expressed concern regarding the financial status of
U.N. peacekeeping operations. In 2019, U.N. Secretary-
Selected Policy Issues
General (SG) António Guterres noted an increase in the
Funding and Growth of U.N. Peacekeeping. Debates over
number of peacekeeping missions that were frequently cash
constrained. Causes included payment patterns and arrears,
U.N. peacekeeping funding often occur against the
and “structural weaknesses” in peacekeeping budget
backdrop of broader concerns regarding the changing
nature of U.N. peacekeeping. The concept of peacekeeping
methodologies, including inefficient payment schedules and
borrowing and funding restrictions. Such issues led to cash
has evolved since the first mission was established in 1948.
“Traditional” peacekeeping involves implementi
shortages and delays in reimbursements to some TCCs
ng cease-
fire or peace agreements; however, the Security Council has
(U.N. document A/73/809). To address these issues, the
General Assembly approved the management of cash
increasingly authorized operations in complex and insecure
balances of all active peacekeeping operations as a pool
environments where there is little peace to keep and no
clear outcome. Peacekeepers may be required to protect
(while maintaining the balances in separate funds for each
mission), and requested that the SG issue assessment letters
civilians, disarm violent groups, monitor human rights
for the full budget period approved by the Assembly
violations, or assist in delivering humanitarian assistance.
Such activities can place additional financial demands on
(Resolution 73/307). U.N. officials report that due in part to
these reforms, the overall liquidity of active peacekeeping
U.N. members. Some experts argue that current
operations continues to improve. The United States
peacekeeping funding cannot effectively support some of
generally supported these efforts. Congress has
the broad mandates authorized by the Council.
demonstrated an interest in the effects of such funding
U.S. Peacekeeping Arrears. In the mid-1990s, the United
shortfalls; for example, the FY2023 SFOPS Act required
States accumulated significant U.N. peacekeeping and U.N.
the State Department to report to Congress on overdue
regular budget arrears. Many U.S. policymakers were
payments to TCCs, including any operational impacts.
concerned that the United States could lose its vote in the
General Assembly unless it made substantial payments on
Luisa Blanchfield, Specialist in International Relations
its outstanding dues. In 1999, Congress and the
Administration negotiated what is known as the “Helms
IF10597
-
Biden Agreement,” which established conditions under
which some U.S. arrears, including peacekeeping arrears,
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 23 · UPDATED