• Comment (4)

Ambassador Susan Rice Blasts GOP U.N. Funding Plan

September 12, 2011 RSS Feed Print

A House GOP plan to force the United Nations to reform or face massive U.S. funding cuts was assailed by President Obama's ambassador to the world body today as a wrong-headed political scheme.

"Legislation that would withhold funding for the United Nations is fundamentally flawed in concept and practice, sets us back, is self-defeating, and doesn't work," charged Ambassador Susan Rice.

[See photos of the Obamas abroad.]

She added that it would cut American influence in the New York-based assembly and turn the United States into a carping outsider.

During a breakfast interview with reporters sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, Rice said that the U.S. is working to reform the United Nations, long seen by critics as an ineffective, anti-American body that wastes money.

"The goal of reform is one that we are working to pursue every day of the week but we believe very strongly that the way to do that is from the vantage point of a member in good standing that meets its obligations and is viewed as a constructive player where our influence is much enhanced rather than as a laggard and a debtor who's carping from the outside that things are not changed as we would like to see them changed," says Rice in unusually sharp language. [See photos of unrest in Libya.]

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman IIeana Ros-Lehtinen, a leading U.N. critic, is pushing a plan to let had the U.S. pay for what it wants at the U.N. as a way to pressure for new reforms. Currently the U.S. funds about 22 percent of the United Nations, or $6.4 billion out of the U.N.'s $22.3 billion budget. That's double what it was just 10 years ago.

Choosing what to pay for instead of ponying up the full amount would crush U.S. influence, says Rice.

"We can't violate our treaty obligations and take an a la carte approach to paying our obligations," says Rice. Previous efforts to punish the U.N. by slashing U.S. donations, she added, "reduced our standing, it reduced our influence, and it made it much harder for us to use the institution to obtain the positive results for the United States."

Tags:
UN,
Susan Rice,
Congress,
national security terrorism and the military,
politics

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Only in the US would we continue to fund an organization that is so anti-American, ant-Israeli, and corrupt.

After all, it's the Government's money, right?

"We continue to try to reform from within as a member in good standing".

Really? Where has it gotten us? 22% compared to 3% for China. Do you see us having a larger voice than them or any other country?

This is a joke.

divmstr95 6:41PM October 15, 2011

We're broke! What part of this can't people understand. And by the way, the U.N. will always need us, not the other way around.

Chuck Molinari of PA 6:19PM September 13, 2011

I just read this for my International Relations class, and It seems that both sides have a point. Reducing UN funding is overall a good idea, but it does have serious concequences, which even though not mentioned in the article, we could potentially loose our spot on the securit council (we need this!!!). Maybe there is a way to meet in the middle - reducce funding, but not dramatically?

ALESSA of CO 10:56PM September 12, 2011

About this blog

About this blog

Washington Whispers has been featured in U.S. News & World Report since 1933, offering a fun, insider's view of Washington.

advertisement

Latest Videos

advertisement