U.S. takes a firm stand against United Nations

Even after all the negative publicity the United Nations has received in recent years, some member states still haven’t come to terms with what needs to be done to improve the world organization’s reputation.

Case in point: During the recent debate on the $4.17 billion two-year budget, developing nations wanted to disband the antifraud office in six months and had refused to approve full funding for the operation.

The nations, banded together as the Group of 77, were willing to ignore the fact that the antifraud office had blown the lid off questionable contracts. It identified more than $600 million improper U.N. contracts and is now investigating an additional $1 billion in suspect agreements, according to the New York Times.

The United States was unyielding in its demand for full funding for the antifraud office and it ultimately succeeded in persuading the developing nations to abandon their ill-advised move.

Mark Wallace, the American ambassador for management, is credited with keeping the task force alive beyond June 30. Wallace also was in the spotlight with regard to the no-vote cast by the United States on the budget.

The opposition to the spending blueprint was prompted by the General Assembly’s decision to include money for a second round of the World Conference Against Racism, which was first held in 2001 in South Africa.

New-world nations

The Group of 77, made up of new-world nations, pushed for the funding even though it was clear that the United States would not go along.

U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the insistence of some members of the Group of 77, which represents 132 mainly developing countries and China, to fund a follow-up conference from the U.N.’s regular budget made it impossible for the United States to support the overall budget proposal.

In 2001, in reaction to the attacks on Israel during the racism conference, then Israeli deputy foreign minister, Michael Melchior, said the conference “hosted the most racist speeches and proposals to be heard in an international forum since World War II.”

Yet, last week, money was set aside in the budget for the second round of the conference — even though it had been previously agreed to by member states that it would be funded voluntarily by participants.

By sticking to its guns and standing by its chief ally in the Middle East, the United States has delivered a clear message to the United Nations: the high jinks by the developing nations that have undermined the credibility of the world organization will not be tolerated.

The oil-for-food scandal, the widespread allegations of crimes, including rape, being committed by peacekeeping forces from Third World countries, and the corruption that has permeated some of the key departments justify a top-to-bottom scrubbing of the United Nations.