USA - US House of Representatives Pass Numerous Anti-UN Amendments to State Dept Operations Legislation : Paula Boland / UN Association USA
UNA Statement shared by Kul Gautam
After last night’s Presidential debate debacle, here is another one coming - defunding the UN and its agencies.
Hope some sanity prevails and US democracy finds some self-correcting mechanisms.
Kul
See below from our colleagues at the Better World Campaign.
--------------------------------------------
This week, the House is considering the Fiscal Year 2025 State/Foreign Operations (SFOPS) legislation. 75 amendments have been made in order for floor consideration, including several extreme anti-UN proposals.
These include the following:
Tiffany (Order #68/Amd. #34): Defunds the UN entirely and all its agencies like WFP and UNICEF.
Spartz (Order #59/Amd. #89): Prohibits funding for United Nations entities unless specifically appropriated in the underlying bill.
Spartz (Order #59/Amd. #89): Prohibits funding for United Nations entities unless specifically appropriated in the underlying bill.
Hageman (Order #21/Amd. #149): No funds to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Hageman, Biggs, Perry, Burlison (Order #22/Amd. # 8): No funding for the International Organization for Migration's activities in the Western Hemisphere.
Hageman, Biggs, Perry, Burlison (Order #22/Amd. # 8): No funding for the International Organization for Migration's activities in the Western Hemisphere.
Mace (Order #35/Amd. #19) Prohibits funds to the UN Refugee Agency.
Besides the many other problematic amendments, BWC hopes you can reach out to offices asking them to vote NO or share these resources. In short, eliminating funding to the UN and its various agencies would be a betrayal to our friends and allies, would be celebrated by China and Russia, and would have catastrophic humanitarian consequences. Attached are talking points against each of these amendments.
Besides the many other problematic amendments, BWC hopes you can reach out to offices asking them to vote NO or share these resources. In short, eliminating funding to the UN and its various agencies would be a betrayal to our friends and allies, would be celebrated by China and Russia, and would have catastrophic humanitarian consequences. Attached are talking points against each of these amendments.
We also provided a tally of who voted against anti-UN amendments last year.
In addition, we are urging opposition to the underlying bill - H.R. 8771 - as it would make unprecedented cuts to U.S. funding for the United Nations. If enacted, the legislation would put the U.S. on a glide path to international irrelevancy and be a gift to authoritarian regimes who would like to see nothing more than the U.S. exit the United Nations. Provided here is a recent op-ed illustrating why defunding UN agencies, which has been tried before, is so counter-productive. In addition, provided below and attached above is information outlining the damage on the health, humanitarian, geopolitical, and security fronts of withdrawing and withholding funding to the UN.
Impact of UN Cuts
America Alone: Passage of HR 8771 would mean the end of U.S. global leadership within UN - in place since WWII - leaving the field open to competitors and alienating allies.
Greater Humanitarian Suffering:
Passage of the Rep. Tiffany Amendment would cut all WFP funding within the International Disaster Assistance account. It would mean a $2.1 billion reduction in contributions, which would result in ~5 billion lost rations - enough to feed 83 million people for an entire month. If the US Congress banned funding to UNICEF via this amendment, it would result in 18 million fewer people with clean water and sanitation in humanitarian contexts; deny more than 11 million children and families protection services in emergency settings; and jeopardize the health of more than 14 million children who depend on measles vaccines in the midst of conflict and crisis.
Passage of the underlying bill would mean slashing contributions to Sudan when it's on the brink of collapse. The total number of internally displaced has surpassed 9 million, the most in the world. Nearly five million people are close to famine and many are forced to eat dirt and leaves to survive. A window of opportunity exists for the international community to act now during the planting season, but this bill would cut or eliminate aid to UNICEF, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund, heaping additional misery during the world’s largest hunger crisis.
Gift to China: While the underlying bill purports to be strong on China, it will have exactly the opposite effect and would be championed by China. The PRC is the second largest financial contributor to the UN Regular Budget (UNRB) and UN peacekeeping. Cutting off all funding for the UNRB as this bill suggests – for the first time in history - would allow the PRC to spin a narrative that the U.S. is an unreliable partner and not interested in international cooperation. As U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas Greenfield has noted, U.S. arrears are “China’s favorite talking point.” This bill would make the problem so much worse, at time when China has ramped up its soft power efforts with other countries and through the UN.
Boon to Russia. The UN peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic is a key source of information on the malign activities of Russian mercenaries working on behalf of the Wagner Group. Cutting UN peacekeeping funding, when we are already over $1.3 billion in arrears, would undermine the mission and bolster Russia. It is through UN reports that we know that Russia has delivered heavy military equipment to the country. Russia would welcome the necessary cuts to the mission, as it would be much more difficult for UN human rights monitors and peacekeepers to highlight what’s happening.
Undermine Global Health: H.R. 8771 would prohibit all funding to WHO, which would lead to a reduction in international deployments of scientific experts to respond to deadly outbreaks of polio, measles, Yellow fever, malaria, and cholera, causing these diseases to spread further, faster, and at greater financial expense and economic impact. This would also significantly raise the likelihood of causing imported polio and measles outbreaks in the United States. Defunding the premier international organization coordinating the global response to public health threats will undoubtedly negatively impact our ability to respond to the next pandemic. The American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America have all stated strong opposition to defunding WHO, as has the Chamber of Commerce and even the Heritage Foundation. As a reminder, WHO coordinates its entire global public health mandate with a budget of $3.3 billion a year—17% of the 2025 budget of the Maryland Dept of Health ($19.6 billion).
More Fentanyl in the U.S. Passage of the Rep. Tiffany amendment means more opioids and fentanyl in America and more American lives lost throughout the country. For the last several years, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has created a system for monitoring illicit crop cultivation in Mexico. Through this project, which uses satellite imagery and aerial photographs to depict where cultivation is taking place, the Mexican government is able to view exact locations where illicit crops are grown. This information in turn helped the Mexican army destroy hundreds of thousands of poppy plots. In addition, the State Department, Mexican government, and UNODC have just joined together for the Container Control Programme —a joint initiative launched to increase port security measures and minimize the use of maritime shipping containers for illicit drug trafficking and other transnational organized crime activities. Cutting all U.S. contributions to UNODC - as this amendment mindlessly calls for - would greatly weaken these efforts and lead to more drugs coming into this country and more lives lost to opioids and fentanyl.
More Pollution/More Disease: The underlying bill zeroes out the entire International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account—which contains over a dozen UN entities—and includes core funding for UNICEF, UNFPA, the UN Development Program, the UN Environment Programme, and the UN Human Rights Office. This is not based in science but spite. For example, the bill calls for eliminating all U.S. contributions to the “Montreal Protocol.” If you’re not familiar, 30+ years ago, countries across the world committed to the Montreal Protocol UN treaty, a landmark international agreement demanding reduced use of hydrochlorofluorocarbons, gases that deplete the ozone layer and warm the planet. At the time, President Ronald Regan called it a “monumental achievement.” Due to the UN treaty, estimates show that the world has curbed 98 percent of the ozone-depleting substances being produced in 1990. As a just released scientific article notes, “This milestone is a testament to the power of international cooperation...By setting clear, enforceable targets that were cognizant of each nation’s needs, the agreement propelled people to take action, while remaining the only treaty signed by every country on Earth. It is credited with helping the world avoid millions of skin cancer cases and as much as a full degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming." As such, cuts to U.S. funding for the UN treaty would unquestionably slow efforts to curb these pollutants, lead to increased cancer rates and greater warming. Of note, due to this being one of the most successful treaties in history, two years ago, the U.S. Senate ratified - with strong bipartisan support - an amendment to the Montreal Protocol that compels countries to phase out hydrofluorocarbons. The treaty was supported by environmental NGOs and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, believing it makes American businesses more competitive overseas.
Impact of UN Cuts
America Alone: Passage of HR 8771 would mean the end of U.S. global leadership within UN - in place since WWII - leaving the field open to competitors and alienating allies.
Greater Humanitarian Suffering:
Passage of the Rep. Tiffany Amendment would cut all WFP funding within the International Disaster Assistance account. It would mean a $2.1 billion reduction in contributions, which would result in ~5 billion lost rations - enough to feed 83 million people for an entire month. If the US Congress banned funding to UNICEF via this amendment, it would result in 18 million fewer people with clean water and sanitation in humanitarian contexts; deny more than 11 million children and families protection services in emergency settings; and jeopardize the health of more than 14 million children who depend on measles vaccines in the midst of conflict and crisis.
Passage of the underlying bill would mean slashing contributions to Sudan when it's on the brink of collapse. The total number of internally displaced has surpassed 9 million, the most in the world. Nearly five million people are close to famine and many are forced to eat dirt and leaves to survive. A window of opportunity exists for the international community to act now during the planting season, but this bill would cut or eliminate aid to UNICEF, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund, heaping additional misery during the world’s largest hunger crisis.
Gift to China: While the underlying bill purports to be strong on China, it will have exactly the opposite effect and would be championed by China. The PRC is the second largest financial contributor to the UN Regular Budget (UNRB) and UN peacekeeping. Cutting off all funding for the UNRB as this bill suggests – for the first time in history - would allow the PRC to spin a narrative that the U.S. is an unreliable partner and not interested in international cooperation. As U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas Greenfield has noted, U.S. arrears are “China’s favorite talking point.” This bill would make the problem so much worse, at time when China has ramped up its soft power efforts with other countries and through the UN.
Boon to Russia. The UN peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic is a key source of information on the malign activities of Russian mercenaries working on behalf of the Wagner Group. Cutting UN peacekeeping funding, when we are already over $1.3 billion in arrears, would undermine the mission and bolster Russia. It is through UN reports that we know that Russia has delivered heavy military equipment to the country. Russia would welcome the necessary cuts to the mission, as it would be much more difficult for UN human rights monitors and peacekeepers to highlight what’s happening.
Undermine Global Health: H.R. 8771 would prohibit all funding to WHO, which would lead to a reduction in international deployments of scientific experts to respond to deadly outbreaks of polio, measles, Yellow fever, malaria, and cholera, causing these diseases to spread further, faster, and at greater financial expense and economic impact. This would also significantly raise the likelihood of causing imported polio and measles outbreaks in the United States. Defunding the premier international organization coordinating the global response to public health threats will undoubtedly negatively impact our ability to respond to the next pandemic. The American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America have all stated strong opposition to defunding WHO, as has the Chamber of Commerce and even the Heritage Foundation. As a reminder, WHO coordinates its entire global public health mandate with a budget of $3.3 billion a year—17% of the 2025 budget of the Maryland Dept of Health ($19.6 billion).
More Fentanyl in the U.S. Passage of the Rep. Tiffany amendment means more opioids and fentanyl in America and more American lives lost throughout the country. For the last several years, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has created a system for monitoring illicit crop cultivation in Mexico. Through this project, which uses satellite imagery and aerial photographs to depict where cultivation is taking place, the Mexican government is able to view exact locations where illicit crops are grown. This information in turn helped the Mexican army destroy hundreds of thousands of poppy plots. In addition, the State Department, Mexican government, and UNODC have just joined together for the Container Control Programme —a joint initiative launched to increase port security measures and minimize the use of maritime shipping containers for illicit drug trafficking and other transnational organized crime activities. Cutting all U.S. contributions to UNODC - as this amendment mindlessly calls for - would greatly weaken these efforts and lead to more drugs coming into this country and more lives lost to opioids and fentanyl.
More Pollution/More Disease: The underlying bill zeroes out the entire International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account—which contains over a dozen UN entities—and includes core funding for UNICEF, UNFPA, the UN Development Program, the UN Environment Programme, and the UN Human Rights Office. This is not based in science but spite. For example, the bill calls for eliminating all U.S. contributions to the “Montreal Protocol.” If you’re not familiar, 30+ years ago, countries across the world committed to the Montreal Protocol UN treaty, a landmark international agreement demanding reduced use of hydrochlorofluorocarbons, gases that deplete the ozone layer and warm the planet. At the time, President Ronald Regan called it a “monumental achievement.” Due to the UN treaty, estimates show that the world has curbed 98 percent of the ozone-depleting substances being produced in 1990. As a just released scientific article notes, “This milestone is a testament to the power of international cooperation...By setting clear, enforceable targets that were cognizant of each nation’s needs, the agreement propelled people to take action, while remaining the only treaty signed by every country on Earth. It is credited with helping the world avoid millions of skin cancer cases and as much as a full degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming." As such, cuts to U.S. funding for the UN treaty would unquestionably slow efforts to curb these pollutants, lead to increased cancer rates and greater warming. Of note, due to this being one of the most successful treaties in history, two years ago, the U.S. Senate ratified - with strong bipartisan support - an amendment to the Montreal Protocol that compels countries to phase out hydrofluorocarbons. The treaty was supported by environmental NGOs and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, believing it makes American businesses more competitive overseas.
Attachments:
FY24 SFOPS Amendments https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T9vf669VKFlgp46glCdcgS4a8PmRu2tSKzP08albvJ4/edit?usp=sharing
Full House Anti - UN amendments https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HvYBozaOD5Aah3iKL8js6p3nXpl4eu3GpZmhMAY8OPc/edit?usp=sharing
Impact of cuts - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W44hwQcRM4hpvWKUO8v8NYMFjWQfdcij88nXqCSM81A/edit?usp=sharing
--
Paula Boland
She/Her/Hers
President, UN Association of the National Capital Area
Immediate Past Chair, UNA-USA National Council
202-223-6092 
paula@unanca.org
2000 P Street NW, Suite 540, Washington, DC 20036
http://unanca.org/
Anyone who can only think of only one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination." —Mark Twain
--
A. Edward Elmendorf
Past President, United Nations Association
2435 4th Street, Apt. 1319
Boulder, Colorado, 80304
--
Paula Boland
She/Her/Hers
President, UN Association of the National Capital Area
Immediate Past Chair, UNA-USA National Council
202-223-6092 paula@unanca.org 2000 P Street NW, Suite 540, Washington, DC 20036 http://unanca.org/Anyone who can only think of only one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination." —Mark Twain
--
A. Edward Elmendorf
Past President, United Nations Association
2435 4th Street, Apt. 1319
Boulder, Colorado, 80304
Thanks for sharing the latest on US defunding proposals by some of the US politicians. The discussion on the US funding of the UN has been bouncing back and forth for several years. There is also misperception among the general public in the US on the volume of the US funds to the UN. Most US citizens see the UN as a parasite on the US. The same cohort of public may also have influence on the political elites of the US calling to defund the UN.
ReplyDeleteThe call to defund the UN this time may have been influenced by the propaganda against the UN promoted by the Israeli media accusing the UN of supporting Hamas and UNRWA employing members of Hamas, etc. Even the UN has been designated by some Israeli media as a terrorist organisation. The reality is the opposite as the UN has become a sacrificial lamb in the current culture of geopolitics. Binding resolutions, ICJ and ICC have been not only ignored but vilified.
I am also a little surprised to read the role of UN peacekeeping in the Central African Republic. The message implicitly implies that the UN peacekeeping is providing security information (intelligence) to the US. People could imply this message as a UN peacekeeping mission spying on behalf of the US.
While we cannot separate geopolitics from any of the UN activities, however, explicit reference to China and Russia in this message is perhaps unfortunate as it is coming from the UN association of the USA.
Have a good day
Ramesh