Hi Trudy,
You're right, and I take the general point - withholding money can be
another way of influencing outcomes. It is also true that US hasn't paid
its regular fees for a number of years; however, it does contribute
voluntary funding to particular bodies such as UNESCO and it has provided
large amounts - diverted mainly from Defence budgets and therefore without
Congressional approval - to various UN 'peacekeeping' exercises. On one
estimate of this amounted to $11 billion on international peacekeeping
efforts between 1992 and 1997.
All in all, whether through funding or witholding of funding, the US exerts
an inordinate influence on UN practices and priorities, casting a fair bit
of doubt on the concept that it is an 'independent' body.
Tim
Trudy wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>I'm just jumping in to make one point - the US hasn't paid its bills in
>years and is the reason that the UN is almost broke. The US is
>withholding its funding until the UN 'reforms'...sound familiar?
>Not paying can, on occasion, accord more power than paying your bills.
>The US wants the UN to reform its monetary efficiency, however, not the
>committee system.
>
>Trudy
------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
