By Brett D. Schaefer
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Devotees of the United Nations are upset. The House
Appropriations Committee recently approved spending “only” $3.5 billion on the
U.N. and other international organizations — substantially less than the nearly
$4 billion the White House had requested for FY 2013. Among the arguments
raised against the committee’s decision, perhaps the least plausible is that
the spending cut is “at odds with voters’ wishes.”
That’s the claim advanced by the United Nations
Foundation, an independent U.N. “partner” that lobbies Congress and the
president to support U.N.-backed positions and to maintain or increase U.S.
funding for the U.N. American voters want Congress to fully fund the administration’s
budget request for the U.N., the foundation insists. Its evidence? A poll in
which more than eight in ten voters said the United States should maintain an
“active role within the United Nations.”
It is hardly shocking that the U.N. Foundation would
spin, to the U.N.’s advantage, a poll they commissioned to benefit the U.N. But
why should U.S. policymakers pay attention to that poll rather than other, more
impartial polls that show quite different results?
Gallup, for instance, which has tracked American opinion
on the U.N. since 1953, notes that “Americans have never held the United
Nations in particularly high esteem, with a historical average of 40% saying it
is doing a good job.” In 2012 Gallup asked its standard question, “Do you think
the United Nations is doing a good job or a poor job in trying to solve the
problems it has to face?” Only 32 percent of Americans answered that the U.N.
is doing a “good job,” compared with 61 percent who said it’s doing a “poor
job.”
This is not news. In the 34 Gallup polls that posed the
question over the past 40 years, respondents who answered that the U.N. was
doing a poor job outnumbered those who thought it was doing a good job, by an
aggregate score of 50 to 39 percent. And a Rasmussen poll conducted this month
found that 49 percent of likely U.S. voters view the U.N. “at least somewhat
unfavorably” versus 42 percent who view it “at least somewhat favorably.”
The U.N. Foundation reports that over 60 percent of
Americans think the U.S. should pay its U.N. “dues” in full and on time. Is
this outcome really surprising, though? Most Americans are taught to honor
their commitments and be personally responsible.
But what about context? The poll never explains the
reasoning behind the proposal that the U.S. withhold its dues until the U.N.
demonstrates improved performance, better oversight, holding peacekeepers to
account for their crimes, or other reforms.
The poll does, however, “push.” In asking whether U.S.
membership in UNESCO is important, it supplies the following description of the
agency:
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, also known as UNESCO, focuses on education, science and culture around the world. UNESCO helps prevent conflict and build peace around the world by promoting democracy, works to eradicate poverty, and supports education for all. They promote new and innovative ways to educate children in the developing world and help people learn how to provide for themselves.
The wording includes no mention of UNESCO undermining
U.S. and Israeli interests by admitting the Palestinian Authority as a member
state last year — and after the U.S. told them such action would trigger a
suspension of U.S. funding. There is no mention that UNESCO is largely a facilitator,
rather than an implementing agency, and that many of its functions could be
performed by others. Could anyone doubt that the poll results would have been
very different if that information had been presented?
Moreover, Americans might be happy to express support for
the U.N. or a U.N. agency in the abstract, especially when told it performs a
laudable-sounding mission, but they are much less pleased with other U.N.
priorities. A recent Rasmussen poll found that just 5 percent of likely U.S.
voters support a proposal that a U.N. agency regulate the Internet. Fully 80
percent oppose the idea.
Since the U.N.’s founding, the U.S. has been its largest
financial supporter. Americans are currently charged with paying 22 percent of
the regular budget and more than 27 percent of the peacekeeping budget,
although they are often disappointed by the U.N.’s inability to live up to its
mission. The body’s inaction regarding Syria is but the latest example.
Fraud and mismanagement remain troublingly common. The
organization’s oversight mechanisms remain inadequate, as a recent report by
the U.N.’s own Joint Inspection Unit explains. Its efforts to address global
problems such as terrorism, human trafficking, and proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction have been weak, ineffectual, or counterproductive. Indeed, the
U.N. cannot even agree on a definition of terrorism.
Many Americans support the founding principles of the
U.N. Who doesn’t want to prevent war, promote fundamental human rights, or
contribute to higher living standards? But Americans understand as well the
bitterly disappointing reality of the U.N. and how far it falls short of those
ideals.
American voters expect Congress to be responsible stewards
of taxpayer money, not a rubber stamp for the U.N. Our politicians should be
vigilant, guarding against impropriety and waste at the U.N., and insisting
that U.S. contributions to the U.N. advance U.S. interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment