So explain to me...why are we in the U.N.?

Question

Why shovel MILLIONS of dollars to them a year, and they can't even solve Darfur. Corrupt countries veto and block everything as suprisingly they are part of the U.N. as well.

So why are we there? What good has it done? Should we "pull out"? Isn't this just a waste of money?

Answer 1

Because, it's politically correct.

Answer 2

I am not suggesting that the United Nations hasn't achieved some success and I am not suggesting that the United Nations is trying to establish a "One World Government". What I am suggesting is that the United Nations should be either dissolved or reorganized into a modern, 21st century peace keeping body. It's time to start over. The United Nations is obsolete as it stands today. It has become an ineffective highly bureaucratic nightmare. It has a rare opportunity to reorganize into a viable and relevant organization for world peace. An opportunity it most likely will let go by.

The UN came into being at a time when the world was without an Internet and a global economy had yet to emerge. The immediacy that is common place today did not exist when the UN was founded. Much of the activities of the UN were not known to most of the world. This is why in the first 40 years sanctions by oppressive governments were largely ignored.

Regular Budget

The Fifth Committee of the UN General Assembly decides on the scale of assessments for contributions to the Regular Budget every third year. The scale of assessments reflects a country’s capacity to pay (measured by factors such as a country’s national income and size of population). The Peacekeeping Budget assessments are based on the Regular Budget rates, but with discounts for poor countries. The five permanent members of the Security Council, who approve all peacekeeping operations, pay extra fees to compensate for those discounts. A “ceiling” rate sets the maximum amount of any member state’s assessed share of the regular and Peacekeeping Budgets. The US is the only member that is affected by those ceilings. Consequently the US pays less than its share of the world economy. (There is also a minimum rate of 0.001% to the Regular Budget for poor countries.) In December 2000, the Fifth Committee voted to lower the ceiling rate from 25% to 22% for the Regular Budget. The US had promised to pay its longstanding debt to the UN in exchange for lower assessments. Half a decade later, the US still owes around US$500 million to the UN Regular Budget.

Over 80% of all member states fail to pay their dues to the UN in full and on time. Failure to pay can lead to loosing one’s vote in the General Assembly. According to Article 19 of the UN Charter, a country loses its vote if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount it was billed in the preceding two years. The US, the largest debtor to the UN, pays just about enough to keep its vote in the assembly. Its debt to the Regular Budget has since the beginning of the 1980s averaged around US$200 million by December 31 of each year, i.e. 11 months after the payment deadline. This has caused serious financial difficulties for the organization. US contribution for the year 2007 is regular budget US $493 million prior years due US $ 291million total US $ 784 million.

Peace keeping Budget

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) sets the Peacekeeping Budget each year from July to June. However, the committee reviews and adjusts the budget throughout the year. Since peace missions vary in number and duration, contributions to the Peacekeeping Budget fluctuate widely from year to year. The Peacekeeping Budget pays for UN peacekeeping operations all over the world. The budget is financed through assessments of all UN member states, based on the scale of assessments for the Regular Budget. But the five permanent members of the Security Council, who approve all peacekeeping operations, pay a surcharge on top of their regular assessments. Poor countries get a discount on their rates. In the 1990s, as the Security Council launched an unprecedented number of peacekeeping operations, the Peacekeeping Budget and total debt to the budget rose quickly. US debt to the peace keeping budget as at March, 2007 is US $ 1041 million.

Answer 3

Seemd like a good idea at the time. But now they're trying to impose changes to our constituion (international gun ban), and we simply can't have that. No bloc of fudged up 3rd world countries are going to tell me  how to live my life. I say we withdraw.

Answer 4

If you have complaints, check with the US which created the way the UN works. Thanks.

UN workers try to do the best they can with the 5 permanent members.

Answer 5

I suppose the "Why" is that it seemed like a good idea in the beginning.

They certainly do not seem to like the Host Country very much.

I believe they have resided in the U.S. long enough that they have become resentful of our standard of living as compared to the standard of living of other people in "some" other countries.

I do not see how resentment will get them very far but, hey, what do we regular folks know?

Answer 6

The number one reason that we participate is to avoid letting it turn into a complete lunatic asylum and thus give the nut jobs the credibility of international appearances.

The UN is a joke, but dropping out will make it a dangerous joke.

Answer 7

Better plan:

we stop paying them.  They obviously don't need the money if their gratitude comes in the form of hurled insults.  

Also, we evict them from NYC.

Answer 8

In it's beginning it really served a purpose to counter the warsaw pact. The purpose was military in nature. (Used to be called the League of Nations) Now it's a debate society. We should pull out. We're only there for political reasons.

Answer 9

Roughly, the US pays close to $20 billion annually to the UN in monetary dues and other compensations, in terms of troops, food, aid, medical supplies, etc.

It is true, the US shovels millions of dollars at the UN and often Americans feel as though we get little to nothing in return.  Of course, the flip side to this is that for a number of years the US did not pay their membership dues to the UN either, so our complaints may often fall of deaf ears.

It is true, the UN has not been able to solve the Darfur crisis, but that doesnt meant that they are an ineffective organization or that we shouldnt donate.  Most of the positive work that is accomplished by the UN goes unaware and often unpraised.  The UN does give the US significant bargaining power and the ability to control certain things.  Absolutely the US would never pull out of the UN, it would be crazy.  The amount we pay a year is certainly worth the Veto Power in the Security Council alone, dozens of countries would easily pay as much as we for that power.  It isnt really a waste, its just hard to see.

Answer 10

The UN is a system comprising countries. It is the will of countries that determines the mandate and activities of the UN. Furthermore is the decision of the people (elections) that determines the position of governments. The UN system represents the society as is today. A better society will result in a better UN system. I can't go to a deep analysis on the cost/effectiveness issue but the UN system is achieving already much in comparison with the money it gets from the member countries.