Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

Can We Finally Talk About United Nations Funding?

Published

5 months ago

8 minute read

David Clinton The Audit

@davidclinton

 

Billions of dollars disappear into the black hole. Not much value comes out the other end

No area touched by government policy should be off-limits for open discussion. It’s our money, after all, and we have the right to wonder how it’s being spent. Nevertheless, there’s no shortage of topics that, well, aren’t appreciated in more polite company. Until quite recently, I somehow assumed that Canada’s commitments to the United Nations and its many humanitarian programs were among those restricted topics. I had my own deep reservations, but I generally kept my thoughts to myself.

Then the Free Press published a debate over US funding for the UN. I know that many subscribers of The Audit also read the Free Press, so this probably isn’t news to most of you. If questioning UN funding was ever off limits, it’s officially open season now.

The Audit is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The only defense of the organization to emerge from the debate was that America’s spooks need the surveillance access made possible by the UN headquarter’s New York address, and the city needs the billions of dollars gained from hosting the big party. No one, in other words, could come up with a single friendly word of actual support.

For context, Canada doesn’t bill for parking spots around Turtle Bay in Manhattan. And our spies are not up to the task of bugging hospitality suites anywhere nearby.

How much money do Canadian taxpayers spend on the United Nations? According to data from Canada’s Open Government resource, UN-targeted grants cost us at least $3.7 billion between 2019 and 2022. That number could actually be a lot higher since it’s not always easy to identify spending items as specifically UN-related.

Of that $3.7 billion, more than $265 million went to administrative and headquarters operations. Those administrative grants included $209 million directed to the “United Nations Organization” and officially described as “Canada’s assessed contribution to the United Nations Regular Budget”. Membership dues, in other words.

So what do we get for those dues? Arguably, nothing at all. Because the actual work of the UN happens through their specific programs – which were covered by the other $3.5 billion we contributed.

Unfortunately, those contributions are often misspent. Take as an example the eight million or so dollars Canada sends each year to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). Since 1978, UNIFIL’s 10,000-strong contingent’s only job has been to:

“confirm Hezbollah demilitarization, support Lebanese army operations against insurgents and weapon smuggling, and confirm Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, in order to ensure that the government of Lebanon would restore its effective authority in the area”.

It’s no secret how splendidly that worked out. Hezbollah cheerfully spent the best part of the past two decades building some of the most robust military infrastructure on earth. And all under the direct supervision of UNIFIL.

Then there’s the disturbing relationship between United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and both Hamas and Hezbollah. As I’ve already written, by their own admission, Global Affairs Canada completely missed (or chose to ignore) that one. UNRWA cost Canadians $55 million between 2019 and 2022.

It’s true that some UN peacekeeping missions from decades back saw success, like operations in Namibia, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, East Timor, and El Salvador. But the failures were, to say the least, noticeable. Those included Rwanda, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, Angola, Haiti, and Darfur. And all that’s besides the accusations of widespread, systemic sexual abuse committed by peacekeepers just about anywhere they go. The peacekeeping model’s value proposition is far from proven, but the financial costs are right out there in the open.

Besides their regular happens-to-the-best-of-us failures, the UN has carefully cultivated their own unique brand of corruption. In 2005, Paul Volcker’s Independent Inquiry Committee (IIC), for example, reported on widespread corruption and abuse associated with the UN’s Oil-for-Food program for Iraqi citizens.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has long been associated with corruption, cronyism, and a general lack of financial control. But to be fair, those claims are very much in line with accusations regularly leveled against the UN as a whole.

Most Canadians are agreeable to sharing their collective wealth and expertise with those around the world who are less fortunate. But we’d be far more effective at it by creating our own programs and bypassing the rotting corpse of the United Nations altogether. That is, after all, what Global Affairs Canada is supposed to be doing.

While I’ve still got your attention, there’s one other United Nations-y thing that I’d like to discuss. While researching this post, I accessed official data representing all UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions since 2000. Fascinating stuff, I assure you. But it didn’t turn out the way I’d expected.

You see, for years I’ve been hearing about how UN resolutions are overwhelmingly focused on condemnations of Israel – to the point where Israel takes up the majority of the organization’s time.

In fact, there were far too many spurious and gratuitously hostile anti-Israel resolutions. And I defer to no one in my contempt for each one’s dishonesty and hypocrisy. But unless there’s something very wrong with the official UN data on resolutions, condemnations of Israel take up no more than a small minority of their time.

Specifically, of the 1,594 General Assembly resolutions from the past quarter century, just 60 or so targeted Israel. And the Security Council faced a total of 1,466 resolutions over that time, of which only somewhere in the neighborhood of 55 concerned everyone’s favorite colonial-settler, apartheid, space laser-firing, and weather-controlling oppressor.

The cesspool that is the modern UN is bad enough on its own merits. There’s no need to manufacture fake accusations.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 2 hours ago

Next federal government should reverse Ottawa’s plastics ban

Business / 3 hours ago

Trump walks back tariffs on Mexico, Canada for another month

Agriculture / 7 hours ago

Dairy Farmers Need To Wake Up Before The System Crumbles

Business

Trump walks back tariffs on Mexico, Canada for another month

Published on March 6, 2025

By

From The Center Square

By 

Stocks sunk Thursday afternoon despite President Donald Trump’s decision to grant major exceptions to the 25% tariffs he put on Mexico and Canada earlier this week.

All three major U.S. market indexes were in the red by the time of Trump’s afternoon bill signing. Trump said Thursday in the Oval Office that steel and aluminum tariffs were on track for next week without modifications.

Trump shrugged off the stock losses, blaming the decline on “globalists.”

“I think it’s globalists that see how rich our country is going to be and don’t like it,” he said.

Trump has promised that his tariffs would shift the tax burden away from Americans and onto foreign countries, but tariffs are generally paid by the people who import the products. Those importers then have a choice: They can either absorb the loss or pass it on to consumers through higher prices. He also promised tariffs would make America “rich as hell.” And he’s used tariffs as a negotiating tactic to tighten border security.

Trump granted temporary tariff relief to both Canada and Mexico on Thursday by exempting goods under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement from tariffs until April 2.

On April 2, Trump plans to announce broader reciprocal tariffs against countries that impose tariffs on U.S. goods or keep U.S. goods out of their markets through other methods.

Since imposing his latest round of tariffs on top of trading partners this week, Trump has been paring them back. On Wednesday, Trump said the Big Three automakers – Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Stellantis NV – would be exempt from his tariffs for a month.

In February, Trump took a step forward on his plan to put reciprocal tariffs on U.S. trading partners by signing a memo directing staff to come up with solutions in 180 days. Trump previously said he would put those tariffs in place on April 2 to avoid any confusion on April 1.

In his joint address to Congress on Tuesday, Trump said all countries would have to either make their products in the U.S. or be subject to tariffs.

“Whatever they tariff us, we tariff them. Whatever they tax us, we tax them,” Trump said. “If they do non-monetary tariffs to keep us out of their market, then we do non-monetary barriers to keep them out of our market. We will take in trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, governs trade between the U.S. and its northern and southern neighbors. It went into force on July 1, 2020. Trump signed the deal. That agreement continued to allow for duty-free trading between the three countries for products largely made in North America.

U.S. goods and services trade with USMCA totaled an estimated $1.8 trillion in 2022. Exports were $789.7 billion and imports were $974.3 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with USMCA was $184.6 billion in 2022, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Continue Reading

International

Pursuing world peace: Trump’s secret peace talks with Hamas a stunning break from decades of neocon policy

Published on March 6, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

The Trump administration is pursuing a clean break with the approach of the last 70 years. Perhaps the only hope for peace lies in breaking the rules of the old rules-based order.

As Donald Trump publishes a stark warning to Hamas, news emerges that his administration is also engaged in direct negotiations with the militant group to secure a lasting peace deal in Gaza.

A statement released on Trump’s Truth Social account and by the White House reads:

“Release all of the Hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you. Only sick and twisted people keep bodies, and you are sick and twisted! I am sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job, not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say.”

The statement followed Trump’s meeting at the White House with some of the Israeli hostages released following a deal brokered by his initiatives and led by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff.

 

“We believe you have been sent by God to save us,” Trump was told. Israel media reported hostage relatives asking, “Why does Witkoff (Steve Witkoff, US Envoy to the Middle East) answer us but not our own ministers?”

Trump is credited by the released hostages and their families with saving their lives, whilst Israeli leader Netanyahu has been accused of having “sabotaged” every hostage deal for the past year, with his own national security minister saying Netanyahu “sacrificed the hostages for his own personal interests” in January. The deal to release the hostages was secured because Trump “pressured” Netanyahu into accepting it, Israeli sources say.

Donald Trump’s message to Hamas and to the people of Gaza was stark:

Yet an exclusive report from Axios yesterday showed the Trump administration is also engaged in secret and direct negotiations with Hamas.

“The Trump administration has been holding direct talks with Hamas over the release of U.S. hostages held in Gaza and the possibility of a broader deal to end the war, two sources with direct knowledge of the discussions tell Axios.”

The White House confirmed the historic move.

Direct talks with Hamas were described by Reuters as having broken a “long- standing diplomatic taboo,” with their report also noting the Israeli response to the news.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office issued a statement saying: ‘Israel has expressed to the United States its position regarding direct talks with Hamas.’ It did not elaborate but Israel, which along with many other countries considers Hamas a terrorist organization, refuses to negotiate directly with the group.”

The pursuit of direct bilateral talks with the “enemy” here mirrors the approach pursued by the U.S. in reopening and normalizing diplomatic channels with the Russians – suspended by the Biden administration for around three and a half years.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier this week it was notable that “normal conversation” had resumed between his nation and the U.S.

 

The return of direct diplomacy is a signal that the Trump administration is serious about peace, and whilst stressing its power to respond with overwhelming in force in both theaters of war, has been willing to engage with the Russians and with Hamas to break the deadlock.

This is a significant departure from the decades of policy which produced escalation, emergencies, and periodic wars in place of rational compromise and peace.

Israeli commentator Ori Goldberg, a former academic in Middle East Studies, framed the situation as a choice between a leader who is for peace, and another who is for war.

 

Trump’s direct threats in public are partnered with direct negotiations in private, with the goal seemingly to return hostages and remove the leadership of Hamas from Gaza. It is likely these negotiations will feature the vastly higher number of Palestinian hostages held by the Israelis, whose appalling treatment has included rape with metal rods – a practice endorsed in the Israeli parliament and discussed favorably on Israeli daytime TV.

The ultimatum to Hamas follows Trump’s “Mar-A-Gaza” plan for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip along the lines of a holiday resort, which would seemingly entail the mass expulsion of the Palestinian population.

In response to this proposal, which has been met with widespread condemnation and outcry, Arab leaders have produced an Egyptian-led counter-proposal for the future of Gaza, involving $35 billion of Arab-led investment. This plan, rejected by the Israelis, would see Egypt assume security supervision of Gaza in place of Hamas, and would permit the Palestinians to remain in Gaza as reconstruction is undertaken. U.S. national security spokesman Brian Hughes said the plan, which will be presented to Trump in the coming weeks, did not recognize that Gaza was now “uninhabitable.”

Meanwhile, the crisis flowing from Netanyahu’s actions – and inaction – undertaken to consolidate his grip on power continues to develop. Controversy over the failings of the Israeli government and army to prevent the October 7 attacks continues to deepen.

The new IDF (Israeli army) chief of staff, ignoring Netanyahu’s strong opposition, has ordered a “re-examination” of the army’s actions during the October 7 attacks. The previous army chief, Herzi Halevi, has resigned – citing his and the Netanyahu government’s failure to protect Israelis.

Netanyahu “dismissed” a warning from Shin Bet, the Israeli security service, issued five months in advance of the attacks, as Haaretz reports. Whether Netanyahu deliberately sabotaged the hostage deal, or refused to act on warnings about October 7, the Israeli leader is beset with questions he refuses to answer.

He is increasingly being seen, inside and outside Israel, as the main problem, being implacably opposed to any attempts to find solutions that would give several decades oppressed Palestinians any new rights and their own state.

Having been in power for most of the last 16 years, Netanyahu can be charged not only with corruption, but with having managed Israel into what has become an existential crisis the tiny nation has never before experienced to this degree. His political future, very similar to that of also corrupt, Jewish Ukrainian president Zelensky, appears to be staked on making any lasting peace impossible.

The reality behind the headlines once again reveals the development of a new geopolitical order beneath the sensational chaos of the current news cycle.

The Trump administration is pursuing a clean break with the approach of the last 70 years. That consistent pattern of repeatedly broken agreements, war crimes, propaganda, atrocities, and ruinous regime change has been part of the process intended to sabotage any chance of peace through periodic escalations and a permanent state of emergency punctuated by all-out war.

After decades of politics dominated by an ongoing death machine, perhaps the only hope for peace lies in breaking the rules of the old rules-based order and placing the protection of ALL innocent human lives as the top priority.

Continue Reading

Trending

X