Budget cuts, such as those proposed in the UN80 revised estimates, are not a valid response to the ongoing financial crisis facing the UN Secretariat as they only serve to exacerbate the cash shortfall. Although the expenditure reductions currently underway in peacekeeping operations are a more appropriate measure, this “contingency plan” is only a stopgap measure applicable only within a single financial period.

Several readers have asked me whether reducing the U.S. share of the UN budgets could be a more effective way to improve the financial situation, given that the U.S. underpayment is the primary driver of the financial crisis.1 Although reducing the U.S. share of assessed budgets would mitigate the cash shortfall going forward, such a “solution” to the problem is far easier said than done; approval of a reduction in the assessment rates for the United States by Member States is highly unrealistic given the dynamics and decision-making process within the General Assembly.