[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 31 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H1894-H1895]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FACTS THAT ARE MISUNDERSTOOD WITH REGARD TO H.R. 7
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from California [Mr. Kim] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. KIM. Mr. Speaker, the people in my district in California do not
have any luxury to subscribe to the Washington Post and the Washington
times, which have extensive coverage of what is happening inside the
Beltway.
There is a lot of rhetoric, especially about the U.N. peacekeeping
mission. This bill that we just passed, H.R. 7, which is named the
National Security Revitalization Act, the people are saying if this is
passed, that will be the end of the U.N. peacekeeping mission.
[[Page H1895]] I would like to clarify this. I would like to urge all
my people in my district, people in California, to contact Mr. Clinton
not to veto this important bill.
Let me tell you what this really truly says. In the last year, 1995,
fiscal year, our administration came to Congress to ask for $533
million for the U.N. peacekeeping mission, just peacekeeping. That is
our assessment. At 6 months later, they come back asking an additional
$672 million. Adding it together, our assessment was actually $1.2
billion last year alone, cash assessment to the United Nations.
This year our administration asked again for only $445 million.
Now, who is trying to fool who this time? This is a very unrealistic
request to try to trick the system by grossly underestimating our
peacekeeping assessment numbers so that the overall budget looks
smaller. I can bet you that they are going to come back halfway through
this year asking another $1/2 billion.
Anyway, in addition to $1.2 billion we paid to the United Nations, we
also paid an additional $75 million last year as a gift, as a gift,
voluntary gift. This year they are asking an additional $100 million as
a voluntary gift.
It is beyond my comprehension why we are paying gifts in addition to
$1.2 billion.
The U.S. Government gets no credit for these voluntary contributions.
Let us talk about other countries. How much do they pay? Ninety
countries How much do they pay? Ninety countries pay less than one-
hundredth of 1 percent, 0.01 percent, nothing; 90 countries pay less
than that. Only 10 countries pay more than a lousy 1 percent. Let me
repeat only 10 countries in the world pay more than 1 percent on this
U.N. peacekeeping mission.
How much do we pay? Thirty-two percent.
{time} 1500
We used to pay only 25 percent. What happened? Because Russia
dissolved and were unable to pay, we have to pick up the tab. Is that
not ridiculous?
We are paying 32 percent while only 10 countries pay more than 1
percent. Now, that means we are paying more than 3\1/2\ times more than
the second largest contributing nation, which is Japan. Japan pays 12.5
percent. Not to mention the gifts and not to mention the in-kind
contributions.
Let me tell you what it is. We spent $1.7 billion in-kind
contributions to support of this U.N. peacekeeping mission. What are
they? Let me give an example: Sending military forces to Somalia,
millions and millions of dollars is what it cost us. Also the airlift
of supplies to Bosnia.
We are now involved in 13 different places on peacekeeping and
humanitarian support in this world.
Altogether we spent $1.7 billion in addition to the $1.2 billion cash
assessment, in addition to the gifts.
Now, this $1.7 billion we spent as in-kind contributions was not
credited to us. Added altogether we are about $30 billion a year that
we are donating to the United Nations under the name of peacekeeping
mission.
Now, what this bill will do, let me explain: Under section 509 it
says the United States shall not pay more than 25 percent. Is that not
fair?
Second, section 506 says that all the in-kind donations shall be
credited, credited to the United States. That is exactly what it says.
Section 507, no more voluntary gifts unless it is some kind of
emergency or national security interest.
Finally, section 511 says U.N. management must be reformed. You
cannot just go around and asking us for money like we were a bottomless
pit. They have to reform, they have to shape up. That is what this bill
does, asking the U.N. to shape up. We are asking them to hire an
inspector general so they can audit the books and find out exactly who
pays what and how much.
We are not against peacekeeping. I understand we all believe in human
rights, but, by golly, it has to be fair. This bill provides for a more
equivalent sharing of the real cost of such activities, something that
all the American people deserve. That is what it is all about. We are
not talking against peacekeeping. It is about time for us to get a fair
share and a better accountability.
____________________