[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11276-S11277]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    HOW THE UNITED NATIONS BENEFITS AMERICANS: THE U.N. ENVIRONMENT 
                               PROGRAMME

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, last week, the 51st session of the U.N. 
General Assembly convened in New York City. To recognize the occasion, 
I spoke on the floor of the Senate to highlight some of the many 
benefits that the United Nations brings to the American public. The 
United Nation has furthered American national interests by working to 
promote peace and democracy, to protect human rights, to strengthen 
international stability, and to foster cooperation between states on a 
wide range of important issues. Today I wish to focus on one of these 
important issues--an area where the United Nations has made significant 
advances by enabling countries to work together and to find common 
solutions to common problems. Today I wish to discuss the unique role 
of the U.N. Environment Programme.
  The 1972 U.N. Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm was 
the catalyst for the creation of the U.N. Environment Programme [or 
UNEP]. As a participant in those meetings, I eagerly supported the 
effort to integrate human development and the protection of the 
environment as two equally important goals to the international 
community. The establishment of UNEP ensured that all countries would 
have access to technical information and skills in order to develop and 
improve national environmental policy. UNEP has also served as a 
valuable forum for reaching international and regional consensus on 
laws and operational standards that reinforce cooperative efforts to 
achieve long-term sustainable development.
  Because of its unique role within the United Nations as the only 
agency with the mandate to make environmental concerns the top 
priority, UNEP has facilitated U.S. policy initiative in the 
environmental field. As Secretary of State Warren Christopher noted in 
an address at Stanford University last April:

       The environment has a profound impact on our national 
     interests in two ways: First, environmental forces transcend 
     borders and oceans to threaten directly the health, 
     prosperity and jobs of American citizens. Second, addressing 
     natural resource issues is frequently critical to achieving 
     political and economic stability, and to pursuing our 
     strategic goals around the world.


[[Page S11277]]


  I wholeheartedly agree with Secretary Christopher that the United 
States must view environmental problems from a global perspective. The 
actions of one state inevitably affect the well-being of the citizens 
of its neighbors. The United States cannot afford to ignore the 
overpopulation, or the pollution, or the deforestation occurring in 
other countries because the consequences could be devastating right 
here at home.
  That is why the United States has participated in and supported U.N. 
agencies like UNEP. It is in our own best interests to work together 
with other states to protect the international environment. Under the 
leadership of UNEP over the last 20 years, the international community 
has agreed upon several international conventions which directly 
further U.S. environmental objectives. These conventions include the 
1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species [or CITES] 
which prohibits or regulates trade in some 35,000 endangered species; 
the 1985 Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and 
the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, 
which have led to a 77 percent drop in global CFC emissions since 
1988--saving millions of lives through the prevention of skin cancer--
and the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which commits 
industrialized countries to reducing their emissions of greenhouse 
gases by the year 2000. These are but a few examples of international 
cooperation led by UNEP which have benefited U.S. citizens.
  Despite these tangible benefits, however, I am concerned that the 
survival of UNEP is in jeopardy today. At a time when our Government's 
financial constraints are increasing, the United States should be 
looking for ways to increase cooperation with other states in order to 
avoid bearing the cost of acting alone. While I support the calls for 
making U.N. agencies more efficient and effective, it is important that 
the United States continue to play a leading role in promoting 
international environmental cooperation by supporting UNEP. The Clinton 
administration should persist in its efforts to streamline the programs 
and personnel of UNEP while making some real financial commitments at 
the upcoming meeting of the governing council in January. Equally 
important, the decision on the leadership of UNEP should be given high 
priority for United States attention during the next month.
  This is a critical moment for UNEP as the agency's financial crisis 
has reached a point where many of its important programs may no longer 
be viable. Given the recent decrease in financial and political support 
for UNEP from its member states, the international community must 
decide whether or not environmental concerns are still a priority on 
the international agenda. If the answer is yes, then all member states 
must commit themselves to both reforming and financially supporting 
UNEP. We have seen 20 years of impressive progress in the environmental 
field that has often been achieved through the expertise and leadership 
of UNEP. With so much at stake, it would be a tragedy to allow this 
organization to founder today.

                          ____________________