“If the United Nations moves forward with the ill-conceived resolution, I will work to form a bipartisan coalition to suspend or significantly reduce United States assistance to the United Nations,” Graham said in his statement. “In addition, any nation that which backs this resolution and receives assistance from the United States will put that assistance in jeopardy.”
As Graham correctly noted in his statement, the U.S. does provide 22 percent of the U.N.’s funding, and cutting such funding has been long overdue. Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton argued in a 2015 Boston Globe column that due to the U.N.’s pattern of “feckless decisions,” it was time to make U.N. contributions entirely voluntary.
“Shifting to voluntary contributions means adopting two principles that, at the UN at least, would be profoundly revolutionary,” Bolton wrote. “We would pay only for what we want, and we would insist that we get what we pay for — that is, real performance. And, of course, we should vigorously encourage other UN members (especially large contributors like Japan, Germany, Britain, and France) to join us in moving to entirely voluntary contributions.”