UNITED NATIONS-US: Surprise! You’ve Won One Billion Dollars!!

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 19 1997 (IPS) - Maverick U.S. businessman Ted Turner’s threw U.N. diplomats off guard this week with an offer to donate one billion dollars to the world body and sent analysts into a frenzy of speculation over the precedent his gift poses.

Turner wants his billion-dollar donation to be used to create a U.N. foundation which will provide money for de-mining, environmental protection, children’s causes and other “worthy” activities. But some analysts worry that his gift could usher forth an era in which the world’s richest individuals and corporations can push their own causes onto the U.N. agenda.

“The long-run concern is that the United Nations, like everything else in the modern world, will become increasingly privatised as a result of (relying on) private funding,” warned Adamantia Pollis, professor of political science at New York’s New School for Social Research.

“It’s a good thing if it doesn’t become widespread, and you don’t have private institutions and corporations begin to substitute for governments in funding the United Nations,” she added. Already, the billion-dollar offer is worth as much as one year’s U.N. regular budget costs – and is several times larger than the yearly contribution of the entire developing world.

At least for the United Nations, which has endured a financial crisis largely caused by the nonpayment of some 1.5 billion dollars in U.S. dues, Turner’s announcement at a Thursday night award ceremony came as a happy surprise. “It’s a billion-dollar day at the United Nations,” U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said with a smile.

Balanced against the good cheer, however, is the sobering work ahead of ensuring that Turner’s promised contribution of 100 million dollars annually for the next 10 years meets U.N. regulations. On Friday, officials from the billionaire’s charitable Turner Foundation met with U.N. legal experts to hammer out ways in which the offer could be accepted.

U.N. officials acknowledge that the world body is not allowed to use private donations to pay its costs. As a result, Eckhard said, Turner’s offer cannot offset the 1.5 billion dollars that Washington owes the U.N. regular and peacekeeping budgets. “No- one is off the hook,” he said.

What the donation achieves, however, is to open the way for a mechanism by which much of the United Nations’ work – including that which is performed by agencies like the U.N. Childrens’ Fund (UNICEF), which can accept private voluntary contributions – can be funded. More to the point, it puts immense pressure on Washington, the chief U.N. debtor, to pay its arrears, which the Senate has only been willing to do partially and with strings attached.

“I think it (Turner’s offer) is a wonderful gesture, and I hope it is a sign of things to come,” U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said. “It shows his belief in the organisation and in international cooperation, and I hope it will inspire governments to pay what they owe.”

That message was hit home more bluntly by Turner when he announced his offer, largely on the spur of the moment, as he received a leadership award Thursday night by the non-profit United Nations Association-USA.

“I’ve been thinking about the United States not paying, and it’s been bothering me for a long time,” Turner told the audience, which included Annan and other top U.N. officials. “I even thought about buying the U.S. debt at a discount, and then going to (Republican Senate Foreign Relations Chairman and U.N. opponent) Jesse Helms and saying, ‘Pay me or I’ll sue you’.”

Instead, the founder of Cable News Network (CNN) said he would donate one billion dollars to help fund U.N. activities, and encourage other wealthy businessmen to do the same. “If you’re rich, you can expect a letter or a call from me,” he said.

The announcement puts U.S. President Bill Clinton, who is to speak at the United Nations Monday, in a tight spot. After months of lobbying Congress, the best deal he has obtained to repay U.S. arrears is one that will free up only some 819 million dollars – money that Ambassador Razali Ismail of Malysia this week dismissed as “half a loaf”. Even that amount has been attached to conditions that the world body pursue greater cuts and even allow U.S. monitoring of its accounts, which U.N. officials are unlikely to accept.

Now, Clinton faces the potential humiliation of appearing before his fellow world leaders here Monday, unable to offer even as much in dues – which his government is required by treaty to pay in full – as a private U.S. citizen was able to offer in one night.

“I don’t think (Clinton) is easily embarrassed, but I think he should be,” Pollis said. In any case, she added, Turner’s move could prod Congress to free up greater money for the United Nations – although, she cautioned, right-wing Senators could just as easily use it as an excuse to avoid committing government funds.

U.N. officials also face the potential for embarrassment, and even anger among member states, if they are perceived to be rewarding Turner in any way for the contribution.

Eckhard insisted that Turner “would not set U.N. priorities – priorities are set by member states.” The spokesman also declined to detail how the contribution would be made, although Turner suggested providing 100 million dollars’ worth of stock each year to an appropriately-authorised U.N. foundation.

At the very least, Turner already looks ready to profit in terms of receiving fulsome praise from U.N. bodies.

UNICEF, in a statement Friday, lauded Turner for his “significant gesture of support”, and added, “He is raising his hand for a world which works as one to make a better place for all.”

For the time being, Turner is probably the one U.S. citizen likely to garner such plaudits.