FINANCE-US: Washington to Surrender UNDP Leadership?

By Jim Lobe Reprint | | Print |

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Mar 3 1999 (IPS) - The United States was leaning against submitting a nominee to head the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), a key economic agency that has been headed virtually exclusively by Americans since its creation in 1966, according to officials here.

While no decision had been taken, it would mean that the likely successor to the current Administrator, James Gustave Speth, would almost certainly be Poul Nielson, Denmark’s development minister, according to US officials.

Washington’s attitude was telegraphed by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in testimony to Congress last week when she said retaining US leadership of UNDP was “problematic…because, as a whole, the Europeans contribute more than we do.”

“I think that it’s something that we have to…accept that they want leadership of that,” she added.

Her remarks contrasted to statements made last September by US officials who vowed to fight off an anticipated European challenge to succeed Speth who planned to step down in Spring to help out Vice President Al Gore’s bid to succeed President Bill Clinton in the 2000 elections.

The 15-member European Union (EU) has long coveted the top UNDP spot, arguing that the combined contribution of members, both to the agency and the United Nations, far outweighed that of Washington.

The United States and Denmark, along with Japan, the Netherlands, Germany and Norway, have been the six major contributors to UNDP. Washington was contributing about 100 million dollars to UNDP in 1999 and Denmark’s contribution was about 86 million dollars.

The EU has claimed that it is currently the main financial contributor to the United Nations, paying 36 percent of its regular budget, nearly 40 percent of foreign aid, between 55 to 60 percent of the cost of peacekeeping operations, and nearly 60 percent of aid to Palestine.

In a letter to Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the European Union said last year that member states had “contributed almost 60 percent to the core budget of UNDP, yet the Office of Administrator has never been held by a citizen of an EU member state.”

Washington’s strongest candidate was considered to be J. Brian Atwood who has served as Administrator of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). But Atwood, who spent most of his tenure battling Republican efforts to eliminate the agency, was now set to be US ambassador to Brazil.

The likely decision by the US administration to give up the UNDP job comes within the context of growing problems for Washington at the United Nations – arising primarily from its failure to pay it about 1.5 billion dollars in arrears.

The continuing deadbeat status of the United States contributed to growing frustration among members of the world body, including some of Washington’s closest allies.

In 1996, the United States was voted off the UN’s most important budgetary committee in what was regarded as a reflection of the General Assembly’s impatience.

In that same year, the rivalry over UNDP’s leadership first surfaced as Denmark seriously considered challenging Speth’s intention to gain a second term as Administrator. In order to prevail, Speth reportedly promised to step down during the spring of 1999, less than halfway through his second four-year term.

The challenge was fuelled by a sharp drop in the US contribution in 1996 to the agency – from 113 million dollars the previous year to only 52 million dollars. The reduction was forced on the administration by a harshly anti-U.N., Republican-led Congress.

Congress has made it far more difficult for Clinton to pay Washington’s UN arrears. Since 1996, it has tied payment of the arrears to a ban on all US aid for overseas agencies which lobby their governments to ease anti-abortion laws.

Over the years, the job of UNDP Administrator has been held by Paul Hoffman, David Owen, Rudolph Petersen, Bradford Morse, William Draper and Speth – all U.S. nationals, with the exception of Owen who was British.

At present, US citizens held four top management positions in the United Nations – more than any other member country. They included Joseph Connor, undersecretary general for management and finance; Carol Bellamy at the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF); and Catherine Bertini at the World Food Programme (WFP) in Rome.

Of the three, UNDP is considered the most influential.

Its budget comes to more than 1 billion dollars per year – a fraction of the annual spending of the World Bank – also headed by a US national – but it plays a key coordinating role in the development work of all UN agencies.

Steven Dimoff, vice president of the US chapter of the UN Association commented that “the fact that the U.S. will not have leadership has implications for our continuing financial support of the agency.”

But John Sewell, head of the influential Overseas Development Council here, had a different take, calling the move “a graceful acquiescence to shared international leadership.”

Sewell, who was himself suggested by some sources as a potential candidate for the job, said the challenge for any new administrator will be to define a clear mission for UNDP whose role as the biggest provider of technical assistance to developing nations only recently was eclipsed by the World Bank.

The US administration is also cutting its proposed 2000 contributions to UNICEF and the WFP, albeit by lesser amounts. UNICEF, which is to receive 105 million dollars this year, will get 101 million dollars in 2000 if the administration gets its way, while WFP’s portion is to be cut from five million dollars to 3.5 million dollars.

The administrator is appointed by the secretary-general of the U.N. whose choice is subject to the General Assembly’s endorsement.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, however, has asked that he be presented with more than one candidate for the post, a move that could yet produce a challenge to front-runner Nielson.