By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Jun 23 1999 (IPS)

The US Senate has approved a bill that will, if signed into law, make up about two-thirds of the 1.5 billion dollars the United States owes the United Nations in back dues.

The near unanimous vote in the Senate is a first critical step toward fulfilling a pledge by President Bill Clinton to strengthen the world body and pay Washington’s arrears.

But the bill’s eventual fate is still uncertain. Payment of the arrears is conditional on a series of UN reforms which, among other things, will reduce Washington’s dues to both the world body and its peacekeeping operations.

In addition, the bill is likely to get caught up in domestic politics. Last year, anti-abortion forces in the House of Representatives tied the arrears payment to a ban on US aid going to overseas population groups that favour easing abortion laws – and they have vowed to do so again.

If they succeed, Clinton is almost certain to veto the entire legislation as he did last year.

The arrears payment passed by a 98-1 vote in the Senate Tuesday is part of the government’s 1999 State Department authorisation bill. Like last year, the bill provides that Washington will pay 819 million dollars in US debts to the United Nations over three years and forgive an additional 107 million dollars which the world body owes the United States.

Payment would mark a major breakthrough in US relations with the United Nations where other members, including some of its closest allies, have become increasingly outspoken about Washington’s deadbeat status.

If Washington does not make a substantial payment of its arrears this year, it could lose its vote in the UN General Assembly, according to the UN Charter. But payment under the bill passed Tuesday would be tied to a number of conditions, including the UN’s acquiescence in substantial unilateral cuts in Washington’s share of its budget.

Washington intends to reduce its contribution to the UN’s regular budget from 25 percent to 20 percent and cuts portion of the UN’s peacekeeping budget from 31 percent to 25 percent.

Payment of the arrears is also tied to several other conditions – including curbs on UN spending, demands that Washington not be forced to pay interest on the arrears, and prohibitions on the UN’s taking steps to create a permanent military force or a system of international taxation.

The bill’s critics argue that Washington’s dues to the United Nations are a treaty obligation, and that any cuts which take place without the UN’s consent constitute a treaty violation. They also argue that treaty obligation cannot be subject to conditions.

Sen. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland, the only senator who voted against the bill, cited these arguments in the debate. He also says his fellow-lawmakers fail to understand how the United Nations served US interests.

“The money we are paying has been heavily conditioned,” he complained. “Important US interests are undermined by our failure to pay what we owe.”

But he was swimming against a strong tide. The administration calculated last year that it would have to accept the conditions of Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Jesse Helms, who lies on the far right of the Congressional political spectrum, if it had any hope of getting the arrears paid.

Once it agreed with Helms and Sen. Joseph Biden, the ranking Democrat on the committee, it was stuck with the deal, according to Congressional aides. “This was an unbelievably stream-lined process today,” said one.

But the bill still faces a major uncertainty in the House of Representatives where anti-abortion forces are believed to have enough votes to attach the ban on US overseas aid to population groups which advocate easing their countries’ restrictions on abortion.

Led by Rep. Christopher Smith of New Jersey, these forces successfully tied the ban to the UN arrears last year – despite pressure from a number of Republicans, including Helms, to drop it.

Smith claimed earlier this year that he had obtained a commitment from the Republican’s new leadership in the House to back a vote on the ban, which was official US policy under the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush.

Under pressure from women’s and population groups, Clinton has vowed to veto any measure which contains such a ban, which, in his view, not only harms Washington’s ability to boost family planning in developing countries, but also violates US constitutional guarantees on free speech.

The House is expected to take up its own version of the State Department bill after the Independence Day recess on July 4. Its bill does not include either the arrears payment or the curbs on population said at the moment.

Smith has said that if lawmakers try to add the arrears on the floor, he will then offer his amendment.

Population activists admit that Smith has the votes in the House to attach his amendment on the floor.

They hope, however, to offer a “substitute amendment” before his amendment can be voted on. If the substitute, which will be designed to appeal to the less fervent among the anti-abortion ranks, gains a majority, then Smith’s amendment will not be considered.

Excerpt: