U.N. Pay to Play

April 1, 2006
The Wall Street Journal
Original Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114385328089014200.html

It turns out Iran isn't the only country threatening to go nuclear if it doesn't get its way at the United Nations. Recently, Japan and the U.S. have made separate proposals to modify the criteria by which U.N. dues are assessed, so what member states pay better reflects what they can afford. This has Russia and China in a radioactive state of mind.
The proposals are hardly radical. Japan, which is seeking a permanent seat on the Security Council and pays 19.5% of the U.N.'s budget (second only to the U.S., at 22%), would like the Council's five veto-wielding members to contribute a minimum of 3% of U.N. dues. Britain and France both surpass that target, while Russia and China contribute only 1.1% and 2.05% respectively to the U.N.'s $1.9 billion budget.
The U.S. proposal would have the U.N. calculate assessments the same way the World Bank currently does, using data based on purchasing power parity (PPP). Currently, the U.N. bases its assessments on Gross National Income figures, the proper measure of which cannot be taken when currencies are not convertible. Using a PPP index, Russia's share of the budget would rise to about 2.5%, China's to 13.7%. (America's share would remain nearly unaffected.)
In real terms, the proposed increases are well within the budgets of both countries. And one would think China would be flattered to learn that, under PPP, its share of world GDP rises to second place from seventh, just as Russia's rises to 10th place from 16th. Instead, both countries are reportedly outraged by the proposals; an editorial in the China Daily even accuses Japan of blackmailing the U.N.
Whatever Japan's motive, China and Russia are certainly shortchanging it. Given how much we've heard from them about the need to work within the international system, they owe it to the rest of us not to do so on the cheapest possible terms.