UN on the Brink of Bankruptcy Due to US and China Delays in Payments

According to a Common Wikipedia entry The UN is in deep trouble because the US and China aren't paying their dues, which make up 42% of its budget. The US has a debt of $4.28 billion to the UN, while China owes $455 million. This situation could lead to major interruptions in aid efforts, food supply, and peacekeeping missions. The Trump administration has put off payments because they're pushing for changes in the UN, calling it inefficient. Now, with the UN potentially running out of cash by August, do you think they will give in to the Trump administration’s demands, or is this the beginning of the end for this global governing body?

No wonder, the UN got used to lot of founds and did nothing to make a difference. Just more cars, more posts. An example of how not to lead an organization. Remember the take on getting rid of hunger of a UN Commissioner with Elon Musk?    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/11/16/un-food-chief-details-how-mega-rich-elon-musk-could-spend-just-66-billion-avert

So UN is on the brink of Collapse if they don’t answer to what Trump’s Administration wants, they probably would answer to that to get the funding to avoid crisis.. There’s this saying; Whoever Feeds you, Controls you! This is just what we’re about to witness. The UN isn’t an Organization that is completely Independent and it’s largely dependent on the United States….even their Headquarters is in NY, so there’s no other way to this.. Cutting jobs wouldn’t solve their problems, they should find ways to become self sufficient atleast in the nearest future or maybe it’s just going down. No wonder they didn’t say anything about these Wars

The US has always used its dues as leverage, this isn't really new. The UN won't disappear over this, but it'll probably shrink and "restructure" enough to keep Washington happy. Honestly some trimming wouldn't hurt given how bloated the bureaucracy has gotten. The real losers are the aid programs in places like the DRC (as mentioned in the article) that can't afford political games.

If they knew they can’t sustain the body without yielding why are they delaying to doing what the US president is asking them to do? Why resisting when at the end you will have no option than to do what your major sponsor wants. Without the US government fundings most of these organizations, can’t survive. If the funds are not coming forth they will definitely bow to the demands of the American government there’s no two ways about it. I only pity those that are already losing their jobs before the UN yield to Trump.

It is true that currently the UN is facing a financial crisis, as we know the United States is the number one country paying contributions and is second only to China which contributes contributions, but if you think about it, it seems like you should just let the UN go bankrupt and disband. they do not work, such as the shooting/bombing of French, Indonesian UN troops in Lebanon by Israel, until now there is no definite legal action for Israel. The UN is not to protect countries oppressed in war, Iran vs. US and Russia vs. Ukraine, what the UN has done is not there, so just let them disband it doesn't work, they only collect money from member countries, if they have a budget deficit of course they no longer have operational funds, meaning the UN will be abolished in this world.

This is a serious situation, because this means the UN might come to an end if enough funds is not guaranteed or do serious restructuring and that means UN isn't an independent organization as it's easily assumed by the public. Wondering what the restructuring is all about in the first place and why the UN have not heed to the restructuring.

We should be careful about being happy or gleeful about the UN failing. Some may call it obsolete or even useless, but at least it is an organisation who's purpose is to pretend that we should all get along. It has peace keepers, who have to operate in very volatile and difficult conditions, which come from all corners of the globe. We have been extremely lucky these last decades since WW2 and take for granted these "small" things that happen in the background that help to quell a lot of violence. Currently we have an absolute clown of a US president who is such a fool that he would destroy the world by accident and he's so close to death already that he's not even going to care that he drags the rest of us along with him.

They have no choice other than to follow what demanded from their biggest donators. Like what stated if US and China contributed almost a half from UN funding. They can't always rely upon the big nations to fund all of their programs. The only alternative is that to force the all of small countries to substitute 42% funding given by US and China, but the question is that what country can dot hat? I'm sure this ineffective organization will be collapse due to the lack of operational fund.

What the UN did the 25 years is close to nothing. Endless debates, reunions, travel. What did they accomplish?

That's a double standard when the aggressor comes from the two powerful contributors; there's also politics in the UN. Their hands are tied, and their mouths sealed when these two powerful nations are the aggressors, and they have to endure insults as long as Trump is in power. There's no equality in the world; they are still controlled by powerful countries because the fate of the world is in their hands, and we, small countries, are just their pawns.

I think the UN would definitely bend to the demand of the U.S because they along with China are a major stake holders with their financial contributions and just as we saw how Iran used economic leverage to hold the U.S to ransom in its current, that's same tool the U.S will use to make the UN give in to its demands. It's clear how the world has gone past military warfare and towards a more economic warfare that drives the point home instead of direct bloodshed. This is a brutal diplomacy tactic and it's just the way things are these days. The UN won't fail, but will eventually give in to what the major financial contributors want.

Do not think for a moment that there is anything wrong with the US or China not paying for this. Everything with the UN is wrong, and it needs to improve or it needs to go away. It is basically a bloated place with many people who do not do anything useful, almost permanent jobs for people who just chat leisurely, take some bribes and do very little. Expensive dinners, cars, meets, that is not work and it is also unfair that the US pays such a huge percentage of the funding because the US does not represent 42% of the world's wealth or population. Other countries should pay their fair share or they need to accept that the UN will shrink or go away. That is it exactly, just another useless avenue for people who do not do productive work and for which we have to pay high taxes for. Most of these things should be cut to the bare minimum and taxes for normal people should be as close to 0 as possible. It is known worldwide that government job, local or international are like permanent jobs and once you get into that tract you have guaranteed job because even the worst worker does not get removed from those positions usually unless they break the law. It is unfair to the good people that are working hard to survive. Fixing an injustice is not a brutal diplomacy tactic.

It's a power play and both parties are using their funding as leverage to get their way in the organization, it is all politics and it is the organization and its essential programs that are at the receiving end. That said, i have to agree with Donald Trump that the U.N. is an inefficient organization. They hardly achieve any of their core purposes, either in maintaining international peace, building friendly relations, etc. It is a very ineffective and corrupt organization. I do not agree with the idea of "blackmailing" the U.N. through their funding, but i believe the organization is at a point were it needs restructuring and new approach to solving global issues.

After reading about this whole thing, I think they really need restructuring in the organization and that’s definitely their last resort because they can’t keep up without funding. I don’t understand why they don’t agree to restructure based on mutual negotiations between them and the US government aforehand? Maybe the leaders in the UN have something fishy in their court. Their corruption is probably the sole reason they don’t agree with the restructuring but they would agree to it anyway since they don’t have any other options to get fundings for their enormous spendings.

Many countries have reported about the in efficiency and wrong decision making process of the United Nation but just to make reforms in it , it is quite risky to make them face financial crisis. Despite all the issues with the United Nation it is still helping in peace keeping mission in different war/ conflict zones of the world,  supporting refugees, funding different food programs around the world and many other projects.  if the countries like United States and China withhold their payments then those projects will be on hold and people have to face difficulties across the globe. There is the need to find the balance between making reforms in United Nation and providing fundings for the UN to operate and keep it’s program going.

Earlier I did not really follow the work of the UN, for me it was an international organization that did something, declared something, sort of fulfilled its functions laid down at its creation in 1945. Frankly speaking, I was not concerned with its actions or inactions, so I did not pay much attention to its work. But after the events of 2014 and 2022, I began to closely follow its actions. In brief - now I do not see the point in this organization. The reason is banal - it is a very corrupt structure, it does not fulfill its purpose, moreover, it often becomes an obstacle to the adoption of necessary measures within the framework of the legislative framework and the rights and obligations of this organization.  Most likely, the world needs a new, really functioning organization of a similar plan, but without the shortcomings of today's UN.

Moreover, the UN really doesn't have much influence anymore, it seems. They often ignore events they should be addressing, but they can only criticize with arguments without actually being able to provide any impetus to stop the conflict, especially in the Middle East, which has long been undermined by Israel and its allies. So letting it go bankrupt wouldn't be a problem, it seems. And hasn't the US withdrawn from many UN agencies during the Trump era? So I think the US also has a burden they feel they don't need to do, including China. They might think that way. If asked whether they can afford it or not, I think they definitely can.

They already yielded. Cut 3,000 staff, cut 15% budget, speed up troop withdrawal from Congo. What more yielding do people want. There is no guarantee of anything from yielding. The US owes $4 billion and there's zero incentive to actually pay. Withholding is the leverage. Once you pay, you're out. Essential game theory concepts. Both Washington and Beijing figured it out. That is why China is still $455 million in debt and acts as if it's still protecting multilateralism. Bit rich. In the 80s, Reagan did the same thing literally! Kassebaum-Solomon Amendment, pulled out of UNESCO, withheld dues until the UN restructured. What IS different this time: Trump pulled the US out of 31 UN bodies in January alone. UNFCCC, UN Women, UNFPA. Meanwhile WFP is operating on half its needed budget. Reducing food rations in West Africa as we discuss whether the institution is "bloated. Real people, real hunger and we're talking about efficiency. The UN won't formally die. There's no mechanism for that. But it can turn into a complete hollow and by all means it is going. A paper organisation that does not do anything is worse than a falling organisation. At least collapse forces you to build something new. Will we lose the UN? Nah. We will simply have it around as furniture.

I have watched the global event unfold for a while and what I have been able to deduce from everything especially about these type of news is that some countries are not just happy because, their interest is not protected and the way that they used to have a monopoly of events in the world is no longer thesame especially with the UN. If not I don't know why trump will will refuse to pay their levy as contribution to the the UN. This only reads one meaning to me that these two countries especially the united states was having their way in the United nation general assembly in the past but with countries like China rising up and opposing some of the policies of the United States trump is calling the UN all sorts of names.