John Bolton, President-elect Trump’s former national security adviser, said that Trump’s pick for ambassador to the United Nations, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), will have “her work cut out for her” when it comes to U.N. reform.
Bolton, now a vocal Trump critic, argued that one of the obstacles to successfully enacting reforms in the U.N. is the State Department’s bureaucracy in a Thursday opinion piece. He also advocated that the U.S. reevaluate the donations it provides to the 193-member organization and suggested that some should be cut down.
“That burden will fall not only on U.S. missions to U.N. components but also on the State Department’s regional bureaus, which are responsible for bilateral relations with the other 192 members,” Bolton wrote in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal.
“For decades, the regional bureaus have found reasons not to engage, pleading that innumerable bilateral issues be given higher priority,” wrote Bolton, who served as a U.N. ambassador. “Secretary of State-designate Marco Rubio will need to crack the whip for reform to succeed.”
Shortly following his win in the 2024 presidential election, Trump tapped Stefanik for the post, which requires Senate confirmation.
The New York Republican is a strong supporter of Israel and has criticized the U.N. for its rebukes of the Jewish State’s military operation in Gaza following the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas. In September, she went after the diplomatic organization, claiming it was infected by “antisemitic rot.”
The former national security asserted that the U.S. should scale back its donations to the U.N., writing that the current spending levels are “out of control.”
Countries make two types of payments to the U.N.: assessed and voluntary contributions. In Bolton’s view, assessed donations, that are mandatory for member states, “amount to taxation of America by other U.N. members.”
“That alone is sufficient reason to reject the concept of assessments, since it isn’t our votes in these bodies that matter. The only vote that matters is our Security Council vote (and veto), our main shield against one-nation-one-vote majorities U.N.-system-wide,” he wrote in the op-ed.
“Our permanent seat in the council and its vote are written into the U.N. Charter, and we can veto changes to the charter,” he added. “The potential negative consequences of ending assessed contributions, then, are essentially nil.”
Bolton, a defense hawk, wrote that Stefanik and Trump’s choice for Secretary of State, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), should announce “that the U.S. no longer accepts the concept of assessed contributions” shortly after taking office, arguing therefore the U.S. will only pay voluntary contributions “which we will decide by evaluating the performance of each U.N. agency and program.”
He said that this approach will ensure the U.N. programs can prove their worth through performance. Bolton warned that if voluntary programs are not up to the task, the U.S. should downgrade its funding levels.
“U.N. agencies that are funded entirely by voluntary donations, such as the World Food Program, generally tend to outperform those funded by assessments,” Bolton wrote. “Because they have to prove their worth annually, they have an incentive to sustain and even boost their performance. If voluntarily funded programs fail or falter, we should reduce their funding accordingly.”
Bolton recommended that the U.S. withdraw from the United Nations Education, Culture and Science (UNESCO), a Paris-based organization it formally rejoined in May last year.
“While many other reforms are possible, they won’t match the power of unilaterally controlling our contributions,” he wrote on Thursday. “Besides, we need a much larger defense budget; reducing contributions to the U.N. is a good start to find the necessary funding.”
