LETTERS: U.S. LEADERSHIP NEED FOR U.N.

To the editor:

On Oct. 24, the peoples of the world will commemorate the 51st anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. Fifty nations gathered in San Francisco in June 1945 to sign the U.N. charter first proposed by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill in 1941.

Every American president since has supported the United Nations. In the words of Harry Truman, "This is the best instrument for peace and security in the world."

Today the U.N. has 185 members. All nations are eligible, but each must have the approval of the General Assembly. All must accept the obligations stated in the charter.

The first article of the charter spells out the U.N.'s main purpose: to maintain international peace and security. One of the main criticisms leveled at the U.N. is that it hasn't done this. In Somalia, the U.N. was drawn into combat in a guerrilla war. In Bosnia, U.N. peacekeepers were powerless to stop the killing.

This is largely because of the way the U.N. is structured. The founders gave the main decision-making power on keeping the peace to the five permanent members of the Security Council (the principal victors in World War II). Any of the five can wield veto power -- and frequently did during the decades of the Cold War. Today, the five are usually unanimous in their decisions but lack the means to enforce them. There is no command-control system, no troops, no effective logistics. Each peacekeeping operation is improvised, and the missions are directed by a small staff at U.N. headquarters in New York.

Today, 80 percent of the U.N.'s work is devoted to economic and social programs. These include stopping deadly ebola viruses in Africa or providing capital for Third World economic development through the World Bank. All this work is accomplished through 15 subsidiary organs administered by the Economic and Social Council, plus 19 specialized agencies.

The proliferation of these agencies and the growth of their staffs have resulted in what many see as gross waste and mismanagement. But although reforms may indeed be necessary, the total cost of the U.N. is relatively small. In 1996, total operating expenses cam to $18.2 billion. The world's nations spent $747 billion for armaments that same year. Total U.N. peacekeeping operations came to only $3 billion, equal to 1.1 percent of America's military budget.

The U.N. budget is derived from assessments on member nations. Congress recently reduced the American share of peacekeeping costs to 25 percent from 31 percent. To date, the U.S. owes $1.5 billion in unpaid assessments to the U.N. Congress has said it will not pay until reforms are effected.

Reform proposals recommended by the special commission appointed by President Bush have yet to be acted on. President Clinton's proposal fro an inspector-general to prevent fraud and corruption has been ignored.

For the U.N. to become the effective instrument its founders envisioned will require the support and leadership of the United States. In many surveys, the American people have stated their support and the their preference for acting on international problems in partnership with the total U.N. membership.

To fulfill our legal and financial obligations is not only a matter of national honor, it clearly serves our best interests in terms of peace and security.

JOANN M. TAYLOR

Cape Girardeau