UN: India Should Rethink on Increasing its Contribution to the UN as Beijing Budgets to win Influence
STORIES, ANALYSES, EXPERT VIEWS
Last Christmas Eve, the UN’s regular budget increased China’s share to 20% making it almost equal to that of the US, which has capped its share at 22% for years.
Since its inception nearly 80 years ago, the top contributors to the UN have been western nations. This naturally saw them lead the thinking at the UN, not only through the power play that money brings but also through the placement of their people at various key places in the UN Secretariat.
The rise of China, writes Manjeev Singh Puri (former deputy permanent representative of India to the UN) “has now been noted for years but its importance at the global high table needs to be now seen as more than the Security Council veto. It now challenges the US-led western hegemony and suggests a certain G2 in the global order no matter that the UN is headquartered in New York and there is still a significant difference in economic and strategic power between the US and China, including in the US’s overall contributions to the UN system through its funds, programmes and specialised agencies."
With President Trump cutting back on its contribution or withdrawing as is being done for the WHO and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, these moves “result in a vacuum in leadership for which now a contender stands in the shadows. For India, of course, a G2-type scenario at the UN raises major concerns about multipolarity and a certain overbearing influence of China at the UN.”
Determining contributions to UN
In determining the scale of assessment, the UN goes by two broad criteria — a country’s share of global GDP and a discount for low per-capita income countries. India avails the latter’s benefit and contributes just about 1% of the UN’s budget.
For years, the accepted theory in India was that not availing of the low per-capita income discount would only mean paying into coffers where the power would continue to be western and P5 dominated. However, stresses Puri “now India is the largest country in the world and the fifth largest economy on its way to becoming the third largest one. Our aspirations for a seat on the global high tables, rightly, mirror these facts no matter that we have a long way to go in becoming a rich country.”
Reform beyond veto: India has been at the forefront of reform of the UNSC with the addition of its permanent membership. “While such a reform with veto seems a tough one, especially given likely Chinese opposition, there are possibilities to be explored, short of the veto, even for a permanent seat through negotiations and pushing the biggies to realise that having India inside the tent was better for them. The formation of the G20 is a case in point. The key to all this, of course, is to be a country that assumes responsibility, diplomatic jargon that means pays. This must be for the regular budget and not voluntary contributions, which India also makes but which go towards areas of direct interest to it.”
The higher contribution “also allows seeing the induction of our senior and qualified people for policy-level placements in the UN, not just on their own merit but as nominees of India, a major plus in the UN system. This, indeed, is the practice followed by the major players…"
In short, The rise of China as a paymaster at the UN and our major interest in a place at the global high table would appear to demand a rethink on paying into the UN.”
