On 7/3/03 16:35, in article be243e$gko2$1@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de, "Kevin
Gowen" <kgowenNOSPAM@myfastmail.com> wrote:

 
>>> Um, Jason, why do you think the US could renegotiate? Member States
>>> don't get to negotiate what percentage of UN expenses is apportioned
>>> to them by the General Assembly.
>> 
>> Interesting choice of words.
> 
> No more interesting than Article 17(2):
> "The expenses of the Organization shall be borne by the Members as
> apportioned by the General Assembly."

If only the UN was solely run via the General Assembly...

>> The percentage isn't negotiated but the
>> total amount certainly is.
> 
> Here we have a shift of ground. The US has gone from agreeing to pay a given
> percentage of the UN budget to simply agreeing to the total amount of the UN
> budget.

No, here we have Kevin putting another's words into my mouth. I never said
the US paid based on a a percentage. Michael wondered why their portion,
regardless of how that derived, was so high. I made the point that they were
not forced into this situation. I did not comment as to whether it was
decided as a percentage.
 
>> Do you think the apportioned expenses are
>> numbers pulled out of thin air and without any prior discussion?
> 
> I never said anything of the kind, Jed.

Kevin, I thought you already felt secure in your superiority to us
intellectual lightweights. Yet here you are, sounding much like a person
with a massive inferiority complex.

> Of course there is prior discussion,
> but not in the General Assembly. Discussion takes place in the GA's
> Administrative and Budgetary Committee (5th committee of the UNGA). The
> United States has no representative in its bureau.

Are you familiar with the workings of such committees? (Not just budgetary.)
They do not operate in a vacuum and they most certainly do not make
decisions without outside input.