DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 11278 

Bureau of International Organization Affairs 

Released September 2005 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 
United States 

Participation 

in the United Nations 

Report by the Secretary of State 

to the Congress 

for the year 2004 
CONTENTS

Acronyms and Short Forms..................................................................................v 

Prologue................................................................................................................1 

1. Political and Security Affairs 

Regional Issues...............................................................................................5 

Near East..................................................................................................5 

Iraq ....................................................................................................5 

Arab-Israeli Situation.........................................................................6 

UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)...........................................8 

UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO).................................9 

UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF).................................9 

Lebanon/Syria....................................................................................10 

South Asia................................................................................................10 

Afghanistan........................................................................................10 

India/Pakistan ....................................................................................13 

Africa .......................................................................................................13 

Burundi..............................................................................................13 

Cote d’Ivoire......................................................................................14 

Democratic Republic of the Congo....................................................16 

Ethiopia/Eritrea..................................................................................18 

Guinea-Bissau....................................................................................19 

Liberia ...............................................................................................21 

Libya..................................................................................................23 

Sierra Leone.......................................................................................23 

Somalia..............................................................................................24 

Sudan.................................................................................................25 

Western Sahara..................................................................................26 

East Asia and the Pacific..........................................................................27 

Bougainville ......................................................................................27 

Burma ................................................................................................28 

East Timor .........................................................................................28 

Europe and Eurasia ..................................................................................29 

Bosnia and Herzegovina ....................................................................29 

Cyprus ...............................................................................................29 

Georgia ..............................................................................................30 

The former Yugoslavia: UN Interim Administration Mission in 

 Kosovo.............................................................................................31 

Western Hemisphere................................................................................32 

Haiti...................................................................................................32 

Disarmament Issues........................................................................................34 

UN Disarmament Commission (UNDC) .................................................34 

Conference on Disarmament (CD)...........................................................34 

Peacekeeping Issues.......................................................................................36 

Peacekeeping and Financing....................................................................36 

Force Protection for U.S. Peacekeepers...................................................36 

CIVPOL...................................................................................................37 

HIV/AIDS................................................................................................38 

Sexual Abuse ...........................................................................................38 

Special Issues.................................................................................................40 

Terrorism .................................................................................................40 

Sanctions..................................................................................................41 

i 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Oil-for-Food.............................................................................................43 

Non-Self-Governing Territories...............................................................43 

Security Council Thematic Debates.........................................................44 

2. Economic and Social Affairs 

Economic and Development Issues................................................................49 

Development Bodies and Programs.........................................................49 

UN Development Program (UNDP)..................................................49 

UN Conference and Trade and Development (UNCTAD)................50 

Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) .............................51 

UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF).........................................................52 

UN-HABITAT ..................................................................................53 

Environment.............................................................................................55 

UN Environment Program (UNEP)...................................................55 

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)............56 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)........................57 

Population ................................................................................................58 

UN Population Fund (UNFPA) .........................................................58 

UN Commission on Population and Development (CPD).................58 

Regional Economic Commissions ...........................................................59 

Economic Commission for Europe (ECE).........................................59 

Economic Commission for Latin America and the 

Caribbean (ECLAC)..........................................................................60 

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the 

 Pacific (ESCAP)..............................................................................61 

Social Issues...................................................................................................61 

Commission for Social Development ......................................................61 

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities............................62 

Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice....................................................63 

International Drug Control.......................................................................64 

International Narcotics Control Board (INCB)..................................65 

Human Rights.................................................................................................65 

Status of Women......................................................................................65 

Commission on Human Rights ................................................................66 

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights...............................68 

UN Democracy Fund ...............................................................................69 

Democracy Caucus ..................................................................................69 

NGO Committee ......................................................................................71 

Humanitarian Issues.......................................................................................71 

World Food Program (WFP)....................................................................71 

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)....................................73 

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near

 East (UNRWA)......................................................................................75 

UN Disaster and Humanitarian Relief Activities.....................................75 

3. Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) ....................................................77 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)................................................79 

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).........................................85 

International Health Organizations.................................................................87 

World Health Organization (WHO).........................................................87 

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).............................89 

Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) ...........................................90 

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) ..........................................91 

 ii
Table of Contents 

International Labor Organization (ILO).........................................................92 

International Maritime Organization (IMO)...................................................94 

International Telecommunication Union (ITU)..............................................96 

UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) ..............98 

UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 

 (UNSCEAR) ................................................................................................99 

Universal Postal Union (UPU).......................................................................100 

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).........................................103 

World Meteorological Organization (WMO).................................................105 

4. Legal Developments 

Cloning...........................................................................................................109 

Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)................................110 

Host Country Relations..................................................................................113 

International Court of Justice .........................................................................114 

Mexico v. United States of America.........................................................114 

Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall 

 in Occupied Palestinian Territory..........................................................115 

International Criminal Court (ICC)................................................................116 

International Law Commission (ILC) ............................................................117 

Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations...............................118 

War Crimes Tribunals....................................................................................119 

International Criminal Tribunal Rwanda .................................................119 

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia .....................120 

Special Court for Sierra Leone.................................................................121 

Cambodia Khmer Rouge Tribunal ...........................................................121 

5. Reform of the UN System 

Security Council Reform................................................................................123 

Management Reform......................................................................................124 

Peacekeeping Reform.....................................................................................125 

6. Administration and Budget

UN Financial Situation...................................................................................127 

UN Budget .....................................................................................................128 

Capital Master Plan ........................................................................................129 

Scale of Assessments .....................................................................................130 

Committee for Program and Coordination (CPC)..........................................131 

Audit Reports.................................................................................................133 

Joint Inspection Unit (JIU).............................................................................135 

Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS)................................................138 

Human Resources Management.....................................................................140 

International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) ............................................142 

Employment of Americans.............................................................................144 

UN Joint Staff Pension Board ........................................................................147 

Appendices

1. Address by President George W. Bush......................................................151 

2. Principal UN Organs.................................................................................159 

General Assembly....................................................................................159 

Security Council.......................................................................................162 

Trusteeship Council .................................................................................162 

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)...............................................162 

International Court of Justice ...................................................................163 

UN Secretariat..........................................................................................163 

3. U.S. Representatives..................................................................................167 

 iii
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN General Assembly .............................................................................167 

Subsidiary and Other Bodies .............................................................167 

Security Council.......................................................................................168 

Trusteeship Council .................................................................................168 

Economic and Social Council and Related Bodies ..................................168 

Functional Commissions ...................................................................168 

Regional Economic Commissions.....................................................169 

Standing Committees.........................................................................170 

Related Subsidiary Bodies.................................................................170 

Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies...................................................170 

U.S. Permanent Representatives to the United Nations from

 1946 to 2004 ..........................................................................................172 

4. UN and Related Websites..........................................................................175 

UN Bodies ...............................................................................................175 

UN Missions/Peacekeeping Operations.............................................177 

International Organizations......................................................................178 

Specialized U.S. Government Agency Sites............................................180 

IO Missions..............................................................................................180 

Conferences .............................................................................................180 

Conventions/Agreements.........................................................................181 

Index ....................................................................................................................185 

 iv
Acronyms and Short Forms 

AP Additional Protocol

AU African Union 

BOA Board of Auditors 

CA Council of Administration

CCIT Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism

CD Conference on Disarmament 

CEB Chief Executives Board

CHR UN Commission on Human Rights 

CIS Commonwealth of Independent States 

CIVPOL civilian police 

CMP Capital Master Plan

CND UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs 

COP Conference of the Parties 

CPA Coalition Provisional Authority 

CPC Committee for Program and Coordination 

CPD UN Commission on Population and Development 

CSD UN Commission on Sustainable Development

CSW UN Commission on the Status of Women

CTC Counter-Terrorism Committee

CTED Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate 

CU contributory units 

DDRR disarmament, demobilization, repatriation, and reintegration 

DFI Development Fund for Iraq

DPKO UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations 

DPRK North Korea 

DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo

ECE Economic Commission for Europe 

ECLAC Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 

ECOSOC Economic and Social Council

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States 

ESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific 

ETOEs Extraterritorial Offices of Exchange 

EU European Union 

EU3 France, Germany, and the United Kingdom

EUFOR EU Force 

v 
United States Participation in the United Nations–2004 

EXCOM Executive Committee of the UN High Commissioner for 

 Refugees 

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization 

FCCC/UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

FCTC Framework Convention on Tobacco Control 

FMCT fissile material cutoff treaty 

GCOS Global Climate Observing System

GTRI Global Threat Reduction Initiative 

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency 

IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer 

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

ICC International Criminal Court 

ICJ International Court of Justice 

ICPD International Conference on Population and Development 

ICSC International Civil Service Commission

ICTR International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

ICTY International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 

IDP internally displaced persons 

IEC Incident and Emergency Center 

IGC Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property 

 and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and 

 Folklore 

IGWG Intergovernmental Working Group 

IHRs International Health Regulations

IIC Independent Inquiry Committee 

ILC International Law Commission OR International Labor 

 Conference

ILO International Labor Organization 

IMF International Monetary Fund

IMO International Maritime Organization

INCB International Narcotics Control Board

INSServ International Nuclear Security Advisory Service 

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IPEC International Program for the Elimination of Child Labor 

ISAF International Security Assistance Force 

ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security Code

vi 
Acronyms and Short Forms 

ISWG Inter-Sessional Working Group

ITU International Telecommunication Union

JEMB Joint Electoral Management Body

JIU Joint Inspection Unit 

KRT Khmer Rouge Tribunal

LMA Linas-Marcoussis Agreement 

LURD Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy

MIF Multinational Interim Force 

MINUCI UN Mission in Cote d’Ivoire 

MINURSO UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara 

MINUSTAH UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti 

MNF Multinational Force 

MODEL Movement for Democracy in Liberia 

MONUC UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

MRTD machine readable travel documents

NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NGO nongovernmental organization 

NPT Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 

NSAs Negative Security Assurances

OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 

OIC Organization of the Islamic Conference 

OIOS Office of Internal Oversight Services 

ONUB UN Operation in Burundi 

OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation Europe 

PAHO Pan American Health Organization 

PAROS Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space 

PCB Program Coordinating Board

PCT Patent Cooperation Treaty

PIF privately-financed infrastructure 

PISG Provisional Institutions of Self-Government 

POC Postal Operations Council 

POLISARIO Frente Popular para la Liberacion de Saguia el-Hamra y Rio 

 Front de Oro 

PoW Program of Work

PRT Provincial Reconstruction Team

RGC Royal Government of Cambodia 

vii 
United States Participation in the United Nations–2004 

SCP Standing Committee on the Law of Patents 

SCSL Special Court for Sierra Leone 

SFOR Stabilization Force 

SOFA Status of Forces Agreement 

SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 

SOMA Status of Mission Agreement 

SPLM/A Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army 

SPM Special Political Missions

SRSG Special Representative of the Secretary-General 

SUA Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts 

 Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation

TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission

TSZ temporary security zone 

UN-HABITAT UN Human Settlements Program

UNAIDS Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

UNAMA UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan 

UNAMI UN Assistance Mission for Iraq

UNAMIS UN Advance Mission in the Sudan 

UNAMSIL UN Mission in Sierra Leone 

UNCITRAL UN Commission on International Trade Law 

UNCTAD UN Conference on Trade and Development 

UNDC UN Disarmament Commission 

UNDCP UN Drug Control Program

UNDOF UN Disengagement Observer Force 

UNDP UN Development Program

UNEP UN Environment Program

UNESCO UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

UNFCCC/FCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNFICYP UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus 

UNFPA UN Population Fund

UNHCR UN High Commissioner for Refugees 

UNICEF UN Children’s Fund

UNIFIL UN Interim Force in Lebanon 

UNMEE UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea 

UNMIK UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo 

UNMIL UN Mission in Liberia 

UNMISET UN Mission of Support in East Timor

viii 
Acronyms and Short Forms 

UNMOGIP UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan

UNOCI UN Operation in Cote d’Ivoire

UNODC UN Office on Drugs and Crime 

UNOGBIS UN Peace-building Support Office in Guinea-Bissau 

UNOMB UN Observer Mission in Bougainville 

UNOMIG UN Observer Mission in Georgia 

UNOMIL UN Observer Mission in Liberia 

UNOPS UN Office for Project Services

UNRWA UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the 

 Near East 

UNSCEAR UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic 

 Radiation 

UNTSO UN Truce Supervision Organization 

UPU Universal Postal Union 

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development 

USAP Universal Security Audit Program

USG Under Secretary-General 

USMOG-W U.S. Military Observer Group-Washington

USOAP Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program

VCP Voluntary Cooperation Program

WFP World Food Program

WHA World Health Assembly

WHO World Health Organization 

WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

WMC World Meteorological Congress 

WMD weapons of mass destruction 

WMO World Meteorological Organization 

WSIS World Summit on the Information Society

WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development

ix 
United States Participation in the United Nations–2004 

x 
Prologue

This report is submitted pursuant to the “United Nations Participation 

Act of 1945” (Public Law 79-264). Section 4 of this law provides, in part, 

that: 

“The President shall from time to time as occasion may 

require, but not less than once each year, make reports to the

Congress of the activities of the United Nations and of the

participation of the United States therein.” 

In July 2003, the President delegated to the Secretary of State the

authority to transmit this report to Congress. 

The United States Participation in the United Nations report is a

survey of the activities of the U.S. Government in the United Nations and its 

agencies, as well as the activities of the United Nations and those agencies 

themselves. More specifically, this report seeks to assess UN achievements 

during 2004, the effectiveness of U.S. participation in the United Nations, and 

whether U.S. goals were advanced or thwarted. 

The United States is committed to the founding ideals of the United

Nations. Addressing the UN General Assembly in 2003, President Bush said, 

“The founding documents of the United Nations and the 

founding documents of America stand in the same tradition.

Both assert that human beings should never be reduced to

objects of power or commerce, because their dignity is 

inherent. Both recognize a moral law that stands above men 

and nations, which must be defended and enforced by men 

and nations. And both point the way to peace, the peace that 

comes when all are free.” 

The United States believes the United Nations should be a place

where diverse countries and cultures of the world work together for freedom, 

democracy, peace, human rights, and prosperity for all people. In 2004, the

United Nations continued to face many challenges in living up to those 

founding principles. 

This report treats thematically UN activities that most significantly 

affected U.S. interests. It is divided into six chapters: 

Part 1, on Political and Security Affairs, focuses on activities

undertaken by the United Nations to maintain international peace and security. 

Under the UN Charter, the primary responsibility for this task lies in the 

Security Council, which is empowered to take various actions to maintain 

international peace and security through the adoption of resolutions 

authorizing peacekeeping and special political missions. The activities of the 

UN General Assembly and other UN bodies are also described. This chapter

also covers security-related thematic issues, such as disarmament and 

international terrorism. 

1 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

In 2004, the Security Council answered President Bush’s 2003 call to 

address the threat posed by rogue states and terrorists acquiring weapons of

mass destruction and their means of delivery. With U.S. leadership, the

Security Council adopted Resolution 1540, requiring member states to take 

and enforce effective measures to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction, develop and maintain export controls consistent with international 

standards, and to secure any and all sensitive materials within their own

borders. 

The United Nations played an important role in promoting peace and 

stability in Sudan, Haiti, and other countries of importance to the United

States. The Security Council pressured the Sudanese government to rein in

Janjaweed militias committing atrocities in Darfur, established an arms

embargo, and supported the African Union’s mission in Darfur. Moreover,

Security Council efforts to help bring an end to Sudan’s civil war culminated

in a November 2004 special session of the Security Council in Nairobi in 

which the Sudanese government and southern rebels committed themselves to

concluding a final comprehensive peace agreement. 

In Haiti, upon the resignation and departure of President Aristide in 

early 2004, the Security Council authorized a U.S.-led multinational interim 

force to restore order for a short period, and later established a UN

peacekeeping mission, known as the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti. The

Security Council also helped establish the framework for the transfer of

authority in Iraq from the Coalition Provisional Authority to the Iraqi Interim 

Government. 

Part 2, on Economic and Social Affairs, assesses the work of the

General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the UN Commission on

Human Rights, and various subsidiary bodies and commissions on issues that

involve economic development, the status of women, humanitarian aid, and 

crime prevention and control. 

The United States met several objectives in these bodies in 2004. The 

Commission on Human Rights, though largely discredited as an institution,

nevertheless adopted a resolution condemning the situation of human rights in

Cuba as well as a resolution on the consolidation and promotion of democracy

which was supported jointly by members of the UN democracy caucus. The

Commission and the General Assembly’s Third Committee together also 

adopted resolutions addressing human rights situations in Burma, Iran, and

other countries, but failed to speak forcefully against other countries with 

deplorable human rights situations, such as Sudan and Zimbabwe. 

Part 3, on Specialized Agencies, describes the activities of a host of 

agencies, from the Food and Agriculture Organization to the World Health

Organization, and assesses how they served U.S. interests. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) played a

particularly important role in 2004 as it focused attention on Iran’s nuclear 

program and it’s failure to comply with its safeguards obligations and other 

nonproliferation commitments. The IAEA Board called on Iran to suspend all

2 
Prologue 

of its enrichment- and reprocessing-related activities and to cooperate fully 

with the IAEA in resolving outstanding questions about Iran’s nuclear 

program. Iran agreed in November 2004 to suspend uranium enrichmentrelated and plutonium reprocessing efforts, facilitating negotiations between

Iran and France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The IAEA also provided

oversight as Libya dismantled its clandestine nuclear weapons program and 

came into compliance with international safeguards obligations. 

Part 4, on Legal Developments, highlights the work of the 

International Court of Justice and other judicial bodies, such as the War 

Crimes Tribunals in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and developments on

issues such as cloning. 

Part 5, on Reform of the UN System, describes progress on reform

of the United Nations, and of the UN’s main bodies. 

The High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, appointed 

by the Secretary-General in 2003, issued its report in December 2004, making 

101 recommendations to address a range of global threats. The UN General

Assembly adopted resolutions to strengthen the Office of Internal Oversight

Services, pursuant to a U.S. initiative, and the Joint Inspection Unit. 

Part 6, on Administration and Budget, provides an overview of the 

UN current financial situation and resource management issues. 

Information on funding of UN activities and UN bodies, as well as 

U.S. assessments or contributions, are provided throughout this report. Unless 

otherwise noted, figures provided are for calendar year 2004. 

Finally, the report’s appendices include the President’s 2004 speech

to the UN General Assembly, in which he first proposed a UN Democracy 

Fund, information about the principal organs of the United Nations and their

membership and leadership in 2004, a list of U.S. representatives to the United 

Nations in 2004, and other reference information. 

Questions about this report may be directed to the Bureau of 

International Organization Affairs, U.S. Department of State. 

3 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

4 
Part 1 

Political and Security Affairs 

Regional Issues 

Near East 

Iraq 

In late December 2003, the President of the Iraqi Governing Council 

wrote to the UN Secretary-General asking whether elections in Iraq were

feasible by June 30, 2004; and if not, by what alternative means an Interim 

Government could be formed, to which sovereignty would be restored. On 

January 19, 2004, the Security Council met with the Chair of the Iraqi

Governing Council, who reiterated and clarified these questions. The United 

States and the United Kingdom joined the Chair in expressing their support for 

the UN’s re-engagement in Iraq. Soon thereafter, UN Secretary-General

Annan responded positively to Iraq’s request and named Lakhdar Brahimi

(Algeria) as his Special Advisor, charged with playing a role in Iraq’s political 

transition process. Brahimi subsequently led a small team of political and

electoral experts to Iraq in February. The findings of his visit were presented

to the Security Council as a report of the Secretary-General on February 23. 

The report included recommendations for preparations for elections to be held

by January 2005. 

The Security Council issued a Presidential Statement on March 24

welcoming and strongly supporting the Secretary-General’s decision to 

dispatch Brahimi and an electoral assistance team to Iraq as soon as possible.

Brahimi and the electoral assistance team would lend assistance and advice to 

the Iraqi people in the formation of an Iraqi interim government to which 

sovereignty would be transferred on June 30, as well as in preparation for

direct elections to be held in 2005. 

On April 21, the Council adopted Resolution 1538, which welcomed

the appointment of the independent high-level inquiry for the investigation of

the Oil-For-Food Program and called on the Coalition Provisional Authority, 

Iraq, and all other member states to cooperate fully with the inquiry. 

On April 27, Brahimi briefed the Security Council on UN efforts in 

Iraq. The Council issued a press statement immediately thereafter in support 

of Brahimi’s ideas for the formation of an interim Iraqi Government. The 

statement also encouraged the Secretary-General and Brahimi to continue

diligently with their efforts and welcomed the Special Adviser’s intention to 

return to Iraq shortly. The Council also called on all Iraqi parties to cooperate 

fully with Brahimi and urged Iraq’s neighbors and the international

community at-large to lend support to these efforts. 

In late May, the United States and United Kingdom circulated a draft

text of a new resolution on Iraq which endorsed the imminent transfer of full

responsibility and authority for governing Iraq to the Interim Government of 

5 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Iraq, further defined the UN role in Iraq, extended the mandate for the

Multinational Force (MNF), extended the mandate for the Development Fund 

for Iraq (DFI) and the International Advisory and Monitoring Board for the

DFI, and called on the international community to provide assistance in

several areas, including reconstruction, political, security, and humanitarian

efforts. The draft text also noted the Council’s intent to revisit the mandates 

for the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (on weapons

and prohibited missiles) and the International Atomic Energy Agency. 

On June 3, the Iraqi Minister for Foreign Affairs addressed the 

Security Council, urging the Council to adopt the draft resolution to endorse

the establishment of the sovereign interim government as soon as possible to

support the ongoing political process. He also reaffirmed Iraq’s need to 

control its own resources, and recognized Iraq’s need for the continued

presence of a multinational force in partnership with the Iraqi authorities. The 

United States encouraged adoption of the text of the draft resolution under 

consideration. 

The Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1546 on June

8. Annexed to the resolution were letters from Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad

Allawi and U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell which further addressed the

MNF’s scope of action as well as the intended establishment of an MNF-Iraqi

security partnership. The letter from the Secretary of State also noted the 

intention to create a distinct entity under unified command of the MNF with a 

dedicated mission to provide security for the UN presence in Iraq. 

On June 30, the Security Council issued a statement welcoming the 

handover of full responsibility and authority for governing Iraq to the fully

sovereign and independent Interim Government of Iraq on June 28, thus

ending the occupation of the country, and condemning, in the strongest terms, 

the continued violence in Iraq. 

The UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) was initially

established by Resolution 1500 (2003) for a one-year period to support the

Secretary-General in fulfilling his mandate under Resolution 1483 (2003), and

to consolidate UN activities. On August 12, the Council unanimously adopted

Resolution 1557, which the United States and the United Kingdom drafted.

The resolution extended UNAMI’s mandate for an additional 12 months;

stated the Council’s intention to review the mandate in one year or sooner, if

requested by the Iraqi Government; and reaffirmed that the United Nations

should play a leading role in assisting the Iraqi people and government in the

formation of institutions for representative government. 

During the reporting period, the United States, on behalf of the MNF 

and the Coalition Provisional Authority, presented a total of six reports 

regarding their respective activities in Iraq, pursuant to Resolutions 1483, 

1511, and 1546. 

Arab-Israeli Situation 

Even as violent events continued to unfold in the Middle East, the 

United States actively pursued in the United Nations President Bush’s vision 

6 
Political and Security Affairs 

of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and 

security. To this end, in 2004 the United States continued to work in

partnership with the other members of the Quartet (the United Nations, the 

European Union (EU), and Russia) to realize the Quartet’s Performance-Based 

Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

(the “Roadmap”). 

In March, the United States vetoed a draft Security Council resolution 

sponsored by Algeria and Libya condemning Israel for the killing of Hamas 

leader Shaikh Yassin. In explaining its vote, the United States noted that the 

resolution was flawed because it was silent about terrorist actions committed 

by Hamas, did not reflect the realities of the conflict in the Middle East, and 

would not further the goals of peace and security in the region. 

The United States was unable to prevent adoption in May of General 

Assembly Resolution 58/292 on the Status of the Occupied Territories 

including East Jerusalem, which received the support of the EU. The United 

States raised concerns that the resolution contradicted previous Quartet 

statements that no party should take unilateral actions that seek to 

predetermine issues that can only be resolved through negotiation and 

agreement between the two parties. 

Also in May, the United States abstained on the otherwise unanimous 

Security Council Resolution 1544, which expressed concern about Israeli

destruction of Palestinian homes in the Gaza Strip. In explaining its 

abstention, the United States noted that Israel had the right to act to defend 

itself and its citizens but its operations in Gaza did not serve the purposes of 

peace and security. However, because the resolution failed to address the 

broader context of events in Gaza, including terrorists groups smuggling 

weapons into Gaza, the United States did not support the resolution. 

In December 2003, the emergency special session of the General 

Assembly had adopted Resolution ES-10/14, which requested the International

Court of Justice (ICJ) to render an advisory opinion on the “legal 

consequences” of Israeli construction of a barrier in areas of the West Bank. 

In response to the ICJ’s July 9, 2004, advisory opinion that “deemed 

construction...contrary to international law,” Arab states in the General

Assembly called for an emergency special session in which it adopted

Resolution ES-10/15. This resolution demanded that Israel comply with the 

advisory opinion by, among other things, the cessation of construction and

requesting the Secretary-General to establish a register for damages caused by 

the construction. In explaining its opposition to the resolution, the United

States reiterated that a durable solution could only be found in a negotiated 

settlement and that the resolution diverted attention from practical efforts to

move the parties toward the goal of two states living side-by-side in peace and 

security. 

On October 5, the United States vetoed an Algerian, Pakistani, and 

Tunisian cosponsored resolution condemning Israeli actions in the Northern

Gaza strip and demanding Israeli military withdrawal. In its explanation of 

7 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

vote, the United States characterized the draft as unbalanced, rife with material 

omissions, and lacking in credibility. 

On December 10, the United States, together with all EU member

states, Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, and the Russian Federation, 

formally requested the Secretary-General to convene a special session of the

General Assembly on January 25, 2005, to commemorate the 60th anniversary

of the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps. The broad support for this 

special session represented a significant achievement in Israel’s efforts to 

focus UN attention on issues of importance to Israel. 

In the 59th UN General Assembly regular session, 19 resolutions

concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and related issues were introduced;

all were adopted. The United States opposed 17 of these resolutions because

they addressed final status issues that the Israelis and Palestinians have agreed 

to decide through negotiations; advocated activities or language incompatible 

with basic principles of the Middle East peace process; and expended 

resources that could be used in more productive ways to improve the lives of

the Palestinian people. 

The United States made progress in the General Assembly toward its 

goal of cutting into the large, automatic majorities by which these recurring 

resolutions have usually been adopted. U.S. lobbying marginally increased the 

number of “no” votes and abstentions over 2003. 

The United States supported a resolution that addressed humanitarian 

assistance to Palestinian people. In 2004, the United States provided $127

million to the UN Relief and Works Agency, the UN agency charged with 

providing humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees. The United States 

remained the largest single donor to that agency. 

Throughout the year, U.S. representatives spoke out forcefully and

frequently in numerous UN bodies to ensure that Israel was not excluded from

or isolated at UN meetings and conferences, that Israel be included in the

Western European and Others Group and UN counterparts outside of New 

York, and that Israeli interests were given fair consideration.

UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) 

The UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) was established by UN 

Security Council Resolutions 425 and 426 in March 1978. These measures 

responded to the Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon following a Palestinian

Liberation Organization attack inside Israel. UNIFIL’s mandate included

confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon, assisting the 

Government of Lebanon in restoring its effective authority, and contributing to

the restoration of international peace and security in the region. In a report to

the Security Council in 2000, the Secretary-General asserted that UNIFIL’s 

remaining task was restoring international peace and security to the area. 

In 2004, UNIFIL reported numerous armed encounters in violation of

the Line of Withdrawal, or “Blue Line,” by Israeli Defense Forces, Hizballah, 

and armed Palestinian elements. Hizballah attacked Israeli positions in the 

8 
Political and Security Affairs 

Sheb’a Farms area with rockets, mortar, and small arms fire. Hizballah also 

directed anti-aircraft fire into Israeli territory. Israel responded to these attacks 

with aerial bombs, mortars, and helicopter gunship fire. Armed Palestinian 

groups also fired rockets toward Israel, prompting an Israeli retaliatory air

strike on Naameh, 15 kilometers south of Beirut. UNIFIL recorded numerous

airspace violations by Israeli military aircraft and the launch of a drone into 

Israeli territory by Hizballah. 

UN-assessed costs for UNIFIL totaled $46.8 million in 2004. The

U.S. contribution totaled $10.5 million. As of December 31, UNIFIL had 

1,995 troops from seven nations. No U.S. troops served in UNIFIL. 

UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) 

The UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) was the first UN

peacekeeping mission. In 1948, the Security Council established the UNTSO 

under Resolution 50 to supervise the truce called for by the Council at the end 

of the British mandate in Palestine. Since then, the UNTSO has supervised the 

implementation and observance of the general agreements between Israel and 

Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. 

Following the 1967 Middle East War, UNTSO took on cease-fire 

monitoring responsibilities in the Israel-Syria sector and the Suez Canal Zone. 

In 1972, the Council established a similar operation in southern Lebanon. The 

Council also directed the unarmed UNTSO military observers to assist UN

peacekeeping forces deployed in the Sinai (1973), on the Golan Heights 

(1974), as well as in southern Lebanon (1978). 

In 2004, UNTSO helped maintain a stabilizing presence in the region, 

including providing military observers and administrative staff to support the

UN Interim Force in Lebanon and the UN Disengagement Observer Force in 

the Golan Heights. At Egypt’s request, the mission also provided a small 

monitoring team to patrol the Sinai. 

As of December 31, UNTSO had 153 military observers from 23 

nations. Three U.S. military observers were assigned to UNTSO. UNassessed costs for UNTSO totaled $28.2 million in 2004. The U.S.

contribution totaled $6.2 million. 

UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) 

The UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) was established 

by Security Council Resolution 350 (1974) in the aftermath of the 1973 ArabIsraeli War. UNDOF plays a positive role in observing the implementation of

the Israel-Syria Disengagement Agreement and serves U.S. national security 

interests by maintaining confidence levels and preventing the escalation of

tensions between Israel and Syria. The Security Council extends UNDOF’s 

mandate at six-month intervals. The Security Council renewed UNDOF on

December 15, by adopting Resolution 1578. 

UNDOF monitors the cease-fire between Israel and Syria, supervises 

the disengagement of Israeli and Syrian forces on the Golan Heights, and 

monitors the areas of separation and limitation between the two countries. In 

9 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

2004, the security situation in UNDOF’s area of operations remained generally 

calm.

In 2004, UN-assessed costs for UNDOF totaled $44.3 million; the 

United States contributed $10.8 million. As of December 31, UNDOF had

1,018 troops from six nations. No U.S. personnel served in UNDOF. 

Lebanon/Syria 

Syrian interference in Lebanon’s electoral process prompted the

United States and France to circulate a Security Council resolution intended to

preempt foreign interference in Lebanon’s presidential elections. On

September 2, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1559. This resolution

called for the evacuation of all foreign forces from Lebanon, the disbanding of

all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias, and the extension of Lebanese 

government control over the entire country. 

On October 1, Secretary-General Annan reported to the Security

Council that he could not certify that the Syrian or Lebanese governments had

fulfilled the requirements of Resolution 1559. In particular, he reported that

Syria maintained at least 14,000 troops in Lebanon; several armed elements,

among them Hizballah, were present in the south of the country; and the 

Lebanese government had not extended its control over all of its territory. In

response, the United States and France drafted a statement, which was adopted

by the Council and issued on October 19, welcoming the Secretary-General’s

report and requesting that he continue to report to the Council on the

implementation of Resolution 1559 every six months. On December 13, 

Secretary-General Annan appointed Terje-Roed Larsen (Norway) as his

Special Envoy for the implementation of Resolution 1559, with the mandate to

work with the governments of Lebanon and its neighbors on fulfillment of the

resolution and to prepare the requested reports. 

South Asia 

Afghanistan 

Throughout 2004, the United States worked through the United

Nations and with the international community in pursuit of a prosperous, 

democratic, and self-governing Afghanistan. At the heart of this mission was

assisting Afghans as they rebuilt their country under the terms of the Bonn

Agreement (2001). 

On January 4, the newly-elected Loya Jirga (the national assembly) 

adopted a constitution which reflected the determination of the Afghan people 

to move their country towards a stable and democratic state. Lakhdar Brahimi 

(Algeria), the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Afghanistan, 

ended his assignment on January 6, and on February 6, the Secretary-General

announced his intention to appoint Jean Arnault (France) as Brahimi’s 

replacement. 

On March 19, the Secretary-General issued a report to the Security 

Council and the General Assembly on the situation in Afghanistan and its 

implications for international peace and security. The report described the key 

10 
Political and Security Affairs 

challenges to the successful completion of the Bonn Agreement, including

voter registration and holding elections; security; progress in the disarmament, 

remobilization, and reintegration process; attacking the corrupt culture of the

drug economy; and human rights. 

The Security Council established the UN Assistance Mission in

Afghanistan (UNAMA) by Resolution 1401 (2002) with a mandate to

facilitate implementation of the Bonn Agreement, including fulfilling the tasks 

and responsibilities related to human rights, the rule of law, gender issues, and 

national reconciliation. UNAMA’s mandate also included management of all

UN humanitarian relief, recovery, and reconstruction activities. On March 26, 

2004, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1536, which 

extended UNAMA’s mandate for a further 12 months. 

With strong U.S. support, the principal focus of UNAMA in 2004 

was to support the development of Afghan institutions. UNAMA and several 

UN agencies and programs cooperated with Afghan authorities to develop 

responses to the drought (in its sixth year) and other related humanitarian 

issues affecting some 4 million Afghans. More than 740,000 refugees 

returned to Afghanistan in 2004, bringing the total number of returnees 

assisted by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) since 2002 to

well over 3 million. As a direct result of the UN Mine Action program, the

number of mine victims declined from more than 150 per month in 2002 to

fewer than 100 per month in 2004. 

Meeting in Berlin from March 31 to April 1, the international

community reaffirmed its support for the transitional process in Afghanistan,

with continued emphasis on security and the generation of financial and other

donations. Pledges from donors at this conference totaled $8.2 billion over 

three years. This level of assistance reflected Afghanistan’s continued 

importance to U.S. national security, both as a linchpin for regional stability in

South Asia and as a central focus of the Global War on Terror. On April 6, the 

Security Council issued a presidential statement welcoming the results of the 

Berlin Conference and stressing the need for donors to honor their pledges. 

Having taken command of the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) 

in Konduz in December 2003, on July 1, 2004, the International Security 

Assistance Force (ISAF) assumed command of the PRT at Mazar-e-Sharif. 

The United States strongly supported NATO’s leadership of ISAF, and its 

expansion into northern and western Afghanistan. Shortly thereafter, ISAF 

took control of the PRT at Maimana, and by year’s end had also assumed 

command of the PRTs at Fayzabad and Baghlan. On September 17, the

Security Council extended ISAF’s mandate for a further year by Resolution

1563. 

Due to the absence of census data, Afghanistan’s Joint Electoral 

Management Body (JEMB) decided in early July that the difficulty in

allocating parliamentary seats among provinces made it necessary to delay 

parliamentary elections until April 2005. The JEMB simultaneously decided 

to delay the election for president from September 2004 to October 9. This

11 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

decision elicited a statement from the President of the Security Council on July

15 in which the Council emphasized the necessity of making good use of the 

additional time before parliamentary elections to ensure all conditions could be

met for free and fair elections. 

Critical to Afghanistan’s success was the implementation of the 

political process outlined in the Bonn Agreement, including establishment of a 

constitutional, representative, and effective government that embodied the

aspirations of all Afghans. Afghanistan made significant progress towards that 

goal with the successful elections for President on October 9. More than 8.1 

million ballots were cast, representing 70 percent of registered voters. An

estimated 41.3 percent of voters were women. From a field of 18 candidates,

Hamid Karzai was elected the country’s first democratically chosen head of 

state, winning 55.4 percent of the vote. The United States worked closely with

the Afghan Government and UNAMA to assist the JEMB in conducting what

was generally judged to be a credible electoral process. On October 12, the

Security Council issued a presidential statement congratulating the Afghan 

people for this historic event. 

Narcotics production in Afghanistan continued to be a concern for the 

United States in 2004. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime estimated that 

opium poppy cultivation increased by two-thirds during 2004, reaching 

206,000 hectares. Despite the widespread increase in cultivation, bad weather 

and crop disease reduced the output per hectare, resulting in an overall

increase in production of “only” 17 percent. Afghanistan remained the 

world’s largest producer of opium in 2004, accounting for over 85 percent of

global production. Due to excess supply, opium prices declined by 67 percent

in 2004 from the year before. 

On December 8, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 

59/112 by consensus. The General Assembly addressed Afghanistan’s 

continuing quest for peace and security by reiterating the General Assembly’s 

strong support for the Afghan Transitional Authority in its efforts to

successfully implement the Bonn Agreement. Members applauded the

adoption of a pluralistic and democratic constitution, the successful

presidential election, and the substantial progress towards empowerment of 

women in the Afghan political process as historic milestones which would

help to consolidate durable peace and national stability in the country. The

Assembly acknowledged the continuing fragility of the security sector, the 

uncertainty of which had a profound effect on reconstruction activities in 

Afghanistan. The General Assembly called upon member states to support the 

Transitional Authority and provide emergency assistance for peace, normalcy,

and reconstruction; and encouraged donors to channel assistance through the

development budget of the Transitional Authority. The uncontested adoption

of this resolution was an important indicator of the substantial international 

support for the establishment of peace and security in Afghanistan. 

The United States contributed $95 million of the $198 million 

provided by the international community to pay for voter registration political

12 
Political and Security Affairs 

party development, civic education, polling operations, and logistics. 

UNAMA cost $67.5 million in 2004. The U.S. contribution was $14.8

million. In addition, the United States contributed $36.3 million to the 

UNHCR for its work to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of Afghan refugees 

and to provide protection and assistance to refugees remaining in neighboring 

countries. 

India/Pakistan 

The UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) 

was deployed in January 1949 under UN Security Council Resolution 47

(1948) to supervise the cease-fire agreement between India and Pakistan in the

state of Jammu and Kashmir. In July 1949, India and Pakistan signed the

Karachi Agreement establishing a cease-fire line to be supervised by UN

observers. 

At the end of 1971, hostilities again broke out between India and

Pakistan. Following a cease-fire, India and Pakistan agreed in 1972 on a Line

of Control which UNMOGIP monitors. UNMOGIP’s functions were to

observe and report, investigate complaints of cease-fire violations, and submit 

its findings to the parties and to the UN Secretary-General. 

Despite UNMOGIP’s passive role in Kashmir, the United States 

believes that to de-establish the mission without replacing it with an 

alternative mechanism could upset the delicate equilibrium, which allowed

both sides to meet on a range of bilateral issues, including the status of

Kashmir. 

UNMOGIP is funded through the UN regular budget rather than the 

peacekeeping budget. The 2004 annual budget for UNMOGIP was $7.3 

million, and the U.S. assessment was $1.6 million. As of late 2004, 44

military observers served in UNMOGIP. No U.S. military personnel were

assigned to the mission in 2004. 

Africa 

Burundi 

In 2004, the United States continued to work in the UN Security

Council to support international efforts to assist Burundi’s peace process and 

promote national reconciliation. The Security Council closely followed the

work of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative (SRSG) for Burundi, 

Carolyn McAskie (Canada), who was appointed on June 1. The SRSG served

as the chair of the Monitoring Committee, which ensured the implementation 

of the Arusha Agreement on Peace and Reconstruction in Burundi (2000). 

The Council also received regular briefings on progress in negotiating an allinclusive cessation of hostilities agreement with the major Burundi rebel group

not party to the peace process, the National Council for the Defense of 

Democracy/Forces for the Defense of Democracy, led by Pierre Nkurunziza. 

On May 21, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1545, which 

established the UN Operation in Burundi (ONUB) to restore lasting peace as 

provided under the Arusha Agreement. The resolution, noting the obstacles 

13 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

remaining to Burundi’s stability and authorizing the use of force under 

Chapter VII of the UN Charter, set deployment of ONUB peacekeepers for an

initial six month-period from June 1. 

Additionally, on December 1, the Council adopted Resolution 1577. 

This resolution reaffirmed the Council’s full support for the process of the 

Arusha Peace Agreement by calling on all the Burundian parties to fully honor 

their commitments, acknowledging ONUB’s achievements, and extending its

mandate until June 1, 2005. 

The total ONUB budget for 2004 was $156 million, with a U.S.

contribution of $41.6 million. The authorized strength of the ONUB force was 

5,650. The United States did not contribute any personnel. 

Cote d’Ivoire

After a military coup in 1999, Cote d’Ivoire held elections in 2000, in 

which the Ivorian Supreme Court declared Laurent Gbagbo President. Rebel

forces (the Forces Nouvelles) and the Government of Cote d’Ivoire met in

January 2003 and signed the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement (LMA). However,

tensions have continued in Cote d’Ivoire. In January 2004, the ministers of the

Forces Nouvelles ended a three-month boycott of the coalition government

and began participating in meetings with President Gbagbo. France and the

Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) began deploying

troops in northern Cote d’Ivoire. Combatants turned in light weapons, and 

government forces and rebels began withdrawing heavy weapons, pulling back

from the Zone of Confidence separating the two sides, and removing

roadblocks. However, by late March, disagreements between the two sides led 

to the opposition again withdrawing from the government. Riots broke out in

Abidjan, leaving an estimated 200 dead. 

The Security Council adopted Resolution 1527 on February 4. The 

resolution extended the mandate of the UN Mission in Cote d’Ivoire 

(MINUCI) until February 27 to allow the Council time for discussion of the 

Secretary-General’s recommendations for a peacekeeping operation. On 

February 27, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1528, creating the UN

Operation in Cote d’Ivoire (UNOCI), with an initial mandate of 12 months

beginning April 4, subsuming a UN political mission and a force fielded by

ECOWAS. UNOCI was authorized up to 6,240 military personnel, including

200 military observers and 200 staff officers, and up to 350 civilian police 

officers. In addition, France continued to field its approximately 4,000-strong

force (known as the Licorne forces), and was authorized to use all necessary

means to support UNOCI.

The Security Council mandated UNOCI, among other tasks, to

observe and monitor implementation of the comprehensive peace agreement; 

contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights; assist the 

government in monitoring the borders; support the process of disarmament, 

demobilization, and reintegration (DDR); support the 2005 presidential 

elections; and assist the government with restructuring and reforming the 

14 
Political and Security Affairs 

police and judiciary. The resolution also called for close liaison with the UN 

missions in Liberia and Sierra Leone. 

In April, a delegation led by the UN Under Secretary-General for

Peacekeeping Operations, with representatives from the United States, France, 

the United Kingdom, the African Union (AU), and ECOWAS, traveled to Cote 

d’Ivoire to underline the international community’s concern. The Security

Council issued a statement on April 30 underscoring the need for the Ivorian

parties to carry out their commitments under LMA and noting the Council’s

readiness to take actions against individuals impeding the peace process. Also 

in April, the UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR) sent a Commission of

Inquiry to look into the violence in March. The National Assembly adopted a

law on the status of foreign nationals and began considering other draft

legislation, as called for under LMA. 

In May, the Commission of Inquiry looking into the March violence

blamed all parties for failing to move the peace process forward but concluded 

that the “highest authorities of the state” were responsible for the violence. 

The CHR established another Commission of Inquiry to investigate violations

of human rights and international humanitarian law which occurred between

mid-September 2002 and the signing of the LMA in January 2003. This new

Commission of Inquiry arrived in Cote d’Ivoire in July 2004. The Security 

Council issued a statement on May 25 expressing deep concern about the

actions of both sides. 

In June, rival groups of the Forces Nouvelles clashed, and rogue 

Forces Nouvelles elements attacked Licorne and Ivorian armed forces

(FANCI) positions; UNOCI assisted the FANCI and Licorne in repelling the 

attack. A Security Council mission to West Africa visited Abidjan to 

underline international concern. ECOWAS heads of state, including President 

Gbagbo, met in Abuja on June 20, and President Gbagbo subsequently urged 

the National Assembly to adopt legislation called for by the peace agreement.

He hosted a meeting for leaders of the parties who had signed the accord;

Forces Nouvelles leaders boycotted the session. 

In July, the Forces Nouvelles and Ivorian Government met in Accra, 

under ECOWAS and AU auspices, and agreed on a timetable to get the peace

process back on track. The Security Council issued a statement of support. 

Following the signature of the Accra III Agreement, President Gbagbo issued

a decree restoring three opposition ministers, whom he had accused of 

undermining the peace process and fired in May, to their positions in the

government. He also delegated some powers to Prime Minister Diarra to

facilitate the implementation of the provisions in the Linas-Marcoussis 

Accords. However, the parties did not honor deadlines agreed to in Accra, and 

the Forces Nouvelles did not begin DDR on October 15 as scheduled. The

Security Council issued a statement regretting the lack of progress on

implementation of the peace agreements. 

Demonstrations ensued, and once again opposition leaders began

boycotting cabinet meetings. On November 4, FANCI violated the cease-fire

15 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

agreement by bombing Forces Nouvelles bases and launching an air attack on

the Licorne base in Bouake, killing nine French troops and an American 

humanitarian worker, and injuring 35 French soldiers. French forces retaliated

by destroying the government’s small fleet of aircraft. An upsurge of violence

followed. Many expatriates left Cote d’Ivoire and several thousand Ivorians

fled to neighboring countries. Also on November 4, the AU asked South 

African President Mbeki to meet with Ivorian President Gbagbo and work on a 

political solution in response to the violence; they met on November 9. Six

AU heads of state issued a communiqué on November 14 endorsing a Security 

Council resolution and called for an arms embargo. On November 15, the

Security Council adopted Resolution 1572, imposing an immediate arms

embargo on Cote d’Ivoire and targeted sanctions (a travel ban and assets

freeze) on individuals who constituted a threat to the peace process, were 

responsible for serious violations of human rights and international

humanitarian law, violated the arms embargo, or publicly incited hatred and 

violence. The targeted sanctions entered into force on December 15, as

authorized by Resolution 1572 if the signatories of the Linas-Marcoussis and 

Accra III Agreements had not fully implemented their commitments by that 

date. 

On December 8, the UN Secretary-General recommended increasing

UNOCI’s force strength. Also in December, the National Assembly passed 

legislation called for under LMA affecting nationality, eligibility for the 

presidency, and naturalization. The Security Council issued a statement

supporting President Mbeki’s peace mediation efforts and delayed 

implementation of the targeted sanctions while mediation continued. 

UNOCI’s budget for 2004 was $307.7 million, of which the United 

States was assessed $82 million. By the end of 2004, UNOCI’s strength stood 

at 5,846 troops, 154 military observers, and 215 UN civilian police. No U.S. 

personnel were assigned to UNOCI. 

Democratic Republic of the Congo 

The UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo 

(MONUC) was established by Security Council Resolution 1258 (1999) to

assist in the implementation of the Lusaka Cease-Fire Agreement between the 

Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Governments of Angola, 

Namibia, Rwanda, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Security Council Resolution

1533, adopted March 12, 2004, called on member states to enforce the arms

embargo and requested MONUC to undertake monitoring. This resolution

also created a DRC Sanction Committee. On October 1, the Security Council

adopted Resolution 1565, which strengthened MONUC’s mandate and 

increased its authorized strength to 16,700. MONUC created three joint 

commissions to assist the transitional government in security sector reform,

legislation, and elections. MONUC’s overall objective in DRC is the holding

of elections followed by stable, sustainable peace. 

In November, the Parliament adopted laws on nationality and voter 

registration, but by the end of 2004, the Parliament was still discussing other 

16 
Political and Security Affairs 

electoral laws, raising international concerns that the elections would be 

delayed. MONUC was expected to provide security and logistics for 

approximately 28 million potential voters for the national elections. Elections 

are not expected to take place before the end of 2005 or 2006. 

During 2004, despite modest progress in the implementation of the

transitional government agenda, the security situation in the districts of Ituri

and North and South Kivu remained highly volatile due to the lack of central 

DRC government authority and recurrent fighting among rival armed militias.

There were several attacks on MONUC forces in the Ituri district as MONUC

forces progressively expanded operations from Bunia, the capital of Ituri. In

February, six MONUC boats on Lake Albert carrying human rights workers 

were attacked. In late 2004, MONUC’s Ituri brigade sustained many incidents

of direct fire from armed militias. Regular clashes between rival militias took

place in the districts of North and South Kivu. Security along the border with 

Rwanda deteriorated in late 2004 when Rwanda accused militias of attacks 

from DRC territory, and the DRC accused Rwanda of sending its troops into

DRC. Rwandan threats of a strike against the DRC were followed by a 

buildup of Rwandan troops along the border with the DRC and high tension

among local communities in North and South Kivu. Later, fighting broke out 

between rival factions of the DRC armed forces in North Kivu. MONUC’s

establishment of a humanitarian zone and transitional government mediation

succeeded in defusing tension. 

The Bukavu crisis of May and June, rooted in tensions between DRC

military commanders and dissident rivals in South Kivu, resulted in

widespread violence, rape, and civilian deaths. MONUC had 450 troops in the 

area when the crisis erupted, and sent about 550 reinforcements soon after.

Nevertheless, MONUC’s military contingent was stretched, and Bukavu 

temporarily fell under control of dissident forces for a few days in early June.

Many Congolese and international observers blamed MONUC for not

preventing the capture of Bukavu. Rioters attacked MONUC, UN, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) facilities in major cities throughout the

DRC, resulting in substantial damage and the death of a MONUC military 

observer at Kalehe. The United Nations and NGOs suspended their 

humanitarian programs, and the DRC-Rwanda border was closed for several

weeks. 

The massacre of approximately 160 Congolese refugees at the transit

camp at Gatumba, Burundi, in August increased domestic political tensions in 

the DRC. An armed Hutu extremist group in Burundi, known as PalipehutuFNL, claimed responsibility for the attack. Despite extensive UN 

investigation, it was unclear whether the FNL acted alone. MONUC and UN 

agencies supported NGO efforts to resettle refugees and internally displaced 

persons in North and South Kivu. Sporadic violence also took place in

Katanga and the Kasai provinces. 

In September, the Foreign Ministers of the DRC and Rwanda signed

the terms of reference for a Joint Verification Mechanism, a framework for the

17 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

parties to address border issues. In October, the first meeting of the Joint 

Verification Commission took place in Kigali, Rwanda, and the parties later 

endorsed the concept of operations for the Joint Verification Teams. 

Separately, the United States facilitated a tripartite agreement signed by the 

DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda on regional security. The parties committed 

themselves to ensure disarmament, demobilization, and repatriation (DDR) of

foreign armed groups within 12 months. 

The DRC’s DDR program received financial support from the World 

Bank and the Multi-Donor Demobilization and Reintegration Program, as well 

as logistical support from MONUC. With assistance from MONUC and the 

UN Development Program, the transitional government established a 

disarmament and community reintegration program for an estimated 15,000-

person militia. Implementation of the program was slow due to reluctance of

militia leaders to allow soldiers to disarm and the transitional government’s 

failure to integrate some militia leaders into the national DRC army. By

December, only about 1,500 former combatants had registered for the DDR

program. Although repatriations were slowed by violence at the end of 2004, 

MONUC reported that more than 11,000 foreign combatants and dependents 

had been repatriated from the DRC to Burundi, Rwanda, and Uganda. 

Numerous allegations of sexual misconduct were brought against 

MONUC personnel in 2004. Please see the section on Peacekeeping Issues: 

Sexual Abuse for more information. 

MONUC’s budget for 2004 was $114 million, of which the United

States paid $30.2 million. At the end of 2004, MONUC had a total troop 

strength of 12,471 military personnel. No U.S. military personnel were

assigned to MONUC in 2004. 

Ethiopia/Eritrea 

The UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) was established 

by Resolutions 1312 (2000) and 1320 (2000) after the two countries signed 

cease-fire and peace agreements in Algiers, ending the border war which had 

broken out in May 1998. UNMEE’s mandate, which has been renewed in sixmonth increments, includes monitoring the cease-fire and security

commitments agreed to by both parties, verifying redeployment of forces to

positions outside a 25-kilometer temporary security zone (TSZ) that separates 

Ethiopian and Eritrean forces, technical assistance for humanitarian mineclearing activity, and coordination of activities with humanitarian and human 

rights activities of the United Nations and other organizations. UNMEE drew 

down its forces by approximately one-third during the year and reduced its

presence from three to two sectors. 

Eritrea and Ethiopia agreed to the following provisions in the Algiers 

accords: to establish a neutral Boundary Commission to delimit and demarcate

the border, with expenses to be borne equally by Eritrea and Ethiopia; to

cooperate with the Boundary Commission and its staff in all respects during

the process of delimitation and demarcation; to agree that the determination of

the Boundary Commission would be final and binding; and to respect the 

18 
Political and Security Affairs 

territorial integrity and sovereignty of the other party. The Boundary

Commission announced its delimitation decision in April 2002. UNMEE’s 

mandate was expanded to include support for border demarcation as well as 

logistical and field support for the Boundary Commission. 

The United States, although concerned by lack of progress on the

border demarcation, joined the Security Council to unanimously adopt two 

six-month renewals of UNMEE’s mandate during 2004, Resolution 1531, 

adopted March 12, and Resolution 1560, adopted September 14. Due to the 

protracted stalemate, the threat to military stability remained a serious concern. 

Reaffirming the importance of political dialogue between the two countries in

order to ensure the success of the peace process, the Security Council

resolutions called on Ethiopia and Eritrea to engage in dialogue and 

confidence building measures in order to normalize relations. 

In November, Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi submitted to

Ethiopia’s Parliament a five-point proposal in which Ethiopia accepted the

ruling of the Boundary Commission in principle but insisted on dialogue with

Eritrea. On the other hand, Eritrea accepted the Commission’s decision and 

wanted Ethiopia to abide by the decision without conditions as well. Efforts 

by the United Nations and international community to resolve the situation and 

to complete demarcation were unsuccessful. The situation in the TSZ 

remained generally calm and stable, despite a steady increase of troops of the 

Ethiopian Armed Forces south of the TSZ in December. 

Eritrean authorities closed a vital road between Asmara and Barentu

to UNMEE traffic beginning in March, a major impediment to UNMEE 

supply operations. Eritrean authorities also refused to allow UNMEE to 

operate direct flights from Addis Ababa to Asmara. 

UNMEE’s budget for 2004 was $185.9 million. The U.S. share was

$49.5 million. UNMEE’s military force strength was 3,864. The United

States provided six military observers and one staff officer to UNMEE. 

Guinea-Bissau 

The UN Peace-building Support Office in Guinea-Bissau

(UNOGBIS) was established by the Secretary-General on March 3, 1999, after

a military coup attempt and civil war led to the ouster of Joao Vieira, GuineaBissau’s first freely-elected president. In February 2000, following two

rounds of transparent presidential elections, the interim government

transferred power to Kumba Yala. Yala was in turn deposed in September

2003 in a bloodless coup, and businessman Henrique Rosa was chosen by the

military as the transitional head of state, pending presidential elections

scheduled for mid-2005 under the provisions of a Transitional Charter. 

During the first quarter of 2004, under the leadership of David 

Stephen (United Kingdom), the Secretary-General’s Representative, 

UNOGBIS staff initiated planning for reform of the Guinea-Bissau’s military,

including a program for demobilization and reintegration. UNOGBIS staff

also worked closely with the Transitional Government to facilitate political

dialogue, and assisted in the development of a National Human Rights Action

19 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Plan. Efforts in the area of gender equality resulted in the election of a woman

as President of the Supreme Court and appointment of five women to

ministerial posts in the Transitional Government from a cabinet consisting of

16 ministers and seven state secretaries. 

Under President Rosa, the country remained peaceful and the

Transitional Government made important progress towards restoring order in

2004. Following elections for the President and Vice-President of the

Supreme Court of Justice on January 26, credible legislative elections were

conducted on March 28. In preparation for these elections, the U.S. election 

observer mission worked directly with the UNOGBIS-led observer mission,

and the United States also provided technical assistance to the National 

Elections Commission. The new National Popular Assembly and new 

Government were installed on May 11. Judges and military officers were not

part of the National Popular assembly, but both institutions functioned in 

tandem with the new Government. 

On June 18, the President of the Security Council issued a statement 

(S/PRST/2004/20) expressing satisfaction with the progress made by the 

Transitional Government towards restoring constitutional order. The 

statement noted, however, that the democratization progress remained fragile 

due to weakness of new governmental institutions and the persistent economic

crisis resulting from the 1998 civil war. 

David Stephen retired from the United Nations in April. On

September 3, the Secretary-General appointed Joao Bernardo Honwana 

(Mozambique) as his Representative in Guinea-Bissau and head of UNOGBIS.

Tensions arising from persistent arrears in military pay, poor living

conditions, and allegations of corruption within the military hierarchy led to a

mutiny by military officers and the killings of the Armed Forces Chief of Staff 

and the military’s Chief of Human Resources on October 6. Responding to

these murders and escalating unrest arising from unaddressed grievances and

continued economic weakness, the President of the Security Council issued a 

statement (S/PRST/2004/41) on November 2 condemning such actions and 

urging all parties to refrain from attempts to seize power by force. The 

statement also called for contributions from the international community to

help the Transitional Government pay overdue military and civil service 

salaries. 

In his report to the Security Council of December 15, the SecretaryGeneral highlighted the Transitional Government’s acceptance of officers

nominated by the leaders of the mutiny as Chief of Staff and chiefs of the 

army, navy, and air force. This “cave in” by the civilian authorities was seen

as a dangerous weakening of the authority of the Transitional Government.

This erosion intensified the climate of uncertainty in the country, and led to 

increasingly aggressive demands from civil sector workers.

On December 22, expressing concern that the gains achieved since 

the installation of the Transitional Government had been jeopardized by the

October 6 mutiny, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1580 to extend the

20 
Political and Security Affairs 

mandate of UNOGBIS for one year. In so doing, the Council revised the

mandate to direct the Office to work with the UN country team to facilitate

restoration of the rule of law; to assist with planning for presidential elections

to be held in 2005; and to integrate development and peace and security 

activities in order to develop a peace-building strategy for the immediate, 

medium, and longer terms. Resolution 1580 also cautioned the National

Assembly, as it considered the issue of amnesty for those involved in past 

military coups, to adhere to the principles of justice and to avoid granting 

impunity to those who had acted with criminality. 

Liberia 

Following several years of civil war in Liberia, the Economic

Community of West African States brokered a peace agreement in 1993. With 

the support of the UN Observer Mission in Liberia (UNOMIL), established in 

September 1993 after some delays in the peace process, Charles Taylor was

elected President of Liberia in 1997. UNOMIL was closed in September 1997

and the UN Peace-building Support Office in Liberia was established in 

November 1997 to further support national reconciliation and reconstruction.

However, government abuses and the inability of the Government of Liberia 

and opposition parties to reach agreement on key issues such as security sector

reform led to a resumption of fighting. 

Following its creation in September 2003, the UN Mission in Liberia 

(UNMIL) began disarming ex-combatants immediately. However, it lacked

adequate arrangements for handling ex-combatants and funds for the 

reintegration stage of the disarmament, demobilization, reintegration, and 

repatriation (DDRR) program. The program was unsuccessful, and UNMIL

suspended it. UNMIL mounted an information campaign for ex-combatants 

throughout Liberia in January 2004, following a meeting with the Liberian 

Government, ex-Government of Liberia troops, the National Commission for

DDRR, and the two former rebel groups (Liberians United for Reconciliation 

and Democracy (LURD) and the Movement for Democracy in Liberia

(MODEL)). In addition, construction began on cantonment sites in key areas 

selected by teams with representatives from all the above groups. 

By the end of February, 48 mid-ranking field commanders from excombatant groups had attended briefings in Monrovia on DDRR planning. 

UNMIL disarmament restarted in mid-April. However, the SecretaryGeneral’s December report expressed concern about shortfalls in funding for

the critical reintegration phase of the DDRR program.

The August 2003 Accra peace agreement called for the United States 

to help restructure the Liberian armed forces. A U.S. assessment team visited

Liberia in late January 2004, and, in February, briefed a donor conference in

New York that was opened by the Secretary of State and cosponsored by the 

United States, the United Nations, and the World Bank. U.S. military planners 

visited Liberia again in May. 

On March 12, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1532,

requiring UN member states to freeze the financial assets of former Liberian

21 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

President Charles Taylor, his immediate family members, senior officials of 

the former Taylor regime, and other close allies or associates, as designated by 

the Liberia Sanctions Committee. On June 17, the Security Council adopted 

Resolution 1549, which re-established the Liberia Panel of Experts until 

December 21, 2004. The Panel’s mandate was to investigate and compile

information on the implementation and any ongoing violations of the arms

embargo, travel ban, assets freeze, and embargo of rough diamonds, round 

logs, and timber products. 

In May, UNMIL and the Liberian Government launched a 

recruitment campaign for the Liberian Police Service. Chairman Bryant (head 

of the Liberian Government) and the Special Representative of the SecretaryGeneral briefed a Liberian reconstruction conference liaison group in New

York in June. In August, struggles between two factions of the LURD

resulted in violence, which was brought under control in a joint effort by the 

Liberian police and UNMIL. 

On September 17, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1561,

which extended UNMIL’s mandate for an additional year, until September 19, 

2005. Chairman Bryant made his first trip outside the capital since taking 

office in 2003, to Buchanan, an indication that the security situation had 

improved. U.S. Treasury Under Secretary John Taylor visited Liberia in

September, underscoring U.S. support for financial reforms; the U.S. Treasury

provided a group of experts to work with the Liberian Ministry of Finance and

the Central Bank. UNMIL restored order during several violent riots in

Monrovia during September. 

In October, a dispute over land in a Monrovia suburb resulted in

several days of rioting in various parts of the city. There were a number of

other episodes of violent protests and looting, in part attributable to the 

growing number of ex-combatants and unemployed youth in Monrovia.

Liberian police, UNMIL troops, and civilian police were able to restore order. 

The disarmament phase of DDRR ended in October, with more than 90,000 

ex-combatants disarmed since December 2003. 

Sierra Leonean President Kabbah hosted a meeting of LURD factions

in Freetown in October 2004. The factions agreed to transform LURD into a 

political party. In November, LURD, MODEL, and ex-Government of Liberia 

troops formally disbanded at a ceremony in Monrovia. UNMIL announced 

that it was handing over to the Liberian security services the discretionary

security for most of the faction leaders, cabinet ministers, and other senior

government officials UNMIL had been protecting since September 2003. 

UNMIL continued to provide special protection to the Chairman and ViceChairman of the Government. 

In December, UNMIL began monitoring flights over Liberian waters. 

On December 21, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1579, which 

renewed the arms embargo, travel ban, and timber sanctions for an additional

12 months. The resolution also renewed the diamond sanctions for six

months, and re-established the Panel of Experts until June 21, 2005. Heads of

22 
Political and Security Affairs 

the UN missions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Cote d’Ivoire met in Monrovia

to discuss cross-border issues, including DDRR, trafficking in persons, and

flows of small arms and light weapons. 

UNMIL’s budget for 2004 was $944.3 million, of which the United 

States was assessed $259.4 million. By the end of 2004, UNMIL’s strength

stood at 14,501 troops, 189 military observers, and 1,098 civilian police. The 

United States provided five troops, seven military observers, and 61 civilian

police. 

Libya 

The Security Council considered and lifted sanctions against Libya in 

September 2003, removing the item from the Council’s agenda. In a

December 2003 letter to the Security Council, the Government of Libya 

announced that it would voluntarily abandon its programs to develop weapons 

of mass destruction. The Security Council welcomed Libya’s decision in a 

December 23, 2003, statement to the press after informal consultations among 

the members of the Council. 

On March 10, 2004, Libya signed an agreement with the International

Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) allowing it enhanced access to verify that

Libya’s nuclear activities are for peaceful activities only. On April 22, the

Council welcomed Libya’s decision and expressed hope that the agreement 

would be implemented in a spirit of continued cooperation. 

Sierra Leone 

After over 10 years of conflict, in 2004 the United States emphasized 

the progress made in restoring stability to Sierra Leone and pressed the 

Security Council and the United Nations to begin drawing down the UN 

Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) as rapidly as security would allow. A

UN assessment mission visited Sierra Leone in mid-February to review

progress on benchmarks for UNAMSIL’s drawdown and potential residual 

tasks for a post-UNAMSIL UN presence. 

On March 30, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1537, which

extended UNAMSIL’s mandate to September 30, 2004. The Council agreed 

with the Secretary-General’s recommendations that UNAMSIL be reduced by

the end of 2004 to approximately 5,000 troops, and further reduced in

February 2005 to 3,250 troops. On September 17, the Security Council 

adopted Resolution 1562, which extended UNAMSIL’s mandate until June 30, 

2005. The resolution laid out tasks for UNAMSIL’s smaller force in 2005, 

with a focus on building Sierra Leone police and military capacity. 

Local elections were held peacefully throughout Sierra Leone on May

22, 2004, for the first time in 34 years. UNAMSIL provided logistical 

support, helping to move ballots, equipment, and observers to key points

throughout the country. In September, UNAMSIL hosted a meeting of the 

Working Group on UN Inter-Mission Cooperation, part of a continuing

dialogue on cross-border issues, which was attended by representatives of the

23 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN peacekeeping operations in Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire and by staff of the

UN Office for West Africa. 

On May 31, the Sierra Leone Special Court rejected former Liberian 

President Charles Taylor’s claim that he was immune from prosecution as a

former head of state. Trials of Special Court indictees belonging to the 

Civilian Defense Force (pro-government militia) began in June; trials of

Revolutionary United Front indictees began in July. 

In October, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission issued its final 

report, concluding that endemic corruption and the denial of basic human 

rights were the underlying causes of the Sierra Leone civil war. The 

Commission reported that Sierra Leoneans were the main actors in the conflict 

but that outsiders, in particular former Liberian President Taylor and Libya,

had intensified the hostilities. The report also concluded that diamonds were

not the root cause of the conflict. During the year, government control over

diamond exports improved considerably. Armed political groups ceased 

operating out of diamond areas. By year’s end, UNAMSIL had transferred to

the government primary responsibility for security in all districts of Sierra 

Leone. 

UNAMSIL’s budget for 2004 was $318.2 million, of which the

United States was assessed $84.7 million. In addition, the United States paid 

$12 million to support the Sierra Leone Special Court in 2004. At the end of

2004, UNAMSIL’s drawdown was on track, with the mission’s strength at

4,061 troops, 138 military observers, and 75 UN civilian police. One U.S. 

civilian police officer assigned to the mission left mid-year. 

Somalia

In 1991, after the overthrow by anti-government forces of dictator 

Mohammed Siad Barre, Somalia fell into civil war and disorder. In 1992, with 

U.S. support, the Security Council called for a cease-fire and, in Resolution 

733 (1992), imposed an arms embargo on the entire territory of Somalia. 

Throughout 2004, the Security Council Committee on Somalia sanctions (the 

“751 Committee”) discussed a draft list of arms embargo violators, and 

supported the work of the Nairobi-based Monitoring Group. The Monitoring

Group’s mandate is to focus attention on ongoing violations of the embargo

and to recommend how to strengthen enforcement. 

Resolution 1519 (2003) requested the Secretary-General to reestablish a monitoring group (formerly the Panel of Experts) to investigate

arms embargo violations. In January 2004, the Secretary-General appointed 

four experts to the Monitoring Group. The Monitoring Group found evidence

of violations of the arms embargo and recommended continued monitoring.

The Security Council reviewed the Group’s report and adopted Resolution 

1558 on August 17. The resolution requested the Secretary-General to reestablish the Monitoring Group with the mandate to continue investigating 

violations of the arms embargo. The Secretary-General re-appointed the 

experts on August 26. 

24 
Political and Security Affairs 

A presidential statement, adopted on February 25, reiterated the

support of the Security Council for the Somali national reconciliation

conference launched under the auspices of the Inter-governmental

Authority on Development and led by Kenya. In particular, the statement 

welcomed the January signing of the Declaration on the Harmonization of 

the Various Issues by the Somali Delegates at the Somali Consultative 

Meetings. 

Sudan 

In 2004, The United States continued to lead UN Security Council

efforts to encourage the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s

Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) to sign a Comprehensive Peace

Agreement to end over 20 years of conflict in Sudan. 

In 2004, the United States drafted and sponsored several key UN

Security Council resolutions on the situation in Darfur. These resolutions

increased the pressure on the parties to the conflict in Darfur to immediately

fulfill Council demands including a cessation of violence, humanitarian

access, human rights protection, and peace talks. 

At year’s end, there were more than 1.5 million internally displaced 

persons (IDPs) in Darfur, and another 200,000 civilians had fled into Chad. 

Approximately 70,000 people reportedly died as a result of the violence and

forced displacement. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell concluded in 2004

that genocide had been committed in Darfur. He affirmed that the 

Government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bore responsibility for these 

atrocities and advocated for a full-blown and unfettered investigation.

On July 30, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1556, which

imposed an arms embargo on all non-governmental entities and individuals, 

including the Janjaweed, operating in Darfur and endorsed the deployment of

international monitors, including the protection force under the leadership of

the African Union, to the Darfur region. The resolution further requested the 

Secretary-General to report in 30 days and monthly thereafter to the Council 

on progress made by the Government of Sudan in fulfilling its commitments to 

disarm the Janjaweed militias and to bring to justice Janjaweed leaders and 

their associates who have incited and committed human rights and 

international humanitarian law violations and other atrocities. 

Demonstrating strong Council and international support for the 

African Union’s peacekeeping efforts, Resolution 1564, adopted on September 

18, demanded the Sudan Government to submit to the African Union Mission

documentation of the names of Janjaweed militiamen disarmed and arrested

for human rights abuses. Resolution 1564 also determined that should the 

Government of Sudan fail to fully comply with Resolution 1556 or 1564, the 

Council would consider further measures, including restrictions on Sudan’s

petroleum sector, the Government of Sudan, or individual members of the

Government of Sudan. Both Resolutions 1556 and 1564 called on the 

Secretary-General to dispatch human rights protection officers and monitors

from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to Darfur. 

25 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

On October 26, the Council adopted Resolution 1569, which was 

initiated by the United States. This resolution provided for meetings of the 

Security Council to be held in Nairobi November 18–19 to discuss Darfur’s 

development with representatives of the African Union and the International

Government Authority. 

Additionally, the United States worked closely with the United 

Kingdom in drafting and sponsoring Resolution 1574, adopted on November

19, which called on the Government of Sudan and the SPLM/A to conclude a

peace agreement and to ensure an end to the violence in Darfur. It also 

supported the decisions of the African Union to increase its mission in Darfur

to 3,320 personnel and to enhance its mandate. 

In 2004, the United States also supported the appointment by

Secretary-General Annan, of Jan Pronk (the Netherlands) as the SecretaryGeneral’s Special Representative (SRSG) to Sudan and the formation of the 

UN Advance Mission in the Sudan (UNAMIS), as a precursor to a UN

peacekeeping mission in Sudan (upon the signing of the Comprehensive Peace

Agreement). SRSG Pronk and UNAMIS’ presence in Sudan further increased 

the international spotlight on Sudan. 

The United States also worked closely with the African Union (AU) 

and other allies such as NATO and the European Union to stabilize the region, 

mitigate the violence, and ensure that humanitarian assistance reached as many 

people as possible. Proactive efforts by the AU Mission were successful in 

moderating violence in its operation areas. 

The United States remained the world’s leader in providing

humanitarian assistance to Darfur, contributing $696 million in humanitarian 

assistance since the beginning of the Darfur emergency in 2003. 

Western Sahara 

The UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)

was established by Security Council Resolution 690 (1991) to help implement 

a settlement plan (the “Settlement Plan”) that Morocco and the Frente Popular

para la Liberacion de Saguia el-Hamra y Rio de Oro (POLISARIO Front)

agreed to on August 30, 1988. Among other things, the Settlement Plan called 

for a referendum under UN auspices to determine the future status of the 

territory. 

In January 2003, the UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy to the 

Western Sahara, James A. Baker III, presented to the parties a new proposal 

entitled “Plan for Self-Determination of the People of Western Sahara.” This 

plan incorporated elements from the draft Framework Agreement favored by

Morocco as well as elements of the Settlement Plan and Houston Accords 

favored by the POLISARIO Front. The POLISARIO Front endorsed the Plan 

for Self-Determination. In April 2004, the Government of Morocco formally

rejected the plan. At the same time, the Security Council affirmed its support

of the Settlement Plan and renewed MINURSO’s mandate for another six 

months to give the parties more time to move the peace process forward. 

26 
Political and Security Affairs 

James Baker resigned in June and was not replaced by a new Personal

Envoy. In September, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, 

Alvaro de Soto (Peru), resumed Baker’s work with the parties. 

UN assessments for MINURSO in 2004 totaled $37.7 million. The 

U.S. share totaled $10 million. As of December 31, MINURSO had 227 

troops and military observers. No U.S. personnel served in MINURSO. 

East Asia and the Pacific 

Bougainville 

In 2001, after 13 years of civil conflict, Bougainville and Papua New 

Guinea signed the Bougainville Peace Agreement, which granted Bougainville

autonomy and an eventual vote on independence from Papua New Guinea in

10 to 15 years. The UN Security Council established the UN Political Office 

in Bougainville in 1998. In 2003, the Security Council voted to replace the

Political Office with the smaller UN Observer Mission in Bougainville

(UNOMB). UNOMB’s mandate is to facilitate a smooth transition to elections

of autonomous Bougainville Government and to certify the collection and

disposal of weapons. The United States supported the completion of the 

constitutional process and finalization of the destruction of weapons. 

Based on a recommendation by the Secretary-General, the Security 

Council on June 30, 2004, endorsed the final extension of UNOMB until 

December 31. The Council also requested the Secretary-General to present a 

report to the Council on “an assessment of the ground situation and on a 

mission closure-plan.” In his September report, the Secretary-General noted

that the Bougainville Constitutional Commission had submitted the final draft 

of the constitution to the Bougainville Constituent Assembly, but they were 

not ready to hold elections by the end of the year. The report observed that the 

target date for holding of elections by the end of 2004 would not be met in

spite of continuing solid progress in all three areas constituting the major 

landmarks of the peace process: weapons disposal, constitution making, and

preparations for elections. 

In his December 21 report, the Secretary-General reported to the 

Security Council that 94 percent of the weapons in Bougainville had been

destroyed. The Secretary-General also commended the Government of Papua 

New Guinea and the Bougainville parties for overcoming their differences and

adopting the Bougainville Constitution, and expressed his interest in the 

removal of barriers to the electoral process. In addition, the Secretary-General

stated that he would be grateful for the Council’s support in responding

positively to the Papua New Guinea Government’s request for UNOMB’s 

continued presence in Bougainville and recommended that the mandate of the 

Observer Mission be extended for a period of six months, until June 30, 2005. 

The Security Council agreed to the extended mandate for the Observer 

Mission and remained supportive of Bougainville efforts towards peace and 

reconciliation. 

27 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

The total budget for UNOMB for 2004 was $1.6 million. The United 

States provided $350,000 to the Mission. 

Burma 

In 2004, the United States continued to work through the UN system 

in order to advocate for the release of National League for Democracy leader 

Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners, and to advance national

reconciliation and the re-establishment of democracy. The United States 

remained concerned by the junta’s continued refusal to enter into a genuine 

political dialogue with the democratic opposition ethnic minority groups. The 

United States encouraged visits to Burma by the UN Secretary-General’s

Special Envoy for Burma, Razali Ismail (Malaysia), and the UN Special 

Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in Burma, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro

(Brazil). However, the Burmese Government continued to refuse to allow 

either UN representative into the country. 

On September 29, the United States participated in a meeting hosted 

by UN Secretary-General Annan with a select number of governments to

discuss ways to move forward in Burma. The United States also raised the

issue during a lunch on October 7 with Council members and the SecretaryGeneral, and during a Security Council session that day. In addition, the 

Security Council sent a letter on November 22 to the Secretary-General urging

action on Burma. Annan’s reply on December 2 reaffirmed his commitment 

to encourage the Burmese authorities to move forward with democratization

and reconciliation. 

Continued U.S. attention to the situation in Burma in the Security 

Council resulted in statements by the Secretary-General in November and 

December calling for Aung San Suu Kyi’s release and for the realization of 

democracy and national reconciliation in Burma. The United States supported

resolutions on Burma’s human rights situation in the General Assembly and 

the Commission on Human Rights, and both were adopted. 

East Timor 

During 2004, the United States emphasized the progress made in 

restoring stability to East Timor and pressed the Security Council to begin

drawing down the UN Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET) as

rapidly as security would allow, with a view to closing the mission in May 

2005. 

UN civilian police and East Timorese police trainers began a program 

in January 2004 to train 120 candidates for the East Timor police Rapid 

Deployment Service to work in the border region. In April, East Timor began

training prison guards in non-lethal techniques for subduing prisoners, with 

assistance from UNMISET, the UN Development Program, and bilateral 

donors. 

In May, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1543, which

extended UNMISET’s mandate for six months, while decreasing its size. 

UNMISET’s mandate was pared back, keeping the focus on assisting East 

28 
Political and Security Affairs 

Timor in carrying out key civilian functions such as public administration and

justice, developing law enforcement capacity, and continuing support for

stability. The resolution also called for the Serious Crimes Unit to wrap up its 

investigations by November 2004 and to conclude prosecution by no later than

May 20, 2005. UNMISET handed over all responsibility for policing and 

external security to the East Timor Government on May 19, 2004. 

On November 16, Security Council Resolution 1573 extended 

UNMISET’s mandate for a final six months until May 20, 2005. The Special 

Representative of the Secretary-General established working groups to prepare

for handover of responsibility to Timorese or international experts. 

UNMISET’s budget for 2004 was $56.8 million, of which the United

States was assessed $15.1 million. At the end of 2004, UNMISET’s strength 

stood at 429 troops, 43 military observers, and 147 civilian police, including

nine U.S. civilian police officers. 

Europe and Eurasia 

Bosnia/Herzegovina

The UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina closed on December 31,

2002, but the United Nations continued to endorse the continuing operations of

NATO and the European Union (EU) in support of the 1995 Dayton Peace 

Agreement via a series of biannual Security Council resolutions. On July 9, 

2004, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1551, which demonstrated the

Council’s endorsement of the NATO-led multilateral stabilization force 

(SFOR) for an additional six months. On November 22, the Security Council

unanimously adopted Resolution 1575, which recognized the conclusion of

NATO’s SFOR operation at the end of 2004 and the establishment of a new 

multilateral stabilization force under EU command (EUFOR) for an initial

period of 12 months. The EUFOR had primary peacekeeping responsibility 

under the terms of the Dayton Agreement. It also recognized the

establishment of a follow-on NATO headquarters, with the primary mission of

assisting in the reform of the defense and security forces of Bosnia and 

Herzegovina. 

Cyprus 

The United States continued to support UN efforts to achieve a 

comprehensive settlement to the division of Cyprus during 2004. The UN 

Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) was created in March 1964 under 

UN Security Council Resolution 186 to help end the violence between Greek

Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities. Since the de facto division of the

island in 1974 as a result of the Turkish military intervention (following a 

coup d’etat directed by Greece), UNFICYP has served as a buffer force

between Turkish and Turkish Cypriot forces on one side, and Greek Cypriot

National Guard and Greek (Hellenic Republic) forces on the other. 

In November 2002, on the basis of talks between leaders of the two 

communities on the island, Secretary-General Annan had proposed a detailed 

settlement plan to reunify the island, give considerable authority to Greek

29 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot constituent states, and enable displaced persons 

to return home. The plan also was intended to allow Cyprus to accede to the 

European Union as a reunited island. The United States strongly supported

these talks and maintained close contacts throughout the process with the

United Nations, the Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders, Greece, Turkey, and 

the European Union.

A referendum on the Secretary-General’s Settlement Plan took place 

on April 24, 2004, with the Turkish Cypriots voting in favor of the Plan, and 

the Greek Cypriots rejecting it. Following the collapse of the SecretaryGeneral’s Good Offices peace initiative, the Secretary-General announced a 

review of the mandate, size, and concept of operations of UNFICYP. In a

September report, the Secretary-General recommended maintaining the 

original mandate while cutting troop numbers by 30 percent by concentrating 

forces and increasing their mobility. On October 22, the Council adopted 

Resolution 1568, renewing UNFICYP’s mandate until June 15, 2005, and

endorsing the Secretary-General’s recommendations for troop reduction. 

The political impasse remained stalled as the Secretary-General, as 

noted in a report of his Good Offices mission, waited for the Greek Cypriots to

clearly articulate concerns they had regarding implementation of the 

Settlement Plan and its security provisions. 

The cost of UNFICYP to the United Nations was $25.7 million, with

the U.S. share at $6.8 million. At the end of the year, UNFICYP had 1,269 

troops and civilian police from 13 nations. No U.S. personnel served in this

mission. 

Georgia 

The UN Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) was established on

August 24, 1993, by Security Council Resolution 858. The mission monitors 

compliance with a cease-fire agreement reached between the Georgian 

Government and Abkhaz separatists. On July 21, 1994, UN Security Council

Resolution 937 increased the authorized number of military observers in

UNOMIG (all unarmed) from 55 to 136. The Security Council renewed 

UNOMIG’s mandate in Resolution 1554, adopted on July 29, 2004. The 

mission carried out its mandate despite continued inaccessibility to the Kodori

Valley. 

Under the May 1994 Moscow Agreement, a peacekeeping force of 

the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) monitors compliance with the 

terms of the cease-fire. The CIS force, consisting of approximately 1,700 

armed Russian Federation troops, maintained checkpoints along both sides of

the cease-fire line. UNOMIG military observers maintained a close working 

relationship with the CIS force, which is also responsible for UNOMIG’s

security. 

The United States continued to work with the “Friends of the 

Secretary-General for Georgia” (consisting of France, Germany, Russia, the 

United Kingdom, and the United States) to achieve a comprehensive political

settlement to the conflict. The “Friends of the Secretary-General for Georgia”

30 
Political and Security Affairs 

met in February, under the leadership of Under Secretary-General for 

Peacekeeping, Jean Marie Guehenno, to develop strategies for advancing 

negotiations between the Georgian Government and Abkhaz separatists. 

Progress stalled, however, following a maritime incident in July when a 

Georgian coast guard vessel fired shots at a Turkish ship bound for an Abkhaz 

port. Disputed “presidential” elections in Abkazia in October also detracted 

from the negotiating process. Following resolution of the Abkhaz election

dispute in December, the Group of Friends met again to plan for negotiations

in 2005 to include the parties. 

UN-assessed costs for UNOMIG in 2004 totaled $28.9 million, with 

the United States contributing $7.7 million. As of December 31, UNOMIG

had 130 military observers. Two U.S. military observers were assigned to the 

mission. 

The former Yugoslavia: UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo 

(UNMIK)

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia agreed to withdraw its forces

from Kosovo following the U.S.-led 1999 NATO air campaign, aimed at

stopping the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo. UN Security Council Resolution

1244 (1999) authorized an international security presence that became the

NATO-led Kosovo Force and an international civilian presence to establish an 

interim governing authority. 

The civilian presence, the UN Interim Administration Mission in

Kosovo (UNMIK), was formed as a unique collaboration of the UN with other

organizations such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

(OSCE) and the European Union. UNMIK implements the broad authority set 

forth in Resolution 1244. The Secretary-General’s Special Representative in 

Kosovo established in April 2002 goals and benchmarks in the areas of

functioning democratic institutions; rule of law; freedom of movement; returns 

and reintegration; economy; property rights; dialogue with Belgrade; and the 

Kosovo Protections Corps. These goals and benchmarks were designed to

advance the “Standards before Status” policy, i.e., creation of a democratic, 

multi-ethnic, and tolerant Kosovo with a functioning indigenous 

administration, prior to any determination of Kosovo’s future political status. 

In November 2003, the UN Security Council endorsed holding a

Comprehensive Review of progress on Standards sometime in mid-2005,

which could lead to the start of a process to determine Kosovo’s future status. 

In March 2004, Kosovo was plagued by several days of ethnic rioting

that resulted in over 4,000 displaced persons, mostly ethnic minorities;

hundreds of homes and some Serbian Orthodox Churches were damaged or

destroyed. In the aftermath of the violence, the Secretary-General asked 

Ambassador Kai Eide (Norway) to report on the causes of the rioting and the

appropriate way ahead in Kosovo. Eide released a report in August, with 

several recommendations, including prioritization of the Standards, and 

increased devolution of authority to the Provisional Institutions of SelfGovernment (PISG). By the end of 2004, 1,864 persons remained displaced 

31 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

by the March riots, despite the PISG’s reconstruction of 88 percent of homes 

that had been damaged or destroyed. 

In response to the violence, on March 31, UNMIK introduced the

Kosovo Standards Implementation Plan, a list of over 400 action items 

illustrating Kosovo’s progress on Standards. The action items expanded the 

original eight standards into concrete technical measures that the PISG must 

undertake to demonstrate progress on implementation. 

Following the resignation of UN Special Representative of the 

Secretary-General Harri Holkeri (Finland) in May, the Secretary-General 

appointed Soren Jessen-Petersen (Denmark) in June. He assumed duties as the

new Special Representative to Kosovo in August. Larry Rossin (United 

States) was named as Principal Deputy. 

With assistance from the OSCE, the Kosovo-run Central Election 

Commission in October held elections for the Kosovo Assembly that were 

deemed free and fair by international observers. The Democratic League of

Kosovo party, led by President Ibrahim Rugova, and the Alliance for the 

Future of Kosovo, led by Ramush Haradinaj, formed a ruling coalition.

Rugova retained the Presidency and Haradinaj assumed the Prime Minister’s

post. 

UN-assessed costs for UNMIK totaled $267.6 million in 2004. The 

United States contributed $71.1 million. As of December 31, UNMIK’s force

strength stood at 37 observers and 3,509 civilian police, to which the United

States contributed 309 personnel. The U.S. civilian police contingent suffered 

three fatalities in April, when a member of the Jordanian Special Police Unit

shot at American officers. Ten other officers were wounded, five seriously.

The perpetrator, who appeared to have acted alone, was killed in an ensuing 

exchange of fire. The associated Jordanian unit returned to Jordan in October. 

Western Hemisphere 

Haiti 

Shortly after former Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide’s 

resignation and departure, and at the request of the constitutionally designated

successor, Interim President Boniface Alexandre, the Security Council

unanimously adopted Resolution 1529 on February 29, authorizing the 

immediate deployment of a U.S.-led Multinational Interim Force (MIF) for a 

three-month period to restore order and prevent civil unrest in Haiti. The MIF 

deployed over 3,000 troops drawn from the United States, Canada, Chile, and

France. The headquarters and majority of MIF troops were deployed in the 

capital of Port-au-Prince. The MIF also established a presence in the northern 

cities of Gonaives, Cap Haitien, and Fort Liberte. 

Acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Security Council

adopted Resolution 1542 on April 30, establishing the multidimensional UN

Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) to succeed the MIF for an initial

period of six months. MINUSTAH’s mandate included providing support to

the Transitional Government of Haiti to ensure a secure and stable 

32 
Political and Security Affairs 

environment in which the constitutional and political process in Haiti could 

take place. The mandate also envisioned assistance to the Transitional

Government for the reform of the Haitian National Police; development of a 

comprehensive disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration program; and

facilitation of the national dialogue and reconciliation process. Additionally, a

key element of MINUSTAH’s mandate related to the assistance to the 

Transitional Government in its efforts to organize, monitor, and carry out free

and fair municipal, parliamentary, and presidential elections at the earliest 

possible date. The Security Council adopted Resolution 1576 on November

29, to extend MINUSTAH’s mandate for an additional period of six months

until June 1, 2005. 

In response to Resolution 1542, the Secretary-General appointed Juan 

Gabriel Valdes (Chile) as his Special Representative to Haiti. Valdes assumed

his responsibilities on August 17. 

MINUSTAH assumed operational responsibilities from the MIF by

June 25, with the minimum military strength required. Chilean and Canadian 

MIF forces were reassigned as MINUSTAH participants and MIF personnel

from the United States and France left Haiti by June 30. In accordance with

the military concept of operations, MINUSTAH troops were deployed

throughout Haiti in phases. U.S. Ambassador to United Nations Anne

Patterson visited Haiti in November to review with MINUSTAH leadership

the situation on the ground. 

The MIF provided critical assistance in response to major flooding in

southern Haiti at the end of May. The MIF provided helicopter transport for 

much-needed supplies to be delivered to the affected area. UN agencies and

humanitarian organizations continued to provide support during the on-going

rehabilitation process. Peacekeeping forces were called upon again in 

September when heavy rains caused flash floods in the northwest of Haiti. 

MINUSTAH responded to the disaster with the temporary re-deployment of

military and police personnel to Gonaives to support Argentine troops

providing security for distribution points, warehouses, and humanitarian 

convoys, as well as providing logistical support to relief activities and 

participating in clean-up operations. 

The total cost of MINUSTAH in 2004 was $221.7 million, with the 

United States contributing $59.2 million. By the end of the year,

approximately 6,000 (of the authorized 6,700) troops and staff officers and

about 1,400 (of the authorized 1,622) civilian police officers representing 40

countries were deployed. The United States contributed three troops to

MINUSTAH and four U.S. staff officers assigned to MINUSTAH’s military

staff; 25 U.S. personnel were assigned to the civilian police by the end of 

2004. 

33 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Disarmament Issues 

UN Disarmament Commission (UNDC) 

The UN Disarmament Commission (UNDC), a subsidiary body of the 

General Assembly, is a deliberative body intended to consider in depth, and

make recommendations on, issues in the field of disarmament. The 

Commission’s recommendations must be approved by consensus. The UNDC

meets annually for three weeks in New York when, working in three-year

cycles, it considers a limited number of agenda items. The UNDC reports

annually to the General Assembly. All UN member states are eligible to 

participate, but barely one-third have attended the UNDC in recent years. 

The focus of the United States has been to ensure that the UNDC

adopts reports that are consistent with, and advance, U.S. policy. The NonAligned states historically have tried to focus UNDC discussion almost

exclusively on nuclear disarmament issues. A key U.S. interest, however, is to

maintain a balance in UNDC work between nuclear disarmament and nuclear 

non-proliferation, on the one hand, and other disarmament issues, such as

conventional arms control matters, on the other. The UNDC last issued

consensus recommendations in 2000. 

The 2001–2003 issue cycle failed to produce substantive 

recommendations for consideration by the General Assembly. Indeed, the

Non-Aligned delegations actually used their numerical majority to cancel the 

2002 session. The 2003 session resumed those delayed discussions on “ways 

and means to achieve nuclear disarmament” and “practical confidencebuilding measures in the field of conventional armaments,” but Non-Aligned

states (principally India on the former and Pakistan on the latter) blocked

agreement in both areas. In 2004, the UNDC was unable to agree on what

issues to consider. The United States and the European Union tabled a number 

of compromise proposals on the UNDC agenda, but the Non-Aligned

countries refused to drop their demand that nuclear disarmament remain the 

Commission’s focus. As a result, at the 2004 session of the UN General

Assembly First (Disarmament) Committee, the United States declined to 

participate in the adoption of the annual UNDC resolution. As in previous

years, the resolution failed to set an agenda for the 2005 session. 

The failure of the UNDC to issue consensus reports over the 2001–

2004 period indicated the limited contribution that this body made to the UN’s 

work, and further called into question this body’s ability to advance U.S. 

disarmament objectives. 

Conference on Disarmament (CD) 

The Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament (CD) is the principal

multilateral forum for negotiating arms control and disarmament agreements. 

The CD has produced significant treaties in the past, including the Nuclear

Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention. However, 

the Conference in 2004 adjourned in a stalemate for the eighth consecutive 

34 
Political and Security Affairs 

year because it was unable to agree on a Program of Work (PoW). Progress

was stymied because some CD members continued to focus on outmoded Cold 

War-era issues, and sought to establish links between elements of the proposed

PoW. 

Although funded from the UN budget, the CD is an autonomous

body. The Conference’s 65 member states are divided into geopolitical

groups—the Western Group, the Eastern Group, and the Non-Aligned Group, 

with China as an independent member. All CD decisions are made by

consensus. The presidency of the CD rotates among its members on a monthly

basis. The CD adopted its annual report to the UN General Assembly on

September 7. 

In 2004, the CD’s agenda included nuclear disarmament and

prevention of nuclear war, weapons of mass destruction, conventional

armaments, negative security assurances (NSAs), prevention of an arms race 

in outer space (PAROS), and transparency in armaments. Much of the

discussion focused on a PoW proposal offered by Algeria, Belgium, Chile,

Colombia, and Sweden. The proposal called for the establishment of four ad 

hoc committees. Two of those would have negotiating mandates, one for an 

“effectively verifiable” Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT), and the other

on NSAs. The other two committees would have mandates to discuss nuclear

disarmament and PAROS. The proposal also included elements on which the 

CD had been unable to reach consensus for several years, so the 2004 session 

once again ended without any agreement on a PoW. 

On July 29, the U.S. representative announced at a CD plenary

meeting that the United States had completed an extensive policy review on

FMCT. The United States reaffirmed its commitment to the negotiation in the

CD of a legally-binding treaty banning the production of fissile materials for

nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. However, the U.S.

review had concluded that effective verification of an FMCT is not 

realistically achievable. In the same plenary meeting, the United States also 

announced that it had decided to pursue the negotiation in the CD of an 

international ban on the sale or export of landmines that do not self-destruct or

deactivate within a set time. The United States also welcomed the CD’s

decision to hold a series of informal plenary meetings on non-traditional

issues, such as landmines and organizational reform. 

The United States reiterated its commitment to effective multilateral

solutions to disarmament issues, and made clear that the CD will be unable to

adopt a PoW while some CD members insist on creating links between agreed 

subjects and unrelated issues about which there is no agreement. The 

sustained lack of an agreed PoW, however, raised concerns among members

that the CD’s relevance as an international negotiating forum was eroding.

The CD is supported through the budget of the UN Department of

Disarmament Affairs. The United States was assessed 22 percent ($880,000)

of the CD’s 2004 budget of approximately $4 million. 

35 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Peacekeeping Issues 

Peacekeeping Financing 

In 2004, the United States continued to base its support for UN 

peacekeeping operations on such established criteria as national interests, clear 

objectives, a sound plan, acceptable risks and costs, and a realistic end-state 

and exit strategy. In recognition that these criteria had been met, the United 

States supported new UN peacekeeping missions in Burundi, Cote d’Ivoire, 

Haiti, and an expansion of the mission in Democratic Republic of the Congo 

(MONUC), making it the largest UN peacekeeping mission. UN missions in 

East Timor and Sierra Leone downsized as they began transferring tasks to the

host countries. 

The United States supports UN peacekeeping operations when they

can be an effective means of containing conflict and resolving disputes in

support of U.S. national interests. It has supported proposals to improve the 

UN’s ability to assess conflict situations, to plan and manage peacekeeping 

operations, and to respond quickly to Security Council mandates. The United

States also continued to encourage other member states to include 

peacekeeping in their national security strategies and to contribute forces to 

peacekeeping whenever appropriate. The total number of troops, military 

observers, and civilian police (CIVPOL) from all nations serving in UN 

missions at the end of 2004 increased by approximately 18,905 from 2003. 

The increase was mainly attributed to the three new missions and the

expansion of MONUC. As of December 31, 2004, the United Nations had a

total of 64,720 personnel (55,909 troops, 2,046 military observers, and 6,765

CIVPOL) participating in UN peacekeeping missions. The U.S. contribution 

included eight U.S. troops in Haiti and Liberia; 17 U.S. military observers in 

Ethiopia, Kosovo, Liberia, Georgia, and in the Middle East; and 404 U.S.

CIVPOL in East Timor, Haiti, Kosovo, and Liberia. 

The costs of UN peacekeeping operations increased in 2004. The

United Nations assessed member states a total of $2.8 billion (compared to $2 

billion in 2003), of which the United States was assessed $746.4 million.

Assessments increased for operations in the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo and Liberia. In addition, assessments for new UN peacekeeping 

missions in Burundi, Cote d’Ivoire, and Haiti contributed to an overall

increase in assessments. These increases were only partially offset by the 

downsizing of operations in East Timor and Sierra Leone. 

Force Protection for U.S. Peacekeepers 

During 2004, there were no fatalities among U.S. military personnel

serving in UN peacekeeping operations, and there were no injuries resulting 

from hostile action. In addition, there were no U.S. military personnel 

captured or taken hostage while in service in UN peacekeeping operations. 

However, there were casualties among U.S. civilian police contingents 

participating in UN operations. On April 17, a Jordanian civilian police 

officer serving in the UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo fired on a 

36 
Political and Security Affairs 

convoy of 21 American civilian police officers, killing three and injuring 10. 

The United Nations performed an investigation and found the Jordanian 

officer, killed in the crossfire, was acting alone. The associated Jordanian unit 

returned to Jordan in October. Peacekeeping remains an endeavor with 

tangible risks, and UN planners scrutinize every deployment with respect to

personnel safety and force protection. 

During 2004, the U.S. Military Observer Group-Washington

(USMOG-W) conducted force protection surveys of all peace operations in 

which U.S. military observers served under UN operational control. In 

addition, USMOG-W conducted pre-deployment training for observers, antiterrorist training such as defensive driving and bomb identification, increased 

communication during movement, and the use of protective body armor. 

In most instances, UN peacekeepers are covered by Status of Forces

Agreements (SOFA) or Status of Mission Agreements (SOMA), which are

negotiated between the United Nations and host governments. These

agreements set the terms and conditions governing the relationship between a 

host government and the UN peacekeeping forces. In instances where a 

SOFA/SOMA has not yet been negotiated, the terms and conditions of the 

standard SOFA/SOMA may apply, per General Assembly Resolution 52/12B

(1997). Personnel acting in support of a UN operation, but who are not “blue 

helmeted,” are generally considered to be “experts on mission” under the 

terms of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United

Nations. 

The potential vulnerability of U.S. personnel to the International

Criminal Court (ICC) jurisdiction was again an issue in 2004. The protections

provided by Security Council Resolution 1422 (2002) and Security Council

Resolution 1487 (2003) were not renewed in 2004. These resolutions 

precluded the ICC from initiating any investigation or prosecution of current

or former officials, or personnel of states that are not party to the Rome Statute 

for actions or omissions while serving in UN-established or UN-authorized 

missions for renewable periods of one year. In the absence of a new 

resolution, the United States took into account the risk of ICC review when 

determining contributions to UN authorized or established operations. In

addition, the United States continued to pursue bilateral agreements with all 

countries to protect not only peacekeepers but other, broader categories of U.S. 

personnel and officials from any assertion of ICC jurisdiction by the ICC.

CIVPOL 

International civilian police (CIVPOL) continued to play a critical 

role in peacekeeping while the international community struggled to meet 

worldwide demand for qualified CIVPOL officers. The United States 

continued efforts to enhance both domestic and international capacities for 

recruiting, training, and deploying CIVPOL to peacekeeping missions around 

the world. The United States contributed 25 CIVPOL to the newly created 

peacekeeping operation in Haiti. As of December 31, the United States had 

37 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

CIVPOL officers deployed to UN missions in Haiti, Kosovo, Liberia, and East

Timor. 

There was an increasing recognition by peacekeeping mission

planners that there was a need for “formed units,” a type of international

policing that falls between functions performed by regular civilian police and 

those performed by the military within peacekeeping operations. Specially 

trained formed units can perform crowd control, conduct high-risk arrests,

investigations, and other specialized law enforcement functions. In 2004,

formed units were deployed to missions in Burundi, the Democratic Republic

of the Congo, Haiti, Kosovo, and Liberia. 

HIV/AIDS 

Preventing HIV transmission among UN peacekeepers and host 

communities was a key UN priority in 2004. The UN Department of

Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) finalized its testing policy and, in

accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1308 (2000), made available 

voluntary and confidential HIV testing and counseling for peacekeepers before 

their deployment and during missions. The United Nations respected national

HIV testing requirements of troop contributing countries. DPKO had a 

standardized pre-deployment training module on HIV/AIDS for troop

contributing countries to incorporate into peacekeeper instruction. 

DPKO and the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)

coordinate HIV/AIDS prevention activities involving peacekeepers. In 2004, 

DPKO deployed HIV/AIDS advisers in its major peacekeeping operations. 

These advisors collaborated with UNAIDS and with national authorities on

HIV/AIDS prevention plans. Smaller peacekeeping missions had staff 

members who served as HIV/AIDS points of contact. UN peacekeepers

carried UNAIDS awareness cards, and DPKO reviewed its HIV/AIDS policy

in consultation with UNAIDS. 

Sexual Abuse 

In 2004, the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) 

reported that victims had made a total of 105 allegations of sexual exploitation 

and abuse against peacekeeping personnel. Of these, 16 involved civilian UN 

staff, nine involved civilian police, and 80 involved military. Close to twothirds of the allegations involved rape or sexual assault. The range of alleged

abuse also included child pornography, child molestation, and prostitution.

Most of the serious allegations of sexual exploitation, abuse, and misconduct

were against UN peacekeeping personnel in the Democratic Republic of the

Congo (DRC) in 2004. There were other credible allegations of sexual

exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers assigned to UN missions in

Burundi, DRC, Haiti, Liberia, and Sierra Leone in 2004. 

In April, following the earliest allegations of sexual exploitation and

abuse, the United Nations assigned a Personnel Conduct Officer to the UN

Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) to reinforce

disciplinary procedures and adherence to the UN code of conduct for

38 
Political and Security Affairs 

peacekeepers. From June to September, the UN Office of Internal Oversight

Services also investigated 72 allegations involving civilian and military 

members of MONUC located in the Ituri district of DRC. In July, the DPKO 

distributed guidance to missions on implementing the Secretary-General’s 

2003 bulletin on sexual exploitation and abuse and began designating focal

points within UN missions to handle complaints involving these types of 

allegations. 

In August 2004, the Secretary-General appointed Prince Zeid Ra’ad 

Al-Hussein, the Jordanian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, to

advise him on sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeeping personnel

and to engage with member states and troop contributing countries on

accountability for perpetrators. UN Security Council Resolution 1565, 

adopted on October 1, asked the Secretary-General to investigate allegations

of abuse by civilian and military personnel of MONUC and to take appropriate

action. The resolution encouraged MONUC to conduct training to ensure 

compliance with the UN code of conduct. 

In a public statement on November 19, the Secretary-General 

expressed his outrage at the allegations and demanded accountability. During

October and November, Prince Zeid visited MONUC. He noted that sexual

exploitation and abuse appeared to be widespread and that there appeared to be

no compliance with the UN policy of zero tolerance for sexual exploitation 

and abuse. In November, the DPKO established a sexual exploitation and

abuse task force for MONUC at headquarters in New York, headed by the

newly-appointed Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General. 

Also in November, the United Nations assigned an Assistant UN SecretaryGeneral to head an investigative team to the DRC to address cases involving 

MONUC members and to assist the mission in developing a prevention

program.

In 2004, the United States demanded stronger UN oversight,

transparency, and accountability. The United States endorsed the UN policy

of zero tolerance, UN investigations into allegations of sexual exploitation and 

abuse, and enhanced training for all new UN peacekeeping personnel, while 

calling on troop-contributing countries to take disciplinary actions to deter and

prosecute abuse. U.S. officials, including Secretary Powell, reiterated to the 

Special Representative of the Secretary-General in the DRC in October, and to 

the UN Secretary-General in November, that the United Nations must 

strengthen enforcement of its code of conduct. The United States encouraged

the United Nations to adopt effective preventive measures and procedures to 

ensure that violators of UN policy are disciplined, and where crimes are

involved, prosecuted. The United States commended UN decisions to 

repatriate civilian perpetrators from its missions and stood ready to work with

the United Nations and troop contributors to put in place a system to end

sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers.

39 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Special Issues 

Terrorism

The United States continued its efforts to advance international

counterterrorism initiatives throughout the UN system, including in Security

Council committees (the 1267 Sanctions Committee and the CounterTerrorism Committee (CTC), and in the General Assembly. 

The Security Council adopted five resolutions in 2004 directly related

to terrorism. Resolution 1526, adopted in January, strengthened the current

sanctions regime against individuals and entities associated with the Taliban 

and al-Qaida. Resolution 1530, adopted in March, condemned as a terrorist

act the March 11 bombings that killed commuters in Madrid. Resolution

1535, also adopted in March, established the Counter-Terrorism Committee 

Executive Directorate (CTED), as part of its effort to revitalize the CTC. The 

United States was a lead sponsor of Resolution 1540, adopted in April, which 

required all states to take steps to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction. In response to terrorists seizing a school in Beslan, Russia, and 

killing more than 300 people, mostly children, Russia introduced Resolution

1566 in October. This resolution recalled that criminal acts against civilians, 

committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of

hostages, with the purpose of provoking terror, among other things, are 

unjustifiable by any consideration. 

The al-Qaida/Taliban Sanctions Committee maintains a list of

individuals and entities associated with al-Qaida, the Taliban, and Usama bin 

Laden subject to international sanctions—asset freezes, travel bans, and arms

embargoes—that member states are obligated to implement. The United 

States continued referring names of individuals and entities that were included 

on the Committee’s sanctions list. If the United States is proposing an 

addition to the list, the individuals or entities are first vetted within the

appropriate U.S. Government agencies and then submitted to the United

Nations for circulation to the other 14 members of the Committee with 

sufficient explanatory information for the Committee to determine whether 

they should be added. The same U.S. Government interagency group reviews

names proposed by other governments. 

The CTC, established by Security Council Resolution 1373 after

September 11, 2001, made progress towards its goal of raising the level of

performance of the governments of all 191 member states in the fight against

terrorism. On March 26, 2004, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1535,

which established the CTED to enhance the Committee’s ability to monitor the 

implementation of Resolution 1373 and effectively continue the capacitybuilding work in which it is engaged. The United States played an active 

leadership role in the CTC, urging the Committee to become more active in 

facilitating technical assistance to member states and promoting closer 

cooperation and coordination among international, regional, and sub-regional

organizations. 

40 
Political and Security Affairs 

The General Assembly adopted Resolution 59/46, “Measures to

Eliminate International Terrorism,” on December 2. The resolution 

condemned all acts, methods, and practices of terrorism as criminal and

unjustifiable, wherever and by whomsoever committed. It reaffirmed previous 

Declarations on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, and urged all 

states to become parties to the 12 international terrorism conventions and

protocols. The resolution stipulated that the Ad Hoc Committee, established 

by General Assembly Resolution 51/210 (1996) to work on the elaboration of

international legal instruments to fight terrorism, should continue its work on

the negotiation of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism

(CCIT) and on the negotiation of an International Convention for the 

Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. 

The eighth and ninth rounds of negotiations on the CCIT in the Sixth

Committee (Legal Issues) in 2004 did not make any progress toward ending an 

impasse on the following two issues: the scope of the offense and the nonapplication of the convention to state military forces. However, during

concurrent negotiations on the Nuclear Terrorism Convention, significant 

progress was made. 

In November 2003, the Secretary-General appointed a High Level

Panel to examine global security threats, assess existing approaches, and

recommend changes. The High Level Panel of Experts issued their report in

December 2004. The report contained recommendations for strengthening the

work of the United Nations in response to the threat of terrorism. Among 

other things, the Experts urged UN members to conclude without delay the 

two international terrorism conventions and to agree on a definition of 

terrorism. 

Sanctions 

The United States continued to support the imposition of UN 

sanctions in response to threats to international peace and security. Chapter 

VII, Article 41, of the UN Charter authorizes the Security Council to mandate 

member states to implement measures not involving the use of armed force to

enforce its decisions. Under this authority, the Council has resorted to the use 

of multilateral sanctions as an enforcement tool when international peace and 

security have been threatened and diplomatic efforts have failed. 

The United States believes that sanctions, appropriately structured

and targeted and supported by the international community, can serve as a key 

policy tool to prompt a change in policy or behavior of regimes, groups, or

individuals that threaten international peace and security. U.S. opposition to

artificially time-limited sanctions reflects this philosophy. Sanctions have

restricted access to arms, funds, and commodities used to undermine security, 

while denying political support to the leadership of sanctioned regimes. The 

United States recognizes that sanctions must be used in conjunction with other 

appropriate diplomatic approaches. The effectiveness of UN-imposed

sanctions is directly linked to the willingness and ability of member states, 

particularly neighbors of the targeted regime, to implement and enforce the 

41 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

measures. The United States reviewed efforts to improve member state

compliance. 

During 2004, sanctions remained in place against Saddam Hussein 

and other senior officials of the former Iraqi regime, their immediate family

members, and individuals and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the 

Taliban, and al-Qaida. UN sanctions also remained in effect in the Democratic 

Republic of the Congo (DRC), Liberia, Somalia, and Sudan. The Security

Council imposed sanctions on Cote d’Ivoire. UN restrictions on nongovernmental groups in Rwanda and Sierra Leone also remained in effect. 

On January 30, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1526 to

improve implementation of the arms embargo, travel restrictions, and assets

freeze imposed by Resolution 1267 (1999) and succeeding resolutions on 

Usama bin Laden, members of the Taliban and al-Qaida, and their associates. 

Resolution 1533, concerning the DRC, adopted March 12, established

a sanctions committee and a panel of experts to assist in monitoring the arms

embargo on armed groups and militias operating in the districts of North and

South Kivu and Ituri and on groups that were not party to the Global and AllInclusive Agreement. Resolution 1552, adopted July 27, renewed the DRC

arms embargo and re-established the panel of experts. 

An arms embargo, assets freeze, travel restrictions, and restrictions on

the export of conflict diamonds and timber remained in effect in Liberia. On

March 12, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1532, which required 

member states to freeze the assets of former Liberian President Charles Taylor, 

his immediate family members, senior officials of the former Taylor regime, 

and other close allies or associates. Resolution 1579, adopted December 21, 

renewed the arms embargo, travel restrictions, and timber ban on Liberia for a

period of one year, and the diamond ban for a period of six months, and reestablished a panel of experts. 

The arms embargo on Somalia, dating back to 1992, remained in

place as the oldest sanctions regime currently in effect. By Resolution 1558,

adopted on August 17, 2004, the Council re-established a monitoring group,

established by Resolution 1519 (2003), to continue monitoring implementation

of the arms embargo on Somalia. 

On July 30, 2004, the Council adopted Resolution 1556 concerning

Sudan, imposing an arms embargo on non-governmental entities and 

individuals operating in the Sudanese states of North, South, and West Darfur.

In Resolution 1564, adopted on September 18, the Council encouraged

proactive monitoring of the Darfur region by the African Union and threatened

imposition of additional measures, including restrictions on Sudan’s petroleum 

sector, if the Government of Sudan failed to fully comply with the demands of

the Council. 

The Council imposed an arms embargo on Cote d’Ivoire by

Resolution 1572 on November 15. It also imposed travel restrictions and an

assets freeze on those who constituted a threat to the peace and national

reconciliation process, were responsible for serious violations of human rights

42 
Political and Security Affairs 

and international humanitarian law, publicly incited hatred and violence, or

violated the arms embargo. 

Oil-For-Food 

The UN Oil-for-Food Program ended in November 2003, as 

mandated by Security Council Resolution 1483 (2003). First-hand Iraqi

accounts and documentary evidence of abuses of the Program surfaced in 

2003, when the Coalition Provisional Authority obtained access to official 

Iraqi documents that revealed systemic abuses of the Program by the former

Iraqi regime. As early as 2000, the United States brought reports of abuses to

the UN Security Council and its Iraq Sanctions Committee. 

In response to allegations of wrongdoing by UN officials, in April

2004, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed an independent, high-level

inquiry to investigate the administration and management of the Program.

Specifically, the Independent Inquiry Committee (IIC) was established to

collect and examine information relating to the administration and 

management of the Program, including allegations of fraud and corruption on

the part of UN officials, personnel, and agents, as well as contractors. Paul 

Volcker, former Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, was appointed chair of 

the IIC. 

On April 21, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted 

Resolution 1538, which endorsed the inquiry and called for full cooperation in 

the investigation by all UN officials and personnel, the Coalition Provisional

Authority, Iraq, and all other member states, including their national

regulatory authorities. Throughout 2004, the State Department responded to 

numerous requests for information and briefings from the IIC. The 

Department devoted considerable time and resources to retrieving relevant

archived documents covering the span of the Program. The IIC issued a status 

report on August 9 and a briefing paper on October 21, and was expected to

release a final report in 2005. Six committees of the U.S. Congress

investigated the Program during the year. 

Non–Self-Governing Territories 

The Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the 

Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to

Colonial Countries and Peoples (Committee of 24 or C-24) and the Special 

Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) of the UN

General Assembly annually consider the status of non-self-governing

territories, defined as “territories whose people have not yet attained a full

measure of self-government.” 

As the administering power of three non-self-governing territories—

American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands—the United States has 

consistently partnered with the United Kingdom to ensure agreement on an 

“omnibus” resolution on the “Questions of American Samoa, Anguilla, 

Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, 

Pitcairn, Saint Helena, the Turks and Caicos Islands and the United States 

43 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Virgin Islands.” This resolution confirms the right of self-determination and 

reiterates the call for complete decolonization. It further recognizes the work

of the administering powers to this end. As in prior years, this resolution was 

adopted by consensus. The United States continued to fulfill all reporting 

requirements as requested by this resolution and Article 73(e) of the UN 

Charter. 

During the General Assembly, the United States voted against or

abstained on a series of resolutions further addressing the governance and 

independence of non-self-governing territories. The United States opposed 

these resolutions because of unacceptable references to land tenure, economic 

and military activities, and the responsibilities of administering powers. 

Security Council Thematic Debates 

In 2004, the Security Council held debates on 15 thematic items, 

three more than in 2003, and six more than in 2002. As in the past two years, 

terrorism continued to command the greatest attention. In March, the Security 

Council revitalized the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) and established

the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate to support the CTC in its work

(Resolution 1535). In addition to the open meetings described below, three

additional meetings took place in March, May, and September to condemn the

train bombing in Madrid (Resolution 1530); the bomb attack in Grozny which

killed Ahmad Kadyrov, President of the Chechen Republic (S/PRST/2004/14);

and the taking of hostages at a school in Beslan, Russia, as well as terrorist

attacks in Moscow and on two Russian airliners (S/PRST/2004/31). The 

Security Council also issued a statement to the press to commemorate the first 

anniversary of the bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad in August

2003. 

The Security Council discussed the following themes: 

• Threats to International Peace and Security Caused by Terrorist Acts. At 

the end of January, the Security Council improved sanctions against alQaida and the Taliban and established an analytical support team to assist

the sanctions committee with its work (Resolution 1526). In October, the 

Council declared that terrorist acts are never justifiable and established a 

working group to consider measures against terrorist groups other than alQaida and the Taliban (Resolution 1566). The Council further discussed

the general issue of terrorism at open meetings held in January, March,

May, September, and December. Additionally, the Council held open

meetings on the work of the CTC in March, July, and October. The 

United States made several statements acknowledging the 

accomplishments of the United Nations and the CTC in combating 

international terrorism. Upon adoption of Resolution 1566, which it

cosponsored, the United States emphasized that the deliberate targeting of 

civilians is never justifiable in any cause. 

• Role of Business in Conflict Prevention, Peacekeeping and Post-conflict 

Peace-building. In April, the Security Council held an open meeting on 

44 
Political and Security Affairs 

the role of the private sector in conflict prevention and the issue of

corporate citizenship in conflict zones. The United States declared that

the private sector is the true engine of development, urged member states 

to promote economic freedom, and noted that companies can provide 

leadership by setting examples of good corporate citizenship. The United 

States also expressed support for mechanisms such as the Kimberly 

Process for diamond certification and the Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development’s anti-bribery convention. 

• Children and Armed Conflict. The Security Council held two open

meetings in January and April calling on all parties to respect their 

international obligations regarding the protection of children affected by

armed conflict (Resolution 1539). In its statement, the United States 

recognized the terrible consequences of using children in armed conflict,

called for the active monitoring of governments and armed groups that use

child soldiers, and stressed the need to eliminate this practice. 

• Role of Civil Society in Post-conflict Peace-building. The Security 

Council held an open meeting in June, in which the United States 

highlighted the importance of civil society to achieve international peace

and security and acknowledged the role of the Economic and Social

Council in providing an important link with civil society. 

• Civilian Aspects of Conflict Management and Peace-building. In 

September, the Security Council held a High-Level meeting and issued a 

Ministerial statement on the importance of civilian aspects of conflict 

management and complex crises (S/PRST/2004/33). While supporting an

improved civilian police response in conflict management, the United 

States advocated an integrated approach that incorporates all elements of 

public security and criminal justice and announced the formation of the 

new Office of the Special Coordinator for Reconstruction and 

Stabilization within the State Department to improve the U.S. response to

post-conflict situations. 

• Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict. The Security Council held

open meetings in June and December. The President of the Council

issued a Statement following the December meeting, in which the Council 

condemned violence that targeted civilians and called on all parties to a 

conflict to comply with their obligations under international law 

(S/PRST/2004/46). The United States noted that protection of human

rights is one of the foundations of U.S. foreign policy and reiterated its

commitment to international accountability for war crimes, genocide, and 

crimes against humanity. 

• Complex Crises and United Nations Response. During an open meeting 

in May, the Security Council discussed the UN role in addressing

complex crises and emergencies afflicting different parts of the world,

especially Africa. In its statement, the United States recognized that

complex crises require case-specific responses and bilateral and national

responses should be coordinated with a system-wide UN response. 

45 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

• Non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The Security Council

held three open meetings, two in April and one in December, to discuss 

the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) to non-state

actors, particularly terrorists. At the end of April, the Council decided

that member states should take effective measures to prevent the 

proliferation of WMDs, especially to non-state actors, and established a 

committee to monitor compliance with these obligations (Resolution 

1540). Addressing the Council upon adoption of Resolution 1540, which 

was a U.S. initiative, the United States stated that the resolution fulfilled

the following key goals laid out by President Bush in his address before 

the General Assembly in 2003: to criminalize the proliferation of WMDs,

to ensure all countries have strong export controls, and to secure sensitive 

materials within each country’s borders. 

• United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. The Council issued a

Presidential Statement following an open meeting in May, which 

highlighted the operational needs of UN peacekeeping operations 

(S/PRST/2004/16). The United States expressed support for innovative 

solutions to the capacity challenges facing UN peacekeeping operations 

and, recognizing the role of other actors, stressed that the Council must be

careful not to assign tasks to peacekeepers for which they are not 

prepared.

• Post-conflict National Reconciliation: Role of the United Nations. In

January, the Council reaffirmed, in a Presidential Statement, the important

role the United Nations played in the process of post-conflict 

reconciliation (S/PRST/2004/2). Addressing the Council, the United 

States expressed its belief that the establishment, restoration, and 

preservation of democratic governance should be the most important, 

over-arching objective of post-conflict reconciliation.

• Refugees. An open meeting in May included a briefing by Ruud Lubbers,

the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. The United States expressed 

its gratitude for the work of the High Commissioner, noting that his office 

probably had an impact on more people than any other UN office. 

• Cooperation between the United Nations and Regional Organizations in

Stabilization Processes. The Council held an open meeting in July, 

followed by a Presidential Statement, which encouraged increased

collaboration between regional and subregional organizations and the

United Nations to effectively address conflict situations and to coordinate 

their efforts in stabilization processes based on their complementary and 

comparative advantages (S/PRST/2004/27). While highlighting the

advantages of regional arrangements to support peace and stability, the 

United States noted that a troop-contributing country might have its own

agenda independent of the peacekeeping agenda and that its actions must 

be carefully monitored.

• Justice and the Rule of Law: the United Nations Role. Following an open

meeting in October, the Council issued a Presidential Statement which

46 
Political and Security Affairs 

addressed the issue of helping war-torn societies re-establish the rule of

law and come to terms with large-scale abuses through mechanisms such

as tribunals and truth and reconciliation commissions (S/PRST/2004/34). 

In its statement, the United States underscored the importance of a judicial 

system based on transparency and openness as a true engine of the rule of

law, while expressing concern over respecting national decisions about

criminal justice and U.S. objections to the International Criminal Court.

• Small Arms. In January, the Council held an open meeting, followed by a 

Presidential Statement, which encouraged arms-exporting countries to

exercise the highest degree of responsibility in small arms and light

weapons transactions and encouraged international and regional 

cooperation to prevent their diversion to terrorist groups 

(S/PRST/2004/1). The United States recognized the serious consequences

of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, especially the

proliferation of man-portable air defense systems, welcomed the 

Secretary-General’s recommendations to combat the problem, and 

expressed its belief that a results-oriented approach to the problem was 

best. 

• Women and Peace and Security. Following an open meeting held in 

October, the Security Council, in a Presidential Statement, strongly

condemned the continued violence against women in situations of armed 

conflict (S/PRST/2004/40). Addressing the Council, the United States 

expressed its commitment to end trafficking in persons, welcomed the UN 

commitment to enforcing its zero-tolerance policy in sex trafficking at 

every UN peacekeeping mission, and called for mandatory training for all 

peacekeepers prior to deployment. 

47 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

48 
Part 2 

Economic and Social Affairs 

Economic and Development Issues 

Development Bodies and Programs 

UN Development Program (UNDP)

Headquartered in New York, the UN Development Program (UNDP)

is the leading development agency of the United Nations, with a presence in

136 countries. The United States is a member of its 36-state governing body,

the Executive Board. Mark Malloch Brown (United Kingdom) was appointed

UNDP Administrator by the UN Secretary-General in 1999. 

Promoting democracy and prosperity around the world is a top U.S. 

foreign policy priority. Through participation in the UNDP, the United States 

ensures that the organization’s policies and activities reflect this priority. 

UNDP’s strategic framework for 2004–2007 includes the following five “core

goals”: (1) reducing human poverty; (2) fostering democratic governance;

(3) managing energy and environment for sustainable development; (4) 

supporting crisis prevention and recovery; and (5) responding to HIV/AIDS. 

The United States played a key role in adopting these goals to guide UNDP 

operations. UNDP is also a valuable partner in post-conflict transition and 

peace building and promoting democratic governance in many parts of the

world, including Afghanistan, Iraq, and Liberia. 

In 2004, the United States continued to encourage UNDP to improve 

its management and results-oriented programming. The Department of State 

worked closely with UNDP on a U.S. Office of Management and Budget

Program Assessment Rating Tool Review. This review required the United 

States, in consultation with UNDP, to set up goals, targets, and indicators to

measure management and program performance. The evaluation found UNDP

management and program systems to be effective. 

The United States also urged UNDP in 2004 to implement the 

recommendations of the Commission on the Private Sector and Development,

which UNDP helped to launch in 2003. UNDP publicized the report of the 

Commission in many developing countries, and formed partnerships with

private firms to promote development as a follow-up. The United States 

continued to urge UNDP to help developing countries nurture indigenous

entrepreneurs and private sectors, a key recommendation of the Commission. 

U.S. efforts to direct UNDP to emphasize democracy and 

entrepreneurship as a path to achieve development were resisted by some

Executive Board members. UNDP allocates a portion of its resources to

developing countries according to a needs-based formula. The United States

would prefer distribution of resources based on performance. 

49 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UNDP obtains its funding through voluntary contributions. In 2004, 

the United States, the UNDP’s top contributor, gave over $101 million to the 

general budget, and over $144 million to specific projects and activities. In

2004, UNDP employed about 5,808 people, of whom 2,521 were 

professionals. U.S. citizens occupied 157 of the professional positions. 

UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) 

The UN Conference of Trade and Development (UNCTAD), a

permanent forum for discussions on trade, finance, and development issues, 

functions through a variety of intergovernmental groups. These include its

governing body, the Trade and Development Board, and Commissions on

Trade, Investment, and Enterprise. Based in Geneva, UNCTAD currently has

190 members. UNCTAD’s Secretary-General, Rubens Ricupero (Brazil), 

retired in 2004; he was to be replaced in September 2005 by the former 

Director General of the World Trade Organization, Supachai Panikpakdi

(Thailand). 

In 2004, UNCTAD held expert meetings on competition law and

policy, the financing of commodity-based trade, international standards of

accounting and reporting, and good governance in investment promotion. In 

June, it held its quadrennial ministerial conference, UNCTAD XI, in Sao

Paulo, Brazil. This meeting produced two documents, the Sao Paulo

Consensus and the Spirit of Sao Paulo, which will guide UNCTAD’s work

over the next four years. 

The United States has been an active participant in UNCTAD since 

its founding in 1964. The United States believes that trade and investment are 

the main engines of development and has strongly encouraged UNCTAD’s

work on trade and investment facilitation. It has also worked to bring greater 

focus and more modern management to UNCTAD in line with the general

reform initiatives underway at the United Nations. In 2004, U.S. 

representatives participated in UNCTAD XI and in reviews of UNCTAD 

programs, several of which were curtailed or eliminated. The United States

also worked closely with other member states to reduce the number and length 

of UNCTAD’s inter-governmental meetings, while expanding its technical

work on issues of practical importance to member states. 

In 2004, the United States joined other member states in encouraging 

UNCTAD to increase its technical assistance activities, particularly in areas 

that can help ensure that developing countries participate beneficially from

processes of globalization. This includes work on investment promotion, trade

and transport facilitation, and customs reform. UNCTAD is the source for the 

most widely used automated customs data program in the developing world, a 

useful tool in controlling crime and reducing corruption in transport. Its Debt

Information Management System also helps many states keep track of

commercial and official debt obligations. Likewise, UNCTAD’s investment 

policy reviews are valuable tools for member states and investors alike. These

reviews assess the progress individual developing countries have made in

establishing a legal and regulatory framework conducive to investment. 

50 
Economic and Social Affairs 

Its $115 million biennial budget is funded from the UN regular

budget; the United States pays 22 percent. UNCTAD’s technical assistance

activities are funded separately through trust fund arrangements established by

individual donors (primarily European countries). The United States did not

contribute to any of these trust fund arrangements in 2004. In 2004, 

UNCTAD had 330 professional staff in 2004, of whom eight were U.S. 

citizens. 

Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) 

The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was

established in December 1992 by the Economic and Social Council

(ECOSOC) as a functional commission to follow up implementation of the 

Rio Earth Summit’s goals. Based at UN Headquarters in New York, it is 

composed of 53 UN or UN agency members, elected to three-year terms. At 

the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 

Johannesburg, governments called for specific reforms of the CSD, including 

limiting negotiations in the sessions of the Commission to every two years, 

limiting the number of themes addressed at each session, and having CSD 

serve as a focal point for the discussion of partnerships that promote 

sustainable development, including sharing lessons learned, progress made and

best practices. 

The United States has been a member since the Commission’s

inception. Following the WSSD, the United States worked actively to advance

ideas for how the CSD could implement its reforms to serve as a stronger

catalyst for action. (See http://www.state.gov/g/oes/sus/csd/2003 for a series 

of discussion papers the United States produced in early 2003 regarding the 

future of the CSD.) At the CSD’s 11th session in 2003, the United States 

worked closely with other CSD members to develop a multi-year program of

work that addresses a series of “thematic clusters” and cross-cutting issues in 

two-year “implementation cycles.” The first cycle (2004–2005) focused on

water, sanitation, and human settlement issues. Each two-year cycle includes 

a non-negotiating “review year” to assess the state of implementation and a 

venue to focus on sustainable development partnerships and capacity building 

activities. The second half of each cycle will be a “policy year” to discuss 

policy options and possible actions to address the constraints and obstacles in

the process of implementation identified during the review year. 

Under Secretary for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky led the U.S.

delegation to the CSD “Review Session,” it’s 12th session, in April 2004. The 

delegation included representatives from a wide range of U.S. government 

agencies. The session demonstrated a new way of doing business, with a 

series of highly interactive plenary discussions on water, sanitation, and 

human settlements. More than 100 ministers representing diverse portfolios 

attended the High-Level Segment—more than twice the number that attended 

the 11th session. Some 67 different partnerships, including many involving

U.S. agencies, participated in the session’s “Partnerships Fair.” The event

highlighted efforts by governments, the private sector, civil society, and other 

51 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

organizations to plan and implement voluntary partnerships that promote 

economic growth, social development, and environmental stewardship (see 

http://www.sdp.gov). The CSD’s Learning Center gave practical, hands-on

training to some 500 participants through its 18 courses, including several 

organized jointly by the Smithsonian Institution and the UN Development

Program. The session concluded with the issuance of a Chair’s summary

report. The report, which was later adopted by ECOSOC and the General

Assembly, identified key constraints to achieving internationally agreed goals

on water, sanitation, and human settlements, and pointed the way forward to

advancing implementation. 

UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

The UN General Assembly created the UN Children’s Fund 

(UNICEF) in 1946 to meet the emergency needs of children after World War

II. UNICEF has broadened its efforts to help children by providing both 

humanitarian assistance and long-term development aid targeted at children 

and families. UNICEF is active in 157 countries, with programs addressing

children’s health, sanitation, nutrition, basic education and protection needs

wherever possible through low-cost interventions at the family and community

levels. In humanitarian crises, UNICEF normally takes the lead in infant and 

maternal health care, supplemental nutrition, education, water and sanitation,

and protection issues. 

As a respected authority on children and their well-being, UNICEF 

typically works through broad partnerships with developing countries, bilateral 

donors, and nongovernmental organizations. UNICEF programs target

vulnerable and marginalized children and their families, and are intended to 

improve the capacity of national governments to respond to their needs.

Although the United States in 2004 worked to ensure that UNICEF maintained

strong operational capabilities to supply humanitarian assistance, an increasing

share of its work was tied to capacity building, piloting and disseminating best 

practices, and conducting research on the problems affecting children. 

In 2004, the United States supported the appointment of former U.S.

Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman as the successor to UNICEF Executive

Director Carol Bellamy. The United States has been a member of UNICEF’s

Executive Board, now comprised of 36 members serving three-year terms, 

since the Fund’s inception. The current U.S. term that began in 2003 runs 

until 2006. 

UNICEF has capabilities to provide rapid and cost-effective delivery

of medicines and materials, a cornerstone of its work to promote child

survival. UNICEF procured vaccines for 40 percent of children in developing

countries and worked to ensure not only the distribution, but also the 

development and availability of life-saving vaccines and drugs for children. 

For example, in close partnership with Rotary International, the World Health

Organization, and the Centers for Disease Control, UNICEF facilitated more 

than a 99.6 percent reduction in the incidence of polio from an estimated

52 
Economic and Social Affairs 

350,000 cases per year in 1988 to 1,266 cases in 2004; UNICEF and WHO

declared the Americas, Europe, and Western Pacific polio-free. 

In line with U.S. concerns, UNICEF increased malaria prevention 

efforts and procured 7.3 million insecticide-treated bednets (up 41 percent

from 2003). Educational supplies worth $71 million supported UNICEF 

programs that reached 5 million students in Iraq alone. Re-establishing a

learning environment using “school-in-a-box” kits is a central element of

UNICEF’s humanitarian response since gathering children in a fixed location 

facilitates complementary efforts in basic health and child protection, and 

contributes to a restoration of normalcy. 

In 2004, the United States supported UNICEF in taking a leadership

role in promoting the family in the context of the Tenth Anniversary of the 

International Year of the Family. In response to interest by the U.S. 

delegation, UNICEF hosted several international events on the family

highlighting the crucial nexus between an involved and caring mother and

father and healthy children. 

Also in 2004, the United States actively shaped the development of a 

new strategic plan for 2006–2009 by raising concerns about investments in

basic health programs, recognition of the central role of the family in child 

well-being, and utilization of a results-based approach to programming. The 

draft plan showed marked improvement in these areas, and anchored UNICEF 

around five focal areas of child survival, education, HIV/AIDS, child 

protection, and policy support.

The United States continued to push UNICEF to play a leadership 

role in efforts to harmonize and simplify UN development activities,

particularly at the country level. In dealing with joint programming between 

UNICEF and other UN agencies, the United States succeeded in counteracting 

efforts by other members to encourage UN agencies to pool funds and 

collaborate as an end in itself. Instead, UNICEF will take a more strategic 

approach toward working with its partners. Collaboration will be based on 

evidence of efficiency and/or gains in programming, will take account of the

need to maintain distinct lines of financial accountability to donors, and will

recognize the separate identities and roles of UN agencies. 

In 2004, the UNICEF budget totaled roughly $1.9 billion, provided 

entirely through voluntary contributions. Of this amount, governments 

contributed $1.3 billion. An additional $578 million came from private 

sources. The United States, the largest single donor, contributed $119 million 

to non-earmarked resources and an additional $156 million in earmarked

contributions. UNICEF employed 8,066 people in 2004, 385 of whom were

Americans. 

UN-HABITAT

The UN General Assembly converted the 58-member UN Center on

Human Settlements to a full program of the General Assembly, the UN 

Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT) in 2001. UN-HABITAT’s 

work focuses on the development of sustainable human settlements with 

53 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

access to basic services, such as water and sanitation. UN-HABITAT is also 

the UN focal point for efforts to achieve the Millennium Declaration goal of

significantly improving the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020. 

The creation of the new UN-HABITAT program marked a significant

achievement in the U.S. reform agenda. The United States had pressed for an

overhaul of the former Center after the 1996 Habitat II Conference in Istanbul

and had cut off voluntary contributions to the Center. Following the complete

restructuring of the organization by new management, the United States 

supported granting of program status and resumed modest voluntary

contributions, mostly from reprogrammed funds. 

UN-HABITAT is headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, and is led by

Executive Director Anna Tibaijuka (Tanzania), who was elected by the

General Assembly for a four-year term in July 2002 after having served since

September 2000 as Director of the Center on Human Settlements. UNHABITAT’s Governing Council meets every two years, most recently in May 

2003. States are elected to the Governing Council through regional groups for

four-year terms. The United States was re-elected in 2002 for another term by

the Western Europe and Other Group.

UN-HABITAT’s activities in 2004 were aligned with U.S. objectives 

on economic freedom, good governance, democracy building (through

decentralization of power to local authorities), gender equality, and the 

mobilization of domestic resources. The United States worked to clarify UNHABITAT’s role as a catalyst that advances work on human settlements 

through research and data-collection and capacity-building work, 

supplemented by operational activities including pilot projects. Overall, the 

United States believed that UN-HABITAT performed its role as a catalyst

well, co-hosting a successful international event on human settlements with 

the city of Barcelona, but that it needed to focus more on consolidating many

small programs, trust funds, and other mechanisms into a coherent whole.

The Second World Urban Forum held September 12–17 in Barcelona 

was a major event bringing together a broad spectrum of experts from all 

levels of government, the private sector, and academia to exchange and debate

solutions to the problems confronting the billion slum dwellers of the world. 

U.S. participants, including four mayors, two high-ranking U.S. officials, and

private sector representatives, had a rare opportunity to engage in a public

dialogue with counterparts and local officials to discuss issues such as

property rights, private investment, and good governance. The official U.S. 

delegation hosted or co-hosted several interactive presentation sessions on

topics related to housing finance, and sponsored a well-attended training

course teaching local administrators about financial mechanisms such as 

municipal bonds. 

In order to assist developing countries in managing urbanization, UNHABITAT gathers data on cities and promotes best practices in fields related

to human settlements and the role of local authorities. Its technical arm works 

with local authorities and national governments to develop and decentralize 

54 
Economic and Social Affairs 

services. In 2004, UN-HABITAT published its biennial State of the World’s 

Cities, an extensive compendium of research information and best-practices

for both policy-makers and technical experts. Highlighting the ongoing

demographic shift from a rural to urban world, the report documented changes 

in the urban environment and offered examples of innovative approaches to

meeting the challenges of the 1 billion people who currently live in slums.

The United States assisted HABITAT with some of its methodological work, 

and further exchanges are likely.

UN-HABITAT also conducted global campaigns to promote 

improved urban governance, and to promote secure tenure of housing and

land. These aimed to facilitate access to credit, and include advocating the

rights of women to equal treatment, including property inheritance. These

campaigns were conducted through advocacy, research publications, and 

technical cooperation on legislative and policy reform. 

In 2004, funding for UN-HABITAT’s work came from voluntary

contributions to UN-HABITAT’s programs ($32.7 million) which was 

supplemented by UN regular budget funds ($8.3 million). Additionally, UNHABITAT executed technical cooperation projects (construction work) worth

$64 million on behalf of other UN agencies and donor countries. In 2004, the 

United States contributed $745,575 to UN-HABITAT’s core program. UNHABITAT employed 126 professional staff in 2004, seven of whom were

American. 

Environment 

UN Environment Program (UNEP)

The UN Environment Program (UNEP), founded in 1972, is

headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, and has six regional offices in Europe,

Africa, North America, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the

Caribbean, and West Asia. Its Governing Council consists of 58 member 

states, including the United States. The UN General Assembly elects 

members from different regional groupings for four-year terms. UNEP’s 

Executive Director, Klaus Töpfer (Germany), was re-elected to a second fouryear term in 2002 after being re-nominated for that position by the UN

Secretary-General. 

In 2004, the United States provided funding to support operation of

the Secretariats of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 

the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, and the

Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent. In addition, the United 

States was the main supporter of the UNEP Mercury Program, which aimed to

help countries reduce global mercury risks. 

The United States strongly supported work done in UNEP core

programs, such as early warning and assessment of environmental threats, the

regional seas program, capacity building for domestic environmental 

governance in developing countries, and the global program of action to

combat land-based sources of marine pollution. The United States valued 

55 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UNEP’s monitoring, assessing, and publicizing of emerging environmental 

trends. In 2004, the United States delegation spearheaded successful efforts to 

conduct critical budgetary and programmatic reviews in the UNEP Governing

Council. Responding to suggestions by the United States, UNEP improved its 

budget process by making it more transparent.

In 2004, the United States was instrumental in the negotiations

culminating in the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity

Building, which included U.S. priorities such as mainstreaming capacity 

building within the regular programs of UNEP. As a part of this effort to

focus UNEP’s programs on implementation, the United States encouraged

UNEP to strengthen its links with scientific institutions and assist developing 

nations to improve their ability to monitor and assess environmental change. 

In addition, the United States cooperated closely with UNEP on 

several important initiatives. In Iraq, UNEP’s Post Conflict Assessment Unit

worked closely with the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on a variety of activities, 

most notably on efforts to help the Iraqi Ministry of the Environment develop 

environmental legislation. The United States participated in several UNEP 

Division of Technology, Industry, and Economics technical meetings on the

Mesopotamian marshlands. UNEP’s Post Conflict Assessment Unit worked 

closely with the United States on forest related issues and provided general

assistance to the Government of Liberia to strengthen environmental offices. 

UNEP facilitated the U.S. Clean Energy Initiative by hosting the 

Solar and Wind Energy Resource Assessment database and by leading action 

on the Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles, an effort of a broad coalition 

of international organizations, industry groups, and governments to foster the 

widespread use of clean fuels and environmentally sound vehicle technologies.

The United States provided funding. Due to UNEP-led work, over 50 percent

of the gasoline in Africa was lead-free by the end of 2004, and most of the 

continent was on track to phase lead out of gasoline by the end of 2005. 

UNEP’s Kingston Regional Seas Office coordinated the Cartagena

Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of

the Wider Caribbean Region, working closely with the private sector, 

governments, and nongovernmental organizations. The Kingston Regional

Seas Office program also facilitated the U.S.-initiated White Water to Blue

Water partnership, which focused on sound marine transportation, sustainable 

tourism, integrated watershed management, and marine eco-system based

management. 

UNEP’s core budget for the 2004–2005 biennium was $131 million.

The United States made a voluntary contribution of $10.9 million to UNEP

and related activities in 2004. Twenty-two U.S. citizens worked at UNEP at

the end of 2004, out of a total of 487 professional employees. 

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 

entered into force in March 1994. There are currently 188 parties to the 

UNFCCC. The United States ratified the convention in 1992. The UNFCCC 

56 
Economic and Social Affairs 

promotes stabilization of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at

levels that would prevent dangerous human interference with the climate

system. The UNFCCC parties adopted the Kyoto Protocol in December 1997. 

Russia ratified the Kyoto Protocol in September 2004, thereby meeting the 55 

percent threshold of global CO2 emissions that is required for the Protocol to

enter into force. This Protocol requires developed nations to reduce their 

collective greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent below 1990 

levels during the period 2008–2012 (7 percent below 1990 levels for the 

United States). However, because the Kyoto Protocol exempts developing 

countries, including some of the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases,

from binding emission targets and because of the harm it would cause to the

U.S. economy, President Bush announced in March 2001 that the United 

States would not ratify the Protocol. This decision is consistent with the 

recommendation of Senate Resolution 98, approved in July 1997 by a vote of

95 to 0. 

The United States engaged in extensive international efforts on 

climate change, both through bilateral and multilateral activities. The

UNFCCC’s Tenth Conference of the Parties, held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 

in December 2004, provided an opportunity for high-level dialogue on “the 

Convention after 10 years,” adaptation, mitigation, and technology. The 

United States used the opportunity to highlight its multilateral scientific and 

technological efforts to promote cooperation and progress on climate change.

The Conference also approved the Buenos Aires Program of Work on

Adaptation and Response Measures, a program for advancing adaptation

concerns under the UNFCCC. Continued U.S. participation in and support for 

the UNFCCC helped advance U.S. approaches to climate change issues. 

The United States contributed $3.4 million to the UNFCCC in 2004. 

Four of the UNFCCC’s 78 professional staff were U.S. citizens. 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created 

in 1988 as a joint effort of the World Meteorological Organization and the UN

Environment Program. The IPCC conducts periodic assessments of studies on

the science of climate change, its potential impacts, and ways countries adapt

and seek to mitigate climate change. In 2004, the IPCC organized its

comprehensive Fourth Assessment Report, which will be developed by several

hundred experts over the next three years. 

Continued U.S. participation and support for the IPCC helped ensure

that international actions to address climate change were informed by up-todate, peer-reviewed scientific and technological information. 

In 2004, the United States contributed $2.2 million to the IPCC. A 

U.S. citizen chaired the IPCC’s Working Group I on science. 

57 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Population 

UN Population Fund (UNFPA) 

The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) provides funding for population 

and reproductive health programs in over 140 countries. UNFPA supports

maternal, child, and reproductive health and family planning programs 

worldwide and works on the issues of gender empowerment, child marriage, 

and violence against women. UNFPA provides assistance in the framework of 

three to five year country plans, which are developed jointly with the recipient 

country and approved by the Executive Board. 

Thoraya Ahmed Obaid (Saudi Arabia), the Executive Director of 

UNFPA, was appointed in 2001 by the UN Secretary-General. The SecretaryGeneral extended her tenure for another term, which will end in December

2008. The United States is a member of UNFPA’s Executive Board and 

participates actively in the decision-making processes to safeguard its 

interests. In 2004, the Executive Board approved 10 country programs, 

approved extension of one program, took note of 14 draft country programs

and comments made thereon, and took note of implementation of one special 

program of assistance. 

The United States has made no contributions to UNFPA since fiscal

year 2002. In July 2002, the Secretary of State determined that UNFPA’s 

support of, and involvement in, China’s population-planning activities allows 

the Chinese Government to implement more effectively its program of

coercive abortion, and that, therefore, the Kemp-Kasten Amendment 

precluded funding of UNFPA at that time. In July 2004, the Secretary

determined that, because UNFPA continued its support and involvement in

China’s coercive birth limitation program in counties where China’s restrictive

law and penalties are enforced by government officials, the Kemp-Kasten 

Amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriation Act continued to 

preclude U.S. funding of UNFPA. 

UN Commission on Population and Development (CPD) 

The UN Commission on Population and Development (CPD) advises 

the UN Economic and Social Council on population changes, including

migration, and their effects on economic and social conditions. It is also 

charged by the General Assembly to monitor, review, and assess 

implementation of the Program of Action of the International Conference on

Population and Development (ICPD), held in Cairo in 1994. 

The CPD held its 37th session in New York March 22–26 and May 6.

The central theme of the session was review and appraisal of the progress

made in achieving the goals and objectives of the Program of Action of the

ICPD. The United States emphasized the importance of assuring that

international assistance efforts, including in basic health, family planning, and 

education, reach the most disadvantaged. The United States joined consensus

on a resolution on follow-up to the ICPD Program of Action, but made an

Explanation of Position emphasizing that the United States did not interpret

58 
Economic and Social Affairs 

any language in the resolution or any of the documents it cited as promoting 

abortion. The Commission also adopted a resolution on the work program in

the field of population. 

Regional Economic Commissions 

The UN regional economic commissions include the Economic

Commission for Africa, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the

Pacific (ESCAP), Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), Economic 

Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), and the

Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia. These bodies are 

charged with “raising the level of economic activity” within their respective

regions and “maintaining and strengthening the economic relations” of the 

countries within their scopes, “both among themselves and with other 

countries of the world.” The regional commissions are funded out of the

regular UN budget, of which the United States pays 22 percent. Many of their 

activities are financed by extra-budgetary grants from bilateral and multilateral

donors. The United States is a member of ECE, ECLAC, and ESCAP. U.S.

participation in regional commissions advances and safeguards U.S. foreign

policy and commercial interests in these regions. 

Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) 

The Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) was established in

1947 to encourage economic cooperation within Europe and between Europe

and other countries with close trade and business ties. At the end of December 

2004, ECE membership consisted of 55 Western Europe nations, as well as the 

United States, Canada, Switzerland, Israel, and the Central Asian and 

Caucasian states of the former Soviet Union. UN Secretary-General Kofi 

Annan appointed Executive Secretary Brigita Schmognerova (Slovak

Republic) to her position in 2002. 

The ECE is traditionally a “standards setting” and coordination body

in many technical fields, such as in e-commerce, energy, environment, vehicle

construction, road safety, timber and agricultural produce, border crossing, and

statistical collection. Many ECE standards are adopted around the world. 

Many U.S. Government agencies, including the Environmental Protection

Agency and Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Homeland

Security, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation, regularly 

participate in ECE working groups and chair committees. 

At its 59th annual session, held February 24–26, 2004, the ECE

reviewed developments of 2003 and approved the hiring of a team of external

evaluators to create a list of recommendations for ECE reform. During 2004,

the ECE drafted terms of reference and selected a team to begin, in January

2005, an evaluation of its activities. Also during 2004, the ECE signed a

Memorandum of Understanding with Organization for Security and 

Cooperation in Europe to cooperate on the basis of their respective

competencies and resources. 

59 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

The ECE is funded out of the UN regular budget. In 2004, the ECE

was funded at $27.5 million; the United States contributed 22 percent of this

amount. Out of the total Secretariat staff of about 200 at ECE headquarters, 

Americans held 10 positions. 

Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) 

The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

(ECLAC) was established in 1948 and had 41 member states as of December

2004. The United States is a full member with voting privileges. ECLAC also

has seven Associate Members, including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Commission is headquartered in Santiago,

Chile, with two sub-regional offices for Mexico and for the Caribbean

(Trinidad and Tobago). It also has offices in Bogota, Brasilia, Buenos Aires, 

Montevideo, and Washington, D.C. Executive Secretary Jose Luis Machinea

(Argentina) has headed the organization since December 2003. 

ECLAC’s mission is to improve cooperation among member states 

and international entities in order to advance economic and social development 

in the region. Although it previously advocated closed markets and state-run

economies, ECLAC has come to recognize that there are benefits associated 

with trade liberalization and privatization. 

ECLAC held its 30th Biennial Session in Puerto Rico, June 28–July

2, 2004. This session included an Ad Hoc Meeting of the ECLAC Committee 

on Population and Development, that adopted a resolution endorsing the 

implementation of recommendations from the Santiago International

Commission on Population and Development (2003) and the Mexico City

Conference on Women (2004). At the 30th Biennial Session, the United 

States issued an Explanation of Position reaffirming the goals and objectives 

of the International Conference on Population and Development (1994)

contingent on the understanding that the declaration adopted at that conference 

did not create new rights, including any right to abortion, or create any legally

binding obligations on states under international law. 

ECLAC received funding of $32.5 million through the UN regular

budget in 2004, of which $7 million came from the U.S. assessment. Out of 

195 professional staff at ECLAC headquarters, five were Americans. 

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) 

The Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

(ESCAP) was established in 1947, and is headquartered in Bangkok, Thailand.

Fifty-three nations are members of ESCAP and nine non-self-governing

territories hold associate member status, three of which are U.S. territories in

the Asia and Pacific region, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern 

Marianas Islands. The United States is a full member of ESCAP.

ESCAP gives technical support to member governments on a wide

array of socio-economic development issues. ESCAP’s activities include the 

provision of direct advisory services; the training and sharing of regional

60 
Economic and Social Affairs 

experiences; and the dissemination of knowledge and data through meetings, 

seminars, publications, and inter-country networks. 

Since his appointment in July 2000, Executive Secretary Dr. Kim 

Hak-Su (Republic of Korea) has focused ESCAP on poverty alleviation, which

is a dominant concern for many countries. Dr. Kim’s institutional reforms

went into effect in January 2003, outlining a new structure with the following

three main thematic committees: Poverty Reduction, Managing Globalization,

and Emerging Social Issues. The United States continues to be a strong

supporter of these reform initiatives. 

ESCAP met for its annual session during the period April 22–28, 

2004. The theme for the session was “Meeting the Challenges in an Era of

Globalization by Strengthening Regional Development Cooperation.” The 

U.S. representative delivered a statement on two sets of issues related to

globalization: trade and governance at the national level. The statement

highlighted U.S. trade agreements in the region that have set high standards for

openness and transparency. He also stressed that ultimately it is the quality of 

governance at the national level that is the most important determinant of a 

country’s capacity to sustain economic growth, eradicate poverty, and bring 

the benefits of globalization to its people. 

In addition to approximately $33.3 million received from the UN 

regular budget, ESCAP also receives voluntary extra-budgetary contributions, 

primarily for its workshops and other technical assistance programs. The U.S. 

share of the funds received from the UN regular budget totals approximately 

$7.3 million. The United States also made a voluntary contribution of

$150,000 to an ESCAP narcotics demand-reduction initiative. Of the 155

professional positions in the ESCAP Secretariat, 11 were held by American 

citizens. 

Social Issues 

Commission for Social Development 

The Commission for Social Development is a functional body of the 

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) that meets annually to advise

ECOSOC on social policies and issues. The 46-member Commission is the 

key UN body for review of the implementation of the outcome of the 1995

World Summit for Social Development. The priority theme at the 42nd 

session of the Commission, held in New York February 4–13 and 20, 2004,

was improving public sector effectiveness, especially in providing equitable, 

adequate, and accessible social services to all, and improving dialogue and

partnership between countries and between public and private sectors. The 

U.S. delegation took a leading role in the discussion on the related topics of

encouraging governments to uphold the rule of law, combat corruption, and 

promote and protect human rights. The United States also joined consensus to 

recommend that ECOSOC adopt a resolution calling for “Implementation of

the social objectives of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development” that 

61 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

stressed the need for renewed political will to invest in people and their wellbeing, in order to advance social development.

In 2004, countries and societies around the globe celebrated the Tenth 

Anniversary of the International Year of the Family. The U.S. Government 

actively welcomed and supported the commemoration of this vital institution.

At the policy level, the United States pushed the Commission to recommend to 

the General Assembly the adoption of a draft resolution that included 

references to the family as the basic social unit of society and the

responsibilities of both parents in raising their children. The United States

also initiated a draft resolution at the Commission on fatherhood. Separately,

the United States led the General Assembly to consensus on a resolution 

celebrating the Tenth Anniversary. The need to redouble efforts regarding 

maternal mortality was addressed by an expert panel organized by the United

States. These measures reinforced U.S. policy that stable families are the core 

of a healthy and productive society. In furtherance of this, the United States

participated in related international activities such as the International 

Conference on Family (in Doha, Qatar), ECOSOC’s High Level Segment,

International Family Day programming at the United Nations, and the World

Family Policy Forum. The U.S. Mission to the United Nations arranged the 

use of UN premises for American nongovernmental organization International

Federation for Family Development’s 16th International Family Conference. 

Throughout the year, senior U.S. officials, including First Lady Laura Bush, 

advocated defending and strengthening the institution of the family. The 

United States subsequently submitted a report for the General Assembly’s 

consideration on the situation and policy of family in the United States entitled

“A Celebration of the Family—Observance of the Tenth Anniversary of the

International Year of the Family.” 

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 

The UN General Assembly decided in 2001 to establish an ad hoc

committee to determine whether there was a need for a human rights

convention that would focus exclusively on the situation of persons with

disabilities. During the Second Ad Hoc Committee session in June 2003, 

member states determined that the creation of a new international instrument

would be beneficial. The United States, a leader in protecting the rights of 

persons with disabilities, advocated that the best way to protect the rights of

persons with disabilities was through the enactment and enforcement of

national legislation. Consequently, the United States decided to act as an

expert resource for the Committee in the process of considering a convention,

while not intending to accede to a new international agreement. 

In 2004, a Working Group of the Ad Hoc Committee, consisting of

designated member states and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),

prepared a draft text of a Convention, and the full UN Ad Hoc Committee 

reconvened for two two-week sessions as it continued the work of elaborating 

an international agreement. At the Committee’s third session, which convened 

May 24–June 4, it heard proposals from nearly 40 countries for amendments to

62 
Economic and Social Affairs 

the Working Group text, but there was little detailed discussion of these 

proposals. The United States did not have occasion to intervene in the plenary 

discussions of textual amendments. It did, however, participate in a Japanesesponsored seminar on the concept of reasonable accommodation, an area of 

considerable U.S. expertise, and held a briefing for NGOs to explain the U.S.

position on the Convention. 

The fourth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, which met August 23–

September 3, similarly made incremental progress. The Committee finished a

first reading of the draft text, began a second reading, and had a detailed 

discussion of four draft articles. During the discussion, the U.S. delegation 

lent its expertise on domestic disability law and practice as well as selected

matters of international law and practice. The United States organized a panel

discussion on “civic access” for persons with disabilities under domestic law, 

led by disability experts from the U.S. Departments of Justice and Health and 

Human Services and from the U.K. and Australian delegations, and continued

to meet with U.S. NGOs. The UN Committee’s negotiations are expected to 

continue at least through 2006. 

Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice 

The UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice 

(Crime Commission) is the principal UN policy-making body on criminal 

justice issues. The 40-member Commission convenes annually in Vienna. 

Many decisions from these annual sessions are forwarded to the UN Economic 

and Social Council (or occasionally to the UN General Assembly) for 

endorsement. 

The 13th session of the Crime Commission convened May 11–20,

2004, in Vienna. The theme of the Commission was rule of law in promoting 

development. The Commission produced 20 resolutions, including several

resolutions drafted or cosponsored by the United States in the areas of

terrorism prevention, countering money laundering, asset-sharing, and

promoting the recently completed UN Convention against Corruption. These 

resolutions direct the work of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 

towards areas where it has relevant expertise and can best complement U.S.

bilateral assistance efforts. During the session, the United States voiced its 

strong support for efforts to promote the implementation of the UN 

Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and urged other states to

join in contributing resources for this work. The United States also indicated 

its intention to support similar UNODC-led efforts to promote the ratification 

and implementation of the UN Convention against Corruption. 

The UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime entered 

into force on September 29, 2003. Pursuant to article 321 of the Convention, a 

Conference of the Parties (COP) to the convention was established to improve 

the capacity of States Parties to combat transnational organized crime and to 

promote and review the implementation of this convention. The United States 

participated in the first COP, held from June 28–July 9, 2004, in Vienna. 

Despite initial concerns about a limited U.S. role as a signatory and not a 

63 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

party, the U.S. delegation was able to participate fully in negotiation

throughout the session. Countries arrived at an agreement balancing the need 

to focus on reviewing implementation of the criminalization provisions of the

convention and protocols, and permitting consideration of international

cooperation and technical assistance to deal with problems that may be

identified. 

The United States joined consensus in supporting Thailand’s offer to 

host the 11th Crime Congress to be held in Bangkok in 2005. The theme of 

the Congress will be “Synergies and responses: strategic alliances against 

transnational crime.” 

International Drug Control 

Both the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the

International Narcotics Control Board, based in Vienna, support U.S. drug 

control objectives. The UN drug control conventions (the 1961 Single 

Convention on Narcotic Drugs as amended by the 1972 Protocol, the 1971

Convention on Psychotropic Substances, and the 1988 UN Convention

Against the Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances)

provide the framework for international drug control, including prohibiting 

cultivation of opium, cocaine, and marijuana; targeting drug traffickers and

their proceeds; promoting national campaigns on drug abuse prevention and 

treatment; and regulating precursor chemicals used in the production of illicit

drugs. 

U.S. support during 2004 had significant impact on the operations

and expansion of UN counternarcotics programs and policy. UNODC used 

funds provided by the United States to support global programs to prevent

money laundering and terrorist financing, enhance precursor chemical control,

and provide legal advice on treaty implementation. Specifically, the UNODC

used the U.S. contribution to fund major alternative development projects in

Laos and chemical control projects in East, South, and Central Asia, as well as 

judicial/prosecutorial training in Africa. 

The 53-member UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), of

which the United States has been a member since 1946, is the central policymaking body within the UN system for dealing with drug-related matters. The

CND held its 47th session in Vienna March 15–19, 2004. During the regular

CND session, delegates reviewed the worldwide activities and management of

the UNODC and were briefed on various aspects of the global narcotics

situation, with special emphasis on synthetic drugs classed as Amphetamine 

Type Stimulants. 

The United States achieved its major goals during the CND session,

including the adoption of the U.S. cosponsored resolution on the unauthorized 

international sale of licit controlled substances over the Internet. In addition,

the United States strongly supported a resolution on strategic management, 

encouraging UNODC to continue to develop a results-oriented, strategic 

framework for its work, incorporating program evaluation and good

governance as key pillars in the ongoing efforts to solidify the merging of the 

64 
Economic and Social Affairs 

drugs and crime programs. Other resolutions of particular interest focused on

treatment of opiate-dependent persons, chemical precursor control, and efforts

to combat the drug trade in Afghanistan.

The UNODC’s assessed budget for 2004 was approximately $15.5

million, of which the United States paid 22 percent, or $3.4 million. In

addition, the United States made a voluntary contribution of $18 million (23 

percent of total voluntary contributions). In 2004, UNODC employed 177 

professionals; 17 were American citizens. 

International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) 

The 13-member International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) is an

independent, quasi-judicial control body, which has a mandate to promote 

government compliance with the provisions of the international drug control

treaties and to assist governments in this effort. The Board meets periodically 

to monitor the implementation of the drug control treaties and the international 

movement of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Retired 

Ambassador Melvin Levitsky, former Assistant Secretary of State for 

International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, was elected to the Board in

October 2003. Although board members serve in their individual capacity, the

presence of an American viewpoint is invaluable to promote U.S. policy 

interests. 

The INCB presented its annual report to the Commission on Narcotic

Drugs in March 2004. The INCB noted an 11 percent reduction in youth drug

use in the United States, and corrected a misstatement in the report questioning

these results. The INCB criticized the use of various harm reduction policies, 

singling out drug injection rooms, stating they contravened drug conventions,

and that many other harm reduction policies verged on contravention of those 

conventions. The United States endorsed the INCB position on harm

reduction and noted that the United States rejects “any initiative that condemns 

persons to a lifetime of drug addiction, for whatever reason, including the

convenience of the community.” 

Human Rights 

Status of Women 

The UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), established in

1946 as a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council, seeks to

improve the situation of women in the areas of political participation, 

economic opportunity, social development, health, and education. The United

States has successfully used the annual CSW meetings to highlight U.S.

activities to improve conditions for women throughout the world. The United 

States is one of 45 members of the Commission. 

The CSW convened its 48th session in New York March 1–12, 2004. 

The U.S. delegation was headed by Ambassador Ellen Sauerbrey, and

included Dorothy Bush Koch, Elizabeth Cheney, and Ann Korkery as Public 

Delegates. At each session, member states consider two main themes from the

12 areas of concern identified in the Beijing Platform for Action (1995). In 

65 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

2004, member states adopted Agreed Conclusions on the role of men and boys

in achieving gender equality, incorporating U.S. language on the involvement

of fathers. Member states also adopted Agreed Conclusions on women’s equal

participation in conflict prevention, management and conflict resolution and in

post-conflict peace-building. 

Members adopted the following resolutions by consensus: “Situation 

of women and girls in Afghanistan,” “Revitalization and strengthening of the 

United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the 

Advancement of Women,” “Women, the girl child and HIV/AIDS,” “Release 

of women and children taken hostage, including those subsequently

imprisoned, in armed conflicts,” “Mainstreaming a gender perspective into all

policies and programs in the United Nations system” (cosponsored by the 

United States), and “Preparations for the forty-ninth session of the 

Commission.” The United States voted against the resolution “Situation of 

and assistance to Palestinian women,” as it does each year, because it was a

one-sided resolution that singled out Israel for criticism while ignoring the role 

Palestinians and Arab states played in prolonging the crisis. The resolution

also addressed a number of issues, including territory and refugees, which

must be resolved by negotiations between the two sides. 

The United States sponsored a panel entitled “New Approaches in the

Fight Against Trafficking,” which featured speakers from the Southeast

European Cooperative Initiative Center in Romania, the Swedish Government,

and the International Justice Mission, a U.S. nongovernmental organization.

In addition, the United States hosted a luncheon on U.S. efforts to promote

democracy and women’s rights in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere in the 

Near East. 

Commission on Human Rights 

The UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR) is the principal UN

organ for achieving the UN Charter objective of promoting respect for human

rights. It is composed of 53 members, each elected for a three-year term. The 

CHR held its 60th session in Geneva, Switzerland, March 15–April 23, 2004. 

Ambassador Richard S. Williamson headed the U.S. delegation and Mark 

Leland, Tami Longaberger, Hai Van Ha, and Luis Zuñiga served as Public

Delegates. The CHR adopted 87 resolutions and 25 decisions. The Economic 

and Social Council adopted the CHR report and more than 47 resolutions

dealing with human rights issues. The UN General Assembly adopted more

than 70 resolutions on human rights, as well as women’s, social, and related

issues that were considered by the General Assembly’s Third Committee. In 

addition, in a variety of other UN fora in 2004, the United States continued to

call attention to specific situations of human rights abuses in various countries. 

The United States worked with Latin American partners to cosponsor 

a Honduran resolution condemning the situation of human rights in Cuba,

which was adopted by the Commission. This was a major priority for the

United States, and the resolution was adopted. The United States partnered 

with the European Union (EU) in co-introducing a resolution on human rights

66 
Economic and Social Affairs 

problems in Turkmenistan that was also adopted. The United States worked

closely with the EU to support resolutions on Belarus, Burma (Myanmar), and

the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The CHR also adopted several

resolutions providing for advisory services to countries in Africa including 

Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Somalia. 

The United States, along with East Timor, Peru, and Romania, 

introduced a resolution on consolidation and promotion of democracy which 

was adopted by the Commission. The resolution stressed the need for UN 

member states to focus and contribute to democratic institution building, also

establishing a democracy “focal point” in the Office of the High 

Commissioner for Human Rights. The General Assembly also adopted a

similar U.S.-sponsored resolution at its 59th session. 

The United States continued to oppose, publicly and in diplomacy, 

repeated efforts by several members to adopt unbalanced resolutions about 

Israel. The United States also opposed a special sitting to discuss Israel’s 

assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yasin. The sitting was called for by Pakistan, 

on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). It resulted in a

resolution, which the United States also opposed, calling on Israel to “accord 

fullest respect to the principles of international humanitarian law and desist

from all forms of violation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian 

Territory.” On April 22, three statements, in lieu of another special sitting

regarding Israel’s assassination of Abdelaziz Rantissi, were made by Israel, the

Palestinian Observer, and Pakistan on behalf of the OIC. There was no 

resolution associated with this discussion. 

Cuba put forward a resolution, critiquing the U.S. embargo of Cuba

as a de facto human rights problem, which was adopted. The United States 

maintains that the embargo is a bilateral issue and the Commission on Human 

Rights is not an appropriate forum for its discussion. Cuba also introduced a 

resolution that accused the United States of depriving detainees at 

Guantanamo and elsewhere of their rights and called for CHR representatives 

to report on the situation of prisoners at the U.S. naval base. The U.S. 

delegation led the campaign opposing the proposed resolution by highlighting,

among other things, the judicial processes pending in the United States, 

ongoing visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross with detainees, 

and the U.S. record of cooperating with CHR representatives. In the end, 

Cuba failed to muster sufficient support for its resolution to present it for a 

vote, and withdrew it.

A resolution on the situation of human rights in Sudan failed to

present a strong and accurate description of the Sudanese government’s

deplorable human rights record, and the United States opposed adoption of its

weak text, although the Commission adopted the resolution. 

Also at the CHR, U.S.-supported attempts to condemn the human

rights situation in Zimbabwe and China fell victim to no-action motions, a 

procedural tactic that blocks formal consideration of a resolution on an up-ordown vote. No-action motions also plagued the Third Committee of the

67 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

General Assembly in its fall 2004 session, where separate resolutions on the 

human rights situations in Belarus, Sudan, and Zimbabwe were derailed. At

the same time, the United States worked closely with like-minded delegations 

to secure adoption of resolutions condemning human rights violations in

Burma, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, and Turkmenistan. 

The United States achieved positive results in addressing antiSemitism at the CHR. References condemning anti-Semitism were included 

in resolutions on “The Incompatibility between Democracy and Racism,” “The

Elimination of all Forms of Religious Intolerance,” and “The World 

Conference against Racism.” References to anti-Semitism also were included 

in the General Assembly Third Committee resolutions on religious intolerance 

and racism. 

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 

The High Commissioner for Human Rights is the principal UN

official responsible for advancing UN human rights activities and is 

responsible to the Secretary-General. Under the High Commissioner’s

leadership, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

works to ensure the practical implementation of universally recognized human

rights norms, including by carrying out the tasks assigned by UN human rights

bodies. In February, the Secretary-General appointed, and the General

Assembly approved by acclamation, Louise Arbour (Canada) as the High

Commissioner for a four-year term, and she took office in August. The United 

States, through its mission to the United Nations in Geneva, has worked with 

the new High Commissioner to build a strong cooperative relationship. 

OHCHR’s operations in 2004 included wide-ranging activities such 

as the establishment of a residential office in Guatemala; a commission of 

inquiry for Cote d’Ivoire; a jointly funded UN seminar on Good Governance

in South Korea; and reports of the High Commissioner on the human rights 

situation in Darfur, Iraq, and Sudan. 

In 2004, the United States sponsored a resolution on consolidation

and promotion of democracy at the 2004 UN Commission on Human Rights

that called for the establishment of a democracy “Focal Point” within the 

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The United States

donated $200,000 to help fund the position, which serves as a point of contact

for states that are interested in improving and promoting democracy. 

In April, Acting High Commissioner for Human Rights Bertrand

Ramcharan stated his intention of compiling a report on the human rights

situation in Iraq. The United States played a key role in assisting Mr. 

Ramcharan to collect information from the Coalition Provisional Authority

(CPA) on a range of human rights issues pertaining to CPA policies for the

promotion and protection of human rights of Iraqi civilians. 

A key priority for the United States in 2004 was working with the

High Commissioner to ensure sufficient and timely deployment of OHCHR

human rights monitors to Darfur, Sudan, in order to secure facts and evidence

68 
Economic and Social Affairs 

about the genocide taking place there. The United States coordinated regularly

with the High Commissioner to request an increased OHCHR presence in the

field. In 2004, the UN Secretariat was slow to assist OHCHR in recruiting and

deploying monitors. 

The United States contributed $2.5 million to Office of the High

Commissioner on Human Rights to support a range of activities, including

programs to promote human rights monitoring and field activities in the 

context of peacekeeping and peace-building. 

UN Democracy Fund 

Throughout 2004, the United States sought to increase cooperation

among democratic countries in order to promote human rights, the rule of law, 

and freedom in countries undergoing transitions to democracy. On September

21, President Bush called for the creation of a UN Democracy Fund in his

address to the UN General Assembly. He said the Fund “would help countries 

lay the foundations of democracy by instituting the rule of law, independent

courts, a free press, political parties, and trade unions.” The President also 

said that to show its commitment to the Fund, the United States would make

an initial contribution. He urged all other nations to contribute as well. 

The U.S. vision for the fund is to provide the capacity building and 

training to nations transitioning to democracy or that consolidate democratic

institutions. The United States believed the Fund also represented an 

opportunity for democracy caucus members to focus and cooperate on projects 

that can provide concrete assistance to countries seeking to democratize. 

Since President Bush’s speech to the General Assembly, the United 

States worked diligently with other UN member states and with the UN 

Secretariat toward the creation of the Fund. During October, November, and 

December, the United States promoted the Fund to other countries through 

communications to participants in the Community of Democracies, in multiple

senior-level meetings involving Washington and U.S. Mission to the UN

officials in New York, with UN member state representatives, and officials of 

the UN Secretariat, as well as in numerous bilateral exchanges in Washington

with interested nations. 

In 2004, many states expressed political support for the Fund. They 

included Bangladesh, Cape Verde, Chile, Croatia, the Czech Republic, 

Germany, Hungary, India, Italy, Poland, South Korea, and Sri Lanka. India 

pledged $5 million for the Fund. 

Democracy Caucus 

The United States believes that democratic nations must work more 

closely together in order to help the United Nations live up to its founding

principles. Democratic nations share a common commitment to protect human 

rights and fundamental freedoms. The UN democracy caucus, a network of 

democratic nations working together, will facilitate the advancement of the 

work of the United Nations in such areas as human rights, good governance,

and the rule of law. The UN democracy caucus is comprised of approximately 

69 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

130 countries that are members of the Community of Democracies. The 

democracy caucus was not intended to supplant long-standing regional or

other groupings, but rather to provide an added mechanism for like-minded

democratic nations to cooperate. It serves as a supplementary network that 

countries use to cooperate on resolutions and alternatives. 

At the 2004 Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the United States 

increased the democracy caucus’s profile by joining other democracies to

mutually support CHR resolutions dealing with democracy and good 

governance. Specifically, the United States and democracy caucus members

East Timor, Peru, and Romania achieved adoption of a resolution on

consolidation and promotion of democracy. This resolution recognized the 

need for UN members to contribute to democratic institution-building, and 

created a focal point for democracy promotion in the Office of the High 

Commissioner for Human Rights. 

In the Third Committee of the General Assembly in 2004, the United 

States strongly supported the work of Chile, which chaired the first formal

meetings of the democracy caucus at the United Nations. Participating 

governments agreed to support four selected UN resolutions by giving them

positive consideration. These four resolutions, “Torture and other inhuman or

other degrading treatment or punishment,” submitted by Denmark; “Promotion

and cooperation among religions,” submitted by the Philippines; “Enhancing 

the role of regional and subregional and other organizations and arrangements

in promoting and consolidating democracy,” submitted by East Timor, Peru,

Romania, and the United States; and “Improvement of the status of women in

the UN system,” submitted by Australia, were adopted with broad support. 

NGO Committee 

The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Committee on

Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO Committee) is the UN body that

adjudicates requests by nongovernmental organizations for accreditation to 

participate in ECOSOC and its subsidiaries’ meetings. The 19 members of the 

Committee in 2004 were Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire,

Cuba, France, Germany, India, Iran, Pakistan, Peru, Romania, Russia, Senegal,

Sudan, Turkey, United States, and Zimbabwe. Terms for Committee 

membership are four years; the U.S. term will end on December 31, 2006. 

The 2004 regular session met during the period May 10–28. During a brief 

meeting on June 23, the Committee decided against holding a resumed 

session, instead choosing to hold two sessions in 2005. 

The Committee recommended 114 NGOs for consultative status with 

ECOSOC; 27 of these are U.S. based. The Committee also upgraded the

classification of seven organizations and took note of 57 quadrennial reports.

The Committee deferred action on 41 applications and six quadrennial reports,

and decided not to recommend the following four NGOs for accreditation 

based on complaints from member states: Conscience Africane (Cameroon),

31st of December Women Movement (Nigeria), Alliance Vietnam Liberté 

(Vietnam), and International Association Promoting Human Rights (Cuba).

70 
Economic and Social Affairs 

Cuba accused the International Association Promoting Human Rights, a 

Mexico-based NGO, of working to overthrow the Government of Cuba and of

having ties to groups targeting Cuba with terrorism. The United States, along 

with other members of the Committee, requested a delay in the consideration

of this NGO’s application for accreditation. The Committee rejected the U.S. 

request for a delay, and then voted against recommending consultative status

for the NGO. 

U.S. delegates were actively engaged in discussions on both regular

accreditation and suspensions of NGOs. The Committee voted to suspend the

consultative status of Cuban-backed NGO Tupaj Amaru for one year, based on 

the U.S. complaint that Tupaj Amaru members had threatened the U.S. 

delegation and its head, Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, at the 2003 UN

Commission on Human Rights. The Committee also suspended, in a close 

vote, the Italian NGO Transnational Radical Party, a consistent advocate of

democracy promotion and a UN democracy caucus, for three years` based on a 

complaint made by Vietnam. 

Humanitarian Issues 

World Food Program (WFP) 

The World Food Program (WFP) is the UN’s front-line agency in the

fight against global hunger. In 2004, WFP delivered $2.9 billion worth of 

food aid (5.1 million tons of food) to 113 million people in 80 countries, 

including 26 million people in Iraq, through one of the largest operations in

WFP history. Nearly half the worldwide food aid in 2004 was supplied by

WFP and 99 percent of it went to the world’s least developed countries where 

it was needed most. James T. Morris (United States) became WFP’s 10th

Executive Director in April 2002. WFP’s governing body, the Executive

Board, has 36 members, including the United States. 

WFP’s Strategic Plan for 2004–2007 contains the following five 

strategic priorities: to save lives in crisis situations; to protect livelihoods in 

crisis situations and enhance resilience to shocks; to support improved

nutrition and health status of children, mothers, and other vulnerable people; to

support access to education and reduce gender disparity in access to education 

and skills training; and to help governments establish and manage national

food-assistance programs. 

In 2004, WFP helped the United States achieve its humanitarian and 

development goals, carrying out programs in Sudan, Iraq, Ethiopia, southern

Africa, Haiti, and North Korea, among other locations. In response to the 

crisis in Darfur, Sudan, WFP reached an agreement with the Libyan

Government for a new supply route to the refugee camps in eastern Chad

through the Saharan desert. The first shipment of U.S. food assistance made 

its way through the Libyan Corridor in November. In addition, by the end of 

2004, WFP was feeding 1.7 million people per month in the Darfur region. In

September, an inter-agency team led by WFP conducted a Food Security and

71 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Nutrition Survey of internally displaced persons and residents in Darfur—the

most comprehensive survey of its kind. 

In Iraq, WFP continued to support the Ministry of Trade in ensuring

regular food rations for the Iraqi people. WFP procured and secured the 

transport of 1.6 million tons of food, on behalf of the Iraqi Ministry of Trade,

for a three-month buffer stock. This was the largest single amount ever

procured by WFP. 

WFP had school feeding programs in 19 out of the 25 countries most 

affected by HIV/AIDS. WFP also provided take-home rations for vulnerable

children and orphans. In partnership with the Joint UN Program on

HIV/AIDS, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the U.S. Agency for 

International Development, WFP carried out rapid assessments and developed

action plans for the growing orphan crisis in 17 sub-Saharan countries. Food

and education were at the top of the list for responding to the crisis. 

In 2004, WFP fed more than 16.6 million schoolchildren in 72

countries. Working with national governments, local authorities, and other 

aid groups, WFP used food to attract children to schools in areas where

enrollment ratios are lowest and where school feeding will have the greatest

impact. WFP served as the implementing partner for five projects funded

through the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child

Nutrition Program, which provides for donations of U.S. agricultural products, 

as well as financial and technical assistance, for school feeding and maternal

and child nutrition projects in low-income, food-deficit countries that are 

committed to universal education. These projects (in Cote d’Ivoire, Gambia,

Kenya, Malawi, and Mozambique) reached an estimated beneficiary

population of over 1.3 million children. 

Throughout 2004, WFP focused on ways to become more effective,

efficient, and responsive. It strengthened its ability to assess vulnerability and 

emergency needs and improved its internal business process review. It also

expanded its donor base by attracting new donors, including from the private 

sector. In 2004, 16 of the top 20 donors increased their contributions, with

France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Republic of Korea, Malawi, the

Netherlands, and Spain increasing their contributions by more than 15 percent.

In addition, eight governments contributed to WFP for the first time in 2004. 

Contributions from private donors in 2004 totaled $61.6 million in cash and

in-kind gifts. 

WFP increased its work with other UN organizations. In 2004, the 

Food and Agriculture Organization and WFP collaborated on 17 joint crop and 

food-supply assessment missions in Africa, Asia, and Central America. WFP 

collaborated with the International Fund for Agricultural Development on 

seven projects in Asia and Africa. WFP also developed close working

relations with UNICEF (on increasing primary school enrollment and retention 

of young girls, reducing malnutrition, and reducing the risk and burden of

HIV/AIDS); the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (assisting 2.8 million 

72 
Economic and Social Affairs 

refugees in 29 countries); and the World Health Organization (on nutrition 

strategies that improve education, health, and nutritional outcomes). 

WFP’s operational expenditures for 2004 were allocated among 

geographic regions as follows: sub-Saharan Africa—50 percent; North Africa 

and the Middle East—31 percent; Asia—15 percent; Latin America and the

Caribbean—two percent; Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent

States region—one percent.

The 2004–2005 budget of $4.8 billion endeavors to raise funds for 

100 percent of all approved programs and provide the technical support and 

emergency preparedness capacity so that WFP can carry out its work 

effectively. The budget, which is based on anticipated needs rather than on 

past commitments or projected donor funding, as previous budgets had been, 

is $1.6 billion higher than the original budget estimate for 2002–2003. 

Because contributions to WFP are entirely voluntary, this increase did not 

affect the United States. 

WFP operates exclusively from voluntary contributions of 

commodities and cash donated by governments and other donors. In 2004, 88 

percent of its resources went to meet emergency and protracted relief

humanitarian needs; 12 percent went to development programs. In 2004, WFP

received $2.2 billion in confirmed contributions. The United States remained 

WFP’s largest donor, contributing over $1.1 billion (47 percent). At the end of 

2004, WFP had 8,829 contract employees and 1,153 international professional

staff, 111 of whom were U.S. citizens. 

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) 

Established by the General Assembly in 1950, the office of the UN 

High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is mandated to coordinate

international efforts to protect and provide durable solutions for the world’s 

refugees. During 2004, the number of refugees identified by UNHCR fell

from 9.7 million to 9.2 million, the lowest total in almost a quarter of a

century. However, the total number of “persons of concern” to UNHCR, 

which includes refugee returnees, asylum-seekers, stateless persons, and a 

portion of the world’s internally displaced, increased from 17 million to 19.2 

million. 

In 2004, the United States and UNHCR again negotiated a

“Framework for Cooperation.” Priorities included better protection of

refugees, with special focus on women and children; establishment of

comprehensive management and oversight responsibilities to include strong 

accountability; development of standardized registration; improved 

preparedness and emergency response; development of improved information

technology and management systems; emphasis on resettlement as a key 

protection tool and durable solution; assessment of real refugee needs;

consistent use of internationally-accepted standards as the baseline for refugee

care; and improved standards of care in Africa. 

73 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UNHCR had a strong presence in Africa in 2004. Two hundred

thousand Sudanese refugees fled to Eastern Chad, increasing the demand for 

UNHCR services. UNHCR assisted 500,000 Sudanese refugees in other

countries who fled Sudan in previous years. In Darfur, UNHCR provided 

protection, shelter, and humanitarian assistance to 660,000 of the 1.8 million 

internally displaced persons (IDPs). In Central Africa and the Great Lakes

region, nearly 130,000 refugees returned home to Burundi and Angola. The 

voluntary repatriation of Somali refugees was delayed due to peace

negotiations; as a result, some 400,000 Somali refugees remained in UNHCR

camps at the end of 2004. The return of refugees and IDPs to and within 

Liberia was another key activity for UNHCR in 2004. 

Afghan refugees and returnees remained a UNHCR priority in 2004.

UNHCR and its partners (including UN agencies and nongovernmental 

organizations) helped over 760,000 Afghan refugees return home, raising the 

total number of returnees to 3.5 million since the end of 2001. UNHCR

assisted over 750,000 of the more than 2 million Afghan refugees in Iran and

Pakistan. 

The UNHCR Executive Committee (EXCOM), of which the United

States is a member, approves the budget and provides policy guidance. In 

October 2004, the EXCOM met and discussed protection and program policy, 

management and oversight, finance, and human resource issues. The U.S.

delegation worked to advance U.S. interests including strengthening efforts by

the international community to address protection and the pursuit of durable 

solutions for refugees; maximizing UNHCR’s operational performance; 

increasing coordination among UNHCR, its donors, refugee hosting countries, 

and UNHCR’s implementing and operational partners; and improving

emergency preparedness and response capacity. The United States also 

focused on security issues, the protection of women and children, and progress 

made on the High Commissioner’s Five Commitments to Refugee Women. 

In 2003, the EXCOM approved a 2004 annual budget of nearly $955

million. In addition, UNHCR issued supplemental appeals for $278 million to

aid refugees and IDPs in Sudan, returnees to Liberia and Burundi, and for

activities in Iraq. The UN regular budget accounted for about 2.5 percent of 

the overall UNHCR budget; the remainder came from donors. The United 

States, through the Department of State, donated $302 million, 25 percent of 

UNHCR’s annual budgetary needs. In 2004, UNHCR’s income was over $1 

billion, resulting in a funding shortfall of $231 million; as a result, some

operations fell below accepted standards of care. 

UNHCR operates in 121 countries with a staff of over 6,000. Of the 

more than 6,000 UNHCR employees, 1,429 are international staff, of which

117 are Americans. UNHCR hopes to increase U.S. representation within the

agency through efforts such as the recruiting visit to the United States planned 

for the fall of 2005. Officers and refugee coordinators from the State

Department worked in concert with UNHCR to ensure that the UNHCR’s

mandate was executed effectively and comprehensively. 

74 
Economic and Social Affairs 

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the 

Near East (UNRWA) 

Since 1950, the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees 

in the Near East (UNRWA) has provided education, health, and social services

to Palestinian refugees and their descendants that live in the West Bank, Gaza, 

Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. These refugees now number over 4 million.

UNRWA, which was headed in 2004 by Commissioner-General Peter Hansen

(Denmark), has 24,500 employees, most of whom are teachers. In 2004,

UNRWA spent about 54 percent of its regular budget on education, including

schools and teachers. Approximately 18 percent of its regular budget was 

devoted to health services, and another 10 percent on relief and social services. 

The United States believes that UNRWA has done a good job under very

difficult circumstances in providing for the basic humanitarian needs of 

Palestinian refugees. 

There were continued allegations regarding UNRWA employees’ 

membership in terrorist organizations and UNRWA textbooks propagating 

hatred. UNRWA maintains a corps of independent inspectors known as 

Operation Support Officers, established at U.S. urging in 2002, to prevent the 

misuse of UNRWA facilities and report on violations of UNRWA’s privileges 

and immunities. UNRWA has taken the lead in organizing tolerance

education in its schools, and the United States made substantial contributions

to develop teaching materials emphasizing human rights and tolerance for

middle school students. 

In 2004, the United States contributed $127 million to UNRWA, over

25 percent of UNRWA’s total 2004 donor funding of $500 million. This

contribution included $87 million to UNRWA’s General Fund; and $40 

million for food, shelter repair, health needs, and short–term employment in

response to UNRWA’s emergency appeal for the West Bank and Gaza. Of the

129 professional UNRWA employees, 15 were U.S. citizens. 

UN Disaster and Humanitarian Relief Activities 

In 2004, the United States and the United Nations cooperated 

extensively on disaster and humanitarian relief activities. The United States

provided leadership as a donor; as a member of UN agency governing bodies 

and support groups, including the Donor Support Group of the UN Office for

the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs; and as an advocate for improved

response by the global community to humanitarian emergencies. The United 

States also provided substantial support to UN humanitarian operations 

throughout the world, including ongoing relief efforts for complex

emergencies in Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and other

countries in conflict. 

During 2004, the United States attended preparatory meetings for the 

January 2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction to ensure that the first

such event in 10 years would produce tangible outcomes that could

significantly reduce the number or intensity of disasters. In a related 

75 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

development, the United States and the United Nations collaborated closely on 

developing ideas on how to enhance the International Strategy for Disaster

Reduction (ISDR), an office of the Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian 

Affairs. 

The United States actively engaged the United Nations and its

member states on a wide range of humanitarian and disaster related resolutions

in the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. The United 

States supported resolutions on improving the ISDR; strengthening the

coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations;

improving the safety and security of humanitarian personnel and protection of

UN personnel; and several country-specific resolutions. 

On December 26, an earthquake off the coast of Indonesia caused a

tsunami that impacted countries in south and southeast Asia and as far as

South Africa, killing over 240,000 people. The United States worked closely

with the UN Emergency Relief Coordinator and other UN agencies in the last

days of the year to start what became one of the largest humanitarian relief 

operations in history. Several government agencies, especially Departments of 

State and Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the 

U.S. Geological Survey, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, were heavily involved in the initial response, which included 

direct financial support to national authorities, UN operational agencies, and

nongovernmental organizations. The U.S. military also provided indirect

relief in the form of air support and communications. Following the tsunami 

crisis and at the request of the UN Working Group on Emergency

Telecommunications, the Department of State also arranged for an ad hoc

early warning system to be set up for relief workers in Indonesia and Thailand. 

76 
Part 3 

Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies 

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), established in 1945,

is a UN specialized agency that provides global data and expertise on

agriculture and nutrition, fisheries, forestry, and other food and agriculturerelated issues. FAO is the UN system’s largest autonomous agency, with 

headquarters in Rome, and 78 country offices and 15 regional, sub-regional,

and liaison offices, including one located in Washington, D.C. 

Jacques Diouf (Senegal), Director-General of FAO, is serving his

second six-year term. FAO’s highest policy-making body, the biennial

General Conference, comprises all 187 FAO member countries plus the 

European Commission. The General Conference determines FAO policy and 

approves FAO’s regular program of work and budget. Each biennial

Conference elects a 49-member Council that meets at least three times 

between regular Conference sessions to make recommendations to the General

Conference on budget and policy issues. The North America region, which 

comprises the United States and Canada, is allocated two seats on the Council 

and one seat each on FAO’s Program, Finance, and Constitutional and Legal

Matters (CCLM) Committees. Through December 2005, the United States 

holds the North American seat on the Finance and Joint Staff Pension

Committees; Canada holds the North American seat on the CCLM and

Program Committees. 

In 2004, the United States continued to stress more efficient use of

scarce resources and greater program effectiveness; support for FAO’s 

normative work; improvement of emergency needs assessments and response

capabilities; and continued pressure on the organization to work proactively to

hire and retain more staff from traditionally underrepresented countries. At its

127th session in November, the FAO Council agreed by consensus to launch

an independent external evaluation of FAO aimed at strengthening and 

improving the organization, a key U.S. priority. The Council established an

Inter-Sessional Working Group (ISWG), involving countries from all 

geographic regions, to formulate proposals for the scope, conduct, and

institutional arrangements for the evaluation. The ISWG will present its

recommendations to the FAO Council in 2005, assessing FAO’s strengths and 

weaknesses, and establishing a baseline upon which member states would be

able to establish priorities.

In 2004, in response to the outbreak of avian influenza, FAO

provided emergency assistance to help affected countries step up their disease 

control and surveillance programs. FAO also collaborated with the World 

Health Organization and the World Organization for Animal Health in

preparing recommendations on the prevention, control, and eradication of

avian influenza. Following the tsunami in south and southeast Asia in

77 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

December, FAO deployed international and regional fisheries and agricultural

experts to work with governments to provide immediate assistance, including 

in salinity contamination, boat and net repair, and reconstructions of food

processing facilities. At the start of the locust plague in the Sahel (a semi-arid 

area south of the Sahara Desert), FAO was at first slow to mobilize resources

and coordinate a response. The United States, in coordination with FAO and 

the locust-affected countries, developed a three-step approach—crop and

pasture protection, swarm reduction, and capacity strengthening. The United

States also provided financial, technical, and logistic support to FAO for locust 

control. 

FAO fulfills an important function in providing comprehensive data 

for all agricultural commodities, forestry and fishery products, and related

ecosystems. FAO “State of the World” compilations on food and agriculture, 

forests, fisheries and aquaculture, and food security represent the latest 

analyses on major areas within FAO’s competence. In 2004, FAO’s report on 

the State of Food and Agriculture (entitled “Agricultural Biotechnology:

Meeting the Needs of the Poor?”) highlighted the potential for agricultural

biotechnology to address world hunger, a view long-held by the U.S.

Government. 

The United States participated in the Inter-Governmental Working 

Group for the “Elaboration of Voluntary Guidelines to Support Member

States’ Efforts to Achieve the Progressive Realization of the Right to 

Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security.” The Working

Group, which was established as a result of the 2002 World Food Summit:

“Five Years Later,” completed its work in September 2004. During the 

negotiating process, the United States served as the North American member

of the “Bureau,” which assisted the Chair in decisions involving the

guidelines’ text and the negotiating process. In the negations, the United 

States ensured that the guidelines established a link between good governance 

and food security and were consistent with U.S. views on the distinction

between political and civil rights (which should be immediately realizable) and 

economic rights (which do not create specific legal entitlements and require 

economic growth to be achieved). In joining consensus on the adoption of the

voluntary guidelines, the United States submitted a written statement for the 

record, which reiterated U.S. views on the text of the guidelines and on 

economic, social, and cultural rights. 

The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and 

Agriculture entered into force in June 2004. It established a transparent

system to facilitate access to plant genetic resources and to share the benefits. 

The United States signed but did not ratify the treaty. Negotiations were 

underway on a “material transfer agreement” that set terms for access and 

benefit sharing.

In November 2004, FAO and the U.S. Peace Corps signed an

agreement to strengthen collaboration in their efforts to help improve the 

conditions of rural populations around the world. The agreement would also

78
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

enhance prospects for Peace Corps volunteers to take up professional positions

at FAO. 

FAO is funded through contributions of its members, based on the

UN regular assessment scale, and from extra-budgetary activities carried out

with other international organizations, financial institutions, and bilateral

donors. The 32nd Conference, which met in November 2003, adopted by

consensus a $749 million program of work and budget for the 2004–2005 

biennium. It also adopted a “split assessment” mechanism that henceforth

assesses contributions partly in dollars and partly in euros. The U.S. annual

assessment of 22 percent (paid partly in dollars and partly in euros) was $89.7 

million in 2004. 

In 2004, the United States also provided $50,000 in voluntary 

contributions to FAO for an expert group meeting on the material transfer

agreement or for other events associated with the International Treaty on Plant 

Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. 

At the end of 2004, FAO employed 3,811 staff from all funding

sources; and had 1,127 staff in posts subject to geographic distribution, of

which 147, or about 13 percent, were American citizens. Both the number and 

percentage of Americans in posts subject to geographic distribution have

improved slightly but consistently since 2002. In 2004, U.S. citizens held the 

two senior positions of Deputy Director-General and Assistant DirectorGeneral. 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), established in 

1957, serves core U.S. interests in nuclear non-proliferation, safety, 

counterterrorism, and national security by implementing international nuclear 

safeguards, promoting physical protection of nuclear and radiological material, 

and promoting nuclear safety. In 2004, IAEA membership rose to 138 

countries with the addition of Mauritania. The 35-member Board of

Governors, where the United States holds a de facto permanent seat, is 

responsible for directing and overseeing the Agency’s policies and program

implementation. The Board meets in Vienna five times, in March, June, twice 

in September, and November. The General Conference, attended by all 

members in September, carries out broad oversight of the IAEA’s work by

approving the recommendations and decisions of the Board. The fourth

Director-General of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei (Egypt), assumed office 

on December 1, 1997. He was elected to a second four-year term at the

General Conference in September 2001 and indicated that he was available for

a third term in 2005. 

In conjunction with U.S. leadership on safeguards development, the 

United States has worked steadily to prepare for ratification and entry into

force of the U.S. Additional Protocol. A central goal of President Bush’s 

nuclear non-proliferation policy, as he stated in his nonproliferation speech to

the National Defense University on February 11, 2004, is the universal

 79
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

adoption of the Model Additional Protocol (AP). This Model Protocol was 

approved by the IAEA in 1997 and provides for stronger safeguards

provisions. Although all five nuclear weapons states have signed APs, and the 

United Kingdom and France are implementing their protocols, only the United 

States accepted the full text of the Additional Protocol, adding on a National

Security Exclusion. In 2002, President Bush sent the AP to the Senate for its 

advice and consent to ratification, which the Senate provided on March 31,

2004. Congress must now adopt implementing legislation for certain 

provisions before its entry into force. 

As the number of states acceding to IAEA safeguards has increased, 

the number and complexity of nuclear facilities subject to safeguards have also 

grown. Most states abide by their commitments to the IAEA and the Nuclear 

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but the IAEA safeguards system must also 

deal with those few who do not. Iraq, North Korea (DPRK), Iran, and Libya 

were named as violating their IAEA safeguards obligations and conducting 

clandestine nuclear fuel cycle activities. 

Iraq 

In June, the U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense completed a 

joint operation to secure and remove from Iraq radiological and nuclear

materials that could potentially be used in a radiological dispersal device or

diverted to support a nuclear weapons program. In this operation, 1.77 metric 

tons of low-enriched uranium and about 1,000 radiological sources were

removed from the country. The IAEA conducted an annual physical inventory

verification of remaining nuclear material at Tuwaitha under Iraq’s safeguards

agreement in July and in his semi-annual report to the UN Security Council in

October, the IAEA Director-General noted that the Iraqi Interim Government

requested IAEA assistance in the sale of the remaining nuclear material at 

Tuwaitha, with the exception of a small quantity to be retained for research 

purposes. 

North Korea 

Since North Korea expelled IAEA inspectors in December 2002 and 

announced its withdrawal from the NPT in January 2003, the United States has 

sought a peaceful and diplomatic resolution to the situation through Six-Party 

Talks with China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, and Russia. The last 

round of Six-Party Talks in 2004 was held in June. Meanwhile, the IAEA

continued to press DPRK for compliance with its safeguards agreement, and to 

prepare for inspections to support any diplomatic solution that might be 

achieved. 

Iran 

In Iran, the IAEA continued its extensive investigation in response to

public revelations in 2002 about clandestine Iranian nuclear activities. Dr. 

ElBaradei issued a fourth report on Iran on February 2004, which documented 

Iran’s failure to declare its possession of advanced P-2 centrifuge designs and

80
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

to clarify the purpose of its experiments to produce polonium-210. In March,

the IAEA Board adopted a resolution deploring Iran’s failure to declare these 

P-2 centrifuge designs and associate research and repeated calls for Iran to 

take all necessary steps to resolve outstanding issues. The Board deferred

consideration of these and other failures until its June meeting and called on 

the IAEA to continue its investigation and verification work in Iran.

Dr. ElBaradei’s fifth report on Iran, issued in June, identified a 

number of instances where the IAEA caught Iran in further deception about its 

past activities and underscored in detail Iran’s ongoing lack of adherence to its 

own pledge to suspend all enrichment-related activity. In response, the IAEA 

Board adopted a resolution deploring Iran’s insufficient cooperation and again 

calling on Iran to fully suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing

activities, ratify the Additional Protocol, and cooperate fully with the IAEA. 

Iran announced the following week that it would abandon its past pledges to 

the Governments of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany (the EU3) not

to manufacture centrifuge parts or to assemble or test centrifuges. Despite

repeated EU3 calls on Iran to recommit to such a suspension, Iran refused to

do so. 

Dr. ElBaradei issued his sixth report on Iran’s nuclear program in

September. That report confirmed that Iran had not resolved a number of

issues concerning its nuclear program that had been raised in earlier IAEA

reports. The September report confirmed that Iran abandoned the pledge it

made to the EU3 to suspend all enrichment-related activities, a pledge the 

IAEA further confirmed Iran never fully implemented. The report made clear 

that while Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA was improving, it was neither full 

nor proactive. Later that month, the IAEA Board adopted a resolution calling 

on Iran to cooperate fully with the IAEA to ratify the Additional Protocol, and

to suspend fully and immediately all enrichment-related and reprocessing

activity. The Board also requested that Dr. ElBaradei verify those steps before

the November Board meeting. 

In November, Iran signed an agreement with the EU3 committing 

Iran to sustain a full suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing

activities to be verified by the IAEA, and to provide full cooperation to the 

IAEA. That agreement also launched negotiations between Iran and the EU3 

on “mutually acceptable long-term arrangements” regarding Iran’s nuclear 

program, calling on Iran to provide “objective guarantees that Iran’s nuclear 

program is exclusively for peaceful purposes.” In exchange, the EU3 agreed

to provide Iran with “firm guarantees on nuclear, technological, and economic

cooperation and firm commitments on security issues.” 

Immediately following signing of the EU3-Iran agreement, Dr. 

ElBaradei provided to the Board his seventh report on Iran, which summarized 

the previous six reports; included a list of Iran’s past safeguards breaches and 

failures; and provided new findings regarding Iran’s failure to respond to

outstanding IAEA requests for information and Iran’s failure to address IAEA 

concerns with Iran’s claims concerning its past experiments. 

 81
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

In a November resolution, the IAEA Board of Governors welcomed 

the EU3-Iran agreement and called on Iran to sustain fully its suspension 

commitments. The resolution also called on the IAEA to continue its 

investigations into Iran’s nuclear activities, called on Iran to cooperate fully

with the IAEA, and requested the Director-General report to the Board as

appropriate on his findings. 

Libya 

In contrast, in the fall of 2003, Libya voluntarily disclosed an active

nuclear weapons program in violation of its nuclear nonproliferation

obligations. In December 2003, Libya announced its intention to eliminate its

nuclear weapons program and abide by the NPT and its IAEA safeguards

agreement, and agreed to act as if the Additional Protocol were in force. The 

IAEA determined to begin more comprehensive verification work in January

2004. During these inspections, Libyan officials informed the IAEA that since 

1980 Libya had failed to declare the import of uranium and uranium

compounds, uranium conversion activities, uranium enrichment activities, 

irradiation and reprocessing experiments, and nuclear weapon design

documentation. 

Libya also provided the IAEA with information on its past nuclear 

cooperation with other countries, as well as information on some of its sources 

of sensitive nuclear technology. Accordingly, the IAEA, in concert with its

member states, undertook to investigate the supply routes and the sources of

sensitive nuclear technology and related equipment and materials. In a March

2004 resolution, the Board of Governors found that Libya’s past failures to 

meet the Safeguards Agreement constituted non-compliance and requested that 

the Director-General report the matter to the UN Security Council for 

informational purposes only while simultaneously noting and commending the

full cooperation of Libya since beginning verification activities. By

September, the IAEA assessed that aspects of Libya’s nuclear program had

been declared consistently and completely. The IAEA continued its 

verification work in Libya and will do so for the foreseeable future. 

The United States believes it is important that all NPT non-nuclear 

weapon states adopt the stronger safeguards provisions included in the 

Additional Protocol. At the end of December, 90 states had signed the

Additional Protocol, and 62 had ratified and brought it into force. During the 

year, the United States held the Presidency of the G-8 (comprised of Canada, 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United

States) and led a G-8 diplomatic effort to encourage all states that had not yet

done so to sign and ratify safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols. 

The United States continued to work closely with the IAEA and other 

IAEA member states to support the continued evolution of a technically sound

and effective safeguards system, to improve the effectiveness of the IAEA in

identifying violators of safeguards commitments, and to ensure that the IAEA 

had the financial and human resources needed to accomplish these goals. In 

82
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

2004, two reviews of safeguards were undertaken which pointed toward the 

development of a more flexible safeguards system, which could focus Agency

resources more effectively in areas of concern. 

The IAEA continued to provide guidance, technical support, and 

training programs in the prevention of nuclear terrorism in 2004. The United

States was a primary supporter of the IAEA training programs in physical

protection and nuclear security, having developed the training curricula and

presented the courses and workshops on behalf of the Agency in many

countries, including Armenia, the Czech Republic, and South Africa. 

Under the IAEA’s Nuclear Security Action Plan, the Agency

accelerated its activities to prevent, detect, and respond to illicit activities 

involving nuclear and other radiological materials and facilities. As of 

December 31, 26 member states and one nongovernmental organization had 

pledged $37 million to the Nuclear Security Action Plan. The United States 

pledged nearly two-thirds of this total, and encouraged member states to 

recognize that all nations face the threat of nuclear terrorism and would benefit 

from the assistance provided by the Agency. 

With U.S. encouragement, the IAEA began to develop Integrated

Nuclear Security Support Plans with individual states. These plans will 

provide an important tool for improved coordination with bilateral donor state

programs; seven were prepared in 2004. 

The IAEA also further developed its new and more encompassing

International Nuclear Security Advisory Service (INSServ) to help states 

evaluate and strengthen their overall nuclear security posture to include

radioactive sources and border controls. In 2004, the IAEA, supported by

experts from member states, conducted INSServ missions to Argentina, 

Colombia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Tunisia, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Yemen. The

United States participated in the missions to Nigeria and Venezuela to help 

increase protection of research reactors and radiological sources and 

recommend improvement in the control of radioactive material seized by law 

enforcement authorities. 

The IAEA Board of Governors made substantial strides in the 

security of radioactive sources when it approved the revised Code of Conduct

on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources in September 2003, and 

supplemental Guidance on the Export and Import of Radioactive Sources in

September 2004. The United States continued its longstanding support of the 

IAEA’s Model Project, which promoted the development of domestic

infrastructures for the long-term management of radioactive sources and

efforts through the Nuclear Security Action Plan to consolidate and protect

vulnerable and orphan sources. In May, U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer

Abraham announced an ambitious new Global Threat Reduction Initiative 

(GTRI) to identify, secure, recover, and/or facilitate the disposition of highrisk, vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials around the world that pose a 

threat to the United States and the international community. Working with the 

IAEA, the GTRI intends to accelerate removal of high-risk, vulnerable nuclear 

 83
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

materials around the world, speed up the global conversion of research reactor 

fuel from high enriched uranium to low enriched uranium, accelerate the

securing or removal of vulnerable radiological materials worldwide, and

address security “gaps” for nuclear and radiological material not yet covered 

by existing threat reduction programs. 

In a joint U.S.-IAEA initiative, in September a security element was 

added to assessments of the abilities of states’ regulatory authorities to manage

their radioactive sources. This new Radioactive Source Safety and Security 

Infrastructure Appraisal was used in several prototype efforts in which U.S.

personnel participated. This appraisal reflects the need to assist states to

ensure their radioactive sources are not only being used safely, but are also 

secure. 

The United States also continued to play a key role in the effort to 

amend the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material. This 

amendment would expand the Convention’s scope to address the physical

protection of nuclear materials in domestic use, storage, and transport, and the

protection of nuclear materials and facilities from sabotage. In May, Austria, 

with 24 cosponsors (including the United States) requested the IAEA to 

convene a conference of the parties to consider this proposal. The 

amendments will be considered at a Diplomatic Conference in 2005. 

Finally, the IAEA continued its leadership role in strengthening

international nuclear safety practices and standards. The IAEA Department of

Nuclear Safety and Security formulates and implements the IAEA’s program 

on nuclear safety to fulfill statutory requirements, in cooperation with other 

departments within the IAEA, including the Department of Technical

Cooperation. As is the case with other IAEA programs, the United States was 

an active participant in and supporter of efforts to enhance nuclear safety in all

member states. During 2004, the United States allocated funds for priority 

nuclear safety-related projects. These projects included upgrading the 

Regulatory Authority Information System, which addresses states’ need for a

radioactive source inventory management system, and the continued work of

the IAEA International Expert Group on Nuclear Liability. 

The United States continued to support the development of a robust 

international response system for radiological emergencies, notably the

establishment of the IAEA’s Incident and Emergency Center (IEC). The IEC

provides the notification system for two conventions (the Convention on Early 

Notification of a Nuclear Accident and the Convention on Assistance in the 

Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency). 

The IAEA remained active throughout 2004 in fostering international 

cooperation for the peaceful uses of nuclear technologies and worked “to 

accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health, and 

prosperity throughout the world.” The IAEA implemented a broad program of 

technical cooperation with over 90 of its member states, which was designed

to complement and promote the development objectives in recipient states, 

with particular attention to the least developed countries. The United States

84
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

continued to support use of the sterile insect technique (using radiation to

sterilize male insects), including for tsetse fly eradication efforts, and the

IAEA’s new initiative on radiotherapy for cancer treatment. 

The IAEA regular budget for 2004 was $268.5 million, of which

$263 million was assessed to member states. The United States was assessed 

approximately 25.9 percent of this amount, about $68.2 million. In addition, 

the United States remained the largest single contributor of voluntary support

to the IAEA, contributing $52.6 million to support the Technical Cooperation

Fund, technical assistance to safeguards, cost-free experts, in-country technical 

projects, U.S.-hosted training courses and fellowships, as well as nuclear 

safety and security projects. 

In recent years, the United States has been disappointed by the

decline in U.S. representation in the IAEA Secretariat. In 2004, Americans

held 86 of the 743 positions that are subject to its geographical distribution

guidelines, or 11.6 percent. 

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 

Established in 1944 and designated a UN specialized technical

agency in 1947, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) fosters 

the safe and orderly growth of international civil aviation. As of December

31, 2004, the air transport industry included nearly 900 scheduled air carriers

worldwide operating about 21,500 aircraft. There were also about 22,000

business aircraft and many more owned by private pilots. Thus, the challenge

of keeping the skies of the world safe and efficient is enormous. ICAO sets 

international standards and recommended practices for civil aviation, and

offers technical assistance to enhance aviation safety and security worldwide.

The United States strongly supports the work of ICAO. 

ICAO, based in Montreal, Canada, has 188 members. The United

States has consistently been elected to the ICAO Council and was re-elected to

a new three-year term at the 2004 ICAO triennial Assembly. Dr. Taïeb Chérif 

(Algeria) has been the Secretary-General since 2003. Dr. Assad Kotaite

(Lebanon) continued as President of the Council of ICAO, a post he has held

since 1976. The triennial ICAO Assembly was held from September 28 to

October 8, 2004, with record attendance from 175 member states and 36 

observer delegations. 

Ensuring aviation safety and security remained the primary goal of

the organization in 2004. The Assembly endorsed several initiatives designed 

to improve the integrity of the global aviation system. In the area of safety, 

these initiatives included expansion starting in 2005 of ICAO’s successful

Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program (USOAP) to all safety-related

provisions of ICAO’s standards. For increased transparency, ICAO planned to

share full audit reports among member states. Launched in January 1999, 

USOAP consists of audits carried out by ICAO in all 188 member states to

assess the level of compliance with ICAO’s safety standards and to establish

corrective measures. ICAO shifted its focus from developing new standards to

 85
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

assisting in the implementation of existing ones, and from detailed technical

specifications to performance-based standards. ICAO has especially 

accelerated the development of standards and guidance for its program to 

prevent Controlled Flight Into Terrain accidents, which are among the leading 

causes of aircraft accidents. 

The 2004 Assembly requested that aviation security continue to be

treated as a matter of highest priority. It recognized that terrorists can strike

anywhere, at any time, when it adopted Resolution A35-1, “Acts of terrorism

and destruction of Russian civil aircraft.” The Assembly also requested, with 

U.S. support, greater sharing among member states of the results of the ICAO 

Universal Security Audit Program (USAP) created to help identify and correct 

deficiencies in the implementation of security-related standards. In 2004, 44 

states were audited. The Assembly called on member states to exercise strict 

and effective controls on the global movement and storage of man-portable 

defense systems while calling on member states to destroy existing units. 

Member states also were urged to keep fully up to date with the security 

provisions of the convention establishing ICAO and, if not yet signatories, to

become parties to international conventions related to aviation security. 

The 12th session of the Facilitation Division, held in Cairo in March, 

recommended (and the United States supported) that all member states issue

machine-readable passports and incorporate biometrics for further 

strengthening the security aspects of Machine Readable Travel Documents

(MRTDs), an initiative begun in 2003. The ICAO Council will review the 

recommendation with the intention of adopting it as a new standard in Annex 

9 (Facilitation). ICAO also agreed to serve as the “supervisory authority” for 

the Public Key Directory that will be used by governments throughout the 

world to help authenticate the signatures of passport issuing authorities. This 

service will be fully funded by those governments that produce MRTDs. 

Regarding environmental issues, the ICAO Council approved a

recommendation, which the United States supported, made in early 2004 by

the ICAO Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection for new oxides of

nitrogen (NOx) standards to be 12 percent more stringent than the levels 

agreed to in 1999. Substantive guidance material was produced to assist states

in the implementation of a “balanced approach” to noise management, 

comprising four principal elements: reduction of noise at the source; land use

planning and management; noise abatement operational procedures; and

operating restrictions on aircraft. While the Europeans wanted ICAO to

permit governments to levy charges based on greenhouse gas emissions, which

the United States opposed, the Council did not approve the proposal. 

ICAO assessments are based on a country’s economic factors and

relative importance in civil aviation, as measured by passenger/freight mileage 

flown, with a maximum assessment of 25 percent. Member assessments for 

the calendar year 2004 ICAO budget totaled $54.5 million. The U.S. share in 

2004 was $13.6 million, or 25 percent of the assessed budget. In 2004, the 

86
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

U.S. Government provided an additional $1.2 million in voluntary financial

contributions, of which a significant portion supports the USAP. 

U.S. citizens continued to be under-represented at ICAO in 2004,

with Americans occupying only 16 of 268 (6 percent) professional positions 

subject to geographic distribution. In addition, several U.S. experts worked on

detail on the ICAO staff, including in the area of aviation security programs. 

International Health Organizations 

World Health Organization (WHO) 

The World Health Organization (WHO), based in Geneva,

Switzerland, was established in 1948 with the objective of “the attainment by

all peoples of the highest possible level of health.” In 2004, WHO worked in

close partnership with its 192 member states and two associate members,

many intergovernmental agencies, more than 180 nongovernmental 

organizations, and nearly 1,200 leading health-related institutions around the 

world designated as “WHO collaborating centers.” WHO representatives in

142 countries worked with health ministries as advisors and managers of 

technical cooperation programs. 

During 2004, U.S. representatives participated in meetings of the 

World Health Assembly; the WHO Executive Board; Regional Committees 

for the Americas, the Western Pacific, Africa, and Europe; and the Governing 

Council of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. U.S. officials

also participated in meetings of the management committees of WHO’s major 

voluntarily funded programs; the Intergovernmental Working Group on the

revision of the International Health Regulations; and the Program

Coordinating Board of the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS, which is

cosponsored by the WHO and 10 other agencies. 

Dr. Jong-Wook Lee (South Korea) continued the second year of his

five-year term as Director-General. Dr. Lee continued to focus on the 

priorities of achieving the health-related goals of the UN Millennium

Declaration, decentralizing WHO’s work, renewing accountability and 

effectiveness at WHO, improving global disease surveillance and data

management, tackling specific health issues and unmet challenges, and 

strengthening the WHO’s human resources. 

WHO made some progress in 2004 galvanizing international support

for its “3 by 5” initiative to treat 3 million people living with HIV/AIDS by the 

end of 2005, and reported that approximately 700,000 were on anti-retroviral

therapy at the end of 2004. While this was far short of reaching the goal with 

only one year to go, WHO reported that there was accelerated momentum for 

major progress during 2005. 

WHO had concluded negotiations in 2003 on a Framework 

Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which the United States signed in

May 2004. The outcome reflected U.S. desires in virtually all respects, with

the exception of the size of the warning labels on tobacco packaging for which 

 87
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

new U.S. legislation would be required for ratification. In December 2004, the 

required 40 countries ratified the FCTC. 

Negotiations began in 2004 on the Revision of the International

Health Regulations (IHRs) with the first of three meetings of the 

Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) in November of 2004. The first

IGWG made headway on many issues, including on how countries assess a 

potential public health emergency of international concern. Differences 

remained at the conclusion on issues of reporting and verification of disease 

outbreaks; use of nongovernment information sources; settlement of disputes;

references to intentional release; relationship to other international 

organizations; resources for implementation; and how to ensure the IHRs are

applied universally, including in Taiwan. The IGWG made substantial 

progress overall on the goal of finalizing new IHRs for adoption at the 2005 

World Health Assembly. 

The 2004 Assembly adopted a Global Strategy on Diet, Physical 

Activity, and Health, which addressed the major risk factors for the growing 

burden of non-communicable diseases that accounted for half of the global

burden of disease and 60 percent of global deaths. The Global Strategy had

been under development since 2002, and the United States took a lead early 

and throughout the discussions. The Assembly gave the topic much debate 

and intense negotiation. The United States worked to ensure WHO focused its 

efforts on the public health aspects of diet and nutrition rather than on trade 

aspects, and to place proposed dietary recommendations squarely in the 

purview of national governments. 

The Assembly also considered a variety of substantive topics such as 

HIV/AIDS and scaling up treatment, polio eradication, road safety, and health; 

a U.S.-sponsored resolution on family and health; a WHO strategy for 

reproductive health; and genomics and world health. African countries, led by

South Africa, raised the issue of “International Migration of Health

Personnel,” which generated protracted negotiations. A consensus emerged 

after the cosponsors of the resolution dropped references to developing a treaty

and calling for compensation to developing countries that lose health

personnel through migration.

The 2004 World Health Assembly once again considered a proposal

to insert on its agenda an item on granting observer status for Taiwan, put

forward by several countries that had diplomatic relations with Taiwan. The 

bid to grant Taiwan observer status dominated the opening day of the

Assembly, and for the first time since 1997 the issue was put to a vote in the

Plenary. Almost 50 countries spoke in the Plenary either in favor of or against 

the issue, including U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. 

Thompson who noted U.S. support for granting Taiwan observer status. The 

vote resulted in rejection of the proposal, although with a small increase in

support over the 1997 vote. Although there is no provision in the WHO 

Constitution or the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure regarding the conferring of 

observer status, it is understood that observers can only be admitted if a 

88
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

majority of the members present and voting at the Assembly approve the 

proposal. 

The Assembly took up the long-standing agenda item on “Health 

conditions of, and assistance to, the Arab population in the occupied Arab 

territories, including Palestine.” The draft resolution proposed by a number of

Arab states was once again extremely unbalanced in its harsh condemnation of

Israel, though it did reflect some improvement over the resolution adopted in

2003. Ireland, on behalf of the European Union member states, met with the

Palestinian observer delegation to try to amend the draft to make it more

balanced, but the Palestinian negotiators ultimately accepted only minor 

changes. The United States called for a roll-call vote on the resolution, which 

was adopted, with the United States voting against it, and a large number of

abstentions and absences. The United States said the resolution did not

advance the health of the Palestinian people but interjected political issues into

the debate of the Assembly, and such issues were unambiguously outside its 

mandate. 

On financial matters, the World Health Assembly agreed to apply the 

new UN scale of assessments starting in 2005, and requested WHO to develop 

new guidelines to help determine regular budget allocations to the WHO 

regions and headquarters starting in the 2006–2007 biennium. 

In 2004, the United States provided $96.1 million (22 percent) to the 

WHO regular assessed budget, as well as approximately $100 million in

voluntary contributions. 

Within the WHO staff, there were more American citizens in 

professional posts than citizens of any other country. However, U.S. citizens 

remain under-represented at the WHO. At the end of 2004, Americans held 

the senior posts of Assistant Director-General for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, 

and Malaria; legal counsel; director of internal audit and oversight; and 

director of the division of personnel. In 2004, the WHO had 1,441 posts

subject to geographic distribution; of those, U.S. citizens held 167 posts, or 

11.6 percent. The total WHO staff on fixed-term or career service

appointments was 4,017. In addition, there were 3,973 staff on short-term

contracts. 

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a 

subsidiary of the World Health Organization, is a leading cancer research 

institute that monitors global cancer occurrence, identifies causes of cancer, 

and develops scientific strategies for cancer control. The IARC Governing

Council with 15 member states, met at IARC headquarters in Lyon, France, on 

May 13–14, 2004. The Governing Council discussed IARC’s program of 

work in cancer prevention and its various collaborative research efforts, and 

took action on various administrative issues. Following his election in 2003,

the Governing Council welcomed the new IARC Director, Dr. Peter Boyle 

 89
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

(United Kingdom), a distinguished cancer epidemiologist and biostatistician, 

who assumed office in January 2004. 

U.S. regular budget contributions to IARC (based on a 9.88 percent

assessment) were $1.72 million in 2004; the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services provided voluntary contributions. IARC had a total staff of

143, of which 52 were professional posts; of those, four were held by U.S.

citizens, or 7.7 percent.

Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) 

The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) marked its 102nd

year in 2004. Formed in 1902 as the Pan American Sanitary Bureau, PAHO is

the world’s oldest intergovernmental health organization. The Directing 

Council of the PAHO convened at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. on

September 27–October 1, 2004. U.S. officials, including U.S. Secretary of

Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, were active in that meeting, 

as well as in meetings of the Subcommittee on Planning and Programming in

March and the PAHO Executive Committee in June. 

The Director of PAHO, Dr. Mirta Roses (Argentina), who took office 

in February 2003, continued to focus on the priorities of creating greater health

equity for the poor, forging new alliances and strengthening regional

solidarity, tackling the emerging health challenges in the Americas, and 

advocating for continued improvements in the region’s health systems. 

PAHO’s strategies and work with countries of the Americas in 2004 

focused on the importance of achievement of the health-related development

goals of the Millennium Declaration, such as the reduction of child mortality;

improvements of maternal health; access to safe drinking water; and control of 

HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. 

The Directing Council discussed and adopted resolutions on pressing

health issues, including HIV/AIDS, access to medicines, achievement of the

development goals of the Millennium Declaration, and regional work on 

revising the International Health Regulations. The Council reviewed the status 

of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the region and the strides being made in

prevention and control. Representatives of all 38 PAHO member states

participated, mostly at the ministerial level. 

Anonymous allegations of irregularities were levied against the 

PAHO Director in early 2004. When brought to the attention of the Director 

by the United States and several other countries, the Director requested the

PAHO External Auditor (the U.K. National Accounting Office) to conduct an

investigation into the matter and to report his findings to the Directing 

Council. In September 2004, the Directing Council considered the report from

the PAHO External Auditor with findings following the three-month

investigation. The External Auditor reported to the Directing Council that, 

with a minor exception going back over 10 years, the allegations could not be

substantiated. The External Auditor did make a number of recommendations

regarding improving management, personnel, and hiring practices; avoiding

90
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

conflicts of interest; instituting a code of ethics; hiring an Ombudsperson; and 

improving the transparency of management. The PAHO Director committed 

to begin work in earnest to follow-up on the External Auditor 

recommendations. 

The United States paid over 59 percent of the PAHO budget. The 

scale of assessments coincides with that of the Organization of America States, 

with adjustments for membership. The United States provided $57 million to 

the PAHO regular assessed budget, as well as voluntary contributions of

approximately $16.5 million. In 2004, PAHO had a total staff of 829, of

which 470 were professional posts. U.S. citizens filled 77, or 16.4 percent, of 

the professional posts. 

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) 

The Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) began formal 

operations in 1996. Dr. Peter Piot (Belgium) has been the Executive Director

since its inception. The UNAIDS cosponsoring agencies are the World Health

Organization (WHO); the UN Development Program; the UN Office on Drugs 

and Crime; the UN Children’s Fund; the UN Population Fund; the UN 

Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization; the International Labor 

Organization; the World Food Program; UN High Commission for Refugees

(UNHCR); and the World Bank. UNAIDS also has cooperation agreements 

with the Food and Agriculture Organization. UNAIDS works in countries that 

are dealing with the HIV/AIDS epidemic, primarily through countrycoordination theme groups that seek to mobilize all sectors to address AIDS. 

The UNAIDS Program Coordinating Board (PCB) acts as the 

governing body on all programmatic issues concerning policy, strategy, 

finance, monitoring, and evaluation of UNAIDS. The membership of the PCB

comprises 22 government representatives, elected from among the member 

states of the cosponsoring organizations, according to regional distribution. 

The term of membership of these states is three years, with approximately onethird of the membership replaced annually. The United States was not a

member of the PCB in 2004, but participated as an observer. The United 

States is scheduled to resume membership of the PCB in 2005. The UNAIDS 

cosponsoring organizations have full rights of participation in the PCB, but

without the right to vote. Six of the 10 cosponsors may participate in the PCB 

at any one time, with the selection of participants decided on by the

cosponsors. Five nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are also invited to

participate in PCB meetings, but without the right to take part in the formal 

decision-making process or the right to vote. 

The PCB met June 23–24, 2004, in Geneva and December 14–15 in 

Montego Bay, Jamaica. In June, the PCB discussed UNAIDS’s plan for

coordination and harmonization of efforts in the fight against HIV/AIDS; the 

PCB also initiated work on a revitalized Prevention Strategy. The PCB 

discussed participation by cosponsors and NGOs, and welcomed the UNHCR

as a new cosponsoring organization. In addition, the PCB established a

Bureau on a two-year trial basis to serve in an advisory capacity to the PCB 

 91
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

chair, coordinate the PCB’s program of work and facilitate the functioning of 

the PCB sessions. The December 2004 thematic session of the PCB focused

attention on the growth of the AIDS epidemic in the Caribbean; discussed the 

themes of Women, Gender, and AIDS; and reviewed the Unified Budget and 

Workplan. 

In 2004, UNAIDS played an active role in promoting WHO’s goal of

national governments and bilateral and multilateral donors putting 3 million

people with AIDS on anti-retroviral therapy by the end of 2005. By the end of

2004, approximately 700,000 had been treated with the therapy. 

UNAIDS also worked with the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, 

Tuberculosis, and Malaria, an independent, non-UN organization, during

2004. Along with WHO, UNAIDS serves as an ex officio member of the 

Board of the Fund. 

The UNAIDS core budget for 2004 was $145.8 million. The United

States continued to be the major donor to UNAIDS and provided

approximately 18 percent ($26.6 million) to UNAIDS’s 2004 all-voluntary

core budget. The United States provided an additional $4.7 million to

UNAIDS in extra-budgetary funds. 

In 2004, UNAIDS had a total staff of 196, of which 147 were

professionals; of those, 10 posts, or 6.8 percent, including that of Deputy

Executive Director and Director of Monitoring and Evaluation, were held by

U.S. citizens. 

International Labor Organization (ILO) 

The International Labor Organization (ILO), founded in 1919, has a 

mandate to advance humane conditions of labor. The organization promotes 

respect for fundamental principles and rights at work, such as freedom of

association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, 

prohibitions on forced labor and child labor, and non-discrimination in

employment. It also seeks to create greater employment opportunities; 

enhance social protection; and strengthen social dialogue among governments,

employers, and workers, with the goal of contributing to poverty alleviation

and increased social stability around the world. 

Based in Geneva, Switzerland, the ILO has 178 member states. Juan

Somavia (Chile) was elected Director-General of the International Labor 

Office (the ILO secretariat) in 1999 and re-elected to a second five-year term

that began in March 2004. Representatives of workers’ and employers’

organizations participate on an equal basis with government representatives on

the Governing Body, the ILO’s executive board, and at the annual 

International Labor Conference (ILC). 

The ILO’s activities and programs serve key U.S. interests by seeking

to increase global respect for democracy and human rights. Further, the ILO

has helped advance U.S. interests on priority issues in the areas of freedom of

association, forced labor, security concerns, child labor, HIV/AIDS in the

92
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

workplace, and technical assistance for key countries and regions 

(Afghanistan, China, Iraq, Latin America, and the Middle East). 

As one of the 10 countries of “chief industrial importance,” the

United States has a permanent government seat on the ILO’s 56-member

Governing Body. In addition, a U.S. worker representative (from the AFLCIO) and a U.S. employer representative (from the U.S. Council for

International Business) hold seats on the Governing Body. They speak and

vote independently of the U.S. Government. 

The ILO focuses international attention on cases of abuse of basic 

worker rights, and strives for elimination of those abuses. For example, the

ILO is engaged in ongoing efforts to achieve the elimination of forced labor in

Burma, which an ILO Commission of Inquiry found to be “widespread and 

systematic.” 

As part of the response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, 

the United States led efforts at the ILO to develop standards for modern new 

security features in seafarers’ identity documentation. At the June 2003 ILC,

the ILO expedited drafting and adopting of Convention 185, which revised the 

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention originally adopted in 1958 by

mandating greatly improved security features for identity documents issued to 

seafarers by ratifying states. 

The ILO plays a key role in combating exploitative child labor 

worldwide, a U.S. priority, in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, the

Middle East, and Europe. In 2004, the International Program for the 

Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC) removed or prevented more than 90,000 

children from exploitive work through the provision of educational and

training opportunities in ongoing projects funded by the U.S. Department of

Labor. Through these projects, IPEC also increased the capacity of 26 

countries to address child labor, including improvements in the countries’ 

legal frameworks that reflect international child labor standards; adoption or

implementation of programs or policies to combat the worst forms of child 

labor; mainstreaming of child labor concerns into relevant development,

social, and anti-poverty policies and programs; and/or establishment of a child 

labor monitoring mechanism.

The ILO in 2004 had technical assistance programs in place or under 

development in several countries of vital concern to the United States. In

2004, the ILO engaged Iraqi labor officials, business leaders, and trade 

unionists in positive discussions about possible assistance in redrafting Iraq’s 

labor code, enhancing the capabilities of the reformed Iraqi Ministry of Labor 

and Social Affairs, generating employment, and expanding and strengthening

employment services. The ILO spearheaded technical cooperation programs

in Afghanistan and the West Bank and Gaza Strip aimed at boosting 

employment. The ILO also provided assistance and advice to several Gulf

Cooperation Council countries (including Oman and the United Arab Emirates 

with which the United States is negotiating free trade agreements containing

labor provisions) on improving their labor laws and practices. In China, the 

 93
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

ILO sponsored anti-trafficking programs and began exploration with Chinese

officials of possible cooperation in eliminating forced labor. 

The ILO’s regular budget in 2004 was approximately $314 million.

The U.S. assessment for the ILO was about $73 million, representing 22

percent of the ILO’s regular budget funded by assessed contributions, plus

additional funding to make up for exchange rate losses in 2003. In 2004, the 

ILO had 683 professional posts subject to geographic distribution, 94 of which 

were held by U.S. citizens (13.8 percent compared with 14.4 percent for 

2003). 

International Maritime Organization (IMO) 

The International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) principal objectives 

are to foster international cooperation on technical matters affecting 

international shipping and to achieve the highest practicable standards for 

maritime safety, security, and environmental protection. The IMO develops

conventions and treaties on international shipping, facilitates international

maritime trade, and provides technical assistance in maritime matters to

developing countries. It also develops standards and practices to protect

against oil spills and pollution from hazardous and noxious cargo and ship 

waste, ballast, and emissions. 

IMO’s headquarters are in London. The IMO Assembly and Council 

govern the IMO. The United States has been elected to the 40-member

Council ever since the creation of the IMO in 1948 and was re-elected in 2003 

to an additional two-year term. Efthimios Mitropoulos (Greece) is the 

Secretary-General of the IMO. His initial term of four years will extend until

2007. Tuvalu joined IMO in 2004, bringing its total membership to 164 full

IMO members and three associate members (Hong Kong, Macao, and the 

Faroe Islands). 

At U.S. urging, maritime security moved to the top of the IMO’s 

agenda following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United

States. In 2002, the IMO approved amendments to the International 

Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) to enhance maritime 

security and a complementary International Ship and Port Facility Security

(ISPS) Code. The United States proposed most of the adopted amendments, 

which parallel U.S. domestic maritime security regulations. The SOLAS and 

ISPS amendments require ships and port facilities to develop and maintain 

security plans and to designate security officers to ensure that the plans are 

fully implemented. Ships are also required to carry documents on their recent

activities, ownership, and control. Finally, they mandate a ship-to-shore 

system to alert authorities to security incidents. Most significantly, the IMO 

standards enable port states to verify that ships comply with IMO security

regulations and to take appropriate measures in response to any deficiencies 

found, including the denial of port entry. As a port state, the United States

began to use this authority in 2004 to enhance its maritime security. 

94
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

The SOLAS amendments and the ISPS Code entered into force on

July 1, 2004. This marked a critical point in a period of intense activity

throughout the industry as all sectors—port authorities and operators, ship 

owners and operators, governments and administrations—worked to

implement the new measures as quickly and as effectively as possible. The 

evidence suggests that a sensible, balanced approach to the changes has been

adopted. That ships have been detained or refused entry to ports demonstrates 

that the amendments are much more than just a paper exercise. But the 

avoidance of major disruption speaks of a common-sense approach that has

kept commerce moving. Figures made available by the IMO indicated that 

more than 86 percent of ships and 69 percent of port facilities had their 

security plans approved by July 1, 2004. Since then compliance has improved

to close to 100 percent. The focus changed to enhancing the level and quality

of compliance in every country. To that end, the IMO established a trust fund

to provide technical assistance to countries on maritime security. In 2004, the 

United States contributed $100,000 to the fund. To further assist countries’ 

compliance, the IMO in December developed Interim Guidance for voluntary 

self-assessment by SOLAS contracting governments and by port facilities to

assist SOLAS contracting governments to implement and maintain compliance

with the requirements of the ISPS Code. 

Consistent with the direction given by UN Security Council

Resolution 1540 to better control the transportation of weapons of mass

destruction, the IMO also made progress on the revision of the so-called SUA

treaties (Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety 

of Maritime Navigation, 1988 and its Protocol of 1988 relating to Fixed 

Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf), which complement the SOLAS 

and ISPS practical measures now in force. Although 113 states are party to 

the 1988 SUA Convention, the United States believes that its review remains

an urgent matter because of the need to ensure that the legal framework 

developed and kept updated by the IMO continues to provide an adequate

basis for the arrest, detention, and extradition of terrorists acting against

shipping or ports or when using ships to perpetrate acts of terrorism. A 

diplomatic conference has been scheduled for October 2005 to adopt

amendments to the SUA Convention and Protocol in order to strengthen them,

and to provide a response to the increasing risks posed to maritime navigation 

by terrorism.

The IMO worked to facilitate protection of shipping lanes of strategic 

importance. An example is the initiative undertaken by the IMO in 2004

concerning security, safety, and environmental protection in the Straits of

Malacca and Singapore. This initiative was welcomed by the UN General

Assembly in a resolution on Oceans and Law of the Sea adopted in November 

2004. Any serious disruption to the flow of maritime traffic through the 

Straits would have a widespread and far-reaching detrimental effect, 

presenting ships with a long detour and, without doubt, higher freight rates and 

costlier goods and commodities would ensue. The IMO began preparations, 

in collaboration with the Malacca Strait littoral States, Straits users, and other 

 95
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

stakeholders including the industry, for a meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia, in 

2005 and a regional seminar and workshop in Aden to consider security and

piracy in the Red Sea and Arabian Gulf. 

In February 2004, the IMO adopted a new international convention

known as the International Convention for the Control and Management of 

Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments to prevent the potentially devastating

effects of the spread of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens carried by

ships in their ballast water across the seas and oceans of the world. By 

controlling the introduction of such invasive species, the new convention will

contribute significantly towards safeguarding the biodiversity of the oceans.

The problem of harmful aquatic organisms in ballast water is largely due to

expanded trade and traffic volume over the last few decades. The effects in

many areas of the world have been devastating. Quantitative data show the

rate of bio-invasions continues to increase at an alarming rate, in many cases 

exponentially. It is estimated that about 10 billion tons of ballast water are 

transferred globally each year, potentially shifting from one location to another 

species of sea life that may prove ecologically harmful when released into a 

non-native environment. The Convention established global standards for 

ballast water discharges and associated ballast water management practices to

control the introduction of aquatic invasive species. The convention preserves

the rights of contracting parties, including the United States, to take more 

stringent measures as a condition of port entry when appropriate. 

The IMO, strongly urged by the United States, made good progress in

2004 in the establishment and further development of an audit plan to assess 

countries’ effectiveness in implementing IMO global shipping standards. The

IMO Member State Audit Scheme will help promote maritime safety, security, 

and environmental protection by assessing how effectively member states

implement and enforce relevant IMO convention standards and by providing

them with feedback and advice on their current performance. The audits will

initially be voluntary, but are expected ultimately to become mandatory. The 

IMO is likely to approve the Framework and Procedures for the Voluntary

Member State Audit Scheme in November 2005 and specifics of the scheme

started development with pilot trials ongoing. Initial projections show that

ideally 33 countries would be audited each year on a five-year rotating basis. 

Assessments to the IMO are based chiefly on registered shipping

tonnage. Major open-registry countries (those that register vessels but do not

necessarily own them) are among the largest contributors. Panama, Liberia,

Cyprus, and the Bahamas are some of the major open registry states that pay 

large IMO assessments. The United States paid nearly $1.4 million of the

IMO’s $36.6 million budget in 2004. In 2004, U.S. citizens held four of the

122 professional staff positions. 

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) 

96

Established in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, the

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) serves as a forum for

governments and the private sector to facilitate the operation of international 
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

telecommunication networks and services. There are presently 189 member

states and 730 sector members in the ITU. Mr. Yoshio Utsumi (Japan) is 

Secretary-General of the ITU. In June 2004, the Geneva-based ITU held its

annual Council meeting. The United States was particularly interested this 

year in the ongoing efforts to reform the ITU financial system as a means to 

enhance the transparency and efficiency of the Union, and how the ITU, as

Secretariat for the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), would 

finance the Phase II WSIS scheduled to take place in Tunis in November 2005. 

The United States successfully opposed a proposal by the ITU Secretariat to 

raise members’ contributions to offset claimed possible shortfalls in cost

recovery income from satellite network filings for 2004–2005. 

The 46-member ITU Council, of which the United States is a 

member, is elected at plenipotentiary conferences, and is comprised of

representatives from five regions—the Americas, Western Europe, Eastern 

Europe, Africa, and Asia. The Council meets annually between 

Plenipotentiary Conferences to address management and other issues. The 

2004 session of the ITU Council concluded on June 18 with an agreement to 

extend and clarify the mandate of a Canadian-led Council Group on Financial

Regulations, with the United States stressing the importance of coordination

with the more management-focused work of a new Council Oversight Group. 

In response to assertions by the ITU Secretary-General that funding for WSIS 

Phase II would have to come from voluntary contributions, the Council—

doubting that this approach would succeed and realizing that funding would 

have to be found somewhere—instructed him to take appropriate measures to

strengthen WSIS fund raising efforts; make a previously approved additional

amount available from the ITU reserve account; and take appropriate action,

consistent with previous strict Council decisions, in facing financial

requirements for the preparation of WSIS Phase II. 

After much discussion during the 2004 Council session about the 

financial implications and likelihood of possible shortfalls in cost recovery

income from satellite network filings for 2004–2005, the Secretariat

unilaterally announced an increase in the contributory units (CUs) of $9,062 

for each of the years 2004 and 2005 and $6,698 for 2006 and 2007. (Unlike

most other UN agencies, the ITU is funded by a system of CUs rather than

assessed contributions.) The United States strongly objected to this

announcement, requesting that the language regarding CUs in the draft report 

by the Chair of the Finance Committee be deleted and replaced with more 

general language. Supported by Russia, Germany, Brazil, and Australia, and

maintaining that the methodology used to arrive at the estimated increase in

CUs was not at all clear and any statement on a potential decrease in cost

recovery income must indicate the basis on which the figures were arrived at, 

the United States succeeded in having the language deleted from the draft

report. 

ITU’s 2004 budget was $84.5 million. The United States contributed 

$7.4 million in 2004. In 2004, out of 276 ITU personnel positions subject to

geographic distribution, U.S. citizens occupied 17, or 6.2 percent of the total. 

 97
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural 

Organization (UNESCO) 

The United States rejoined the UN Educational, Scientific, and 

Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on October 1, 2003. UNESCO was 

established in 1945 with the primary objective of contributing to peace and 

security worldwide. By promoting collaboration among nations, UNESCO

strives to further universal respect for justice, the rule of law, human rights, 

and fundamental freedoms. Priority programs foster and defend the free flow

of ideas and open access to education for all; build understanding of 

democratic principles and practice; promote scientific knowledge; and protect

the cultural and natural heritage of humankind. The organization’s total 

membership increased from 190 to 191 in 2004 with the addition of Brunei 

Darussalam. UNESCO is headquartered in Paris, and has been led since 1999

by Director-General Koichiro Matsuura (Japan).

The Executive Board, UNESCO’s governing body, consists of 58 

member states with four-year terms of office. It examines the program of 

work and corresponding budget proposals, and ensures the effective and 

rational execution of the program by the Director-General. A U.S. delegation 

participated in the semiannual Board Sessions in Paris April 14–28, 2004, and

September 28–October 14. The Board recommended that the General

Conference continue developing an international standard-setting instrument

on cultural diversity and continue monitoring the progress of a working group

of experts charged with recommending improvements to the function and

structure of UNESCO’s main bodies. The Board also recommended that the

International Bioethics Committee and Intergovernmental Bioethics 

Committee continue work on developing a declaration on bioethics. Although

expressing concern over negotiating a binding convention on cultural

diversity, the United States joined consensus on the decisions to negotiate the 

bioethics and cultural diversity instruments and engaged actively in their 

negotiation. Negotiation on these instruments is ongoing. 

U.S. priorities at the 2004 meetings of the Executive Board were to 

maintain budget discipline within UNESCO and focus UNESCO program

efforts and budget resources on the areas of literacy, capacity building in 

science and engineering, and the preservation of cultural objects. The

Executive Board examined the Director-General’s preliminary proposals

concerning UNESCO’s Program and Budget for 2006–2007, and 

recommended that the Director-General revise the budget, taking into account

recommendations on UNESCO’s reform process; further prioritization of

UNESCO programs; and results-based programming, management, reporting,

and evaluation. The Executive Board requested the Director-General to 

strengthen the delivery of principal priorities while reducing or eliminating

spending on lower priority activities. The United States fully supported this 

decision. 

98
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

In 2004, UNESCO saw several successes in the area of education, the 

U.S. primary focus at UNESCO. The United States seized this opportunity to

work with other member states in promoting results-based education programs

at the country level, where they will do the most good toward achieving the 

goals of education for all. The United States also worked closely with 

UNESCO to help develop the Literacy Initiative for Empowerment, a literacy

strategic framework with the goal of achieving concrete, measurable results in

34 countries with the highest rates of illiteracy. U.S. literacy experts have

been included in the preparation of this strategy, as a way to help ensure that 

U.S. research and experience in this critical area can be shared with others. 

Since 1986, the United States has regularly made voluntary

contributions to UNESCO. The 2004 contribution totaled nearly $1.9 million 

and was used to support UNESCO-related international educational, scientific,

cultural, and communications activities considered to be in the U.S. national

interest. The 2004 contribution supported the World Heritage Committee 

($671,000); the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission ($500,000); 

UNESCO’s science programs conducted in collaboration with the National

Academies of Science and Engineering ($500,000); the Voice of Afghan

Women in Global Media, which established the first privately owned 

television station in Kabul ($60,000); engineering and basic sciences programs 

at UNESCO ($100,000); and to assist libraries in developing countries,

through the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Sciences

($58,000). 

When the United States rejoined UNESCO in 2003, a lump-sum

payment of one-quarter of U.S. dues to UNESCO for calendar year 2003 was 

made. This lump sum of $15.8 million, although an assessed contribution and 

not extra-budgetary, was put into a special account to allow the funds to be 

spent in 2004. UNESCO agreed with a U.S. proposal to use approximately

$10 million of this amount to strengthen and expand UNESCO’s work in

reconstructing educational systems in post-conflict areas, focusing on 

Afghanistan, Iraq, and Africa. The UNESCO regular budget for 2004 was

approximately $382.3 million; the U.S. assessment was $84.1 million. Of 743

positions subject to geographic distribution, in 2004 Americans held 27 posts, 

or 3.6 percent, up from 20 in 2003. The United States is aggressively

promoting the hiring of qualified Americans by UNESCO. 

UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic 

Radiation (UNSCEAR) 

The UN General Assembly established the UN Scientific Committee

on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) in 1955 to provide

continuous review and evaluation of the effects of ionizing radiation on

humans and their environment. Governments and international organizations

around the world rely on UNSCEAR evaluations for estimating radiological

risk, establishing protection and safety standards, and regulating radioactive 

materials, informing policy decisions, and targeting international assistance 

programs. UNSCEAR’s work is of significant interest to many U.S. agencies, 

 99
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection

Agency, and the Departments of State, Health and Human Services, and 

Energy. 

The 52nd session met in Vienna, on April 26–30, 2004. The U.S.

delegation, led by Dr. Fred Mettler of the University of New Mexico and the 

Veterans Administration, included nine other advisors from academia, the

private sector, and the U.S. Government. The Scientific Committee reviewed

12 scientific documents on topics that included sources-to-effects assessment

of radon in homes and workplaces; exposures of workers and the public from

various sources of radiation; the effects of ionizing radiation on the immune 

system; epidemiological evaluation and dose response of diseases that might 

be related to radiation exposure; new epidemiological studies of radiation and

cancer and health effects from the Chernobyl accident; radioecology; and 

medical radiation exposures. 

Although increased communication and coordination between 

UNSCEAR and the UN Environment Program (UNEP) in 2003 partially

restored UNSCEAR funding levels back towards 1994 nominal funding levels, 

funding issues continued to plague UNSCEAR in 2004. The United States 

continued to urge UNEP and the UNSCEAR Secretariat to strengthen

communication and coordination. The United States continued to monitor the 

relationship and interaction between UNSCEAR and UNEP. In light of

ongoing and future U.S. and international efforts to prevent, manage, and 

mitigate radiological incidents, it is in the U.S. interest that UNSCEAR

continue to operate as an effective independent scientific body and that its 

findings are widely disseminated. 

UNSCEAR’s budget for 2004 was $465,500. The U.S. assessment 

was approximately $102,410 (22 percent). 

Universal Postal Union (UPU)

The Universal Postal Union (UPU), with headquarters in Bern, 

Switzerland, facilitates the efficient operation of postal services across national

borders. The United States joined the UPU at its founding in 1874. Edouard 

Dayan (France) was elected Director-General by the plenipotentiary UPU 

Congress held in Bucharest, September 15–October 5, 2004. Mr. Dayan

succeeded Thomas E. Leavey (United States), who had served the maximum

two five-year terms since 1995 in this position. The UPU now has 190

member countries. In recent years, the UPU has become noted for strict fiscal 

discipline, advances in strategic planning, and innovative voluntary

organizations known as “cooperatives” which have brought to the UPU 

corporate-like structures that feature weighted voting, targeted business plans,

and boards whose directors are elected in their individual capacity, as opposed 

to a country being elected.

In 2004, U.S. work in the UPU revolved around preparations for and 

participation in the agency’s plenipotentiary Congress in Bucharest, as well as

preparatory meetings of Restricted Unions and UPU’s governing councils, the

100
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

Postal Operations Council (POC) and Council of Administration (CA). The

CA and POC met in February to put their finishing touches on proposals for 

the UPU Congress. 

In 2004, the U.S. policy goals focused on building a system of 

terminal dues (inter-administration payments for the handling and delivery of

inbound international mail) based as closely as possible on costs; developing

credible systems for measuring the performance of postal administrations, 

airlines, and contractors in transporting and delivering international mail;

solidifying private-sector participation in the UPU; and having the UPU 

recognize that items sent by Extraterritorial Offices of Exchange (ETOEs) are

not subject to the UPU Acts, as ETOEs are commercial operations. The

United States developed a strategic plan that set out specific goals that the 

UPU should achieve by its next Congress in Nairobi in 2008. This plan was

published on the State Department website at the following link:

http://www.state.gov/p/ip/ipp. The plan, which guided the work of the U.S.

delegation at the Bucharest Congress, also served as a statement of U.S. policy 

towards the UPU. 

At Bucharest, the United States achieved its policy goals through 

several key decisions of the UPU Congress. In its main decision on the

complex subject of terminal dues, the Bucharest Congress adopted as a longterm goal the introduction of country-specific terminal dues rates based on the 

actual costs of handling and delivering inbound international mail items.

Currently, only industrialized countries in the target system are required to set 

country-specific terminal dues rates based on domestic postage rates which are

considered temporarily as a proxy for costs. Other countries will be in the 

transitional system and will continue to pay and receive a single flat rate based 

on a worldwide average of delivery costs, which were demonstrated to have 

increased by nine percent over the previous five years. The Bucharest

Congress set the end of the transition period at December 2013, after which all 

UPU member countries are to apply country-specific terminal dues rates which

will reduce, if not eliminate, arbitrage opportunities and bring UPU decisions

into conformity with World Trade Organization principles. 

Bucharest Congress decisions on terminal dues also included a

commitment by the UPU to carry out a study on the classification of countries 

based upon their respective levels of postal development, rather than upon

more general UN Development Program economic criteria. The classification 

of countries will be of importance not only for setting each country’s terminal

dues rates but also for determining the supplemental payments that certain 

countries shall receive under the arrangements of the UPU Quality of Service 

Fund. Further, the Congress decided to take action to encourage more of its

member countries to join arrangements whereby they receive terminal dues

payments based on their performance in delivering inbound international mail

(pay-for-performance). 

Two of the Congress’s main decisions on performance measurement 

drew upon proposals submitted by the U.S. delegation. In the first of these

 101
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

decisions, the UPU committed to designing and publishing reports on the 

performance of postal administrations in handling, scanning, tracking, and 

delivering all types of inbound international mail. A UPU effort in recent

years to publish such report cards for Express Mail through its Express Mail

Service Cooperative had brought dramatically improved delivery performance 

and pay-for-performance arrangements, which in turn solidified the 

improvements in performance. The second Congress decision related to 

performance measurement calls upon the UPU to review all its operational and 

accounting procedures, as well as associated networks and software, to

determine which procedures could be transformed from paper-based

operations to those based on the exchange of computerized data. A third 

Congress decision on this subject set a worldwide average standard for end-toend delivery of international mail at five days after mailing.

The Bucharest Congress made a landmark decision by creating the

Consultative Committee, whose members are drawn from private-sector 

associations of mailers, express delivery firms, trade unions, equipment 

manufacturers, and other postal stakeholders. Six UPU member countries

(three each from the POC and CA) are also members of the Committee whose

members may attend meetings of UPU working groups open to observers and 

whose funding is paid through the regular UPU budget. Creation of the

Consultative Committee was a major policy achievement for the United States, 

which worked assiduously since 1999 to open the UPU to the wider 

community of stakeholders in international postal and package delivery issues. 

At Bucharest, 17 private-sector associations joined the Consultative

Committee, which elected an American, Charles Prescott of the Direct

Marketing Association, as its Chair. The Consultative Committee expressed 

the intention to develop an ambitious plan for its work over the coming years. 

With the decision to create this Committee, the UPU became one of the few 

UN specialized agencies to admit private-sector representatives to its 

meetings. 

The United States was elected to the 40-member POC and elected

Chair of the POC at the Council’s meeting in Bucharest. James P. Wade of 

the U.S. Postal Service will carry out the duties of the POC Chair until the

next UPU Congress in 2008. Due to UPU regulations, the United States was 

not eligible to stand for election to the Council of Administration at Bucharest 

for the 2005–2008 period. 

The UPU operates under a biennial budget. The UPU Congress

approved an overall budget ceiling of $109 million for the next two biennial

UPU budgets (through 2008). In 2004, the UPU budget was $28.5 million

while actual expenditures totaled $26.8 million. The UPU approved budget

has remained level since the mid-1990s. 

Member country contributions to the UPU are determined according 

to “contribution units” that each country volunteers to pay. The United States 

subscribes to 50 contribution units, which equals approximately 5.7 percent of

the UPU budget. The cost to the United States is about $1.6 million per year. 

102
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

In addition, the U.S. Postal Service made extra-budgetary contributions to 

UPU in 2004 amounting to $355,000, including the salary of a postal security

consultant seconded to the UPU staff. 

The UPU staff operating under the regular budget is comprised of 60

professionals. At the end of 2004, apart from the Director-General, two (3.3

percent) of these professionals were American citizens, including the chef de

cabinet. One American was working in the General services category and 

three more were employed with extra-budgetary resources. 

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) promotes the 

protection of intellectual property rights throughout the world through 

cooperation among member states. Established by the WIPO Convention in

1967, it became a UN specialized agency in 1974. WIPO is headquartered in 

Geneva, Switzerland, and operates several offices around the world, including

in New York, Washington, D.C., and Brussels, Belgium. Dr. Kamil Idris 

(Sudan) is the Director-General. There are 182 members of the WIPO 

Convention. The United States is currently a party to 14 WIPO treaties and 

agreements. Fees for service generate more than 90 percent of WIPO’s 

revenue, and fees paid by U.S. nationals comprise approximately 40 percent of

WIPO’s fee revenue. 

WIPO administers various treaties that deal with the legal and

administrative aspects of intellectual property, which includes industrial 

property and copyrights. The two principal treaties are the Paris and Berne 

Conventions, with 169 and 159 members, respectively. WIPO also 

administers 20 multilateral “unions,” which serve as the treaty administering 

organs. 

The General Assemblies of WIPO Unions, of which the United States 

is a member, met in Geneva from September 27 to October 5. This meeting

took place concurrently with the meeting of the Assembly of the Patent 

Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Union. The WIPO General Assemblies addressed 

many important issues facing the organization. These included a resolution 

directing a subsidiary body on copyright to intensify its efforts towards 

concluding a treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations to update

international intellectual property standards for broadcasting in the information 

age, and a proposal by the United States and Japan on a new work plan for the 

Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP). The U.S. proposal for the 

work plan of the SCP to begin patent law harmonization of “prior art” issues

(or examination standards) was not accepted by the Assemblies, but the

Director-General was directed to convene discussions on this matter, which

are on-going. 

Despite claims in 2004 by the WIPO Secretariat that a failure to 

increase PCT fees paid by industry by 12 percent would do irreparable harm to

the organization, the United States successfully led a large number of 

delegations in the Assembly of the PCT Union in opposing the increase. 

 103
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Subsequently, the Assembly rejected the fee increase. The WIPO Secretariat 

later stated that WIPO was, after all, on a sound financial footing. In 2004, the 

UN Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) embarked upon a thorough review of the

organization’s management and administration. The United States worked

with the Program and Budget Committee to put forth a proposal to the 2005 

Assembly for creation of an Audit Committee that would have among its

duties monitoring the implementation of the JIU recommendations. In late 

2004, allegations of irregularities by a senior WIPO official surfaced, which 

the Swiss Government is investigating. The United States called for a 

thorough investigation and transparent handling of the allegations. 

Significant debate occurred during the General Assemblies regarding

the future of the Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on Intellectual Property

and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore, and whether this

forum should accelerate towards international outcomes of the issues under its

mandate. In June 2003, participants at a meeting on the future of the IGC

were unable to agree on whether the IGC should begin immediate negotiations 

on a binding multilateral treaty on intellectual property as it relates to genetic 

resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore. Eventually, the participants

agreed to a compromise text that continued WIPO’s mandate to work on this 

issue. In 2004, the IGC developed draft provisions on principles for the 

protection of traditional knowledge and expressions. These provisions, 

presented to the 2004 Assembly, were to be debated in detail at a 2005

meeting of the IGC, of which the United States is an active member. The

United States expressed concern that the provisions highlight protection over

preservation, conservation, or promotion, and has cautioned that the diversity

of traditional knowledge may not be best addressed by a “one-size-fits-all” 

approach. 

The 2004 WIPO General Assemblies also agreed to further examine a

proposal originally presented by a group of developing countries to enhance

the “development agenda” in all of WIPO’s work. Noting the point raised by

the United States that WIPO is already undertaking many development 

activities, the General Assemblies agreed to convene inter-sessional 

intergovernmental meetings to examine the proposals submitted by Brazil and 

Argentina as well as additional proposals from other states, including the

United States. In its interventions on this proposal during the General

Assemblies, the United States argued that WIPO’s activities already included a 

strong development component, and that creating an additional “development 

agenda” would drain resources away from WIPO’s main mandated activities. 

During the last quarter of 2004, the United States held consultations with

interested U.S. parties and potential allies within WIPO, and began 

development of its own proposal for an Internet-based WIPO Partnership

Program. Utilizing existing WIPO resources, the Partnership Program would

assure that information on WIPO’s many ongoing development activities was 

made more readily available to developing countries. 

104
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

In 2004, WIPO’s total budget was $226.2 million, of which $14.9 

million was assessed to member states. The U.S. share of the assessed budget

was 6.6 percent, or $948,000. The U.S. assessed contribution represented less 

than one percent of WIPO’s total revenue, although, as noted above, 

approximately 40 percent of WIPO’s revenue comes from filing fees paid by

U.S. nationals, the largest group of WIPO supporters. In 2004, out of 366

posts subject to geographic distribution, U.S. citizens filled 22, or 6 percent. 

World Meteorological Organization (WMO) 

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), based in Geneva, 

Switzerland, facilitates international cooperation in making meteorological,

hydrological, and other related observations. It promotes the standardization,

quality control, and rapid exchange of meteorological observations, and 

uniform publication of observations and statistics. It also furthers the 

application of meteorology to aviation, shipping, hydrology, and agriculture.

The WMO promotes flood forecasting and climate studies, and encourages

research and training in various meteorological sciences. 

The WMO membership includes 181 states and six member 

territories, all of which maintain their own meteorological services and make

meteorological observations within their domain. The six WMO regional

groups meet every four years to coordinate operational meteorological, 

hydrological, and climatological activities within their region, and to examine 

questions referred to them by the WMO Executive Council. The WMO 

Secretariat serves as the administrative, documentation, and information center

for the organization. WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud (France) began 

a four-year term as Secretary-General on January 1, 2004.

The World Meteorological Congress (WMC), which is the supreme 

body of the WMO, meets every four years. It determines policies, approves 

the program and budget, and adopts regulations. The WMC last met in 2003, 

in Geneva. The next WMC will meet in Geneva in May 2007. 

The WMO’s Executive Council is the executive body of the WMO 

and is responsible to the WMC for the coordination of the programs of the 

organization and for utilization of its budgetary resources in accordance with 

the decisions of the WMC. It consists of 37 elected members representing six 

WMO Regions. The members are generally the heads of their national

meteorological services. The Executive Council’s Financial Advisory

Committee, which provides budget recommendations, is chaired by the WMO

President and made up of eight selected member countries (generally the

largest contributors, including the United States) and the presidents of the six

WMO regional associations. 

The Executive Council met June 8–18, 2004, in Geneva. The 

Executive Council authorized the Secretary-General to express WMO

willingness to house the Secretariat for the Group on Earth Observations under 

conditions comparable to those enjoyed by the other co-located secretariats. 

The Executive Council also implemented a series of management reforms.

 105
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

The WMO undertook several actions in 2004 to strengthen its financial

management, including establishing an Audit Committee; strengthening the

Internal Auditor’s office through the addition of two new staff; hiring a new

treasurer; instituting fraud detection/prevention training for all WMO staff; 

introducing new procurement rules; completing a new agreement with the 

WMO’s external auditor (the U.K. National Audit Office); and developing a

Code of Ethics for the Secretariat. 

The WMO’s principal programs include the World Weather Watch,

World Climate Program, Atmosphere Research and Environmental Program,

Applications of Meteorology Program, as well as education and training and

technical cooperation programs. The most important activities for the United 

States include the World Weather Watch Program, the Voluntary Cooperation

Program (VCP), and the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS). 

The World Weather Watch provides real-time worldwide weather 

data through the member-operated Global Telecommunication System. 

Observation platforms include four polar-orbiting and five geostationary 

satellites; about 10,000 land-based observation sites; approximately 7,000 ship

stations; and 300 moored and drifting buoys carrying automatic weather 

stations. 

The VCP supports member countries’ implementation of WMO 

Scientific and Technical Programs. It provides, among other things, 

equipment and services, including training, or financial contributions made on

a voluntary basis by member countries. It has assisted developing countries in

undertaking their own observations and may be an important vehicle in the 

future to help construct an integrated global observing system. 

GCOS was established to ensure that the observations and 

information needed to address climate-related issues are obtained and made 

available to all potential users. It is intended to be a long-term, user-driven

operational system capable of providing the comprehensive observations

required for monitoring the climate system, and for supporting research toward

improved understanding, modeling, and prediction of the climate system. 

GCOS is particularly important to the United States in light of the President’s 

commitment to enhance and expand the global climate observing systems in 

order to reduce uncertainties related to global climate change. 

The WMO has eight technical commissions: (1) Aeronautical 

Meteorology, (2) Agricultural Meteorology, (3) Atmospheric Sciences, (4) 

Basic Systems, (5) Climate, (6) Hydrology, (7) Instruments and Methods of

Observation, and (8) Oceanography and Marine Meteorology. The latter is a 

joint commission with the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural

Organization’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. The 

commissions meet quadrennially, and in one case (Basic Systems) biennially. 

The WMO does not prepare annual budgets, but its spending in 2004

was approximately $51.5 million, or one-quarter of the 2004–2007

quadrennial budget of $205 million. Total member assessments in 2004 

amounted to $50.4 million, of which the U.S. share, at 21.6 percent, amounted

106
Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

to approximately $10.9 million. The United States also contributed

approximately $2 million in 2004 to WMO’s VCP. The Geneva-based

Secretariat had 251 employees at the end of 2004. There were four American 

employees out of the 116 professional-level staff subject to geographical

distribution (3.4 percent). 

 107
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

108
Part 4 

Legal Developments 

Cloning 

The United Nations continued consideration in 2004 of an

international convention to prohibit all human cloning. The United Nations

began discussing cloning in 2001 when the 56th General Assembly adopted a

French/German resolution that tasked an ad hoc committee of the UN General

Assembly’s Sixth (Legal) Committee to consider the elaboration of a 

convention to ban human reproductive cloning. In 2002 and 2003, the ad hoc

committee and the working group of the Sixth Committee were unable to

resolve differences between countries that wanted a convention to ban all 

human cloning (including the United States) and countries that wanted a ban

limited to cloning for reproductive purposes but not for experimental purposes. 

In 2004, the Sixth Committee considered two draft resolutions on

cloning. One, submitted by Costa Rica and cosponsored by the United States

and over 60 other countries, called for negotiation of a convention that would

ban all human cloning. The competing resolution, submitted by Belgium and 

cosponsored by 20 other countries, called for a convention that would ban only

cloning for reproductive purposes. 

In November 2004, the Sixth Committee decided by consensus to

take up the issue of human cloning as a non-binding declaration (instead of

pursuing a resolution calling for negotiation of a legally binding convention) 

in February 2005. In its Decision 59/547 of December 2004, the General 

Assembly adopted the recommendation of the Sixth Committee to establish a 

working group to finalize the text of a declaration on human cloning, on the 

basis of the draft resolution contained in A/C.6/59/L.26, and to report to the

Sixth Committee during the resumed 59th session. The United States 

supported this draft resolution, submitted by Italy, because it called upon 

member states (a) to prohibit any attempts to create human life through 

cloning processes and any research intended to achieve that aim; (b) to ensure 

that, in the application of life science, human dignity is respected in all 

circumstances and, in particular, that women are not exploited; and (c) to

adopt and implement national legislation to bring into effect paragraphs (a)

and (b).

The United States supports a ban on all cloning of human embryos,

both for reproductive and so-called “therapeutic” or “experimental” purposes.

The United States does not distinguish one type from the other since both

entail the creation, through cloning, of a human embryo. The United States

believes that using “therapeutic” cloning to create human life specifically to

destroy that life for experimental purposes is no less, if not more, of an affront

to human dignity than cloning for reproductive purposes. 

109 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Commission on International Trade Law 

(UNCITRAL) 

The UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL),

established by UN General Assembly Resolution 2205(XXI) in 1966, 

continued its technical legal work on commercial and economic law reform to

promote trade and commerce in all geographic regions. The Commission’s

work is reviewed and approved by the General Assembly’s Sixth (Legal) 

Committee, and its international legal texts are subject to adoption or

endorsement by the General Assembly. In December 2004, the General

Assembly reaffirmed the Commission’s mandate as the core legal body within

the UN system in the field of international trade law (Resolution 59/39). The 

United States started its new six-year elected term on the Commission in 2004. 

The Commission focuses on economic and technical effects of

commercial law. It promotes economic reform through multilateral

conventions, model national laws, UN legislative guidelines, and technical

assistance on trade and commercial law. The United States actively 

participates in the work of the Commission, since its work products are 

generally effective and are beneficial to the U.S. private sector as well as to 

governmental interests. 

Located at the UN’s International Center in Vienna, Austria, the

Commission usually holds two one-week working group meetings annually on

each topic, as well as interim meetings of experts groups. Each project is then 

reviewed at the Commission’s annual plenary session, which reviews and

approves the work program. The Commission invites industry and privatesector nongovernmental organizations which have established expertise in the 

topic of a working group to participate fully as observers and speak on

technical matters. U.S. private-sector associations are particularly active on

this basis, and the Department of State works closely with U.S. bar and trade

and industry groups to ensure representation of their interests in all

UNCITRAL topics. The 2004 annual plenary session was held June 14–25 in

New York. 

In July, the Commission concluded its four-year effort to prepare a

UN Legislative Guide to business insolvency law reform, which was then 

endorsed by the UN General Assembly in December 2004 in Resolution 

59/40. The Commission’s final product elaborated on the principles which

had been approved on an interim basis by the 2003 plenary session. The 

Guide included updated concepts of insolvency law as a part of an integrated

economic system; promotion of non-discrimination between foreign and 

domestic creditors; and emphasis on options for reorganization of failed 

enterprises, including options for expedited proceedings, goals long sought by

the United States. The Guide was supported by international financial

institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, 

and the Asian Development Bank, reflecting recognition that an effective 

system for recycling economic assets is critical to financing and economic

growth. The IMF and World Bank sought agreement with UNCITRAL as to 

110 
Legal Developments 

how to interrelate their work on insolvency law reform. The United States

expected that the UNCITRAL Guide would be integral to proposed joint IMFWorld Bank standards for assessing the progress of recipient countries in

upgrading the legal framework for their economies. 

In 2004, the Commission’s working group on procurement undertook 

a project to upgrade its widely used model law on procurement of goods,

construction, and services, which was extended through work by the 

Commission’s working group on privately-financed infrastructure projects

(PIF). The model legislation covered the bidding and selection process,

implementation, financing, and extension and termination. A substantial part

of the new effort was focused on practices emerging from electronic

commerce, including electronic reverse auctions. The United States, while 

supporting those aims, also sought to keep new rules technologically neutral. 

From the U.S. point of view, upgrading the model law on

procurement would need to be carefully coordinated with the recently

completed UNCITRAL work on PIF, reflected in its Legislative Guide on 

Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects, and the recent model core

legislative provisions. The growth of privately financed and managed

infrastructure, in partnership with governments, was a significant shift since

the early 1990s away from direct government financing or bilateral aid, and 

the United States sought to upgrade the UN’s procurement model law in a 

manner consistent with the policies underlying the recent PIF work. 

Parallel reform of secured financing laws along with insolvency law 

is a prime objective of the United States and international financial institutions

in seeking to upgrade economic performance through legal reform. Following

General Assembly adoption in 2001 of the UNCITRAL Convention on the 

Assignment of Receivables in International Trade, the Commission began 

preparing a Legislative Guide on General Laws on Secured Interest Financing.

The United States signed the UN Assignments Convention in December 2003, 

and the Department of State worked with various U.S. commercial sectors in

2004 on issues relevant to possible U.S. ratification, which could be a step 

toward gaining ratification by other states. 

The Commission agreed that the initial scope for the legislative guide 

project was the financing of trade and inventory receivables, which the United 

States proposed as an achievable goal. In 2004, the working group considered

expanding the scope to certain banking and negotiable instruments. A key

U.S. objective was to make sure all security devices would be covered.

Sufficient progress was made at the working group’s March and September 

meetings to seek interim approval of the draft legislative recommendations at 

the Commission’s 2006 plenary session. The working groups on security

interests and insolvency law initiated joint sessions on this project and 

insolvency law to coordinate the Commission’s work products. In December 

2004, the General Assembly endorsed this coordination.

The Commission’s working group on electronic commerce continued 

to work on a draft convention on the formation of contracts in e-commerce and 

111 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

the validity of computer messaging. Sufficient progress was made at the 

October meeting so that the working group reached consensus on scheduling 

final negotiation for the next plenary session in July 2005. The draft

convention drew on recent U.S. national laws and laws and directives in the

European Union and other countries. In 2004, the working group largely

eliminated regulatory provisions opposed by the United States and likeminded states. Several objectives of the United States remained unresolved, 

such as adopting a narrow rule on when an electronic message can be

presumed to be received, allowing wider scope for evidentiary proof of an

electronic signature; and agreement on the scope of exclusions from the treaty 

system, including consumer transactions. The working group continued to

elaborate provisions that would provide a treaty overlay for electronic

messaging that could be applied by states to existing multilateral and bilateral

instruments. The U.S. view was that such an initiative is consistent with treaty

law and would expand the footprint of modern e-commerce basic law to many

states, especially developing and emerging states so that they could close gaps

in their access to new Internet and other e-commerce markets. 

The Commission continued in 2004 to consider a draft convention on

the carriage of goods by sea, and its Working Group on Transport Law 

reached preliminary agreement on a number of key issues, including those

regarding the basis of liability under the draft instrument, scope of application 

of the instrument, and freedom of contract. The Working Group also made 

good progress on jurisdiction and arbitration, transfer of rights and right of

control and electronic commerce. This draft Convention would replace 

outdated international transportation treaties. U.S. industry sectors and other 

groups concerned with carriage of goods, ship financing, and insurance

supported this project. The Working Group was of the view that while

completion of its work by the end of 2005 was unlikely, the project could

completed in 2006 with a view to presenting it to the Commission for possible

adoption in 2007. 

The Commission, working with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, 

convened an international colloquium in Vienna in April on the problems

faced by countries and international commercial sectors from the growth of 

cross-border commercial fraud. Private-sector experts and national and local

law enforcement authorities attended the colloquium, which covered problems

involving financial documents, banking transactions, letters of credit, maritime

bills of lading, computer security, and related matters. Commercial fraud was 

noted as an area of seriously growing concern for both developing and

developed states, and appeared in part to be related to wider use of computerbased documentation. The Commission’s review was facilitated by

information provided by the U.S. Government and private-sector experts. 

Participants generally concurred that the absence of an international legal

regime which allowed cross-border cooperation significantly contributed to

this problem, noting that no UN system body had this subject clearly within

their scope of work. While the United States supported continued examination 

of these problems by the Commission, other states noted that work on quasi112 
Legal Developments 

criminal law matters could be outside the Commission’s charter, and that

resource limitations were already a serious concern vis-à-vis funding for the

Secretariat and the existing working groups. 

In 2004, the Commission’s Secretariat (the UN Office of Legal

Affairs Trade Law Branch) was reorganized into two “pillars,” the first being

preparation of new international commercial and trade law instruments; and 

the second covering adoption and implementation of those instruments, and

coordination within and outside of the UN system, and technical assistance for

states with an emphasis on developing countries. 

Coordination within as well as outside the UN system was upgraded

in 2004, to include regular meetings to rationalize the agendas of the principal 

intergovernmental bodies working on international private law matters. 

Developments in regional intergovernmental bodies such as the European

Commission and the Organization of American States were taken into account 

as appropriate by the Commission’s working groups. 

Host Country Relations 

The General Assembly established the Committee on Relations with 

the Host Country in 1971 to address issues concerning the presence of the

United Nations and the UN diplomatic community in the United States. These 

issues concerned the security of missions, the safety of their personnel, tax 

questions, legal and visa issues, and privileges and immunities. The UN 

Headquarters Agreement and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities 

of the United Nations provide the legal framework for the work of the 

Committee.

In light of the enhanced national security requirements implemented

in the United States following the events of September 11, 2001, and the 

difficulties experienced by representatives to the United Nations arriving and 

departing from the United States, the U.S. mission hosted a special briefing at

the United Nations on August 18, 2004, for all missions in preparation for the 

59th General Assembly. The briefing included guidance on diplomatic 

overflight and landing clearances, expedited port courtesies, customs and

immigration, the escort-screening program, and related matters. Members 

were encouraged to do their part to make the processes work smoothly. The

number of complaints from delegations to the 59th General Assembly with 

respect to arrivals and departures were diminutive, a significant improvement

over the previous year. 

Host Country Committee members continued to express concern 

about the implementation of the Parking Program for Diplomatic Vehicles, 

which was adopted in 2002 after considerable rancor in the diplomatic

community. An initial review of the implementation of the Parking Program,

as recommended in 2002 by the UN Legal Counsel in his opinion, was 

undertaken and concluded in 2004. The Committee agreed that the host 

country would continue to bring to the attention of New York City officials 

113 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

reports of problems encountered by the permanent missions and that the 

Committee would remain seized of the matter. 

On December 2, the General Assembly adopted without a vote 

Resolution 59/42, “Report of the Committee on Relations with the Host 

Country.” The resolution requested that the host country continue to solve, 

through negotiations, problems that might arise and to take all measures

necessary to prevent any interference with the functioning of the missions;

noted that the Committee remained seized of the matter of the Parking

Program; expressed its appreciation for the efforts made by the host country;

and noted that the Committee anticipates that the host country will continue to 

ensure the timely issuance of visas to representatives of member states for the 

purpose of attending official UN meetings. 

International Court of Justice 

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the UN’s principal judicial 

organ. The Court decides cases submitted to it by states and gives advisory 

opinions on legal questions at the request of international organizations 

authorized to request such opinions. The UN General Assembly and the 

Security Council vote separately to elect the Court’s judges from a list of

persons nominated by national groups on the Permanent Court of Arbitration. 

Judges are elected for nine-year terms, with five judges elected every three

years. There were no elections for the Court during 2004; the next regular

elections for Judges on the Court will occur in 2005. 

The ICJ is composed of 15 judges, no two of whom may be nationals

of the same state. As of December 31, 2004, the Court was composed as 

follows: Shi Jiuyong (China—President); Raymond Ranjeva (Madagascar—

Vice President); Gilbert Guillaume (France); Abdul G. Koroma (Sierra 

Leone); Vladlen S. Vereshchetin (Russian Federation); Rosalyn Higgins 

(United Kingdom); Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren (Venezuela); Pieter H.

Kooijmans (Netherlands); Francisco Rezek (Brazil); Awn Shawkat AlKhasawneh (Jordan); Thomas Buergenthal (United States); Nabil Elaraby

(Egypt); Hisashi Owada (Japan); Bruno Simma (Germany); and Peter Tomka 

(Slovakia). 

The ICJ is funded from the UN regular budget, of which the United

States pays 22 percent. The ICJ’s appropriation in 2004 was $17.5 million. 

The United States was involved in the following matters in the Court 

in 2004. 

Mexico v. United States of America 

On January 9, 2003, Mexico brought a case against the United States

claiming that the United States violated its obligations under the Vienna

Convention on Consular Relations, including its obligation to inform, “without 

delay,” a number of Mexican nationals that they were entitled to communicate

with Mexican consular officers as required under Article 36 of the Convention. 

These nationals were arrested, and subsequently tried, convicted, and 

sentenced to death in criminal proceedings in the United States. Following 

114 
Legal Developments 

preliminary proceedings in the case, Mexico filed its Memorial on June 23, 

2003, and the United States filed its Counter-Memorial on November 2, 2003. 

The Court held oral proceedings in the case from December 15–19, 2003. 

On March 31, 2004, the Court issued its judgment in the case. In its 

judgment, the Court held, by a vote of 14 to 1 (Judge Parra-Aranguren

dissenting), that the United States had breached its obligations under Article

36 of the Vienna Convention in Consular Relations with respect to 51 of the 

Mexican nationals at issue in the case. The appropriate reparation in the case 

consisted in the obligation of the United States to provide, by means of its own 

choosing, review and reconsideration of the nationals’ convictions and

sentences, taking account both of the violation of the rights set forth in the 

Vienna Convention and particular considerations set out in the Court’s

Judgment. 

The Court further found, by a unanimous vote, that the commitment 

undertaken by the United States to ensure implementation of Article 36 must 

be regarded as meeting the request by Mexico for guarantees and assurances of 

non-repetition. The ICJ also found that, should Mexican nationals 

nevertheless be sentenced to severe penalties, without their rights under 

Article 36, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention having been respected in the

future, the United States shall provide, by means of its own choosing, review 

and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence, so as to allow full weight

to be given to the violation of the rights set forth in the Convention, taking 

account of particular considerations set out in the Court’s Judgment. 

[Note: On February 28, 2005, President Bush issued a determination 

that the United States would comply with the Court’s decision.] 

Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction 

of a Wall in Occupied Palestinian Territory 

On December 8, 2003, in an emergency session, the UN General 

Assembly adopted Resolution ES-10/14 requesting an advisory opinion from

the ICJ on the following question: “What are the legal consequences arising 

from the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in

the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, as

described in the report of the Secretary-General, considering the rules and 

principles of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention of

1949, and relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions?”

Pursuant to the December 19, 2003, order of the Court, the United Nations and 

its member states and Palestine were given the opportunity to file written 

statements with the Court with information related to the question on which

the Advisory Opinion was sought. 

On January 30, 2004, the United States filed a written statement in

the case. In its Statement, the United States expressed its view that the giving 

of an Advisory Opinion in this matter risked undermining the IsraeliPalestinian peace process and politicizing the Court. It emphasized that the

Court should give due regard to the principle that advisory opinion jurisdiction

115 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

is not intended as a means of circumventing the rights of states to determine 

whether to submit their disputes to judicial settlement. It also emphasized the

following two principles in connection with the Israeli-Palestinian peace

process: the permanent status issues at the core of the Israel-Palestinian 

conflict are to be resolved by negotiations between the parties to the dispute; 

and Israelis and Palestinians must fulfill their security responsibilities

separately and in coordination and cooperation with one another. In addition 

to the United States, 43 other states, Palestine, and the United Nations also

submitted written statements. 

The Court issued its advisory opinion on July 9. After finding that it 

had jurisdiction and deciding to comply with the General Assembly’s request, 

a large majority of the Court found that the construction of the wall and its 

associated regime were contrary to international law and that all states were 

obligated not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction 

of the wall or to render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation. The 

Court’s opinion also stated that “illegal actions and unilateral decisions [had

been] taken on all sides” and called for renewed efforts toward a negotiated 

solution “to the outstanding problems and the establishment of a Palestinian

state, existing side by side with Israel and its other neighbours, with peace and

security for all in the region.” 

International Criminal Court (ICC) 

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is not a UN body, and the 

United States is not a party to the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. In

anticipation of the Rome Statute coming into force in July 2002, the United

States was concerned that the ICC could improperly seek to assert jurisdiction 

over U.S. peacekeepers and others involved in UN-authorized or established

missions that could fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. This concern

prompted the United States to seek appropriate protections, which resulted in 

compromise language in UN Security Council Resolution 1422 in 2002;

Resolution 1487, adopted June 12, 2003, renewed this resolution. Both

resolutions provided that, for a 12-month period, the ICC was precluded from

initiating any investigation or prosecution of current or former officials or

personnel from states not party to the Rome Statute of the ICC concerning acts 

or omissions relating to UN-authorized or established missions. Although

Resolution 1487 expressed the Security Council’s intention to adopt a similar

resolution in 2004, the Council was unable to agree on the text of such a 

follow-on resolution, and none was adopted. The United States was

disappointed at the failure of the Security Council to renew the text of

Resolution 1487. 

The United States has pursued bilateral agreements recognized by

Article 98 of the Rome Statute to protect U.S. nationals and military personnel

from surrender to the ICC. One hundred one agreements have been concluded 

to date, 19 in 2004. The American Servicemembers’ Protection Act of 2002

prohibits certain military assistance to certain countries that are parties to the

Rome Statute. The President may waive these prohibitions with respect to a 

116 
Legal Developments 

country that has entered into a bilateral Article 98 agreement or where the 

President determines that it is important to U.S. national interest to do so. The

Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations

Act of 2005, signed into law on December 8, 2004, prohibits the use of fiscal 

year 2005 Economic Support Funds to provide assistance to the government of

a country that is a party to the Rome Statute and has not entered into bilateral 

Article 98 agreements with the United States. The President may waive this 

restriction with respect to certain countries where he determines that it is

important to the national security to do so. 

The United States continued to be a forceful advocate for

accountability for war crimes and other grave violations of international law. 

U.S. policy encouraged states to pursue justice within their sovereign 

institutions and, when appropriate, through ad hoc courts and other 

mechanisms authorized by the UN Security Council. 

International Law Commission (ILC) 

The UN General Assembly established the International Law 

Commission (ILC) in 1947 to encourage “the progressive development of 

international law and its codification.” Its 34 members, who are of recognized

competence in international law, serve not as government representatives but 

in their personal capacity as experts. Members are elected for a five-year term. 

The current member of the Commission from the United States is Michael 

Matheson, a former Principal Deputy Legal Adviser (and Acting Legal 

Adviser) at the Department of State. Mr. Matheson was elected in 2003 to fill 

the vacancy arising from the resignation of Robert Rosenstock, a former Legal 

Counselor at the U.S. mission in New York. Mr. Matheson’s term, as a result, 

expires in 2006. 

The Commission studies international law topics referred to it by the

General Assembly or that it decides are suitable for codification or progressive 

development. It usually selects one of its members, designated a “special

rapporteur,” to prepare reports on each topic. After discussion in the

Commission, special rapporteurs prepare draft articles for detailed discussion

by the members of the Commission. These articles are considered and refined 

in a drafting group before formal adoption by the Commission. The 

Commission reports annually on its work to the Sixth (Legal) Committee of 

the General Assembly. 

In recent years, the ILC has met for two six-week sessions in the May

through August period, with a break in the middle. During the 56th session,

held between May and August 2004, the Commission focused on the issues of

diplomatic protection, responsibility of international organizations, shared

natural resources, international liability for injurious consequences arising out 

of acts not prohibited by international law, unilateral acts of states, 

reservations to treaties, and fragmentation of international law (difficulties 

arising from the diversification and expansion of international law). The first 

reading of the articles on diplomatic protection and the principles on

international liability was completed, and it appears that the Commission will 

117 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

produce a final version of these items in 2006. It is not likely that there will be

a similar outcome on the other topics within this time frame. 

In addition, the Commission decided in 2004 to begin work on a 

series of new topics. Two topics were added to the current work program, the 

effect of armed conflict on treaties and the expulsion of aliens. The work on 

these topics will begin in 2005. One new topic—the obligation to extradite or

prosecute—was added to the long-term program of work, and a decision may

be taken in 2005 to add this to the current work program. Finally, proposals to

add one or more new topics on the question of collective security were not 

accepted, partly because it was unclear whether the Commission could 

usefully add to the existing law in this area and partly because the proposals

were thought to risk politicizing the Commission’s work and intruding on the 

responsibilities of the political organs of the United Nations. 

Special Committee on the Charter of the United

Nations 

In 1974, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 3349, which

established an Ad Hoc Committee on the Charter of the United Nations. The 

Committee was mandated to consider, among other things, any specific 

proposals that governments might make with a view to enhancing the UN’s

ability to achieve its purposes as well as other suggestions for the more

effective functioning of the United Nations that might not require amendments

to the Charter. Since its 30th session, the General Assembly has reconvened 

the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations (“Special 

Committee”) every year, considered its successive reports, and renewed and 

revised its mandate on an annual basis in its resolutions on the topic of the 

Report of the Special Committee. The General Assembly, in Resolution 50/52

(1995), decided that the Charter Committee should henceforth be open to all

UN member states and that it would continue to operate on the basis of

consensus. 

General Assembly Resolution 59/44, adopted on December 2, 2004,

provided that the Special Committee will continue its consideration of a 

variety of proposals (including on questions concerning implementation of the

provisions of the UN Charter related to assistance to third states affected by 

sanctions, the peaceful settlement of disputes, the UN Trusteeship Council, 

improving the Committee’s working methods, and enhancing its efficiency).

In practice, the role the Committee plays is small, due largely to the 

controversial nature of many of the proposals before it and the fact that it

operates by consensus. Indeed, the U.S. goal has been to ensure that the 

Committee resists the formation of elaborate machinery to deal with issues or 

other efforts that could impinge on Security Council prerogatives, and to keep

attention focused on the question of reform of the Committee. 

Of particular concern with regard to issues that could impinge on

Security Council prerogatives, would be the Committee’s consideration of

Article 50 of the Charter. This article provides that when preventive or 

118 
Legal Developments 

enforcement measures (e.g., sanctions) against any state are taken by the

Security Council, any other state which finds itself confronted with special 

economic problems arising from the carrying out of those measures shall have 

the right to consult the Security Council with regard to a solution of those

problems. The United States, the European Union, and Japan, among others,

reiterated their long-standing position that the Charter Committee should not

deal with issues that have been assigned to, or are being addressed by, other

parts of the United Nations. 

The Committee also discussed UN peacekeeping and the issue of 

International Court of Justice advisory opinions. The United States stressed

that the Committee should avoid duplicating the work on peacekeeping carried 

out by other bodies, in particular the Special Committee on Peacekeeping 

Operations. The United States also did not support a proposal put forth by

Russia on the issue of advisory opinions. 

However, the United States continually supports proposals that aim to

streamline the work of the Special Committee, such as moving the Committee

towards considering technical or drafting issues having to do with amending

the Charter. 

War Crimes Tribunals 

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal 

for Rwanda (ICTR) in November 1994. The Tribunal investigates and tries 

individuals accused of having committed genocide, crimes against humanity, 

and other serious violations of international humanitarian law in Rwanda from

January 1, 1994, through December 31, 1994. Under the Tribunal’s 

completion strategy, as endorsed by the UN Security Council, the ICTR seeks

to complete all trials by 2008, and all work appeals by 2010. 

The surrender to and prosecution of indictees by the ICTR, especially 

senior leader Felicien Kabuga, was a critical priority for the United States and 

the Security Council. The United States strongly urged all pertinent parties, 

particularly the Governments of Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo, Kenya, and the Republic of the Congo, to cooperate and support the 

efforts and integrity of the ICTR by apprehending and transferring fugitive 

indictees, and by freezing the assets and restricting travel of fugitive indictees.

In 2004, ICTR had a total of four convictions and two acquittals. 

The United States continued to closely monitor the tribunal and to 

ensure that it adopted and adhered to practices that improved efficiency and 

effectiveness. The United States helped make sure that all increases to the 

budgets were fully justified and in line with the tribunal’s completion

strategies. In 2004, the United States was assessed $72.2 million for ICTR, 

approximately a quarter of the total costs. 

119 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 

The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal 

for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in May 1993 to investigate and try

individuals accused of committing genocide, crimes against humanity, and 

other serious violations of international humanitarian law in the territory of the 

former Yugoslavia. A UN Security Council resolution provides for the 

ICTY’s continuing mandate, with reports due to the Council every six months. 

By the end of 2004, the ICTY prosecution had presented all of its

final indictments for confirmation which, when finally confirmed, totaled 162 

individuals. Fifteen accused died before completion of proceedings, and 21 

indictments were withdrawn prior to completion of the proceedings. By the 

end of 2004, 47 of the defendants appearing in court were either convicted or

pled guilty, and five were acquitted of all charges. Twenty remained fugitives 

from justice, including the most-wanted Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic, and

Ante Gotovina. 

The apprehension and prosecution at ICTY of persons indicted for 

war crimes—especially senior leaders Karadzic, Mladic, and Gotovina—has 

long been a critical priority for the United States and the Security Council. As 

such, the United States strongly urged all entities and states, particularly the 

Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Serbia in Serbia 

and Montenegro, and Croatia, to cooperate and support the efforts and

integrity of the ICTY by apprehending and transferring fugitive indictees to

the ICTY, and by freezing the assets and restricting travel of fugitive indictees 

and those who support them. The United States also made clear to regional

authorities that meeting their obligations to the ICTY was a prerequisite for

full integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. 

To support the ICTY completion strategy, the United States helped 

create the capacity for the fair and credible adjudication of low and mid-level

war crime cases by domestic courts in the region and it supported the transfer

of such ICTY cases to domestic courts. For example, the United States was

the single largest contributor of funds—$10 million in 2004—to help establish

the special war crimes chamber of the Sarajevo State Court for this purpose. 

The United States remained committed to the ICTY’s Security 

Council-endorsed Completion Strategy and the timelines it set out for the 

ICTY to complete its mandate. The United States also welcomed the ICTY’s 

successful meeting of its first completion strategy benchmark, when it 

concluded all investigations by the end of 2004, and looked forward to the

completion of trials by the end of 2008, and appeals by the end of 2010. 

The United States continued to monitor the Tribunal closely to ensure 

that it adopted and adhered to practices that improved both efficiency and

effectiveness, and that any increases to the budgets were fully justified and in 

line with the Tribunal’s completion strategies. 

In 2004, the Tribunal’s budget was approximately $183 million; U.S. 

assessed contributions for the Tribunal totaled approximately $43 million. 

120 
Legal Developments 

Theodor Meron (United States) was re-elected to the bench of the ICTY in

November 2004 and will remain as the Tribunal’s President until November

2005. 

Special Court for Sierra Leone 

The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) was established by an

agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and the United Nations. 

The Court would be financed by voluntary contributions. It is mandated to try

those who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations of international

humanitarian and Sierra Leone law committed in the territory of Sierra Leone

since November 30, 1996. 

Since the Court’s inception, it has indicted 13 people, two in 2004. 

These indictments included a 17-count indictment against former Liberian

President Charles Taylor in March. The indictment against Taylor charged 

him with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of

international humanitarian law. Indictments against two persons were

withdrawn in December due to their deaths. 

In resolutions concerning the UN Mission in Sierra Leone, the 

Security Council included provisions that stressed the importance of the SCSL

and a related Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). These resolutions, 

among other things, called upon all member states to financially support the

work of these institutions. The Security Council unanimously adopted these 

measures. The United States publicly echoed the resolution’s call for donor

assistance to the SCSL. 

The TRC, which was established in 2002, also continued to collect 

testimony of victims and perpetrators. It held hearings to create a record of 

human rights violations, which would promote healing and national

reconciliation. The United States believes that both the SCSL and the TRC 

have important and complementary roles to play in promoting reconciliation

and the rule of law in Sierra Leone. The United States has contributed

$700,000 total to the TRC since its inception. The United States did not

contribute any funds to the TRC in 2004. 

The United States is also an active member of the Court’s

Management Committee, comprised of the largest donors (United States, the 

United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Canada) as well as Nigeria, Lesotho, 

Sierra Leone, and UN representatives. The Committee provides policy advice

and direction on all the non-judicial aspects of the Court’s operations,

including the Court’s annual budget. 

The United States has been a key supporter of the SCSL, voluntarily

contributing a total of $12 million in 2004. A U.S. citizen, David Crane, was

appointed as Prosecutor for a three-year term that began in 2002. 

Cambodia Khmer Rouge Tribunal 

In 2003, the United States welcomed the agreement between the

United Nations and Cambodia to establish the Khmer Rouge tribunal to bring

to justice senior leaders of the Khmer Rouge and those who were most 

121 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

responsible for the atrocities that were committed by that regime between 

April 17, 1975, and January 7, 1979. 

On October 4, 2004, the Cambodian National Assembly ratified the

agreement between the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) and the United

Nations to create an international tribunal to try surviving leaders of the 

Khmer Rouge. This action, along with the necessary related amendments to

Cambodian national law passed by the National Assembly on October 5,

marked the end of a seven-year process of negotiation between Cambodia and 

the United Nations on the establishment of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (KRT).

On December 10, a UN team led by UN KRT Coordinator Mohammed Said 

concluded discussions with the RGC on the final budget for the three-year

tribunal, setting the budget at $56.3 million ($43 million to be provided by

international donors and $13.3 million to be provided by the RGC). 

122 
Part 5 

Reform of the UN System 

Security Council Reform 

Security Council reform was a regular topic during General Assembly 

debates in 2004. Amid this debate, many countries announced interest in 

obtaining permanent seats on the Council. The Secretary-General’s High 

Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change also issued its report and

made recommendations regarding reform of the Security Council. The

common topic in both debates and the report was Security Council expansion.

On August 13, Secretary of State Powell announced that the United 

States supported Japan obtaining a permanent seat on the Council. The United

States did not officially support the addition of other countries to the Security

Council. On September 22, Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan issued a joint

statement supporting each other’s claim for permanent seats on the Security

Council. This coalition believed that the Council must broaden its 

membership to reflect the realities of the 21st century. On September 25, 

South Africa announced its bid for a permanent seat. Other countries that

announced their bids or emerged as possible candidates included Argentina,

Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Many of their arguments for

permanent seats were based on the perceived lack of adequate African, Latin 

American, or Islamic-state representation on the Council. 

On December 2, the 16-member High Level Panel on Threats,

Challenges and Change issued its report, “A More Secure World–Our Shared 

Responsibility.” This panel, consisting of distinguished international citizens

including former heads of state; foreign ministers; and security, military,

diplomatic, and development officials, was appointed by Secretary-General 

Kofi Annan in September 2003. Former Prime Minister of Thailand Anand

Panyarchun chaired the 16-member panel, which included former U.S.

National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. The panel’s purpose was to

identify global and emerging threats to international peace and security; 

identify how collective action could be taken to address the challenges posed 

by these threats; and then recommend necessary changes to the various organs

in the United Nations that would ensure effective action. 

The panel’s report included 101 recommendations to address global

threats to the international community, including terrorism, weapons of mass

destruction, conflict between and within states, genocide, organized crime, 

poverty, infectious disease, and environmental degradation. The report noted

the important role the Security Council could play in maintaining international

security but noted that reforms were necessary to make the body more 

effective. The Security Council reform proposal included two models for

expanding the Council, each of which would create nine additional seats. The 

first model recommended six new permanent seats and three new nonpermanent seats. The second model recommended no new permanent seats, 

123 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

one new two-year non-renewable seat, and eight four-year renewable-term

seats to be rotated among medium-sized countries based on a set of criteria. 

The Panel declined to endorse a specific model for Security Council

expansion. A total of nine recommendations dealt with aspects of Security

Council reform. 

The United States believed that any Security Council reform must 

ensure the effectiveness of the Council and be supported by a broad consensus. 

The United States consistently stressed that any Security Council reforms must 

focus on practical, achievable reforms to enhance its ability to effectively 

implement its original mandate. The United States continued to oppose any 

reform, including the elimination or dilution of the veto power, that would 

encumber the Council’s authority. 

Management Reform 

In 2004, the United Nations, supported by the active efforts of the

United States and other member states, adopted several administrative and

management reforms. The United States was a key sponsor of efforts to

promote better accountability and oversight in the United Nations. As a result, 

the General Assembly adopted resolutions to strengthen the Office of Internal

Oversight Services and the Joint Inspection Unit. [Please see the sections on 

the Joint Inspection Unit and the Office of Internal Oversight Services in Part

6 for more information.]

In 2004, the General Assembly also focused a great deal of attention 

on security and safety issues, as a result of the August 2003 attack on the UN 

Assistance Mission in Iraq. On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly 

adopted by consensus Resolution 59/276, “Strengthening the security and 

safety of United Nations operations, staff and premises,” which created a new

UN Department of Safety and Security that would unify UN security standards 

and practices. The United States strongly supported this important and longoverdue first step towards creating a more secure environment at UN duty

stations and in the field. 

The report of the Secretary-General’s High Level Panel of Experts

proposed several administrative, management, and structural reforms that, if

implemented, would strengthen the Office of the Secretary-General and his

authority to manage the UN Secretariat. Specifically, the report recommended

that the General Assembly take the following actions: 

• Review the relationship between the General Assembly and the 

Secretariat and grant greater flexibility to the Secretary-General to

manage UN staff;

• Approve a one-time review and buyout of senior staff;

• Affirm Articles 100 and 101 of the UN Charter, which stipulate that 

member states will not seek to influence UN staff in the discharge of their

duties and that the UN will hire staff of the highest levels of competence 

and integrity; 

124 
Reform of the UN System 

• Add 60 new Secretariat positions; and 

• Create a second Deputy Secretary-General for peace and international 

security. 

The High Level Panel report was an early part of an extensive reform

effort that will continue in 2005. General Assembly discussion will include

consideration of proposals by the Secretary-General and culminate in a highlevel event in September 2005. 

In 2004, UN specialized agencies also adopted significant reforms.

The United States played a leading role in supporting a series of reforms at the

World Meteorological Organization (WMO), prompted by the discovery of

financial irregularities in 2003. Overall, WMO has handled the situation in a 

transparent and open fashion and has acted quickly and effectively to 

implement management reforms. As a result, the External Auditor provided 

an unqualified opinion for the accounts for 2004. 

WMO Director-General Michel Jarraud’s (France) reform efforts

have focused on integrity to establish within the Secretariat a robust internal 

control system through the segregation of functions; transparency to provide 

information to member states on activities, finance, budget, staffing, and

operations; and efficiency to reduce administrative costs and time

requirements for decisions through process simplification, outsourcing,

automation, decentralization, and improved procurement. Specific actions

taken included, among other things, establishing an Audit Committee, 

augmenting the Internal Auditor’s office with two new staff, hiring a new 

treasurer, instituting fraud detection/prevention training, and appointing a new 

External Auditor (U.K. National Audit Office). 

The United States also proposed significant measures to strengthen 

management of the Universal Postal Union (UPU). The 23rd UPU Congress

adopted several decisions to reform the organization, which included 

reinforcement of a strategic planning process to include quantifiable goals, 

performance measurement, and results-based budgeting; and strengthening the 

roles of the UPU’s Cooperatives (voluntary, extra-budgetary associations of

member administrations). The Cooperatives feature a corporate-like structure, 

decision-making based on weighted voting, annual business plans, quantifiable 

goals and measurements, and Boards of Directors whose members are elected 

ad personam, and decision-making based on weighted voting. 

Peacekeeping Reform 

The addition of three complex peacekeeping missions and an increase

in one mission in 2004 continued a trend of increasing demand for 

peacekeeping around the world. At the close of the year, the United Nations

was operating 16 missions and a total of 64,720 personnel (55,909 troops, 

2,046 military observers, and 6,765 CIVPOL) deployed. This was an increase 

of 18,905 persons deployed over the levels at the end of 2003. 

The growing demand for peacekeeping placed a burgeoning need on

securing troop contingents and meeting the demands for skilled police officers 

125 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

and civilian staff with expertise in justice, civil administration, and other 

specialized fields. To help meet the growing demand for civilian police, the 

United Nations broadened the civilian police eligibility pool to include retired

officers. The United Nations also placed a high priority on training and 

building rosters of rapidly deployable qualified staff to meet the broader needs 

of peacekeeping missions. There were continuing efforts to develop systems

for rapid and effective deployment of uniformed personnel.

The Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) worked to 

achieve its goal of setting up a mission within 30–90 days of Security Council

authorization. DPKO began using new databases to check for countries’ 

capabilities to contribute troops and improved ways to plan and use advance 

funds for a proposed mission before the Security Council authorized its 

creation. Rapid deployment training, to prepare UN staff to be able to set up a

new peacekeeping mission on short notice, intensified in 2004 when scores of 

field and headquarters personnel acquired concrete skills in setting up

functioning missions from day one. 

Overall, peacekeeping operations moved away from cease-fire 

observation and monitoring to managing complex peace operations in the

context of state-building. The shifting role of UN peacekeeping demanded a 

higher level of organizational and administrative capacity. DPKO worked to

improve the support and planning peacekeeping missions receive from UN 

headquarters in New York. The department improved mission leadership by

closing the gap between what the Security Council mandates and what the 

peacekeepers actually do on the ground. The DPKO convenes mission leaders

prior to deploying to the field to review and discuss their mandates.

The UN Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) is an 

independent UN department that assists the Secretary-General to fulfill his 

oversight responsibilities. The head of OIOS is an Under Secretary-General

who functions as the UN inspector general, conducting audits, inspections, 

investigations, and evaluations for all activities under the Secretary-General’s 

authority. OIOS conducted numerous audits in 2004, including several audits

of UN peacekeeping operations. At the request of the General Assembly, 

OIOS evaluated a recent reorganization of the DPKO, and recommended 

improvements in human resources management, institutionalization of best 

practices, and implementation of information and technology objectives. 

With annual budgets of over $2 billion, UN peacekeeping operations 

are a significant sector for OIOS oversight. In 2004, OIOS undertook an

assessment of field security procedures in 14 UN peacekeeping missions to

help improve security of UN personnel in the field. OIOS investigated 

allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse in the UN Mission in the 

Democratic Republic of the Congo, and made recommendations to improve 

administration and management in the UN missions in the Democratic

Republic of the Congo, East Timor, Ethiopia and Eritrea, Kosovo, Liberia, and

Sierra Leone. 

126 
Part 6 

Administration and Budget 

UN Financial Situation 

At a briefing in October 2004 to the UN’s Fifth (Administrative and 

Budgetary) Committee, UN Under Secretary-General for Management 

Catherine Bertini (United States) provided a cautiously optimistic presentation

on the UN’s financial situation for the remainder of the year. She noted that

the United Nations was in a stronger financial position in most areas than at 

the same time in 2003, but stressed that the availability of cash for crossborrowing from closed peacekeeping missions remained a concern, 

particularly in light of the poor financial state of the two international war 

crimes tribunals (former Yugoslavia and Rwanda). At the time of her

presentation, a total of $80 million was owed to the two tribunals by UN 

members. The figure was subsequently reduced to $19.7 million by the end of

December. The United States paid in full its 2004 assessments, which were 

$72.3 million, for the two tribunals. 

With respect to reimbursements to troop contribution countries for

UN peacekeeping operations, Under Secretary-General Bertini noted that the 

United Nations would owe approximately $605 million for troop and

equipment costs at the end of the year, against a total of $439 million at the 

end of 2003. The increase in total debt was attributable primarily to the 

deployment of troops and equipment to three new missions in Burundi, Cote

d’Ivoire, and Haiti. In concluding her presentation, Bertini noted that, 

although the UN’s financial situation remained stable at present, serious 

problems could occur in the future unless member states pay their assessments

in a more timely fashion. In this connection, she stated, “the importance of

member states paying their assessed contributions in full and on time cannot

be overemphasized.” 

The United Nations ended 2004 with members’ arrears totaling 

$2.332 billion for assessments relating to the UN regular budget, UN 

peacekeeping operations, and the international war crimes tribunals for the 

former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. This figure was considerably higher than the 

arrears at the end of 2003, which were $1.603 billion. The higher arrearage 

figure was attributable primarily to higher assessment levels in 2004. Overall 

assessments in 2004 totaled $6.8 billion, compared to $3.9 billion in 2003. 

The most significant increase in assessments related to UN peacekeeping 

budgets, which more than doubled from $2.2 billion in 2003 to $5.1 billion in 

2004. 

The United States accounted for $975 million of the $2.332 billion 

owed by all UN member states at the end of 2004. Most of this amount, $722

million, was related to UN peacekeeping operations. The U.S. payment 

pattern regarding all UN assessments was affected by the delay in the U.S. 

appropriation process for fiscal year 2005. For example, the delay reduced by 

127 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

approximately $72 million the amount that normally would have been paid to 

the UN regular budget during the calendar year, or by December 31, 2004. 

The payment subsequently would be made in early 2005. Overall, the United 

States accounted for $1.515 billion, or 29 percent, of the $5.255 billion in total 

payments made by all UN members in the course of 2004. Most of the U.S. 

payments, nearly $1.1 billion, related to assessments for peacekeeping. 

UN Budget 

At its regular 59th session in fall 2004, the UN General Assembly

approved the revised appropriation level for the UN regular budget for the

biennium 2004–2005 and the level of the UN budget outline for the biennium

2006–2007. These resolutions were adopted by the consensus. 

On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 

59/277, which approved the revised appropriation level of $3.608 billion for 

the biennium 2004–2005. This represented an increase of $447 million over

the initial budget level of $3.161 billion, approved one year earlier by

Resolution 58/271. The increase was attributable primarily to the following

three factors: (1) additional requirements for special political missions (SPMs) 

in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Sudan, and support for the newly created CounterTerrorism Executive Directorate; (2) resources for implementation of the 

Secretary-General’s Phase I and II initiatives to improve the safety and 

security of UN staff and facilities worldwide; and (3) the impact of the 

dramatic decline in the value of the U.S. dollar against other currencies by

which UN expenditures are incurred, notably the Swiss franc and the Euro. 

The United States supported the increased requirements for SPMs,

which accounted for about $192 million of the $447 million increase in the

revised 2004–2005 budget. The mandates of the major SPMs were established 

and renewed by the UN Security Council, where the United States had a major

role in their disposition. The United States was in the forefront of creating and 

enhancing SPMs, particularly in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Sudan, and

establishing the new Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate under the 

auspices of the Security Council. 

The United States also was a strong advocate for strengthening the

safety and security of UN personnel and facilities following the events of 9/11

and the August 2003 bombing of the UN facility in Baghdad, where 22 UN 

staff lost their lives. The revised 2004–2005 UN budget included an increase 

of nearly $118 million for this purpose. The funds would be used to bring all 

UN facilities under the new Minimum Operating Security Standards and

would establish a new UN Security Management Directorate to coordinate all

UN security management activities on a system-wide basis. The new 

Directorate would be headed by an Under Secretary-General, whose position 

would last for a single term of five years. Sir David Veness (United 

Kingdom), a former senior official of Scotland Yard, was appointed as the first

head of the Directorate by the UN Secretary-General. 

128 
Administration and Budget 

The revised 2004–2005 UN budget also included an increase of 

nearly $124 million for “recosting” factors, most of which related to exchange

rate losses due to the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar. While the UN 

budget is denominated in U.S. dollars, its expenditure pattern encompasses 

several foreign currencies, most notably the Swiss franc and the Euro. The

annual “recosting” exercise, which also takes account of inflation rate 

adjustments and personnel vacancy factors, is part of the UN budget process 

and is tied mainly to external factors that are beyond the UN’s control. In past

years, when the U.S. dollar was appreciating against foreign currencies, the 

“recosting” exercise resulted in a decline in the UN budget level. This 

occurred primarily in the 1990s. The event could recur in the future; however, 

it cannot be predicted. The United States continued to advocate maximum 

absorption by the United Nations of such non-discretionary cost increases 

through the use of efficiency savings and other management improvements. 

On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly also adopted 

Resolution 59/278, the proposed UN budget outline for the biennium 2006–

2007. The resolution approved an outline level of $3.622 billion and eight

priorities which will be used by the Secretary-General as a guide for the 

preparation of his detailed budget estimates for the next biennium. The 

detailed estimates will be issued in late spring 2005 and will be considered by

the General Assembly in the autumn during its 60th regular session. In

accordance with Resolution 41/213 (1986), which established the provision of 

a budget outline in the UN’s budget process, the approved outline for 2006–

2007 also included a contingency fund level of $27.7 million, which

represented 0.75 percent of the preliminary estimate. This percentage figure 

has remained fixed since the first budget outline was introduced in the 1980s. 

The United States joined consensus in the adoption of Resolution

59/278. The outline level of $3.622 billion reflects near zero-growth, in real 

terms, and the program priorities reflect several activities of high importance 

to the United States. These priorities included the maintenance of 

international peace and security; promotion of human rights; effective 

coordination of humanitarian assistance efforts; and drug control, crime 

prevention, and the combating of international terrorism in all its forms and 

manifestations.

Capital Master Plan 

There were no resolutions adopted during 2004 by the General 

Assembly with respect to the UN Capital Master Plan (CMP). Further 

consideration of the CMP, including its financing, was deferred by the General

Assembly until its resumed 59th session in 2005. 

The UN Capital Master Plan is the proposed renovation of the UN

headquarters complex in New York. Completed in 1952, the complex does 

not meet current building codes for fire prevention and safety, does not use

energy efficiently, and is in need of upgrades regarding security measures and 

space utilization. The proposal for the CMP was first introduced by the UN 

Secretary-General in 2000 and endorsed, in principle, by the General 

129 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Assembly in 2002 by Resolution 57/292. The CMP is expected to cost over 

$1 billion and take five or six years to complete. 

Among the more contentious issues surrounding the CMP has been

the question of financing the overall cost. As enacted in the fiscal year 2005 

Department of State appropriation legislation, the United States made an offer

of a loan of up to $1.2 billion, at 5.54 percent annual interest, payable up to 30 

years, in order to finance the cost of the CMP. All UN members would share 

in the cost of the re-payment of the loan based on the UN regular scale of

assessments. The U.S. share would be 22 percent, the largest of any UN

member. In addition, the United States also would pay $6 million to cover the 

cost of default risk relating to the loan. The original terms of the U.S. loan

offer were to be in effect through the end of fiscal year 2005. 

The reaction by others to the U.S. offer was mixed. While the

Secretary-General expressed appreciation for the U.S. offer, some UN 

members, especially those from the European Union, expressed 

disappointment that the U.S. loan included the payment of annual interest. 

They believed the U.S. offer of a loan should have been interest-free, similar

to what occurred with the original UN construction in the early 1950s. They

also believed that provision for an interest-free loan would have been

consistent with the U.S. responsibility as the host country for UN 

headquarters. 

The U.S. offer was the only financing proposal that had been tabled

through the end of 2004. There were no other offers from the rest of the UN’s 

membership. Members’ consideration of the U.S. offer, other possible

financing proposals, and further financing of CMP design and project costs 

would continue in 2005, at the resumed session of the 59th General Assembly. 

Scale of Assessments 

At its 59th regular session, the UN General Assembly considered the 

requests of 11 UN members for temporary exemption from the loss-of-vote

provision of Article 19 of the UN Charter. Article 19 prescribes that a UN 

member, which is in arrears to the organization, shall have no vote in the 

General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of 

the contributions due from it for the two preceding years. The General

Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a member to vote if it is satisfied 

that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the member. 

In Resolution 59/1, adopted by consensus, the General Assembly 

granted temporary exemption through June 30, 2005, to the following 11 UN

members: Central African Republic, Comoros, Georgia, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq,

Liberia, Niger, the Republic of Moldova, Sao Tome and Principe, Somalia, 

and Tajikistan. Except for Georgia and Liberia, all requests for exemption had

been previously reviewed by the UN’s expert Committee on Contributions in 

accord with Rule 160 of the Rules of Procedure of the UN General Assembly. 

In approving the requests for Georgia and Liberia, the General Assembly 

invited both members to submit appropriate information to the Committee on

130 
Administration and Budget 

Contributions if similar circumstances regarding loss-of-vote prevail in the

future. 

In was noted that Niger, the Republic of Moldova, and Tajikistan

were abiding by the multi-year payment plans of arrears that each had

submitted in previous years on a voluntary basis. At the June 2004 session of

the Committee on Contributions, the representatives from Comoros, GuineaBissau, and Iraq had informed the Committee that their countries were 

considering the submission of voluntary payment plans in the future if their

economic circumstances would permit. Such plans would be submitted in

advance of the Committee’s next session in June 2005. 

The UN scale of assessments is adopted by the General Assembly for 

a three-year period. The next UN scale will be adopted in 2006 for the period 

2007–2009. 

Committee for Program and Coordination (CPC) 

The Committee for Program and Coordination (CPC) is comprised of

34 members elected by the General Assembly on the basis of equitable

geographic distribution among regions. The United States is one of the

longest serving members of the CPC, participating every year since 1974. 

CPC members serve for periods of three years, and may serve multiple

successive terms. The CPC is the main subsidiary organ of the Economic and 

Social Council (ECOSOC) and the General Assembly for planning, 

programming, and coordination. The CPC is charged with reviewing and

recommending priorities among UN programs, guiding the Secretariat on

translating legislation into programs, developing evaluation procedures, and

making recommendations on where duplication could be avoided. The CPC

considers the activities of UN agencies on a sectoral basis in order to

recommend guidelines that take into account the need for system-wide

coherence and coordination. 

The CPC held its 44th session from June 7 to July 2, 2004, in New

York. This was the first opportunity for the CPC to consider the SecretaryGeneral’s proposed Strategic Framework for the period 2006–2007. General

Assembly Resolution 58/269 established this two-year Strategic Framework 

comprised of two parts to replace the four-year Medium-Term-Plan. In its 

2004 session, members could not agree on Part One of the Strategic 

Framework, the program outline that includes the longer-term objectives of the 

organization, as a result of divergent views on the role of the SecretaryGeneral in establishing the longer-term objectives. The United States and

others argued that it was within the Secretary-General’s authority to articulate 

the UN’s priorities while others maintained that it was the exclusive right of 

member states. All agreed on the actual priorities. 

During the discussion on Part Two, the biennial program plan, the 

United States vigorously encouraged the inclusion of language on improving

baseline data and target performance indicators in Program 1 (General 

Assembly affairs and conference services). Program 8 (least developed 

131 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

countries, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing states) 

sparked contention in the CPC as the developing countries requested that the 

program be redrafted for CPC approval. Citing insufficient time to review the 

revised program, the United States recommended that Program 8 be deferred

to the 59th session of the General Assembly. The Group of 77 argued that

deferral was not necessary. In the final moments of the negotiation, the United 

States accepted the adoption of Program 8 in order to avoid a resumed session 

of the CPC in August. The United States was successful in altering the 

language of Program 11 (environment) to better reflect the mandate of the UN

Environmental Program. The CPC failed to reach agreement on a number of 

major programs in Part Two of the Strategic Framework, including human 

rights, disarmament, internal oversight, and public information. 

As a result of divergent views on the proper role of member states

and the Secretariat on setting priorities at the subprogram level, the CPC 

deferred consideration to the Fifth Committee of the Secretary-General’s 

report on priority setting. The United States and the Western delegates argued 

that member states should agree on broad programmatic priorities and entrust 

the Secretariat to implement the priorities at the program and subprogram 

levels. The Group of 77 contended that priority-setting at all levels is the sole 

prerogative of member states. 

During discussion of the UN’s program performance for the biennium

2002–2003, the United States welcomed the improved format of the SecretaryGeneral’s report on the subject, which focused on results achieved, rather than

the delivery of outputs. The United States noted that the format could still be

improved upon, arguing that it was necessary to establish baselines against

which the Secretariat could evaluate its performance. 

The CPC also considered a number of program evaluation and

coordination reports. The evaluation reports dealt with strengthening the role

of evaluation findings in program design, delivery, and policy directives; the 

in-depth evaluation of the program on public administration finance and

development; the triennial review of the implementation of the 

recommendations made by the Committee at its 41st session on the in-depth

evaluation of sustainable development; and the triennial review of the

recommendations made by the Committee at its 41st session on the in-depth

evaluation of the population program. The CPC selected “Linkages between 

headquarters and field activities: a review of best practices for poverty 

eradication in the framework of the United Nations Millennium Declaration”

as the topic for the pilot thematic evaluation to be considered in its 45th

session. 

All delegates welcomed the improved content and format of the 

Annual Report of the UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination 

(CEB) for 2003. During its consideration of the UN system’s support for the 

New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), the CPC encouraged 

the Special Advisor on Africa to take a larger role in coordinating NEPAD and 

leading efforts to mobilize sufficient resources in supporting it. The United

132 
Administration and Budget 

States and others chastised the Secretariat for including a conclusion that more 

resources must be identified in future budgets in order to fully implement the 

program of action, arguing that resource decisions were outside the purview of

the CPC. 

Consistent with what the United States sees as the increasing inability 

of the CPC to work efficiently and effectively to complete its work in a timely 

manner, the CPC was unable to agree on changes to its working methods. 

Delegates were divided on the need for change and the direction reform would 

take. The CPC submitted its report to ECOSOC in July 2004. The General

Assembly considered the CPC’s report in its 59th session. In Resolution 

59/275, the General Assembly welcomed the CPC’s decision to revert to a

discussion of its working methods as a matter of priority in its 45th session. 

The General Assembly also endorsed the findings and recommendation of the 

CPC on, among other things, the proposed biennial program plan for the 

period 2006–2007, the evaluation reports, the CEB report, the NEPAD report, 

and the Secretary-General’s report on priority setting.

Audit Reports 

The Board of Auditors (BOA), based in New York, serves as the 

external auditor of UN accounts, its funds and programs, the International War 

Crimes Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and the International

Court of Justice. The General Assembly elects members to serve six-year 

terms, though members of the BOA may not serve consecutive terms. In

2004, the Board was composed of the Auditors-General of South Africa, the 

Philippines, and France. Additional information about the Board is available 

at http://www.unsystem.org/auditors/. 

The Board of Auditors issues most of its reports in even-numbered 

years. The financial periods of most organizations the BOA reviews are two

years in length ending in odd-numbered years. Accordingly, the Fifth 

Committee had 17 financial reports to consider in 2004, for the period ending

December 31, 2003, compared to just four reports in 2003. 

In 2004, the Fifth Committee considered the following 17 BOA 

reports: 

• UN peacekeeping operations;

• United Nations; 

• International Trade Center/UN Conference on Trade and 

Development/World Trade Organization;

• UN University; 

• UN Development Program (UNDP); 

• UN Children’s Fund; 

• UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East

(UNRWA); 

• UN Institute for Training and Research; 

133 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

• Voluntary funds administered by the UN High Commissioner for

Refugees (UNHCR); 

• Fund of the UN Environment Program;

• UN Population Fund (UNFPA);

• UN Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT); 

• Fund of the UN International Drug Control Program (UNDCP);

• UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS); 

• International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons 

Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International 

Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan

Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed

in the Territory of Neighboring States between January 1 and December 

31, 1994;

• International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for 

Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the

Territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991; and 

• UN Joint Staff Pension Fund, included in the report of the UN Joint Staff 

Pension Board. 

In May, the Fifth Committee considered the annual BOA 

peacekeeping operations report for the financial period ending June 30, 2003. 

The General Assembly adopted by consensus Resolution 58/249B, which 

concerned the separate peacekeeping operations financial report. During these 

discussions, the United States commended the Board for its excellent efforts, 

and highlighted the adoption of many of the Board’s previous

recommendations that resulted in improvements in the management of 

peacekeeping operations. While the United States noted these improvements, 

there were still instances of lengthy procurement delays and lack of

compliance with regulations and procedures across the spectrum of 

peacekeeping missions. 

On October 18, 2004, the Chair of the Board of Auditors presented 

the remaining financial reports and reports of the BOA to the Fifth Committee.

The General Assembly adopted by consensus Resolution 59/264, which 

concerned these audit reports and their recommendations. During the Fifth

Committee discussions, the United States raised the following concerns

(additional information can be found at 

http://usunweb.state.gov/04print_194.htm): 

• low implementation rate for BOA recommendations; 

• inability of the Board to issue unqualified opinions on the financial 

statements for UNOPS, UNDP, UNFPA, and UNDCP; 

• lack of accountability at UNHCR; 

• doubts in the ability of both War Crimes Tribunals to complete their work

before their respective mandates expire; 

134 
Administration and Budget 

• improper accounting of equipment; and 

• expired mandates for active trust funds. 

The BOA itself emphasized that as of mid-2004, only 46 percent of

the recommendations issued during the previous biennium had been

implemented, leading to continuing financial and management deficiencies. 

The United States noted that expeditious implementation of audit

recommendations will help ensure that management irregularities are both

corrected and prevented from recurring. 

The United States was particularly concerned with the financial

statements of the four organizations the BOA could not properly audit—

UNOPS, UNDP, UNFPA, and UNDCP. The Board did not issue any opinions

for UNOPS because it was unable to obtain adequate assurance on its financial

statements. For UNDP, UNFPA, and UNDCP, the Board had certain 

concerns, which did not affect its opinion on the financial statements, but

focused more narrowly on management issues such as the lack of adequate

internal controls and, specifically for UNDP, a need to improve assurances

obtained from third parties regarding the proper utilization of funds. The 

United States noted a chronic problem with the presentation and disclosure of

financial statements by UN organizations due to inconsistencies in accounting

policies and the financial reporting of organizations. 

The Board noted in its report that the UNHCR had not begun to 

address the General Assembly’s request to examine its governance structures,

principles, and accountability. The United States indicated that, given the

recent publicity concerning the allegations of sexual misconduct by the High 

Commissioner, it is critical to know how the UNHCR holds individuals at all

levels accountable when their actions run counter to established regulations. 

In addition, the U.S. delegate raised the following concerns in 

response to the BOA reports: 

• Auditors lacked confidence in the ability of the War Crimes Tribunals 

(Rwanda and former Yugoslavia) to complete their Security Council

mandated work by 2010;

• Assets, worth in excess of $220 million, were improperly accounted for at 

the UNDP, UNFPA, UN-HABITAT, UNDCP, UNOPS, and UNRWA,

due to inadequate physical inventory counts and inaccurate and unreliable

inventory records; and 

• Sixty-three trust funds remained active despite the fact that no

expenditures were recorded during the last two-year reporting period. The 

United States noted that there had been an increase in the number of trust 

funds that no longer served a purpose. As of December 31, the combined

reserves and balances of these funds totaled $54.1 million. 

Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) 

The Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), based in Geneva, Switzerland, is an 

external oversight body for the entire UN system. Its purpose is to inspect, 

135 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

investigate, and evaluate UN programs and administrative and financial

matters. The JIU produces reports, notes, and confidential letters detailing its 

recommendations. It is accountable to member states through the General

Assembly and through the governing bodies of UN specialized agencies. The

JIU is funded from the UN general budget and reimbursed from the regular

budgets of specialized UN agencies. 

The JIU is comprised of 11 inspectors as well as research and support

personnel. According to the JIU statute, the inspectors should be “chosen

from among members of national supervision or inspection bodies, or from

among persons of a similar competence on the basis of their special experience

in national or international administrative and financial matters, including

management questions.” The inspectors are elected by the General Assembly

and limited to serve two five-year terms. In 2004, Mr. Ion Gorita (Romania)

served as the Unit’s Chair, and Ms. M. Deborah Wynes (United States) served

as the Vice-Chair. 

The JIU produced the following 10 reports in 2004, in addition to a 

separate document titled “Program of Work of the JIU for 2004.” These 

reports and other information on the JIU are available at 

http://www.unsystem.org/jiu. 

• Multilingualism and Access to Information: Case Study of the

International Civil Aviation Organization (JIU/REP/2004/1); 

• Review of the Headquarters Agreements Concluded by the Organizations

of the United Nations System: Human Resources Issues Affecting Staff 

(JIU/REP/2004/2);

• Administration of Justice: Harmonization of the Statutes of the United

Nations Administrative Tribunal and the International Labor Organization

Administrative Tribunal (JIU/REP/2004/3); 

• Review of Management and Administration in the Office of the United

Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (JIU/REP/2004/4); 

• Overview of the Series of Reports on Managing for Results in the United

Nations System (JIU/REP/2004/5); 

• Implementation of Results-Based Management in the United Nations 

Organizations (Part I) Series on Managing for Results in the United 

Nations System (JIU/REP/2004/6); 

• Delegation of Authority and Accountability (Part II) Series on Managing

for Results in the United Nations System (JIU/REP/2004/7); 

• Managing Performance and Contracts (Part III) Series on Managing for 

Results in the United Nations System (JIU/REP/2004/8); 

• Procurement Practices Within the United Nations System

(JIU/REP/2004/9); and

• Harmonization of the Conditions of Travel Throughout the United

Nations System (JIU/REP/2004/10). 

136 
Administration and Budget 

The United States and other countries, interested in improving

efficiency and accountability at the United Nations, urged the General

Assembly to strengthen the JIU. Responding to these concerns, on December

23, the Assembly adopted by consensus Resolution 59/267, Reports of the 

Joint Inspection Unit. This resolution was the result of nearly two years of

effort by the United States and members of the Geneva Group, a group of

major UN contributors.

This long-debated resolution was the subject of intense negotiations

during spring and fall 2004, primarily between members of the Geneva Group

and a small group of G-77 delegations. The resolution spelled out more

clearly that the JIU inspector candidates should have audit and program

evaluation experience. The resolution also authorized the JIU Chair to 

exercise more authority over the other inspectors in an effort to improve JIU 

report quality. Delegates worked through differences to produce an agreement 

that maintained the JIU statute but provided substantial guidance for 

implementing it more effectively. Passage of the JIU resolution paved the way 

for the General Assembly’s approval of the JIU’s $5.4 million budget for

2005. This single year budget cycle, instead of the normal two-year cycle, was

intended to keep the Fifth Committee involved in the continuing reform effort

of the JIU. 

One issue that was not settled but remained open for further 

discussion was the process used to select JIU inspectors. The United States

pushed hard to streamline the flawed selection process, which required the

General Assembly to select only a country candidate during the first year of

the process. In the following year, the selected country was only then required 

to announce a candidate for appointment to the JIU. Because member states

had little or no knowledge of the individuals who will become inspectors when

they selected the country, the United States and others wanted to create a 

direct appointment system that would be completed during a single General

Assembly session and would require the President of the General Assembly to 

screen candidates for their qualifications. The Russians, as well as some G-77

members, were adamantly opposed to this improvement. The United States

ultimately settled for a requirement that the President of the General Assembly

present a report in early 2006 on ways to make the selection process more 

efficient. 

During Fifth Committee deliberations in fall 2004, the JIU Chair

presented a new methodology for assessing risk in the various UN

organizations. This methodology would ensure that all organizations have a 

common review mechanism to yield coherent analyses and identify areas of 

risk in the UN system. 

The United States expressed some satisfaction during the Fifth 

Committee deliberations that the “culture of reform” was beginning to reshape 

the JIU, although there was great concern with the duplication of effort and the 

lack of quality in some reports. The United States was concerned that the JIU 

continued to publish an annual report that contained little additional

137 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

information beyond a listing of the JIU statute and published reports. Also,

the JIU issued a report with a disclaimer that it did not meet its own 

established quality standards. The United States questioned why this report 

was still submitted, at substantial production cost, to the General Assembly. 

This report, in part, acted as the catalyst for the General Assembly to adopt by

consensus Resolution 59/267 to strengthen the JIU. 

Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) 

The Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) is based in New

York. The OIOS chief, Under Secretary-General Dileep Nair (Singapore) 

reports to the Secretary-General. According to General Assembly Resolution

48/218B (1994), the “purpose of OIOS is to assist the Secretary-General in

fulfilling his internal oversight responsibilities in respect of the resources and 

staff of the organization” through monitoring, internal audit, inspection, 

evaluation, investigation, and “implementation of recommendations and 

reporting procedures.” In addition to these mandated responsibilities, OIOS 

provides some management consulting services. Chief Nair serves a five-year 

non-renewable appointment that expires April 2005. 

In 2004, OIOS marked its 10-year anniversary, which included a

review of its mandate by the UN Fifth Committee. To assist the Fifth

Committee with the review, OIOS conducted a self-evaluation of its

operations and activities. During the Fifth Committee discussion, the United 

States presented a plan for strengthening OIOS. The U.S. proposals included

measures to bolster the independence and transparency of OIOS by creating an 

independent budget for OIOS, requiring the release of all OIOS reports, and 

extending the term of office for the OIOS chief. As a result of U.S. efforts, the 

General Assembly adopted resolution 59/272, which required the release of

OIOS reports to any member state upon request and directed the SecretaryGeneral to report on measures needed to achieve full operational independence

for OIOS in accordance with its mandate. This resolution would result in the 

release of 55 OIOS reports on the Oil-for-Food Program. Many of OIOS’ 

reports to the General Assembly are available on its website:

www.un.org/depts/oios. 

In 2004, OIOS continued to work as an effective oversight body. The 

Fifth Committee considered several OIOS reports, including the annual report

for the year ending June 30, 2004. According to the annual report, OIOS

made 1,515 recommendations. OIOS classified 35.7 percent of these

recommendations as “critical,” a designation utilized beginning in January 

2000 to focus attention on “areas with far-reaching consequences for the 

organization’s performance,” as stated in the OIOS annual report. Of all the 

recommendations OIOS issued during the reporting period, 52.3 percent had 

already been implemented as of June 30, 2004. In the period covered by the

latest annual report, OIOS recommendations identified approximately $16.4

million in potential cost savings and recoveries. Total actual savings and

recoveries as a result of recommendations from this and previous reporting

periods was $26.6 million. 

138 
Administration and Budget 

OIOS continued to use a risk-management framework in determining 

its annual work program in 2004. In its annual report, OIOS explained that it 

used this framework to prioritize and rationalize the allocation of resources to 

oversight of programmatic and operational areas that have the greatest

exposure to fraud, waste, abuse, inefficiencies, and mismanagement. OIOS 

outlined the criteria used in determining its annual work program as follows:

“risk to the organization’s resources and reputation; requests from the General

Assembly, departments, and offices for oversight coverage; large budget

items; new activities with no previous oversight coverage; and priority areas

for the reform program of the Secretary-General,” as well as the “need for 

follow-up of critical recommendations in high-risk areas that have not been

implemented by program managers.” 

Examples of specific activities and investigations performed by OIOS

in the period covered by its annual report included the following:

• An audit of the UN Mission of Support in East Timor that resulted in a 

decrease in unliquidated obligations from $10.1 million to $5.1 million

from June 2003 to June 2004;

• An audit of the telephone billing system at the UN Mission in Ethiopia

and Eritrea identified serious control weaknesses that allowed staff to

make fraudulent use of telephone personal identification numbers. The

mission’s own internal investigation estimates the losses at $1.1 million;

• A joint investigation conducted by OIOS and the Anti-Fraud Office of the 

European Commission resulted in the conviction of a former official at the 

UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo and the recovery of $4.3

million in embezzled funds; 

• OIOS audits of the operations of the UN High Commissioner for

Refugees included work in 29 countries and at headquarters and covered

22 percent of the total expenditures for 2003. OIOS issued 34 reports to

senior management, and estimated savings and recoveries totaled $1.7

million. OIOS also investigated allegations of sexual harassment by the

High Commissioner;

• OIOS developed an audit charter in close cooperation with the secretariat 

of the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund that was subsequently approved by the

Pension Board. Because of its considerable investments and large number 

of participants, OIOS continued to employ a risk-based approach to

planning audit coverage of the fund’s $26.5 billion in assets; and

• OIOS provided information to the Independent Inquiry Committee (IIC),

headed by Paul Volcker, who was appointed by the Secretary-General to

look into allegations of corruption in the UN’s Oil-for-Food Program. All

OIOS reports on the Oil-for-Food Program were released to the IIC. 

During UN Fifth Committee discussion of OIOS reports, the United

States called for the implementation of all OIOS recommendations. The U.S. 

delegate noted a relative decline in the implementation rate compared with

139 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

previous annual reports and called upon OIOS to create an automated system

that would track the recommendations. 

In 2004, OIOS had 180 staff; it had a budget of $23.5 million. 

Human Resources Management 

In 2004, the UN General Assembly’s Fifth Committee considered and

reached consensus on a wide range of human resource management issues. 

During the discussion of human resource management, the United States 

strongly supported efforts to integrate recruitment, selection, broad geographic 

representation, gender parity, and mobility into human resources planning and 

management. The United States also supported reducing the number of days a 

vacancy must be advertised from 60 to 45 days. 

Many of the U.S. recommendations and proposals addressed actions

under the jurisdiction of the Secretary-General. The United States encouraged

the Secretary-General to promote and expand the use of the Galaxy system in

order to facilitate a transparent selection process. The United States called on 

the Secretary-General to make increased efforts to achieve equitable

geographic representation, including establishing greater accountability for

managers. The United States also supported the Secretary-General’s proposal 

to establish national focal points with unrepresented and under-represented

member states and to create a special roster of candidates endorsed by the

Central Review Board. 

The United States urged member states to support UN efforts to

increase the percentage of women in professional and decision-making

positions by identifying and encouraging more women to apply and by

nominating more female candidates. The United States encouraged the 

Secretariat to continue its information, planning, and training and evaluation 

campaigns to ensure a smooth transition to the mandatory mobility policy,

which will take effect in May 2007. The United States also expressed concern 

about the organization’s practice of spending millions of dollars annually to

hire consultants, contractors, and retired personnel rather than developing inhouse resources to meet essential needs. 

The Fifth Committee devoted more than 200 hours (two to three 

times more time than allotted to any other of its agenda items) in formal and 

informal sessions to complete a delicately balanced hard-fought resolution on

human resources management. Throughout the discussion and formulation of 

the resolution, the United States and the Western European and Others Group 

effectively advocated U.S. positions, limiting G-77 proposals to micromanage 

the UN Secretariat. In the interest of compromise, long-term solutions on

equitable geographic distribution, mobility, and contractual arrangements were 

deferred. 

On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly adopted by consensus 

Resolution 59/266, the Fifth Committee’s recommended resolution on human

resources management, which, among other things:

140 
Administration and Budget 

• Called for reconstituting the Accountability Panel in order to strengthen

the UN internal system of accountability and to ensure program managers 

are held accountable for complying with individual department human

resource plans;

• Requested the Secretary-General to make efforts to ensure that the central 

review bodies carry out their roles in the staff selection process; 

• Requested the Secretary-General to continue his efforts to reduce the time 

required to fill vacancies; 

• Requested the Secretary-General to fully develop and strengthen the 

Galaxy recruitment tool and to make it more efficient and user-friendly;

• Authorized the Secretary-General to appoint to posts not subject to

geographical distribution at the P-2 level each year up to seven successful 

candidates from the General Service to Professional examination;

• Authorized the Secretary-General to appoint each year up to three 

successful candidates from the General Service to Professional 

examination to P-2 posts in duty stations with chronically high vacancy 

rates when no successful candidates from the national competitive

examination are available; 

• Requested the Secretary-General to make special efforts to appoint

successful candidates from unrepresented and under-represented member

states who have passed the national competitive examination to relevant

vacant posts in the Secretariat;

• Authorized the Secretary-General, for a trial period of two years, to

establish a special roster of candidates from unrepresented and underrepresented member states, for a number of posts at the P-4 and P-5 

levels; 

• Requested the Board of Auditors to perform an audit on the realization of 

equitable geographical representation in the Secretariat; 

• Requested the Secretary-General to increase his efforts to attain and 

monitor the goal of gender parity in the Secretariat, with special focus on 

senior levels; 

• Requested the Secretary-General to make proposals to the General

Assembly to reform the post structure with a view to considering a

possible increase in the proportion of P-2 and P-3 posts, taking advantage

of the projected senior management retirements;

• Authorized the Secretary-General to reappoint under the 100 series of the 

Staff Rules those mission staff whose service under 300-series contracts

had reached the four-year limit by December 31, 2004, or later; and 

• Requested the Secretary-General to continue the practice of using 

300 series contracts as the primary instrument for the appointment of new

mission staff. 

141 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

The report of the Secretary-General’s High Level Panel of Experts

proposed several administrative, management, and structural reform that, if

implemented, would strengthen the Office of the Secretary-General and his

authority to manage the UN Secretariat. Specifically, the report recommended

that the General Assembly review the relationship between the General

Assembly and the Secretariat and grant greater flexibility to the SecretaryGeneral to manage UN staff; approve a one-time review and buyout of staff; 

affirm Article 100 and 101 of the UN Charter, which stipulate that member

states will not seek to influence UN staff in the discharge of their duties and

that the UN will hire staff of the highest levels of competence and integrity; 

add 60 new Secretariat positions; and create a second Deputy SecretaryGeneral for peace and international security. 

International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) 

The International Civil Service Commission (ICSC), a 15-member

body of recognized experts, is responsible for making recommendations on

salaries, allowances, benefits, and other conditions of service (the “common

system”) for employees of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. 

Lucretia Myers, a U.S. citizen, served the third year of her current four-year

term as the U.S. member on the Commission in 2004. 

In 2004, the Commission met in Paris and New York for its 58th and

59th sessions, respectively. At the two sessions, the Commissioners focused

on testing broad-banding and pay-for-performance models, standardization of

paternity leave, increasing by 1.88 percent the base/floor salary scale for 

professional staff via a consolidation of post adjustment, and reviewing the 

level of the education grant. 

The Fifth Committee of the General Assembly discussed the 2004

report of the ICSC during its 59th session. The United States raised concerns

regarding the broad-banding and pay-for-performance systems proposed in the

report and sought assurances that the performance appraisal systems used by 

the organizations included in the current study were credible, reliable, and 

acceptable to all parties. In the context of the pilot project on broad-banding, 

the United States noted that thought should be given to how grade

equivalencies with the comparator will be determined in the future and how 

the system will track career progression under broad-banding. 

The United States supported the ICSC’s 2004–2006 Allowances and 

Benefits Review schedule, which will determine the civil service that pays the 

highest and included a comparison between the United Nations and the U.S.

federal civil service for 2005–2006. The United States urged the ICSC to

complete expeditiously its review of contractual arrangements so that member 

states will be in a better position to consider the Secretary-General’s proposal

to reform and simplify contractual arrangements during the 60th General

Assembly. The United States indicated that contractual arrangements must 

address the changing priorities and needs in the workforces of the 

organizations. 

142 
Administration and Budget 

The United States welcomed the ICSC’s decision to de-link mobility

from hardship as well as to de-link these allowances from the base floor salary

scale. The United States also welcomed the ICSC’s efforts to reconcile work

and family life responsibilities, including the introduction of paternity leave 

benefits as well as its adherence to the Noblemaire principle (the basis for the 

determination of conditions of service of staff in the professional and higher 

categories). Nevertheless, the United States stressed the view that the ICSC

recommendation for four weeks of paid paternity leave for headquarters and

family duty stations and eight weeks paid paternity leave for non-family duty

stations or in exceptional circumstances, was excessive and greatly exceeded

the comparator standard. 

On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly adopted by consensus 

Resolution 59/268, which, among other things:

• Decided that no new strategy or pilot project in broad-banding or pay-forperformance should be undertaken until the General Assembly had an 

opportunity to review the results of the pilot study on broad-banding and

pay-for-performance being conducted by the Commission;

• Requested the Commission to report on the rationale for continuing to

maintain separate salary scales for single staff and those with dependants 

in the context of its report on pay and benefits review;

• Requested the Commission, when reviewing and modernizing the system

of grants and allowances, to attach priority to improving transparency and 

administrative simplicity; 

• Reaffirmed use of the range of 110 to 120 for the margin between the net 

remuneration of Professional and higher categories staff in New York and 

the officials in comparable positions in the comparator civil service 

(United States), on the understanding that the margin would be maintained 

at a level around the midpoint of 115 over a period of time;

• Approved the Commission’s recommendation that the current base/floor 

salary scale for the Professional and higher categories of staff should be

increased by 1.88 percent through consolidation of post adjustment with

effect from January 1, 2005;

• Approved the increase in the maximum reimbursement level for education

grant expenses in certain countries;

• Reiterated the General Assembly’s request in 2000 for UN common

system organizations to harmonize their education grant practices for

internationally recruited staff with those of the United Nations; 

• Requested the ICSC to review common system allowance benefits with 

the comparator service; 

• Confirmed that the ICSC’s recommendation for paternity leave should be

adopted system-wide; and 

143 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

• Defined the jurisdictional boundaries among the ICSC, the UN Chief 

Executives Board for Coordination, and the General Assembly regarding

the implementation of a senior management service. 

Employment of Americans 

The U.S. Department of State assists qualified U.S. citizens in

competing for professional positions in the United Nations and other 

international organizations. The Department’s UN Employment Information and

Assistance Unit, along with counterparts within numerous other federal

agencies, supports this effort by disseminating announcements of vacancies in

international organizations to Americans worldwide. In a typical year, the 

Department provides direct assistance to hundreds of Americans and general 

information about employment opportunities in international organizations to

thousands of others. U.S. missions to the United Nations and other

international organizations in New York, Geneva, Montreal, Nairobi, Paris,

Rome, and Vienna, as well as some embassies, also provide support for this 

function through regular contacts with UN agency officials. While the U.S. 

Government places special emphasis on recruiting and promoting Americans 

for key, senior-level positions throughout the UN system, it supports recruitment 

at all levels, including by sponsoring the UN’s National Competitive Recruitment 

Exam to identify Americans for entry-level positions. 

Total Employment Numbers 

The following chart shows the total number of Americans in

professional and senior positions as of December 31, 2004, in the United

Nations, its specialized agencies, and the International Atomic Energy Agency 

(IAEA). It does not include the international financial institutions or the 

International Court of Justice (ICJ), although for the latter, the total number of

professional staff is included. 

Table 1 

U.S. Representation in the UN System 

Professional and Senior Staff 

 Total Americans Percent

UN Secretariat 4,076 451 11.1%

UN Peacekeeping Operations 1,543 180 11.7% 

UN Subsidiary Bodies 11,425 840 7.4% 

UN Specialized Agencies and IAEA 8,736 806 9.2%

Total 25,780 2,277 8.8%

Agencies with Geographic Targets

The UN Secretariat and several of the specialized agencies have

established systems of “desirable ranges” reflecting each organization’s 

targeted geographic representation for member states. Generally, these 

ranges are driven by formulas that weight variables—typically 

144 
Administration and Budget 

membership, individual member country assessment level, and population.

Each individual agency’s governing body establishes these formulas and

the number and type of positions subject to geographic consideration.

The following chart lists those UN agencies that had such ranges in

2004—the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International Labor Organization (ILO),

the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the 

World Health Organization (WHO)—and the number and status of Americans

on board as of December 31, 2004. (Note: These figures represent only those 

professional posts “subject to geographic distribution” that were funded from

the UN agencies’ assessed budgets.) 

In 2004, the percentage of U.S. citizens in posts subject to

geographic distribution in the United Nations, ILO, and WHO declined from

the previous year, while the percentage increased in FAO, ICAO, and 

UNESCO.

Table 2 

UN-Related Agencies with Geographic Ranges for 

Employment 

UN U.S. 2004 Total Desirable Filled by Americans 

Agency Assessment Filled Range

 Number Percent 

UN 22% 2,547 288-389 313 12.3% 

FAO 22% 1,127 138-187 147 13.0% 

ICAO 25% 210 31 13 6.2% 

ILO 22% 683 91-122 94 13.8% 

UNESCO 22% 743 46-76 27 3.6% 

WHO 22% 1,441 142-193 167 11.6% 

Agencies Seeking Geographic Balance 

Other UN specialized agencies and IAEA do not have official 

geographic ranges but are required to give due consideration to geographic

balance when making appointments. The following chart lists those UN 

agencies, the level of the U.S. regular budget contribution, total professional

posts filled that are subject to geographic consideration (i.e., not necessarily all

professional posts), the number of total filled professional posts, and the 

number of Americans in such posts as of December 31, 2004. These agencies 

are the IAEA, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International

Telecommunication Union (ITU), the Universal Postal Union (UPU), the 

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and the World 

Meteorological Organization (WMO). 

145 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Table 3 

UN-Related Agencies without Geographic Ranges for 

Employment 

 

UN U.S. 2004 

Agency Assessment Total U.S. Number U.S. Percent 

Professional Posts Filled 

 

IAEA 25.8% 743 86 11.6% 

IMO 3.6% 92 4 4.3% 

ITU 8.9% 276 17 6.2% 

UPU 5.7% 89 5 5.6% 

WIPO 6.6% 366 22 6.0% 

WMO 21.6% 116 4 3.4% 

Following is a chart of staffing levels in other major UN bodies 

funded through voluntary contributions to which official geographic ranges do

not apply. These bodies include the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS

(UNAIDS), the UN Development Program (UNDP), the UN High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 

the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East 

(UNRWA), and the World Food Program (WFP). 

Table 4 

UN Programs and Funds Receiving Voluntary Contributions 

with No Geographic Employment Ranges

 

International Professional Posts Filled 

UN Agency Total U.S. Number U.S. Percent 

UNAIDS 147 10 6.8% 

UNDP 2,521 157 6.2% 

UNHCR 1,429 117 8.2% 

UNICEF 3,676 230 6.3% 

UNRWA 129 15 11.6% 

WFP 1,153 111 9.6% 

In 2004, for at least part of the year, Americans held the top position 

in three UN agencies: UNICEF (Carol Bellamy, Executive Director), UPU 

(Thomas Leavey, Director-General), and WFP (James Morris, Executive 

Director). Americans also held one of the second-most senior posts in FAO

(Deputy Director-General), IAEA (Deputy Director-General), ILO (Executive 

Director, Social Dialogue Sector), UNAIDS (Deputy Executive Director), 

Office of the UNHCR (Deputy High Commissioner), UNRWA (Deputy 

Commissioner-General), WHO (Under Secretary-General), and WIPO (Deputy 

Director-General). Four Americans held the rank of Under SecretaryGeneral (USG) at the UN Secretariat, including the USG for Management, the

146 
Administration and Budget 

Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the UN Mission in the 

Republic of Congo, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and 

Coordinator of UN Operations in Liberia, and the President of the StaffManagement Coordination Committee. Six other Americans held UN 

Secretariat positions at the Assistant Secretary-General level. 

Representation of U.S. Women 

Throughout the year, UN agencies continued to give special attention

to recruiting qualified women. In 2004, American women represented about 

49 percent of all Americans in professional and senior positions in the UN 

Secretariat, and about 41 percent of Americans in such positions in the United

Nations, its subsidiary bodies and specialized agencies, and the IAEA. 

U.S. Government Secondments 

The United States has a long-standing policy of supporting UN 

agencies by assigning federal employees to them either on “transfer” (in which

the employee is paid by the UN agency but retains reemployment rights with 

the U.S. agency), or on “detail” (in which the employee typically remains on 

the U.S. payroll, but serves at the UN agency). These assignments may last

as long as eight years. During fiscal year 2004, a total of 168 federal

employees from 16 federal agencies were on detail or transfer to UN system

agencies, representing about 7.6 percent of the Americans who worked in

professional positions in UN agencies during that year. Of the 84 employees

on “detail” to UN agencies, the vast majority came from the Department of 

Health and Human Services—primarily from the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention—on assignment to WHO. Of the 84 employees on “transfer” 

to UN agencies, the largest number (14) were from the Department of State 

who worked for the Multinational Force and Observers, and the next largest

number (12) were from the Department of Transportation who worked for

ICAO. 

Junior Professional Officers 

The United States also continued to fund a number of Junior

Professional Officer positions including some at UNHCR (14), FAO (3), and

WFP (1). Such positions allow officers to develop experience to make them

competitive for future positions. 

UN Joint Staff Pension Board 

The UN Joint Staff Pension Board administers the UN Joint Staff 

Pension Fund. The Fund was established under regulations adopted by the 

General Assembly in Resolution 248 (III) (1948) to provide retirement, death, 

disability, and related benefits for staff upon leaving UN service. The Board 

reports every two years to the General Assembly on Fund operations and 

investment activities and, when necessary, recommends amendments to 

regulations governing Fund activities. In addition to the United Nations, there 

are 20 organizations that are members of the Fund. Through the Pension

Board, the member organizations jointly administer the Fund. This tri-partite 

147 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

board represents governing bodies (e.g., the UN General Assembly),

administrations (e.g., the UN Secretary-General), and participants (e.g., staff 

members within UN organizations). 

The Pension Board is composed of 33 members; 11 members

represent governing bodies of the member organizations, 11 members are 

appointed by the chief administrative officers of the member organizations,

and 11 members are elected by Fund participants. Thomas Repasch, a 

member of the U.S. delegation to the Fifth (Administrative and Budgetary)

Committee, represented the UN General Assembly on the Board in 2004. 

Additional information about the Fund is available at 

http://www.unjspf.org/eng/index.html. 

At its July meeting in Montreal, the Board was informed that the 

Fund’s market value was $25.7 billion, with a 1.14 percent surplus during the 

fiscal period ending December 31, 2003. The 1.14 percent surplus of current 

and projected contributions and earnings meant the Fund had about one

percent more than what was needed to pay current and projected benefits. 

Additionally, the Board learned that the market value of the Fund increased 

during the first quarter of 2004, reaching a record $27.1 billion.

During the meeting, representatives of Fund participants made

numerous proposals to use the 1.14 percent surplus for a variety of purposes, 

including building a retirement home for UN pensioners. The United States 

supported the Board in rejecting these proposals. The United States stated that

it would be prudent to maintain “most of the surplus” to ensure the long-term

health of the Fund. The United States noted that it was not the time to

consider benefit enhancements or other proposals that would sap the Fund’s

resources given the fact that this is the third straight decline in the level of the 

surplus; after reaching 4.25 percent in 1999, the surplus declined to 2.92

percent in 2002, and to 1.14 percent in 2004. 

The Fifth Committee considered the report of the Board during 

meetings in late October and mid December. During these discussions the

Committee members noted the 1.14 percent surplus as well as proposals for 

using some of this surplus for pension benefits and other purposes. 

The United States supported the use of some of the current surplus to

restore a portion of the reduced first inflation-related adjustment given to 

beneficiaries after retirement. The United States viewed this modest use of the

surplus as a prudent measure reflecting good faith between the Board and

beneficiaries. The United States opposed any further use of the current surplus 

until the Fund valuation improves substantially. The United States reiterated

the point in General Assembly Resolution 53/210 (1998) that stated the 

Pension Board should not improve benefit provisions until the value of the

Fund showed a clear upward pattern of surpluses. The United States also 

welcomed the approval of the internal audit charter for the Fund, which 

formalizes and strengthens the relationship between the management of the 

Fund and the internal auditors, helping to provide improved oversight and 

accountability. 

148 
Administration and Budget 

The Fifth Committee subsequently discussed the Board’s 

recommendations, in which the United States played an active role. Besides 

supporting the limited use of the surplus mentioned above, the United States

opposed continued efforts to increase the size of the Board. The United States

reiterated its position that the composition of the Board should be based 

primarily on broader principles of efficiency and good governance, not strictly

numbers of members and alternates. 

On December 23, 2004, the General Assembly adopted by consensus 

Resolution 59/269 on the UN Pension. The resolution:

• noted the decline in the Fund’s surplus from 2.92 percent on December 

31, 2001, to 1.14 percent for the period ending December 31, 2003; 

• approved the phased elimination of the reduction in the first consumer 

price index adjustments due after retirement;

• provided for a minimum guarantee of 80 percent of the U.S. dollar 

amount for those who have their pension benefits paid in their local

currency; 

• recommended further study of the size and composition of the Board;

• noted the significant increase in the market value of the fund assets and 

the positive returns achieved; and

• reaffirmed the Fund’s policy of broad diversification of its investments 

across geographical areas in accordance with the four criteria of safety, 

profitability, liquidity, and convertibility. 

149 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

150 
Appendix 1 

Address by President George W. Bush 

Statement by President George W. Bush before the 59th regular 

session of the UN General Assembly on September 21, 2004. 

Thank you for the honor

of addressing the General

Assembly. The American people

respect the idealism that gave life 

to this organization. And we 

respect the men and women of the 

United Nations, who stand for

peace and human rights in every 

part of the world. Welcome to

New York City, and welcome to

the United States of America. 

During the past three 

years, I have addressed the 

General Assembly in a time of

tragedy for my country, and in

times of decision for all of us.

Now we gather at a time of

tremendous opportunity for the

United Nations and for all

peaceful nations. For decades, the

circle of liberty, security, and 

development has been expanding

our world. This progress has

brought unity to Europe, selfgovernment to Latin America and

Asia, and new hope to Africa.

Now we have the historic chance

to widen the circle even further, to 

fight radicalism and terror with

justice and dignity and to achieve

a true peace, founded on human 

freedom. 

The United Nations and 

my country share the deepest

commitments. Both the American 

Declaration of Independence and 

the Universal Declaration of 

Human Rights proclaim the equal

value and dignity of every human

life. That dignity is honored by

the rule of law, limits on the 

power of the state, respect for 

women, protection of private

property, free speech, equal

justice, and religious tolerance. 

That dignity is dishonored by

oppression, corruption, tyranny,

bigotry, terrorism, and all violence 

against the innocent. Both our

founding documents affirm that

this bright line between justice and 

injustice—between right and 

wrong—is the same in every age, 

every culture, and every nation. 

Wise governments also 

stand for these principles for very

practical and realistic reasons. We

know that dictators are quick to 

choose aggression, while free 

nations strive to resolve 

differences in peace. We know 

that oppressive governments 

support terror, while free

governments fight the terrorists in

their midst. We know that free 

peoples embrace progress and life, 

instead of becoming the recruits 

for murderous ideologies. 

Every nation that wants

peace will share the benefits of a

freer world. And every nation that

seeks peace has an obligation to

help build that world. Eventually, 

there is no safe isolation from

terror networks, or failed states 

151 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

that shelter them, or outlaw

regimes, or weapons of mass

destruction. Eventually, there is 

no safety in looking away, seeking 

the quiet life by ignoring the 

struggles and oppression of others. 

In this young century, our 

world needs a new definition of

security. Our security is not

merely found in spheres of

influence or some balance of 

power. The security of our world 

is found in the advancing rights of

mankind. 

These rights are

advancing across the world. And

across the world, the enemies of 

human rights are responding with

violence. Terrorists and their

allies believe the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights and 

the United States Bill of Rights 

and every charter of liberty ever 

written are lies to be burned and

destroyed and forgotten. They

believe that dictators should

control every mind and tongue in

the Middle East and beyond. They

believe that suicide and torture and 

murder are fully justified to serve 

any goal they declare. And they 

act on their beliefs. 

In the last year alone, 

terrorists have attacked police 

stations and banks and commuter

trains and synagogues and a

school filled with children. This 

month in Beslan, we saw once

again how the terrorists measure

their success in the death of the

innocent and in the pain of 

grieving families. Svetlana

Dzebisov was held hostage along 

with her son and her nephew. Her

nephew did not survive. She

recently visited the cemetery and 

saw what she called the “little

graves.” She said, “I understand

that there is evil in the world, but

what have these little creatures 

done?”

The Russian children did 

nothing to deserve such awful

suffering and fright and death.

The people of Madrid and 

Jerusalem and Istanbul and

Baghdad have done nothing to

deserve sudden and random

murder. Those acts violate the

standards of justice in all cultures 

and the principles of all religions. 

All civilized nations are in this 

struggle together and all must fight

the murderers. 

We are determined to 

destroy terror networks wherever

they operate, and the United States 

is grateful to every nation that is 

helping to seize terrorist assets, 

track down their operatives, and 

disrupt their plans. We are

determined to end the state 

sponsorship of terror, and my 

nation is grateful to all that

participated in the liberation of 

Afghanistan. We are determined

to prevent proliferation and to 

enforce the demands of the world, 

and my nation is grateful to the

soldiers of many nations who have

helped to deliver the Iraqi people

from an outlaw dictator. 

The dictator agreed in 

1991, as a condition of ceasefire, 

to fully comply with all Security 

Council resolutions, then ignored

more than a decade of those

resolutions. Finally, the Security 

Council promised serious 

consequences for his defiance. 

152 
Address by President George W. Bush 

The commitments we make must 

have meaning. When we say 

“serious consequences,” for the

sake of peace there must be 

serious consequences. So a

coalition of nations enforced the 

just demands of the world. 

Defending our ideals is 

vital, but it is not enough. Our 

broader mission as United Nations

members is to apply those ideals

to the great issues of our time.

Our wider goal is to promote hope

and progress as the alternatives to 

hatred and violence. Our great

purpose is to build a better world 

beyond the war on terror. 

Because we believe in

human dignity, the United States 

and many other nations have

established a Global Fund to Fight

AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. 

In three years, the contributing 

countries have funded projects in

more than 90 countries, and 

pledged a total of $5.6 billion to 

those efforts. America has

undertaken a $15 billion effort to 

provide prevention and treatment 

and humane care in nations

afflicted by AIDS, placing a

special focus on 15 countries

where the need is most urgent.

AIDS is the greatest health crisis 

of our time, and our 

unprecedented commitment will 

bring new hope to those who have

walked too long in the shadow of

death. 

Because we believe in

human dignity, the United States 

and many other nations have

joined together to confront the evil

of trafficking in human beings.

We are supporting organizations

that rescue the victims, passing

stronger anti-trafficking laws, and 

warning travelers that they will be

held to account for supporting this 

modern form of slavery. Women 

and children should never be

exploited for pleasure or greed,

anywhere on earth.

Because we believe in

human dignity, we should take

seriously the protection of life 

from exploitation under any

pretext. In this session, the 

General Assembly will consider a 

draft resolution sponsored by

Costa Rica calling for a

comprehensive ban on human 

cloning. I support that draft 

resolution and urge all 

governments to affirm a basic 

ethical principle: no human life 

should ever be produced or

destroyed for the benefit of

another.

Because we believe in

human dignity, the United States 

and many other nations have

changed the way we fight poverty,

curb corruption, and provide aid. 

In 2002, we created the Monterrey

Consensus, a bold approach that

links new aid from developed

nations to real reform in

developing ones. And through the

Millennium Challenge Account, 

my nation is increasing our aid to 

developing nations that expand

economic freedom and invest in 

the education and health of their 

own people. 

Because we believe in

human dignity, the United States 

and many other nations have acted 

to lift the crushing burden of debt

that limits the growth of 

153 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

developing economies and holds 

millions of people in poverty.

Since those efforts began in 1996,

poor countries with the heaviest 

debt burdens have received more

than $30 billion of relief. And to

prevent the build-up of future 

debt, my country and other nations

have agreed that international

financial institutions should 

increasingly provide new aid in

the form of grants rather than 

loans. 

Because we believe in

human dignity, the world must

have more effective means to 

stabilize regions in turmoil and to 

halt religious violence and ethnic 

cleansing. We must create 

permanent capabilities to respond 

to future crises. 

The United States and 

Italy have proposed a Global

Peace Operations Initiative. 

Group of Eight (G-8) countries

will train 75,000 peacekeepers—

initially from Africa—so they can 

conduct operations on that 

continent and elsewhere. The

countries of the G-8 will help that

peacekeeping force with 

deployment and logistical needs. 

At this hour, the world is 

witnessing terrible suffering and 

horrible crimes in the Darfur 

region of the Sudan, crimes my

government has concluded are 

genocide. The United States 

played a key role in efforts to 

broker a ceasefire, and we are 

providing humanitarian assistance 

to the Sudanese people. Rwanda

and Nigeria have deployed forces

in the Sudan to help improve 

security so that aid can be

delivered. The Security Council

adopted a new resolution that 

supports an expanded African 

Union force to help prevent further

bloodshed and that urges the 

Government of the Sudan to stop

flights by military aircraft in 

Darfur. We congratulate the

members of the Council on this 

timely and necessary action. I call 

on the Government of the Sudan

to honor the ceasefire it signed, 

and to stop the killing in Darfur. 

Because we believe in

human dignity, peaceful nations 

must stand for the advance of

democracy. No other system of 

government has done more to

protect minorities, to secure the 

rights of labor, to raise the status

of women, or to channel human

energy to the pursuits of peace. 

We have witnessed the rise of

democratic governments in

predominately Hindu and Muslim, 

Buddhist, Jewish, and Christian

cultures. Democratic institutions 

have taken root in modern

societies and in traditional 

societies. When it comes to the 

desire for liberty and justice, there 

is no clash of civilizations. People

everywhere are capable of 

freedom and worthy of freedom. 

Finding the full promise 

of representative government takes

time, as America has found in two 

centuries of debate and struggle.

Nor is there only one form of 

representative government, 

because democracies by definition 

take on the unique character of the

people that create them. Yet this

much we do know with certainty:

the desire for freedom resides in 

154 
Address by President George W. Bush 

every human heart, and that desire 

cannot be contained forever by

prison walls or martial laws or 

secret police. Over time and 

across the earth, freedom will find 

a way. 

Freedom is finding a way

in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we

must continue to show our

commitment to democracies in 

those nations. The liberty that 

many have won at a cost must be

secured. As members of the 

United Nations, we all have a 

stake in the success of the world’s

newest democracies. Not long 

ago, outlaw regimes in Baghdad

and Kabul threatened the peace

and sponsored terrorists. Those 

regimes destabilized one of the 

world’s most vital and most 

volatile regions. They brutalized

their peoples in defiance of all

civilized norms. 

Today, the Iraqi and 

Afghan peoples are on the path to

democracy and freedom. The 

governments that are rising will 

pose no threat to others. Instead 

of harboring terrorists, they are 

fighting terrorist groups. And this 

progress is good for the long-term

security of all of us. The Afghan

people are showing extraordinary 

courage under difficult conditions.

They are fighting to defend their 

nation from Taliban hold-outs and

helping to strike against the 

terrorist killers. They are reviving

their economy. They have

adopted a Constitution that 

protects the rights of all, while 

honoring their nation’s most

cherished traditions. More than 10 

million Afghan citizens—over 4 

million of them women—are now

registered to vote in next month’s 

presidential election. To any who 

still would question whether 

Muslim societies can be 

democratic societies, the Afghan

people are giving their answer. 

Since the last general 

debate of this General Assembly,

the people of Iraq have regained

sovereignty. Today, in this hall, 

the Prime Minister of Iraq and his

delegation represent a country that 

has rejoined the community of

nations. The government of Prime 

Minister Allawi has earned the 

support of every nation that

believes in self-determination and 

desires peace. And under Security 

Council Resolutions 1511 (2003) 

and 1546 (2004), the world is

providing that support. The 

United Nations and its member

nations must respond to Prime

Minister Allawi’s request and do 

more to help build an Iraq that is 

secure, democratic, federal, and

free. 

A democratic Iraq has

ruthless enemies because terrorists

know the stakes in that country. 

They know that a free Iraq in the

heart of the Middle East will be a 

decisive blow against their

ambitions for that region. So a

terrorist group associated with alQaida is now one of the main

groups killing the innocent in Iraq

today, conducting a campaign of

bombings against civilians and the 

beheadings of bound men. 

Coalition forces now serving in 

Iraq are confronting the terrorists

and foreign fighters so that

peaceful nations around the world 

155 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

will never have to face them 

within our own borders. 

Our coalition is standing

beside a growing Iraqi security

force. The North Atlantic Treaty 

Organization is providing vital 

training to that force. More than

35 nations have contributed

money and expertise to help

rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure and,

as the Iraqi Interim Government

moves towards national elections,

officials from the United Nations

are helping Iraqis build the 

infrastructure of democracy. 

Those selfless people are doing

heroic work and are carrying on

the great legacy of Sergio Vieira 

de Mello. 

As we have seen in other

countries, one of the main terrorist

goals is to undermine, disrupt, and 

influence election outcomes. We

can expect terrorist attacks to 

escalate as Afghanistan and Iraq 

approach national elections. The

work ahead is demanding, but

those difficulties will not shake 

our conviction that the future of 

Afghanistan and Iraq is a future of 

liberty. The proper response to 

difficulty is not to retreat—it is to

prevail. 

The advance of freedom

always carries a cost, paid by the 

bravest among us. America 

mourns the losses to our nation

and to many others, and today I

assure every friend of Afghanistan 

and Iraq, and every enemy of 

liberty: We will stand with the 

people of Afghanistan and Iraq

until their hopes of freedom and 

security are fulfilled.

These two nations will be

a model for the broader Middle

East, a region where millions have 

been denied basic human rights

and simple justice. For too long,

many nations, including my own,

tolerated and even excused 

oppression in the Middle East in

the name of stability. Oppression

became common, but stability 

never arrived. We must take a

different approach. We must help

the reformers of the Middle East 

as they work for freedom and

strive to build a community of 

peaceful, democratic nations. 

That commitment to 

democratic reform is essential to

resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. 

Peace will not be achieved by 

Palestinian rulers who intimidate 

opposition, tolerate corruption, 

and maintain ties to terrorist 

groups. The long-suffering 

Palestinian people deserve better.

They deserve true leaders capable

of creating and governing a free

and peaceful Palestinian state. 

Even after the setbacks

and frustrations of recent months, 

good will and hard effort can 

achieve the promise of the road

map to peace. Those who would 

lead a new Palestinian state should 

adopt peaceful means to achieve

the rights of their people and 

create the reformed institutions of 

a stable democracy. Arab states

should end incitement in their own

media, cut off public and private 

funding for terrorism, and

establish normal relations with 

Israel. Israel should impose a 

settlement freeze, dismantle 

unauthorized outposts, end the

156 
Address by President George W. Bush 

daily humiliation of the

Palestinian people, and avoid any

actions that prejudice final

negotiations. And world leaders

should withdraw all favor and

support from any Palestinian ruler

who fails his people and betrays 

their cause. 

The democratic hopes we

see growing in the Middle East are 

growing everywhere. In the words

of the Burmese democracy 

advocate Aung San Suu Kyi: We

do not accept the notion that 

democracy is a Western value. To

the contrary, democracy simply 

means good government rooted in

responsibility, transparency, and 

accountability. 

Here at the United Nations, 

members know this to be true. In

recent years, this organization has 

helped create a new democracy in 

East Timor and the United Nations

has aided other nations in making

the transition to self-rule. 

Because I believe that the

advance of liberty is the path to

both a safer and better world,

today I propose establishing a

democracy fund within the United

Nations. This is a great calling for 

this great organization. The fund

would help countries lay the 

foundations of democracy by

instituting the rule of law, 

independent courts, a free press,

political parties, and trade unions.

Money from the fund would also 

help set up voter precincts and

polling places and support the 

work of election monitors. To

show our commitment to the new 

democracy fund, the United States 

will make an initial contribution, 

and I urge all other nations to

contribute as well. 

Today, I have outlined a 

broad agenda to advance human 

dignity and enhance the security of 

all of us. The defeat of terror, the

protection of human rights, the

spread of prosperity, the advance

of democracy—these causes, these 

ideals, call us to great work in the 

world. Each of us alone can only

do so much. Together we can 

accomplish so much more. 

History will honor the 

high ideals of this organization.

The Charter states them with

clarity: “to save succeeding 

generations from the scourge of

war...to reaffirm faith in

fundamental human rights...to 

promote social progress and better

standards of life in larger 

freedom.” 

Let history also record 

that our generation of leaders

followed through on these ideals, 

even in adversity. Let history 

show that in a decisive decade, 

members of the United Nations

did not grow weary in our duties,

or waver in meeting them. I am

confident that this young century 

will be liberty’s century. I believe

we will rise to this moment, 

because I know the character of so 

many nations and leaders

represented here today. And I

have faith in the transforming

power of freedom. 

May God bless you. 

157 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

158 
Appendix 2 

Principal UN Organs 

General Assembly 

The General Assembly is composed of all 191 members of the United 

Nations. As of December 31, 2004, they are:

Member Date of Admission

Afghanistan Nov. 19, 1946 

Albania Dec. 14, 1955 

Algeria Oct. 8, 1962 

Andorra July 28, 1993 

Angola Dec. 1, 1976 

Antigua and 

 Barbuda Nov. 11, 1981 

Argentina Oct. 24, 1945 

Armenia March 2, 1992 

Australia Nov. 1, 1945 

Austria Dec. 14, 1955 

Azerbaijan March 2, 1992 

Bahamas Sept. 18, 1973 

Bahrain Sept. 21, 1971 

Bangladesh Sept. 17, 1974 

Barbados Dec. 9, 1966 

Belarus Oct. 24, 1945 

Belgium Dec. 27, 1945 

Belize Sept. 25, 1981 

Benin Sept. 20, 1960 

Bhutan Sept. 21, 1960 

Bolivia Nov. 14, 1945 

Bosnia and 

 Herzegovina May 22, 1992 

Botswana Oct. 17, 1966 

Brazil Oct. 24, 1945 

Brunei Darussalam Sept. 21, 1984 

Bulgaria Dec. 14, 1955 

Burkina Faso Sept. 20, 1960 

Burundi Sept. 18, 1962 

Cambodia Dec. 14, 1955 

Cameroon Sept. 20, 1960 

Canada Nov. 9, 1945 

Cape Verde Sept. 16, 1975 

Central African 

 Republic Sept. 20, 1960 

Chad Sept. 20, 1960 

Chile Oct. 24, 1945 

China Oct. 24, 1945 

Member Date of Admission

Colombia Nov. 5, 1945 

Comoros Nov. 12, 1975 

Congo Sept. 20, 1960 

Congo, Democratic 

 Republic of the Sept. 20, 1960 

Costa Rica Nov. 2, 1945 

Cote d’Ivoire Sept. 20, 1960 

Croatia May 22, 1992 

Cuba Oct. 24, 1945 

Cyprus Sept. 20, 1960 

Czech Republic Jan. 19, 1993 

Denmark Oct. 24, 1945 

Djibouti Sept. 20, 1977 

Dominica Dec. 18, 1978 

Dominican 

 Republic Oct. 24, 1945 

Ecuador Dec. 21, 1945 

Egypt Oct. 24, 1945 

El Salvador Oct. 24, 1945 

Equatorial Guinea Nov. 12, 1968 

Eritrea May 28, 1993 

Estonia Sept. 17, 1991 

Ethiopia Nov. 13, 1945 

Fiji Oct. 13, 1970 

Finland Dec. 14, 1955 

France Oct. 24, 1945 

Gabon Sept. 20, 1960 

Gambia Sept. 21, 1965 

Georgia July 31, 1992 

Germany Sept. 18, 1973 

Ghana March 8, 1957 

Greece Oct. 25, 1945 

Grenada Sept. 17, 1974 

Guatemala Nov. 21, 1945 

Guinea Dec. 12, 1958 

Guinea-Bissau Sept. 17, 1974 

Guyana Sept. 20, 1966 

Haiti Oct. 24, 1945 

Honduras Dec. 17, 1945 

159 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Member Date of Admission

Hungary Dec. 14, 1955 

Iceland Nov. 19, 1946 

India Oct. 30, 1945 

Indonesia Sept. 28, 1950 

Iran Oct. 24, 1945 

Iraq Dec. 21, 1945 

Ireland Dec. 14, 1955 

Israel May 11, 1949 

Italy Dec. 14, 1955 

Jamaica Sept. 18, 1962 

Japan Dec. 18, 1956 

Jordan Dec. 14, 1955 

Kazakhstan March 2, 1992 

Kenya Dec. 16, 1963 

Kiribati Sept. 14, 1999 

Korea, Democratic People’s

 Republic Sept. 17, 1991 

Korea, Republic of Sept. 17, 1991 

Kuwait May 14, 1963 

Kyrgyzstan March 2, 1992 

Laos Dec. 14, 1955 

Latvia Sept. 17, 1991 

Lebanon Oct. 24, 1945 

Lesotho Oct. 17, 1966 

Liberia Nov. 2, 1945 

Libya Dec. 14, 1955 

Liechtenstein Sept. 18, 1990 

Lithuania Sept. 17, 1991 

Luxembourg Oct. 24, 1945 

Madagascar Sept. 20, 1960 

Malawi Dec. 1, 1964 

Malaysia Sept. 17, 1957 

Maldives Sept. 21, 1965 

Mali Sept. 28, 1960 

Malta Dec. 1, 1964 

Marshall Islands Sept. 17, 1991 

Mauritania Oct. 27, 1961 

Mauritius April 24, 1968 

Mexico Nov. 7, 1945 

Micronesia Sept. 17, 1991 

Moldova March 2, 1992 

Monaco May 28, 1993 

Mongolia Oct. 27, 1961 

Morocco Nov. 12, 1956 

Mozambique Sept. 16, 1975 

Myanmar (Burma) April 19, 1948 

Namibia April 23, 1990 

Nauru, Republic of Sept. 14, 1999 

Nepal Dec. 14, 1955 

Netherlands Dec. 10, 1945 

Member Date of Admission

New Zealand Oct. 24, 1945 

Nicaragua Oct. 24, 1945 

Niger Sept. 20, 1960 

Nigeria Oct. 7, 1960 

Norway Nov. 27, 1945 

Oman Oct. 7, 1971 

Pakistan Sept. 30, 1947 

Palau Dec. 15, 1994 

Panama Nov. 13, 1945 

Papua New Guinea Oct. 10, 1975 

Paraguay Oct. 24, 1945 

Peru Oct. 31, 1945 

Philippines Oct. 24, 1945 

Poland Oct. 24, 1945 

Portugal Dec. 14, 1955 

Qatar Sept. 21, 1971 

Romania Dec. 14, 1955 

Russian Federation Oct. 24, 1945 

Rwanda Sept. 18, 1962 

Saint Kitts and 

 Nevis Sept. 23, 1983 

Saint Lucia Sept. 18, 1979 

Saint Vincent and the 

 Grenadines Sept. 16, 1980 

Samoa Dec. 15, 1976 

San Marino March 2, 1992 

Sao Tome and 

 Principe Sept. 16, 1975 

Saudi Arabia Oct. 24, 1945 

Senegal Sept. 28, 1960 

Serbia/Montenegro*Nov. 1, 2000 

Seychelles Sept. 21, 1976 

Sierra Leone Sept. 27, 1961 

Singapore Sept. 21, 1965 

Slovak Republic Jan. 19, 1993 

Slovenia May 22, 1992 

Solomon Islands Sept. 19, 1978 

Somalia Sept. 20, 1960 

South Africa Nov. 7, 1945 

Spain Dec. 14, 1955 

Sri Lanka Dec. 14, 1955 

Sudan Nov. 12, 1956 

Suriname Dec. 4, 1975 

Swaziland Sept. 24, 1968 

Sweden Nov. 19, 1946 

Switzerland Sept. 10, 2002 

Syria Oct. 24, 1945 

Tajikistan March 2, 1992 

Tanzania Dec. 14, 1961 

Thailand Dec. 16, 1946 

160 
Principal UN Organs 

Member Date of Admission Member Date of Admission

The Former Yugoslav Ukraine Oct. 24, 1945 

 Republic of United Arab 

 Macedonia April 8, 1993 Emirates Dec. 9, 1971 

Timor-Leste Sept. 27, 2002 United Kingdom Oct. 24, 1945 

Togo Sept. 20, 1960 United States Oct. 24, 1945 

Tonga, Kingdom of Sept. 14, 1999 Uruguay Dec. 18, 1945 

Trinidad and Uzbekistan March 2, 1992 

 Tobago Sept. 18, 1962 Vanuatu Sept. 15, 1981 

Tunisia Nov. 12, 1956 Venezuela Nov. 15, 1945 

Turkey Oct. 24, 1945 Vietnam Sept. 20, 1977 

Tuvalu Sept. 5, 2000 Yemen Sept. 30, 1947 

Turkmenistan March 2, 1992 Zambia Dec. 1, 1964 

Uganda Oct. 25, 1962 Zimbabwe Aug. 25, 1980 

*The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was an original 

member of the United Nations (signing the Charter on October 19, 1945), until

its dissolution following the establishment and subsequent admission as new 

members of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia, the former Yugoslav

Republic of Macedonia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. 

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was admitted as a member on

November 1, 2000. 

On February 4, 2003, the name of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

was changed to Serbia/Montenegro. 

The 58th regular session of the General Assembly, which had been

suspended December 23, 2003, held resumed sessions during 2004. The

session was formally closed on September 13. 

The 10th emergency special session met in July to discuss illegal

Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied

Palestinian Territory. 

The 59th regular session of the General Assembly convened 

September 14, 2004, and was suspended December 23. 

The Assembly elected Jean Ping (Gabon) as President and the Chairs

of the Delegations of Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Azerbaijan,

Bangladesh, Belgium, Burkina Faso, China, Djibouti, El Salvador, France, 

Ghana, Iran, Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, the United Kingdom, the 

United States, Uzbekistan, and Zambia as the 21 Vice Presidents. 

The Chairs of the six Main Committees, on which each member may 

be represented, were:

First Committee (Disarmament and International Security)—

Luis Alfonso de Alba (Mexico) 

Second Committee (Economic and Financial)—Marco Balarezo

(Peru)

161 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural)—Valery

Kuchinsky (Ukraine)

Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization)—Kyaw 

Tint Swe (Burma) 

Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary)—Don MacKay 

(New Zealand) 

Sixth Committee (Legal)—Mohamed Bennouna (Morocco)

The General Committee (steering committee) is composed of the

President, the 21 Vice Presidents, and the Chairs of the six Main Committees 

of the General Assembly. 

Security Council 

The Security Council is composed of five members designated in the

Charter as permanent (China, France, Russian Federation, the United

Kingdom, and the United States) and 10 members elected by the General 

Assembly for 2-year terms ending December 31 of the year given in the

heading:

2004: Angola, Chile, Germany, Pakistan, and Spain

2005: Algeria, Benin, Brazil, the Philippines, and Romania 

On October 15, the Assembly elected Argentina, Denmark, Greece, 

Japan, and Tanzania as members of the Security Council for 2-year terms of 

office beginning January 1, 2005. 

Trusteeship Council 

The Trusteeship Council is composed of the United States and the 

other four permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, 

Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom). 

In 1994, the Trusteeship Council adopted an amendment to its rules 

of procedure stating that it will meet in the future only on request. The 

Council held its 64th session in October. 

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) 

ECOSOC is composed of 54 members elected by the General

Assembly for 3-year terms ending December 31 of the year given in the

heading:

2004: Australia, Bhutan, Burundi, Chile, China, El Salvador, 

Finland, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, India, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 

Qatar, the Russian Federation, Sweden, Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great 

Britain and Northern Ireland, and Zimbabwe 

2005: Azerbaijan, Benin, Congo, Cuba, Ecuador, France, Germany,

Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, 

Portugal, Saudi Arabia, and Senegal

2006: Armenia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Canada, Colombia, 

Indonesia, Italy, Mauritius, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Poland, the Republic of

162 
Principal UN Organs 

Korea, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, the United Republic of Tanzania, 

and the United States of America 

The General Assembly elected Albania, Australia, Brazil, Chad, 

China, Costa Rica, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Guinea,

Iceland, India, Lithuania, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Thailand,

and the United Kingdom for 3-year terms beginning on January 1, 2005. All

were elected on October 29. 

International Court of Justice 

The International Court of Justice consists of 15 members elected by

the General Assembly and Security Council for 9-year terms ending on

February 5 of the year shown in parentheses. The judges, as of December 31, 

2004, listed in order of precedence, are: 

Shi Jiuyong, China (2012), President 

Raymond Ranjeva, Madagascar (2009), Vice President

Gilbert Guillaume, France (2009) 

Abdul G. Koroma, Sierra Leone (2012)

Vladlen S. Vereshchetin, Russian Federation (2006) 

Rosalyn Higgins, United Kingdom (2009) 

Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren, Venezuela (2009) 

Pieter H. Kooijmans, Netherlands (2006)

Francisco Rezek, Brazil (2006)

Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh, Jordan (2009)

Thomas Burgenthal, United States (2006) 

Nabil Elaraby, Egypt (2006)

Hisashi Owada, Japan (2012) 

Bruno Simma, Germany (2012)

Peter Tomka, Slovakia (2012)

UN Secretariat 

The Secretariat, one of the principal organs of the United Nations, 

services the other UN bodies, administering the programs and policies laid

down by them. It is headed by the Secretary-General, who is appointed by the

General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council for a fiveyear renewable term. Secretary-General Kofi Annan began his first term on 

January 1, 1997, and was reappointed to a second term which began on

January 1, 2002. The Secretariat has a staff drawn from about 170 countries. 

Kofi Annan, Secretary-General 

Louise Frechette, Deputy Secretary-General

Dileep Nair, Under Secretary-General, Office of Internal Oversight

Services 

163 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Hans Corell, Under Secretary-General, Office of Legal Affairs (to

March 2004); Nicholas Michel (from May 2004)

Sir Kieran Prendergast, Under Secretary-General, Department of 

Political Affairs 

Nobuyasu Abe, Under Secretary-General, Department for

Disarmament Affairs 

Jean-Marie Guehenno, Under Secretary-General, Department of 

Peacekeeping Operations 

Jan Egeland, Under Secretary-General, Office for Coordination of 

Humanitarian Affairs 

Jose Antonio Ocampo, Under Secretary-General, Department of 

Economic and Social Affairs 

Chen Jian, Under Secretary-General, Department for General

Assembly and Conference Services 

Shashi Tharoor, Under Secretary-General, Department of Public

Information 

Catherine Bertini, Under Secretary-General, Department of

Management

Antonio Maria Costa, Under Secretary-General, UN Office at Vienna 

Sergei A. Ordzhonikidze, Under Secretary-General, UN Office at 

Geneva 

Klaus Toepfer, Under Secretary-General, UN Office at Nairobi 

The Senior Management Group is a committee of senior UN 

managers that serves as the Secretary-General’s cabinet and the central policy 

planning body of the United Nations. It comprises Secretary-General Kofi

Annan (Chair), Deputy Secretary-General Louise Frechette, all of the Under

Secretary-Generals, and the following: 

Carol Bellamy, Executive Director, UN Children’s Fund

Anwarul Chowdhury, 

High Representative for Least Developed Countries, 

Landlocked, and Small Island Developing States 

Ibrahim A. Gambari, Special Advisor on Africa 

Kim Hak-Su 

Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for 

Asia and the Pacific 

Ruud Lubbers, High Commissioner for Refugees 

Mark Malloch Brown, Administrator, UN Development Program

James T. Morris, Executive Director, World Food Program

Thoraya Obaid, Executive Director, UN Population Fund

Olara Otunnu, Children and Armed Conflict 

Rubens Ricupero (to September 2004)

164 
Principal UN Organs 

Secretary-General, UN Conference on Trade and 

Development

Iqbal Riza, Chef de Cabinet

Louise Arbour (from July 2004) 

High Commissioner for Human Rights

K.Y. Amoako 

Executive Secretary, Economic Commission for Africa 

Jose Luis Machinea 

Executive Secretary, Economic Commission for Latin

America and the Caribbean

Brigita Schmognerova 

Executive Secretary, Economic Commission for Europe 

Mervat M. Tallawy 

Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for 

Western Asia 

Anna K. Tibaijuka, Executive Director, UN-HABITAT

165 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

166 
Appendix 3 

U.S. Representatives 

Permanent Representative and Chief of Mission to the United

Nations: John D. Negroponte (to June 2004); John C. Danforth (from July 

2004)

Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations: James B.

Cunningham (to August 2004); Anne W. Patterson (from August 2004)

Deputy Permanent Representative to the Security Council: James B.

Cunningham (to August 2004); Anne W. Patterson (from August 2004)

Representative on the Economic and Social Council: Sichan Siv

Alternative Representative for Special Political Affairs: Stuart W. 

Holliday 

Representative for UN Management and Reform: Patrick F. Kennedy 

U.S. Representative to the European Office of the United Nations, 

Geneva: Kevin E. Moley

U.S. Representative to International Organizations, Vienna: Kenneth 

C. Brill 

UN General Assembly 

59th regular session (New York, Sept. 14–Dec. 23)

Representatives: John C. Danforth1

 (Chair); Jane D. Hull; Patrick J. 

Leahy; Anne W. Patterson; John E. Sununu 

Alternates: Yousif B. Ghafari; Stuart W. Holliday; Patrick F. 

Kennedy; Susan L. Moore; Sichan Siv

Subsidiary and Other Bodies 

UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 

52nd session (Vienna, April 26–30)

Representative: Fred A. Mettler, Jr., M.D. 

Alternate: Charles Meinhold

Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the 

Strengthening of the Role of the Organization

29th session (New York, March 29–April 8)

Representative: Carolyn Willson

Alternate: Jacob Katz Cogan 

Committee on Conferences

Substantive session (New York, Sept. 7–8, 10) 

Representative: Patrick F. Kennedy

Alternates: Candice Ebbesen 

 

1

 The Secretary of State, Colin L. Powell, served as chair of the delegation, ex 

officio, during his presence at the session. 

167 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Disarmament Commission

25th session (New York, April 5–23)

Representative: Robert L. Luaces 

Conference on Disarmament

First Part (Geneva, Jan. 19–March 26) 

Representative: Jackie W. Sanders 

Alternate: J. Sherwood McGinnis 

Second Part (Geneva, May 10–June 25) 

Representative: Jackie W. Sanders 

Alternate: J. Sherwood McGinnis 

Committee on Information

26th session (New York, April 26–May 7) 

Representative: David A. Traystman 

UN Commission on International Trade Law

37th session (Vienna, June 14–July 2) 

Representative: Jeffrey D. Kovar 

Alternates: Harold S. Burman; Mary Helen Carlson; Eric Rosand

Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations

Meets intermittently in New York. 

Security Council 

Representative: John D. Negroponte; John C. Danforth

Deputies: James B. Cunningham; Patrick F. Kennedy; Stuart W.

Holliday; Anne W. Patterson; Sichan Siv 

Alternate Representatives: Reed Fendrick; Richard Grenell; Gordon

Olson; Josiah Rosenblatt; Nicholas Rostow; Peter Vrooman; Carolyn Willson

Trusteeship Council 

64th session (New York, Oct. 20) 

Representative: Nicholas Rostow 

Economic and Social Council and Related Bodies 

Organizational sessions: New York, Feb. 4–6 and May 4–5

Substantive session (New York, June 28–July 23) 

Representatives: Wade Horn; Sichan Siv

Alternate: Madelyn Spirnak 

Functional Commissions 

Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice

13th session (Vienna, May 11–20)

Representatives: Kenneth C. Brill; Elizabeth G. Verville 

168 
U.S. Representatives

Alternates: Thomas Burrows; Kenneth Harris; Stephen V. Noble 

Commission on Human Rights

60th session (Geneva, March 15–April 23) 

Representative: Richard S. Williamson

Alternate: Kevin E. Moley 

Commission on Narcotic Drugs

47th session (Vienna, March 15–22)

Representative: Kenneth C. Brill 

Alternates: Stephen V. Noble; Christopher Sandrolini 

Commission on Population and Development

37th session (New York, March 22–26)

Representative: Sichan Siv

Alternates: Robert Gehring; Madelyn Spirnak 

Commission for Social Development

42nd session (New York, Feb. 4–13)

Representative: Sichan Siv

Alternate: Madelyn Spirnak 

Commission on the Status of Women

48th session (New York, March 1–12)

Representative: Ellen Sauerbrey 

Alternates: Mark Lagon; Sichan Siv

Commission on Sustainable Development

12th session (New York, April 14–30)

Representative: Paula Dobriansky

Alternates: David Balton; Jonathan Margolis; Sichan Siv; John

Turner

Regional Economic Commissions 

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

60th session (Shanghai, April 22–28)

Representative: Richard Behrend 

Alternate: Joseph Yun 

Economic Commission for Europe

59th session (Geneva, Feb. 24–26) 

Representative: Lynn Cassel

Alternate: Douglas M. Griffiths 

Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

30th session (San Juan, June 28–July 2) 

169 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Representative: Richard Behrend 

Alternate: Kelly Ryan 

Standing Committees 

UN Human Settlements Program

Did not meet in 2004. 

Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations

Regular session (New York, May 10–28)

Representative: Sichan Siv

Alternate: Madelyn Spirnak 

Committee for Program and Coordination

44th session (New York, June 7–July 2) 

Representative: Patrick F. Kennedy

Alternate: Thomas A. Repasch 

Related Subsidiary Bodies 

UN Children’s Fund 

Executive Board, annual session (New York, June 7–11) 

Representative: William O. Brisben

Alternate: Sichan Siv 

UN Development Program 

Executive Board, annual session (Geneva, June 14–23)

Representative: Lynn Cassel

UN Environment Program 

Governing Council did not meet in 2004.

Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees

Executive Committee, 55th session (Oct. 4–8)

Representative: Arthur E. Dewey 

Alternate: Kevin Moley 

UN Conference on Trade and Development 

Conference UNCTAD XI (Sao Paulo, Brazil, June 13–18) 

Representative: Richard T. Miller 

Alternates: Donna Hrinak; Matthew Rohde 

Trade and Development Board, 51st session (Geneva, Oct. 4–15) 

Representative: Richard Behrend 

Alternate: Melissa Kehoe 

Specialized Agencies and Other Bodies

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 

Conference did not meet in 2004. 

170 
U.S. Representatives

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 

General Conference, 48th session (Vienna, Sept. 20–24)

Representative: Spencer Abraham 

Alternates: Nils Diaz; Paul M. Longsworth; Jackie W. Sanders 

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 

35th General Assembly (Montreal, Sept. 28–Oct. 8)

Representative: Norman Y. Mineta 

Alternates: Marion Blakey; Edward W. Stimpson

International Labor Organization (ILO) 

Conference, 92nd session (Geneva, June 1–17)

Minister: Elaine L. Chao

Government Delegates: Robert Hagen; Arnold Levine 

Alternates: Kevin E. Moley; Robert B. Shepard 

International Maritime Organization (IMO) 

Assembly did not meet in 2004.

International Monetary Fund (IMF) 

U.S. Governor: John Snow 

Alternate: Alan Greenspan 

International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

Plenipotentiary Conference did not meet in 2004. 

Council (Geneva, June 9–18) 

Representative: Richard C. Beaird 

Alternate: Francis Williams

UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

General Conference did not meet in 2004. 

UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

The United States withdrew from UNIDO on December 31, 1996. 

Universal Postal Union (UPU) 

Universal Postal Congress (Bucharest, Sept. 15–Oct. 5) 

Representative: Richard T. Miller 

Alternates: Donald E. Booth; John E. Potter 

World Bank Group 

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)

U.S. Governor: John Snow 

Alternate: Alan Larson 

U.S. Executive Director: Carole Brookins 

171 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Alternate: Robert B. Holland, III 

 International Development Association (IDA)

The U.S. Governor, Executive Director, and alternates 

were the same as those of the IBRD. 

 International Finance Corporation (IFC) 

The U.S. Governor, Executive Director, and alternates 

were the same as those of the IBRD. 

World Food Program (WFP) 

Annual session (Rome, May 24–28)

Representatives: Tony P. Hall; Lauren Landis 

World Health Organization (WHO) 

57th World Health Assembly (Geneva, May 17–22)

Representatives: Tommy G. Thompson; Kevin E. Moley; William R. 

Steiger 

Alternates: Ann Blackwood; Lester M. Crawford; Jeffrey

DeLaurentis; Julie Gerberding, M.D.; David E. Hohman; E. Anne Peterson,

M.D.; Stewart Simonson; Mary Lou Valdez

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

Governing Bodies (Geneva, Sept. 27–Oct. 5) 

Representative: Jonathan W. Dudas 

Alternates: Paul Aceto; Steve Pinkos 

World Meteorological Organization (WMO) 

Congress did not meet in 2004. 

World Trade Organization (WTO) 

Ministerial Conference did not meet in 2004. 

U.S. Permanent Representatives to the United 

Nations from 1946 to 2004 

Edward R. Stettinius, Jr. (March 1946–June 1946) 

Herschel V. Johnson (acting) (June 1946–January 1947)

Warren R. Austin (January 1947–January 1953) 

Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. (January 1953–September 1960)

James J. Wadsworth (September 1960–January 1961)

Adlai E. Stevenson (January 1961–July 1965) 

Arthur J. Goldberg (July 1965–June 1968)

George W. Ball (June 1968–September 1968)

James Russell Wiggins (October 1968–January 1969)

Charles W. Yost (January 1969–February 1971)

George Bush (February 1971–January 1973)

John P. Scali (February 1973–June 1975)

172 
U.S. Representatives

Daniel P. Moynihan (June 1975–February 1976)

William W. Scranton (March 1976–January 1977) 

Andrew Young (January 1977–April 1979) 

Donald McHenry (April 1979–January 1981) 

Jeane J. Kirkpatrick (February 1981–April 1985)

Vernon A. Walters (May 1985–January 1989)

Thomas R. Pickering (March 1989–May 1992) 

Edward J. Perkins (May 1992–January 1993)

Madeleine K. Albright (February 1993–January 1997)

Bill Richardson (February 1997–September 1998) 

Peter Burleigh, Charge d’Affaires (September 1998–August 1999)

Richard C. Holbrooke (August 1999–January 2001)

James B. Cunningham, Charge d’Affaires (January 2001–September

2001)

John D. Negroponte (September 2001–June 2004)

John C. Danforth (July 2004– )

173 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

174 
Appendix 4 

UN and Related Websites 

The following lists of web sites are provided as a service to the reader 

and nothing in these web sites is deemed to represent the views of the U.S. 

Government unless otherwise stated. 

UN Bodies 

United Nations (http://www.un.org) 

Board of Auditors (http://www.unsystem.org/auditors/Default.htm) 

Charter (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html) 

Children’s Fund (http://www.unicef.org) 

Civilian Police [CIVPOL] (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/civpol/civpol1.html) 

Commission for Social Development (http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/csd) 

Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice 

 (http://www.unodc.org/crime_cicp_commission.html) 

Commission on Human Rights (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/2/chr.htm) 

Commission on International Trade Law (http://www.uncitral.org) 

Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law 

 (http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/insolvency/2004Guide.html) 

Legislative Guide on Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects

 (http://www.uncitral.org/english/texts/procurem/pfip-index-e.htm) 

Commission on Narcotic Drugs (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/cnd.html) 

Commission on Population and Development 

 (http://www.un.org/esa/population/cpd/cpd.htm) 

Commission on Sustainable Development (http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd.htm) 

Commission on the Private Sector and Development 

 (http://www.undp.org/cpsd/indexF.html) 

Commission on the Status of Women (http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw) 

Committee for Program and Coordination (http://www.un.org/ga/cpc/) 

Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations 

 (http://www.un.org/esa/coordination/ngo/) 

Conference on Disarmament (http://disarmament.un.org/cd/) 

Conference on Trade and Development (http://www.unctad.org) 

Sao Paulo Consensus 

(http://www.unctad.org/Templates/meeting.asp?intItemID=1942&lang=1&m

=4289&info=doc) 

Spirit of Sao Paulo 

(http://www.unctad.org/Templates/meeting.asp?intItemID=1942&lang=1&m

=4289&info=doc) 

Counter-Terrorism Committee (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1373/) 

Democracy Fund (http://www.unfoundation.org/features/un_democracy_fund.asp) 

Department of Peacekeeping Operations 

175 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/home.shtml) 

Development Program (http://www.undp.org) 

Commission on the Private Sector and Development 

 (http://www.undp.org/cpsd/indexF.html) 

Disarmament Commission (http://disarmament.un.org/undiscom.htm) 

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (http://www.unescap.org) 

Economic and Social Council (http://www.un.org/docs/ecosoc) 

Economic Commission for Europe (http://www.unece.org) 

Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 

 (http://www.eclac.cl/default.asp?idioma=IN) 

Environment Program (http://www.unep.org) 

Ethiopia/Eritrea Boundary Commission (http://www.un.org/NewLinks/eebcarbitration/) 

Fifth Committee (http://www.un.org/ga/59/fifth/index.html) 

First Committee (http://www.un.org/ga/59/first/index.html) 

Fourth Committee (http://www.un.org/ga/59/fourth/index.html) 

General Assembly (http://www.un.org/ga/59/) 

General Assembly Resolutions, 58th Session 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/r59.htm) 

High Commissioner for Refugees/UN Refugee Agency (http://www.unhcr.ch) 

High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change Report 

 (http://www.un.org/secureworld/) 

Human Resources Management (https://jobs.un.org/elearn/production/home.html) 

Human Settlements Program (http://www.unhabitat.org) 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (http://www.ipcc.ch) 

International Civil Service Commission (http://icsc.un.org/) 

International Court of Justice (http://www.icj-cij.org/) 

Advisory Opinion on Israeli construction of a barrier: 

 (http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/imwp/imwpframe.htm) 

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (http://www.ictr.org) 

International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 

 (http://www.un.org/icty/index.html) 

International Drug Control Program (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/undcp.html) 

International Law Commission (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm) 

International Narcotics Control Board (http://www.incb.org/incb/index.html) 

International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (http://www.unisdr.org) 

Iraq: Oil-for-Food Inquiry 

 (http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusRel.asp?infocusID=97&Body=Oil-forFood&Body1=inquiry 

Israel-Palestinian Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution 

 (http://www.un.int/usa/s-2003-529-me%20roadmap.pdf) 

Joint Inspection Unit (http://www.unsystem.org/jiu/) 

Joint Staff Pension Fund (http://www.unjspf.org/eng/index.html) 

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (http://www.unaids.org) 

176 
UN and Related Websites 

Office for Project Services (http://www.unops.org/unops/) 

Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 

 (http://ochaonline.un.org/) 

Office of Internal Oversight Services (http://www.un.org/Depts/oios/) 

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 

 (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/hchr.htm) 

Office on Drugs and Crime (http://www.unodc.org) 

Permanent Missions to the United Nations – Geneva: 

(http://www.unog.ch/80256EE600582E34/(httpPages)/8CEC446B720477DA80256EF

8004CB68C?OpenDocument) 

Permanent Missions to the United Nations – New York: 

 (http://www.un.org/Overview/missions.htm#perm) 

Population Fund (http://www.unfpa.org/) 

Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (http://www.unscear.org) 

Second Committee (http://www.un.org/ga/59/second/index.html) 

Secretary-General (http://www.un.org/news/ossg/sg/index.shtml) 

Security Council (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/) 

Security Council Resolutions 2004 

 (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions04.html) 

Security Council Sanctions Committees 

 (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/INTRO.htm) 

Sixth Committee (http://www.un.org/law/cod/sixth/59/sixth59.htm) 

Special Committee of 24 on Decolonization 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonization/special_committee_main.htm) 

Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations

 (http://www.un.org/law/chartercomm/) 

Third Committee (http://www.un.org/ga/59/third/index.html) 

UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (http://www.unesco.org) 

UN Office at Geneva (http://www.unog.ch) 

UN Office at Nairobi (http://www.unon.org) 

UN Office at Vienna (http://www.unvienna.org) 

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) 

 (http://www.un.org/unrwa/) 

UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) 

 (http://www.unscear.org/) 

UN Missions/Peacekeeping Operations 

International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) (http://www.afnorth.nato.int/ISAF/) 

UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) 

 (http://www.unama-afg.org/) 

UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) 

 (http://www.uniraq.org/aboutus/aboutus.asp) 

UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/undof/index.html) 

177 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) 

 (http://www.unmikonline.org/) 

UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/index.html 

UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unmogip/index.html) 

UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/minurso/index.html) 

UN Mission in Cote d’Ivoire (MINUCI) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/minuci/) 

UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) (http://www.unmeeonline.org/) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unmee/index.html) 

UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unmil/index.html) 

UN Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unamsil/index.html) 

UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC)

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/monuc/index.html) 

UN Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unmiset/index.html) 

UN Observer Mission in Bougainville (UNOMB) 

(http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/prev_dip/asia_pacific/bougainville/fr_bougainville_back

ground_3.htm) 

UN Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unomig/index.html) 

UN Observer Mission in Liberia (UNOMIL) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/DPKO/Missions/unomil.htm) 

UN Operation in Burundi (ONUB) (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/onub/) 

UN Operation in Cote d’Ivoire (UNOCI) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unoci/) 

UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unficyp/index.html) 

UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/minustah/) 

UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) 

 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/untso/index.html) 

International Organizations 

African Union (http://www.africa-union.org) 

Alliance Vietnam Liberte (http://www.fva.org/) 

Asian Development Bank (http://www.adb.org) 

Coalition Provisional Authority (http://www.cpa-iraq.org/) 

Economic Community of West African States (http://www.ecowas.int) 

European Commission (http://europa.eu.int/comm/index_en.htm) 

Anti-Fraud Office (http://europa.eu.int/comm/anti_fraud/index_en.html) 

178 
UN and Related Websites 

European Union (http://europa.eu.int) 

European Union Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina (EUFOR) 

 (http://www.euforbih.org/) 

Food and Agriculture Organization (http://www.fao.org) 

Free Vietnam Alliance (http://www.fva.org/) 

Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria 

 (http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/) 

Group of 77 (http://www.g77.org) 

Group on Earth Observations (http://earthobservations.org/) 

Independent Inquiry Committee (http://www.iic-offp.org/index.html) 

International Agency for Research on Cancer (http://www.iarc.fr/) 

International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.iaea.org) 

International Civil Aviation Organization (http://www.icao.org) 

International Committee of the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org) 

International Criminal Court (http://www.un.org/law/icc/) 

International Fund for Agricultural Development (http://www.ifad.org) 

International Labor Organization (http://www.ilo.org) 

International Maritime Organization (http://www.imo.org) 

International Monetary Fund (http://www.imf.org) 

International Telecommunication Union (http://www.itu.int) 

NATO (http://www.nato.int) 

International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) 

 (http://www.afnorth.nato.int/ISAF/index.htm) 

Stabilization Force (SFOR) (http://www.nato.int/sfor/) 

New Partnership for Africa’s Development (http://www.nepad.org/) 

Non-Aligned Movement (http://www.nam.gov.za) 

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (http://www.osce.org) 

Organization of the Islamic Conference (http://www.oicun.org) 

Pan American Health Organization (http://www.paho.org) 

Permanent Court of Arbitration (http://www.pca-cpa.org/) 

Rotary International (http://www.rotary.org/) 

Special Court for Sierra Leone (http://www.sc-sl.org/) 

U.K. National Audit Office (http://www.nao.org.uk/) 

Universal Postal Union (http://www.upu.int) 

World Bank (http://www.worldbank.org) 

World Food Program (http://www.wfp.org) 

World Health Organization (http://www.who.int) 

World Intellectual Property Organization (http://www.wipo.org) 

World Meteorological Organization (http://www.wmo.ch) 

World Organization for Animal Health (http://www.oie.int/eng/en_index.htm) 

179 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

Specialized U.S. Government Agency Sites 

Agriculture Department (http://www.usda.gov/) 

American Servicemembers’ Protection Act 

 (http://www.jura.unimuenchen.de/einrichtungen/ls/simma/Dokumente%20Andreas/ASPA.htm) 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/) 

Congress 

U.S. House of Representatives (http://www.house.gov/) 

U.S. Senate (http://www.senate.gov/) 

Defense Department (http://www.defenselink.mil/) 

Energy Department (http://www.doe.gov/engine/content.do) 

Environmental Protection Agency (http://www.epa.gov) 

Health and Human Services Department (http://www.hhs.gov/) 

Justice Department (http://www.justice.gov/) 

Labor Department (http://www.dol.gov/) 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://www.noaa.gov/) 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (http://www.nrc.gov/) 

Office of Management and Budget: Program Assessment Rating Tool 

 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/index.html) 

Smithsonian Institute (http://www.si.edu/) 

State Department (http://www.state.gov) 

Bureau of International Organization Affairs (http://www.state.gov/p/io/) 

 UN Participation Act 

 (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/decade/decad031.htm) 

Amendment to the Participation Act 

 (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/decade/decad032.htm) 

Treasury Department (http://www.treas.gov/) 

U.S. Agency for International Development (http://www.usaid.gov) 

U.S. Geological Survey (http://www.usgs.gov/) 

U.S. Peace Corps (http://www.peacecorps.gov/) 

U.S. Postal Service (http://www.usps.com/) 

White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov) 

IO Missions 

Geneva (http://www.us-mission.ch/index.html) 

New York (http://www.un.int/usa) 

UN Headquarters Agreement (http://www.un.int/usa/host_hqs.htm) 

Rome (http://usunrome.usembassy.it) 

Vienna (http://www.usun-vienna.usia.co.at) 

Conferences 

2nd UN Conference on Human Settlements [HABITAT II; Istanbul, Turkey; 

 June 1996] (http://www.un.org/Conferences/habitat) 

UN Conference on Environment and Development 

180 
UN and Related Websites 

 (http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/docs_unced.htm) 

UN Fourth World Conference on Women [Beijing, China; September 1995]

 (http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/) 

UN International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) [Cairo, 

 Egypt; September 1994] (http://www.iisd.ca/cairo.html) 

UN World Summit for Social Development [Copenhagen, Denmark; 1995]

 (http://www.iisd.ca/wssd95.html) 

UN World Summit for Sustainable Development [Johannesburg, South 

 Africa; Aug./Sept. 2002] (http://www.johannesburgsummit.org) 

World Food Summit [Rome, Italy; Nov. 1996] (http://www.fao.org/wfs/homepage.htm) 

World Food Summit: Five Years Later [Rome, Italy; June 2002]

 (http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsummit/english/index.html) 

Conventions/Agreements 

1951 Refugee Convention (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm) 

Accra Peace Agreement (2003) [Liberia] 

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/liberia/liberia_08182003_cpa.html) 

Arusha Agreement on Peace and Reconstruction in Burundi

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/burundi/pa_burundi_08282000_toc.html) 

Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 

 (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/index.html) 

Bonn Agreement [Afghanistan] 

 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/texts/bonnagreement.html) 

Bougainville Peace Agreement 

 (http://rspas.anu.edu.au/melanesia/PDF/BougainvillePeaceAgreement29Aug01.pdf) 

Cartagena Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment 

 of the Wider Caribbean Region

 (http://www.cep.unep.org/pubs/legislation/cartxt.html) 

Chemical Weapons Convention (http://disarmament2.un.org/wmd/cwc/index.html) 

Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the Government of Liberia and Liberians

 United for Reconciliation and Democracy and the Movement for Democracy in

 Liberia and Political Parties [Accra Peace Agreement, 2003] [Liberia] 

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/liberia/liberia_08182003_cpa.html) 

Convention Against Corruption 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/crime_convention_corruption.html) 

Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization 

 (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/convention/trtdocs_wo029.html) 

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil 

 Aviation [Montreal Convention]

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_civil_aviation.html) 

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime 

 Navigation 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_maritime_navigation.html) 

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_aircraft_seizure.html) 

Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft 

181 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_aircraft.html) 

Convention on Psychotropic Substances [1971]

 (http://www.incb.org/incb/convention_1971.html) 

Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_plastic_explosives.html) 

Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_nuclear_material.html) 

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally

 Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_protected_persons.html) 

Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations 

 (http://www.unog.ch/archives/un_priv.htm) 

Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Refugee Convention) 

 (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm) 

Cotonou Peace Agreement [Liberia] 

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/liberia/liberia_07251993_toc.html) 

[Cyprus] Settlement Plan (http://www.cyprus-un-plan.org/) 

Dayton Peace Agreement [Bosnia and Herzegovina] 

 (http://www.ohr.int/dpa/default.asp?content_id=380) 

Framework Agreement [Western Sahara] (http://www.wsahara.net/framagrm.html) 

Framework Convention on Climate Change (http://unfccc.int/2860.php) 

Framework Convention on Tobacco Control 

 (http://www.who.int/tobacco/framework/en/) 

General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina

 (http://www.ohr.int/dpa/default.asp?content_id=380) 

Houston Agreement [Western Sahara] (http://www.wsahara.net/UN/sg/S1997742.pdf) 

International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_hostages.html) 

International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast 

 Water and Sediments 

 (http://www.imo.org/Conventions/mainframe.asp?topic_id=867) 

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 

 (http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?topic_id=257&doc_id=647) 

International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_terrorist_bombing.html) 

International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/resolution_2000-02-25_1.html) 

International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

 (http://www.fao.org/ag/cgrfa/itpgr.htm) 

Kyoto Protocol 

 (http://unfccc.int/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php) 

Linas-Marcoussis Agreement [Cote d’Ivoire] 

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/cote_divoire/cote_divoire_01242003en.html) 

Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement [Democratic Republic of the Congo] 

 (http://www.state.gov/t/ac/csbm/rd/22634.htm) 

182 
UN and Related Websites 

Millennium Declaration (http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm) 

Millennium Development Goals (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/) 

Montreal Convention 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_maritime_navigation.html) 

Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer 

 (http://www.unep.org/ozone/Montreal-Protocol/Montreal-Protocol2000.shtml) 

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 

 (http://disarmament.un.org:8080/wmd/npt/index.html) 

 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property

 (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/paris/trtdocs_wo020.html) 

Parking Program for Diplomatic Vehicles 

 (http://www.un.int/usa/host_parking_program.htm) 

Peace Agreement [Ethiopia/Eritrea] 

 (http://www.usip.org/library/pa/eritrea_ethiopia/eritrea_ethiopia_12122000.html) 

Peace Plan for Self-Determination for the People of Western Sahara

 (http://www.wsahara.net/03/bakerplan.html) 

Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms 

 Located on the Continental Shelf 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_platforms.html) 

Protocol on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving 

 International Civil Aviation 

 (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism_convention_airports.html) 

Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees 

 (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_p_ref.htm) 

Rome Statute (http://www.un.org/law/icc/) 

Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (http://www.pic.int/) 

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention 

 (http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C108) 

Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs [1961] 

 (http://www.incb.org/incb/convention_1961.html) 

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 

 (http://www.pops.int/) 

Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons 

 (http://disarmament.un.org:8080/wmd/npt/index.html) 

UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 

 [1988] (http://www.incb.org/incb/convention_1988.html) 

UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and Its Protocols 

 (http://www.odccp.org/crime_cicp_signatures.html) 

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (http://unfccc.int/2860.php) 

UN Headquarters Agreement (http://www.un.int/usa/host_hqs.htm) 

Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and Optional Protocols 

 (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/texts/consul.htm) 

183 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

184 
Index 

31st of December Women 

 Movement 70

A 

Abkhazia 30–31

Abraham, Spencer 83 

Afghanistan 10–13

 Bonn Agreement 10–11

 counternarcotics 12 

 elections 11–12

humanitarian aid 11

peace and security 10–11, 12 

political process 12

refugees 11, 74

UN Assistance Mission in 

 Afghanistan 11, 13

Al-Hussein, Prince Zeid Ra’ad 39 

Al-Khasawneh, Awn Shawkat 114 

al-Qaida 40, 42 

Alexandre, Boniface 32 

Allawi, Ayad 6

Alliance Vietnam Liberté 70

Annan, Kofi 10, 27, 28, 

 29–30

Arbour, Louise 68

Aristide, Jean Bertrand 32

Arnault, Jean 10

arrears 127–128

Arusha Agreement 13–14 

Atomic Radiation, UN Scientific

 Committee on the Effects of 

 99–100

audit reports 133–135

Aung San Suu Kyi 28

avian influenza 77

B 

Baker, James A., III 26, 27

Bellamy, Carol 52

Bertini, Catherine 127

bin Laden, Usama 40, 42

Bonn Agreement 10–11

Bosnia/Herzegovina 29 

Bougainville 27–28

 Bougainville Peace 

 Agreement 27 

 elections 27 

peace process 27 

political process 27

UN Observer Mission in 

 Bougainville 27, 28

 weapon disposal 27 

Boundary Commission 18–19 

Boyle, Peter 89

Brahimi, Lakhdar 5, 10 

Bryant, Gyude 22

budget, UN 128–129

 increase 128–129 

 recosting 129 

safety and security of UN 

 personnel 128

 special political missions 128 

Buergenthal, Thomas 114 

Burma 28 

 International Labor 

 Organization 93 

political process 28

Burundi 13–14 

 Arusha Agreement 13–14 

peace process 13–14 

UN Operation in Burundi 

 13–14

C 

Cambodia 121–122

Capital Master Plan 129–130 

financing proposal 130 

renovation of UN headquarters 

 129–130

CCIT: Comprehensive 

 Convention on International

 Terrorism 41

CD: Conference on Disarmament 

185 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

 34–35

Chemical Weapons Convention 34

Cheney, Elizabeth 65 

Chérif, Taïeb 85

Children’s Fund, UN 52–53 

 development 53

Joint UN Program on

 HIV/AIDS 91

 malaria prevention 53 

Tenth Anniversary of the 

 International Year of the 

 Family 53 

 vaccines 52 

China 58, 67

civilian police 37–38

 formed units 38

climate change 56–57 

Climate Change, UN Framework 

 Convention on 56–57

cloning 109 

convention to ban human

 reproductive cloning 109 

convention to prohibit all human

 cloning 109 

CMP: Capital Master Plan

 129–130

CND: UN Commission on 

 Narcotic Drugs 64 

Commission on Sustainable 

 Development 51–52 

Commission on Human Rights 

 15, 66–68, 70 

Committee for Program and 

 Coordination 131–133

 reform 133 

 Strategic Framework 131 

Committee on Contributions 

 130–131

Committee on Nongovernmental 

 Organizations 70–71

 consultative status 70–71 

Community of Democracies 70 

Comprehensive Convention on

 International Terrorism 41

Conference on Disarmament 

 34–35

Congo, Democratic Republic 

 of the 16–18

 disarmament, demobilization, 

 and repatriation 18

 elections 16–17

peace and security 17–18 

 sanctions 42 

UN Mission in the Democratic 

 Republic of the Congo 16–17, 

 18 

sexual abuse allegations 38–39 

 violence 17–18 

 Bukavu 17 

 Gatumba, Burundi 17

 Lake Albert 17

Conscience Africane 70 

Convention for the Suppression of

 Unlawful Acts Against the Safety 

 of Maritime Navigation 95 

Convention on the Physical 

 Protection of Nuclear 

 Material 84 

Cote d’Ivoire 14–16

Economic Community of 

 West African States 14, 15 

 France 14 

 Linas-Marcoussis 

 Agreement 14 

peace and security 14–16 

peace process 14 

sanctions 16, 42– 43

UN Mission in Cote d’Ivoire 

 14 

UN Operation in Cote d’Ivoire 

 14–15, 16

 violence 15–16 

Commission of Inquiry 15

Counter-Terrorism Committee 40

CPC: Committee for Program and

 Coordination 131–133

186 
Index 

CPD: UN Commission on 

 Population and Development 

 58–59

crime prevention and criminal

 justice 63–64 

UN Commission on Crime 

 Prevention and Criminal 

 Justice 63 

 UN Convention Against

 Transnational Organized Crime 

 63–64

Conference of the Parties 63 

CSD: Commission on Sustainable 

 Development 51–52 

CSW: UN Commission on the 

 Status of Women 65–66

CTC: Counter-Terrorism

 Committee 40 

Cuba 66, 67

Cyprus 29–30 

peace and security 29–30 

 reunification 29–30

UN Peacekeeping Force in

 Cyprus 29, 30 

D 

Darfur, Sudan 25–26 

 human rights 68–69

humanitarian aid 71

refugees 25, 74

Dayan, Edouard 100 

decolonization 43–44 

 non-self-governing 

 territories 43–44

democracy 67, 68, 69–70 

 Democracy Caucus 69–70 

Community of Democracies 70 

UN Commission on Human 

 Rights 70

Democracy Fund, UN 69 

Department of Peacekeeping 

 Operations 38, 39, 126

development 49–52

Commission on Sustainable 

 Development 51–52 

 reform 51 

 investment 50 

UN Children’s Fund 53

UN Conference on 

 Trade and Development

 50–51

 reform 50 

UN Development Program

 49–50

audit reports 134, 135

Joint UN Program on

 HIV/AIDS 91

World Intellectual Property 

 Organization 104 

Diouf, Jacques 77

disabilities, convention on the 

 rights of persons with 62–63

disarmament 34–35

Conference on Disarmament 

 34–35

Chemical Weapons 

 Convention 34

Fissile Material Cutoff 

 Treaty 35 

 Nuclear Non-Proliferation 

 Treaty 34 

UN Disarmament Commission

 34 

disarmament, demobilization, 

 and repatriation 18, 21, 22

disaster and humanitarian relief 

 activities 75–76

 tsunami 76 

DPKO: Department of 

 Peacekeeping Operations 38, 39, 

 126

drug control 64–65

 counternarcotics 12, 64

 International Narcotics Control 

 Board 65

harm reduction policies 65

UN Commission Narcotic 

 Drugs 64

UN Office on Drugs and 

187 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

 Crime 12, 64–65

Joint UN Program on 

 HIV/AIDS 91

 reform 64 

UN International Drug Control 

 Program 134, 135 

E 

East Timor 28–29

UN Mission of Support in East 

 Timor 28–29 

ECE: Economic Commission for 

 Europe 59–60 

ECLAC: Economic Commission 

 for Latin America and the 

 Caribbean 60

Economic and Social Commission 

 for Asia and the Pacific 60–61 

 globalization 61

 poverty alleviation 61 

Economic Commission for 

 Europe 59–60 

 reform 59 

Economic Commission for Latin

 American and the Caribbean 60 

Economic Community of West

 African States 14, 15 

ECOWAS: Economic 

 Community of West African

 States 14, 15

Egypt 9 

Eide, Kai 31 

Elaraby, Nabil 114 

ElBaradei, Mohamed 79, 80, 81 

employment of Americans 

 144–147

 geographic targets 144–146

environment 55–57

climate change 56–57 

 Intergovernmental Panel on

 Climate Change 57 

UN Framework Convention on

 Climate Change 56–57 

 greenhouse gases 57

Kyoto Protocol 57

Tenth Conference of the 

 Parties 57

International Civil Aviation

 Organization 86 

 International Maritime

 Organization 96 

UN Environment Program 

 55–56, 100

 Iraq 56 

 Liberia 56 

 reform 56 

vehicle technologies 56

UN Scientific Committee on the 

 Effects of Atomic Radiation 

 99–100

Eritrea 18–19 

Boundary Commission 18–19 

peace process 18–19 

UN Mission in Ethiopia and 

 Eritrea 18, 19 

ESCAP: Economic and Social

 Commission for Asia and the

 Pacific 60–61 

Ethiopia 18–19 

Boundary Commission 18–19 

peace process 18–19 

UN Mission in Ethiopia and 

 Eritrea 18, 19 

F 

Family, Tenth Anniversary of the 

 International Year of the 53, 62

FAO: Food and Agriculture 

 Organization 77–79 

FCTC: Framework 

 Convention on Tobacco Control 

 87–88

financial situation of the United

 Nations 127–128

 members’ arrears 127–128 

Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty 35

FMCT: Fissile Material Cutoff 

 Treaty 35 

188 
Index 

Food and Agriculture 

 Organization 77–79 

avian influenza 77

food rights 78

food security 78

International Treaty on Plant 

 Genetic Resources for Food

 and Agriculture 78 

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

 91 

locust plague 78 

Framework Agreement 26 

Framework Convention on 

 Tobacco Control 87–88

France 14 

G 

Gbagbo, Laurent 14, 15

GCOS: Global Climate Observing 

 System 106 

genocide 25

Georgia 30–31 

 Abkhazia 30–31

peace and security 30–31 

UN Observer Mission in 

 Georgia 30, 31

Global Climate Observing System

 106

Gotovina, Ante 120 

Group on Earth Observations 105 

Guehenno, Jean Marie 31

Guillaume, Gilbert 114

Guinea-Bissau 19–21 

 elections 20 

peace process 19–21 

UN Peace-building Support 

 Office in Guinea-Bissau 

 19–21

 violence 20

H 

Hai Van Ha 66

Haiti 32–33

humanitarian aid 33

 Multinational Interim

 Force 32, 33

peace and security 32–33 

UN Stabilization Mission in

 Haiti 32–33

Hansen, Peter 75 

Higgins, Rosalyn 114

High-Level Panel of Experts 41, 

 123–125, 142 

HIV/AIDS 91–92 

3 by 5 initiative 87, 92

Department of Peacekeeping 

 Operations 38

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

 38, 91–92

Pan American Health 

 Organization 90 

World Food Program 72 

World Health Organization 87

Hizballah 8–9 

Holkeri, Harri 32 

Honwana, Joao Bernardo 20 

host country relations 113–114

 national security requirements 

 in preparation for General 

 Assembly 113 

Parking Program for Diplomatic

 Vehicles 113–114

Houston Accords 26 

human resources management

 140–142

High-Level Panel of Experts 

 142

human rights 65–71

 Khmer Rouge 121–122

Office of the High 

 Commissioner for Human 

 Rights 68–69 

 Darfur, Sudan 68–69 

 democracy 68 

 Iraq 68 

Sierra Leone’s Truth and 

 Reconciliation Commission 24, 

 121

189 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Commission on 

 Human Rights 15, 66–68, 70 

 anti-Semitism 68

 China 67

Cuba 66, 67

 democracy 67, 70 

 special sitting 67

 Sudan 67

U.S. embargo of Cuba 67 

 Zimbabwe 67 

 women 65–66 

humanitarian aid 71–76

 Afghanistan 11 

 disaster and humanitarian 

 relief activities 75–76

 Haiti 33

UN Children’s Fund 52–53

 UN-HABITAT 53–55

World Food Program 71–73 

I 

IAEA: International Atomic 

 Energy Agency 23, 79–85 

IARC: International Agency for 

Research on Cancer 89–90

ICAO: International Civil 

 Aviation Organization 85–87

ICC: International Criminal 

 Court 37, 116–117

ICJ: International Court of Justice 

 114–116

ICSC: International Civil Service 

 Commission 142–144

ICTR: International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda 119 

ICTY: International Criminal

 Tribunal for the former 

 Yugoslavia 120–121

Idris, Kamil 103 

IIC: Independent Inquiry

 Committee 5, 43, 139 

ILC: International Law 

 Commission 117–118

ILO: International Labor 

 Organization 92–94 

IMO: International Maritime

 Organization 94–96 

INCB: International Narcotics 

 Control Board 65 

Independent Inquiry Committee 

 5, 43, 139 

India 13 

peace and security 13 

UN Military Observer Group in

 India and Pakistan 13 

Intergovernmental Panel on 

 Climate Change 57 

International Agency for Research 

 on Cancer 89–90

International Association

 Promoting Human Rights 70, 71

International Atomic Energy

 Agency 79–85

 Libya 23 

Model Additional Protocol 80, 

 82 

peaceful uses of nuclear 

 technologies 84–85 

physical protection of nuclear

 materials 84 

prevention of nuclear terrorism 

 83 

 safeguards 79–83

 Iran 80–82 

 Iraq 80 

 Libya 82 

North Korea 80

security of radioactive sources 

 83–84

International Civil Aviation 

 Organization 85–87 

aviation safety 85–86 

 aviation security 86

machine-readable passports 86 

 environmental issues 86 

International Civil Service 

 Commission 142–144

 broad-banding 142 

190 
Index 

 pay-for-performance 142 

International Convention for the 

 Control and Management of 

 Ships’ Ballast Water and 

 Sediments 96

International Convention for the 

 Safety of Life at Sea 94–95 

International Convention for the 

 Suppression of Acts of Nuclear

 Terrorism 41

International Court of Justice 

 114–116

Israeli construction of barrier 7 

Advisory Opinion on Legal 

 Consequences of the 

 Construction of a Wall in

 Occupied Palestinian 

 Territory 115–116

 jurisdiction 116

Mexico v. United States of 

 America 114–115

Vienna Convention on 

 Consular Relations 114, 115

International Criminal Court 37, 

 116–117

Article 98 agreements 116–117

 jurisdiction 37, 116

International Criminal Tribunal for 

 Rwanda 119 

International Criminal Tribunal for 

 the former Yugoslavia 120–121

International Labor Organization 

 92–94

abuse of basic worker rights 93 

 Burma 93 

exploitative child labor 93

International Program for the 

 Elimination of Child Labor 93

 Iraq 93 

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

 91 

seafarers’ identity 

 documentation 93 

International Law Commission

 117–118

International Maritime

 Organization 94–96 

audit plan 96

 environment 96

International Convention for 

 the Control and Management

 of Ships’ Ballast Water and

 Sediments 96

maritime security 94–95, 96

International Convention for 

 the Safety of Life at Sea 

 94–95

International Ship and Port 

 Facility Security 94–95

transportation of weapons of 

 mass destruction 95 

Convention for the 

 Suppression of Unlawful Acts

 Against the Safety of 

 Maritime Navigation 95

International Narcotics Control 

 Board 65

International Ship and Port 

 Facility Security 94–95

International Telecommunication

 Union 96–97 

cost recovery from satellite 

 network filings 97

funding for the World Summit 

 on the Information Society 97 

International Trade Law, UN 

 Commission on 110–113 

business insolvency law reform 

 110–111

cross-border commercial fraud

 112–113

draft convention on the carriage 

 of goods by sea 112

 e-commerce 111–112

model law on procurement of

 goods 111

reform of secured financing laws 

 111

International Treaty on Plant 

191 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

 Genetic Resources for Food and 

 Agriculture 78

IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel 

 on Climate Change 57 

Iran 80–82 

clandestine nuclear activities 

 80–82

Iraq 5–6 

 elections 5 

 human rights 68

humanitarian aid 72

Independent Inquiry Committee 

 5 

 International Atomic Energy

 Agency 80 

International Labor Organization 

 93 

Multinational Force 6

political process 5

UN Assistance Mission for Iraq 

 6 

UN Environment Program 56

ISPS: International Ship and Port 

 Facility Security 94–95

Israel 6–10

International Court of Justice 7,

 115–116

Middle East resolutions 7–8 

 permanent status 6–8 

 Roadmap 7 

 terrorism 7 

UN Commission on Human 

 Rights 67

 UN Disengagement 

 Observer Force 9–10

UN Interim Force in Lebanon 

 8–9

 UN Truce Supervision

 Organization 9 

ITU: International 

 Telecommunication Union 

 96–97

J 

Jammu 13 

Janjaweed 25 

Japan 123 

Jarraud, Michel 105, 125

Jessen-Petersen, Soren 32 

JIU: Joint Inspection Unit 

 135–138

Joint Inspection Unit 135–138

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

 38, 91–92

Jordan 9, 32, 36–37

K 

Kabuga, Felicien 119 

Karadzic, Radovan 120 

Karzai, Hamid 12 

Kashmir 13

Khmer Rouge 121–122

Kim Hak-Su 61

Kirkpatrick, Jeane J. 71 

Koch, Dorothy Bush 65

Kooijmans, Pieter H. 114 

Korkery, Ann 65

Koroma, Abdul G. 114 

Kosovo 31–32 

 elections 32 

Jordanian shooting 32, 36–37

political process 31, 32

UN Interim Administration 

 Mission in Kosovo 31, 32

 violence 31–32 

Kotaite, Assad 85

Kyoto Protocol 57

L 

Larsen, Terje-Roed 10 

Leavey, Thomas E. 100 

Lebanon 8–9, 10 

 elections 10 

 Syrian withdrawal 10 

UN Interim Force in Lebanon 

 8–9

192 
Index 

UN Truce Supervision 

 Organization 9 

Lee Jong-Wook 87

Leland, Mark 66 

Levitsky, Melvin 65

Liberia 21–23

 disarmament, demobilization, 

 and repatriation 21, 22

peace process 21, 22 

sanctions 21–22, 42

UN Environment Program 56

UN Mission in Liberia 21, 

 22–23

 violence 22

Liberians United for 

 Reconciliation and Democracy 

 21, 22

Libya 23 

weapons of mass destruction 

 program 23, 82

Linas-Marcoussis 

 Agreement 14 

LMA: Linas-Marcoussis 

 Agreement 14 

locust plague 78 

Longaberger, Tami 66 

LURD: Liberians United for 

 Reconciliation and Democracy 

 21, 22

M 

Machinea, Jose Luis 60 

Matheson, Michael 117 

Matsuura, Koichiro 98 

Mbeki, Thabo 16 

McAskie, Carolyn 13

Meles Zenawi 19 

Meron, Theodor 121

Mettler, Fred 100

Middle East resolutions

 condemning Israel 7–8 

MIF: Multinational Interim

 Force 32, 33

MINUCI: UN Mission in

 Cote d’Ivoire 14 

MINURSO: UN Mission for

 the Referendum in Western 

 Sahara 26, 27 

MINUSTAH: UN Stabilization 

 Mission in Haiti 32–33

Mitropoulos, Efthimios 94 

Mladic, Ratko 120 

MNF: Multinational Force 6

MODEL: Movement for 

 Democracy in Liberia 21 

MONUC: UN Mission in the 

 Democratic Republic of the 

 Congo 16–17, 18

Morocco 26 

Morris, James T. 71 

Movement for Democracy in

 Liberia 21 

Multinational Force 6

Multinational Interim Force 32, 33

Myers, Lucretia 142 

N 

Nair, Dileep 138

NGO Committee: Committee on

 Nongovernmental Organizations 

 70–71

Nkurunziza, Pierre 13 

non-proliferation of weapons of

 mass destruction 46 

non-self-governing territories 

 43–44

North Korea 80

Nuclear Non-Proliferation 

 Treaty 34 

O 

Obaid, Thoraya Ahmed 58 

Office of the High Commissioner 

 for Human Rights 68–69

193 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

OHCHR: Office of the High

 Commissioner for Human Rights 

 68–69

Oil-for-Food Program

investigation 5, 43, 139 

Office of Internal Oversight 

 Services 139 

OIOS: Office of Internal 

 Oversight Services 39, 126, 

 138–140

ONUB: UN Operation in 

 Burundi 13–14

oversight 133–140

Board of Auditors 133–135 

International Criminal 

Tribunal for Rwanda 135 

International Criminal 

 Tribunal for the former 

 Yugoslavia 135 

peacekeeping operations 134 

UN Development Program 

 134, 135 

UN High Commissioner for 

 Refugees 134, 135

UN International Drug Control 

 Program 134, 135 

UN Office for Project Services

 134, 135 

UN Population Fund 134, 135 

UN Relief and Works Agency 

 for Palestine Refugees in the 

 Near East 135 

 UN-HABITAT 135

Joint Inspection Unit 135–138

 reform 137–138

selection of JIU inspectors 137 

Office of Internal Oversight 

Services 39, 126, 138–140

implementation rate of 

 recommendations 139–140 

Joint Staff Pension Fund 139 

peacekeeping operations 126 

 reform 138 

sexual abuse allegations 

 against peacekeepers 39 

Owada, Hisashi 114 

P 

PAHO: Pan American Health 

 Organization 90–91 

Pakistan 13 

peace and security 13 

UN Military Observer Group in

 India and Pakistan 13 

Palestine 6–8

 health conditions 89

International Court of Justice 

 115–116

Middle East resolutions 7–8 

 permanent status 6–8 

 Roadmap 7 

 terrorism 7 

Pan American Health 

 Organization 90–91 

 allegations of 

 irregularities 90–91

 HIV/AIDS 90 

U.K. National Accounting 

 Office 90–91 

Panikpakdi, Supachai 50

Panyarchun, Anand 123 

Parking Program for Diplomatic

 Vehicles 113–114

Parra-Aranguren, Gonzalo 114, 

 115

Patterson, Anne W. 33

peace and security 45–47 

 Abkhazia 30–31

Afghanistan 10–11, 12

 Bosnia/Herzegovina 29 

 Cote d’Ivoire 14–16

 Cyprus 29–30 

Democratic Republic of the 

 Congo 17–18 

 Georgia 30–31 

 Haiti 32–33

 India 13 

 Jammu 13 

 Kashmir 13

194 
Index 

 Middle East 6–10 

 Pakistan 13 

 sanctions 41–43

 Sudan 25–26 

peace process 

 Bougainville 27

 Burundi 13–14 

 Cote d’Ivoire 14

 Eritrea 18–19 

 Ethiopia 18–19 

 Guinea-Bissau 19–21 

Liberia 21, 22

Western Sahara 26

peacekeeping 36–39 

audit report 134

 civilian police 37–38

 formed units 38

 Department of Peacekeeping 

 Operations 38, 39

 rapid deployment 126

 sexual exploitation/abuse 

 task force 39 

 financing 36 

 expansion 36

 new missions 36 

 HIV/AIDS 38 

Office of Internal Oversight 

 Services 39, 126 

protection of U.S. peacekeepers 

 36–37

International Criminal Court 

 jurisdiction 37

Jordanian shooting 36–37 

U.S. Military Observer Group- 

 Washington 37

 reform 125–126

sexual abuse allegations 38–39 

Status of Forces Agreements 37 

Status of Mission Agreements 

 37 

UN Code of Conduct 38, 39

Pinheiro, Paulo Sergio 28

Piot, Peter 91 

Plan for Self-Determination of

 the People of Western Sahara 26

political process 

 Afghanistan 12 

 Bougainville 27

 Burma 28 

 Guinea-Bissau 20 

 Iraq 5 

Kosovo 31, 32 

population 58–59 

UN Commission on 

 Population and Development

 58–59

UN Population Fund 58

audit report 134, 135

 China 58

Joint UN Program on

 HIV/AIDS 91

 population planning 58

Powell, Colin 6, 25, 39

Pronk, Jan 26

R 

Ramcharan, Bertrand 68

Ranjeva, Raymond 114

Razali Ismail 28

Reform 123–126 

Commission on Sustainable 

 Development 51 

Committee for Program and 

 Coordination 133 

 Economic Commission for 

 Europe 59

High-Level Panel of 

 Experts 41, 123–125, 142

Joint Inspection Unit 137–138

 management 124–125

security and safety of 

 personnel 124

Office of Internal Oversight 

 Services 138 

 peacekeeping 125–126 

 rapid deployment 126

Security Council 123–124

 expansion 123–124

UN Conference on Trade and 

 Development 50 

195 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Educational, Scientific, and

 Cultural Organization 98

UN Environment Program 56

UN Office on Drugs and Crime 

 64 

Universal Postal Union 125

World Meteorological 

 Organization 105–106, 125

refugees 73–75 

 Afghanistan 11 

 Sudan 25

UN High Commissioner for 

 Refugees 11, 73–74 

 Afghanistan 74 

 Africa 73–74

audit reports 134, 135

 Darfur, Sudan 74 

Framework for Cooperation 73

Joint UN Program on 

 HIV/AIDS 91

UN Relief and Works Agency 

 for Palestine Refugees in the 

 Near East 75 

audit report 135

 tolerance 75

Repasch, Thomas 148 

Rezek, Francisco 114 

Ricupero, Rubens 50

Rosa, Henrique 19

Roses, Mirta 90 

Rossin, Larry 32 

S 

sanctions 41–43

al-Qaida 40, 42 

bin Laden, Usama 40, 42

Cote d’Ivoire 16, 42–43

Democratic Republic of the 

 Congo 42

Liberia 21–22, 42

peace and security 41–43 

 Somalia 24, 42

Special Committee on the 

 Charter of the United Nations 

 118–119

Sudan 25, 42

Taliban 40, 42 

 terrorism 40 

Sauerbrey, Ellen 65 

scale of assessments 130–131 

 Article 19 130 

 Committee on Contributions 

 130–131

Schmognerova, Brigita 59 

Scowcroft, Brent 123

SCSL: Special Court for 

 Sierra Leone 24, 121 

Second World Urban Forum 54 

Security Council reform 123–124

Settlement Plan 26

sexual abuse allegations 38–39 

UN Department of Peacekeeping 

 Operations 38, 39

Shi Jiuyong 114

Sierra Leone 23–24

 elections 23–24

Sierra Leone Special Court 24, 

 121

Truth and Reconciliation 

 Commission 24, 121 

UN Mission in Sierra Leone 

 23–24

Simma, Bruno 114 

Social Development, Commission 

 for 61–62

convention on the rights of

 persons with disabilities 

 62–63

Tenth Anniversary of the 

 International Year of the 

 Family 62 

SOFA: Status of Forces 

 Agreements 37 

SOLAS: International Convention 

 for the Safety of Life at Sea 

 94–95

SOMA: Status of Mission 

196 
Index 

 Agreements 37 

Somalia 24–25

sanctions 24, 42

Somavia, Juan 92 

Special Committee on the Charter 

 of the United Nations 118–119

 sanctions 118–119

Special Court for Sierra Leone 24, 

 121

Status of Forces Agreements 37 

Status of Mission Agreements 37 

Stephen, David 19 

SUA: Convention for the 

 Suppression of Unlawful Acts

 Against the Safety of Maritime 

 Navigation 95

Sudan 25–26

 Darfur 25–26

 genocide 25

internally displaced persons 25 

 Janjaweed 25 

peace and security 25–26 

 refugees 74 

sanctions 25, 42

UN Advance Mission in the

 Sudan 26

UN Commission on Human 

 Rights 67

 violence 25, 26

Syria 9, 10 

withdrawal from Lebanon 10

T 

Taiwan 88–89 

Taliban 40, 42 

Taylor, Charles 21, 22, 24, 42, 121

Taylor, John 22

Tenth Anniversary of the 

 International Year of the 

 Family 53, 62 

terrorism 40–41, 44

 al-Qaida 40 

 Comprehensive Convention on

 International Terrorism 41

 Counter-Terrorism

 Committee 40 

High-Level Panel of Experts 41 

 International Atomic Energy

 Agency 83 

International Convention for the 

 Suppression of Acts of Nuclear

 Terrorism 41

 Middle East 7 

 sanctions 40 

 Taliban 40

Usama bin Laden 40 

Tibaijuka, Anna 54

Tomka, Peter 114 

Töpfer, Klaus 55 

Transnational Organized Crime, 

 UN Convention Against 63–64

Transnational Radical Party 71 

TRC: Truth and Reconciliation

 Commission 24, 121 

Truth and Reconciliation

 Commission 24, 121 

tsunami relief activities 76

Tupaj Amaru 71

U 

U.K. National Accounting Office 

 90–91, 106, 125

U.S. Military Observers Group- 

 Washington 37

UN Advance Mission in the Sudan 

 26 

UN Assistance Mission for Iraq 6 

UN Assistance Mission in 

 Afghanistan 11, 13

UN Commission on Crime 

 Prevention and Criminal Justice 

 63 

UN Commission on Human 

 Rights 15, 66–68, 70

UN Commission on International 

 Trade Law 110–113

197 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UN Commission on Narcotic 

 Drugs 64

UN Commission on Population 

 and Development 58–59 

UN Commission on the Status of

 Women 65–66

UN Conference on Trade and 

 Development 50–51 

UN Convention Against

 Transnational Organized Crime 

 63–64

UN Democracy Fund 69

UN Department of Peacekeeping 

 Operations 38, 39, 126

UN Development Program 49–50

UN Disarmament Commission 34 

UN Disengagement Observer 

 Force 9–10 

UN Educational, Scientific, and 

 Cultural Organization 98–99 

 cultural diversity 98 

 education 99

Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS 

 91 

 reform 98 

UN Environment Program 55–56, 

 100

UN Framework Convention on

 Climate Change 56–57 

UN High Commissioner for 

 Refugees 11, 73–74 

UN Human Settlements Program

 53–55

audit report 135

Second World Urban Forum 54 

 urbanization 54–55

UN Interim Administration 

 Mission in Kosovo 31, 32

UN Interim Force in Lebanon 8–9

UN International Drug Control 

 Program 134, 135 

UN Joint Staff Pension Board 

 147–149

UN Joint Staff Pension Fund 

 139, 147–149 

surplus 148, 149

UN Military Observer Group in 

 India and Pakistan 13 

UN Mission for the Referendum in 

 Western Sahara 26, 27 

UN Mission in Cote d’Ivoire 14 

UN Mission in Ethiopia and 

 Eritrea 18, 19 

UN Mission in Liberia 21, 22–23

UN Mission in Sierra Leone 

 23–24

UN Mission in the Democratic 

 Republic of the Congo 16–17, 18

UN Mission of Support in East 

 Timor 28–29 

UN Observer Mission in 

 Bougainville 27, 28

UN Observer Mission in Georgia 

 30, 31

UN Office for Project Services

 134, 135 

UN Office on Drugs and Crime 

 12, 64–65

UN Operation in Burundi 13–14

UN Operation in Cote d’Ivoire 

 14–15, 16

UN Peace-building Support Office 

 in Guinea-Bissau 19–21

UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus 

 29, 30

UN Population Fund 58

UN Relief and Works Agency for 

 Palestine Refugees in the Near 

 East 75 

UN Scientific Committee on the 

 Effects of Atomic Radiation 

 99–100

UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti 

198 
Index 

 32–33

UN Truce Supervision 

 Organization 9 

UN-HABITAT: UN Human 

 Settlements Program 53–55

UNAIDS: Joint UN Program on 

 HIV/AIDS 38, 91–92

UNAMA: UN Assistance Mission 

in Afghanistan 11, 13 

UNAMI: UN Assistance Mission 

 for Iraq 6

UNAMIS: UN Advance Mission 

 in the Sudan 26 

UNAMSIL: UN Mission in Sierra 

 Leone 23–24 

UNCHR: UN Commission on 

 Human Rights 15, 66–68, 70 

UNCITRAL: UN Commission on

 International Trade Law 110–113

UNCTAD: UN Conference on 

 Trade and Development 50–51 

UNDC: UN Disarmament 

 Commission 34 

UNDCP: UN International Drug

 Control Program 134, 135 

UNDOF: UN Disengagement 

 Observer Force 9–10

UNDP: UN Development 

 Program 49–50

UNEP: UN Environment 

 Program 55–56, 100

UNESCO: UN Educational,

 Scientific, and Cultural 

 Organization 98–99 

UNFCCC: UN Framework

 Convention on Climate 

 Change 56–57

UNFICYP: UN Peacekeeping 

 Force in Cyprus 29, 30 

UNFPA: UN Population Fund 58 

UNHCR: UN High

 Commissioner for Refugees 11, 

 73–74

UNIFIL: UN Interim Force in

 Lebanon 8–9 

Universal Postal Union 100–103

performance measurement 

 101–102

 reform 125 

 terminal dues 101 

UNMEE: UN Mission in 

 Ethiopia and Eritrea 18, 19 

UNMIK: UN Interim

 Administration Mission in

 Kosovo 31, 32

UNMIL: UN Mission in 

 Liberia 21, 22–23 

UNMISET: UN Mission of 

 Support in East Timor 28–29

UNMOGIP: UN Military 

 Observer Group in India and 

 Pakistan 13 

UNOCI: UN Operation in Cote 

 d’Ivoire 14–15, 16

UNODC: UN Office on Drugs 

 and Crime 12, 64–65

UNOGBIS: UN Peace-building 

 Support Office in Guinea-Bissau 

 19–21

UNOMB: UN Observer Mission 

 in Bougainville 27, 28 

UNOMIG: UN Observer Mission 

 in Georgia 30, 31

UNOPS: UN Office for Project 

 Services 134, 135

UNRWA: UN Relief and Works 

 Agency for Palestine Refugees in 

 the Near East 75 

UNSCEAR: UN Scientific 

 Committee on the Effects of 

 Atomic Radiation 99–100

UNTSO: UN Truce Supervision 

 Organization 9 

199 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

UPU: Universal Postal Union 

 100–103

USMOG-W: U.S. Military 

 Observers Group-Washington 37

Utsumi, Yoshio 97 

V 

Valdes, Juan Gabriel 33

VCP: Voluntary Cooperation

 Program 106 

Veneman, Ann 52

Veness, Sir David 128 

Vereshchetin, Vladlen S. 114 

Vieira, Joao 19

Vienna Convention on Consular

 Relations 114, 115

Vietnam 71 

violence 

 Cote d’Ivoire 15–16

Commission of Inquiry 15

Democratic Republic of the 

 Congo 17–18 

 Guinea-Bissau 20 

 Kosovo 31–32 

 Liberia 22 

Sudan 25, 26

Volcker, Paul 43, 139 

Voluntary Cooperation Program 

 106

Voting 

 Afghanistan 11–12

 Bougainville 27

Democratic Republic of the 

 Congo 16–17 

 Guinea-Bissau 20 

 Iraq 5 

 Kosovo 32

 Lebanon 10

Sierra Leone 23–24

W 

Wade, James P. 102 

war crimes tribunals 119–122

Cambodia Khmer Rouge 

 Tribunal 121–122

International Criminal Tribunal 

 for Rwanda 119 

 audit reports 135 

 violations of international 

 humanitarian law 119

International Criminal Tribunal 

 for the former Yugoslavia 

 120–121

 audit reports 135 

Completion Strategy 120 

violations of international 

 humanitarian law 120

Special Court for Sierra Leone 

 24, 121

violations of international 

 humanitarian law 121

Western Sahara 26–27

 Framework Agreement 26 

Houston Accords 26 

peace process 26 

 Plan for Self-Determination 

 of the People of Western 

 Sahara 26 

 Settlement Plan 26

UN Mission for the Referendum 

 in Western Sahara 26, 27

WFP: World Food Program

 71–73

WHO: World Health 

 Organization 87–89 

Williamson, Richard S. 66

WIPO: World Intellectual 

 Property Organization 103–105

WMO: World Meteorological

 Organization 105–107

women 65–66 

recruitment of women in UN

 agencies 147 

UN Commission on the 

 Status of Women 65–66

World Bank 91

World Food Program 71–73 

200 
Index 

 Darfur, Sudan 71 

 HIV/AIDS 72 

Joint UN Program on

 HIV/AIDS 91

 Iraq 72 

school feeding 72 

World Health Organization 87–89

Framework Convention on 

 Tobacco Control87–88

 HIV/AIDS 87 

international health regulations 

 88 

Joint UN Program on 

 HIV/AIDS 91

Palestinian health conditions 89

public health aspects of diet and 

 nutrition88

 Taiwan 88–89 

World Intellectual Property 

 Organization103–105

allegations of irregularities 104

 development104 

intellectual property rights 

 103–104 

intellectual property treaty 104

World Meteorological 

 Organization105–107

Global Climate Observing 

 System 106 

 reform105–106, 125

Voluntary Cooperation Program 

 106

World Weather Watch 106 

World Weather Watch 106 Wynes, M. Deborah 136 

Y 

Yala, Kumba 19

Yassin, Shaikh Ahmed 7

Z 

Zimbabwe 67 

Zuñiga, Luis 66

201 
United States Participation in the United Nations—2004 

202