IB 
Union Calendar No. 221 
112TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2829 
[Report No. 112–323] 
To promote transparency, accountability, and reform within the United 
Nations system, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
AUGUST 30, 2011 
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN (for herself, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. PENCE, Mr. 
MCCOTTER, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of Cali-
fornia, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. 
CHABOT, Mr. BARTLETT, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Ms. 
BUERKLE, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COFFMAN 
of Colorado, Mr. DOLD, Mrs. ELLMERS, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. FORBES, Mr. 
FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas, Mr. 
GRIMM, Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr. HULTGREN, Mr. HURT, Mr. JOHNSON of 
Ohio, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. KLINE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. 
LANCE, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LONG, Mr. MARINO, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. 
MCHENRY, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. NUNNELEE, 
Mr. OLSON, Mr. PALAZZO, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. POSEY, Mr. RENACCI, Mr. 
RIVERA, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. ROSS of Florida, Mrs. SCHMIDT, 
Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. THOMPSON of Penn-
sylvania, Mr. TURNER, Mr. WALSH of Illinois, Mr. WEST, and Mr. WEST-
MORELAND) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com-
mittee on Foreign Affairs 
DECEMBER 8, 2011 
Additional sponsors: Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. POE of 
Texas, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. SOUTHERLAND, Mr. 
WALBERG, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WOODALL, Mr. CAMP, 
Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. 
ROSKAM, Mr. SCHWEIKERT, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mrs. ADAMS, Mr. 
CANSECO, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Ms. FOXX, Mr. GOSAR, Mr. GRAVES of 
Missouri, Mrs. HARTZLER, Mr. KELLY, Mr. LANDRY, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. 
SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. 
CRAWFORD, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. MARCH-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
01:12 Dec 09, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6652
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ANT, Mr. NUGENT, Mr. TURNER of New York, Mr. WOMACK, Mr. BILI-
RAKIS, Mr. FINCHER, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. ROONEY, 
Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. GARD-
NER, Mr. DENT, Mr. FARENTHOLD, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. HALL, Mr. 
GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. RYAN of 
Wisconsin, Mr. TIPTON, Ms. HAYWORTH, Mr. LABRADOR, Mrs. LUMMIS, 
Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. RUNYAN, Mr. 
THORNBERRY, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. LATHAM, Mr. MACK, Mr. ROHR-
ABACHER, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. CRAVAACK, Mr. 
ROYCE, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. TIBERI, Mr. GOHMERT, Mrs. BLACK, 
Mr. AUSTRIA, Mr. FLORES, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. 
RIGELL, Mr. WALDEN, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. 
WOLF, and Mr. BARTON of Texas 
DECEMBER 8, 2011 
Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 
[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 
[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on August 30, 2011] 
A BILL 
To promote transparency, accountability, and reform within 
the United Nations system, and for other purposes. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
01:12 Dec 09, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6652
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 
‘‘United Nations Transparency, Accountability, and Re-
form Act of 2011’’. 
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents is as 
follows: 
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 
Sec. 2. Definitions. 
TITLE I—FUNDING OF THE UNITED NATIONS 
Sec. 101. Findings. 
Sec. 102. Apportionment of the United Nations regular budget on a voluntary 
basis. 
Sec. 103. Budget justification for United States contributions to the regular budg-
et of the United Nations. 
Sec. 104. Report on United Nations reform. 
TITLE II—TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR UNITED 
STATES CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE UNITED NATIONS 
Sec. 201. Findings. 
Sec. 202. Definitions. 
Sec. 203. Oversight of United States contributions to the United Nations System. 
Sec. 204. Transparency for United States contributions. 
Sec. 205. Integrity for United States contributions. 
Sec. 206. Refund of monies owed by the United Nations to the United States. 
Sec. 207. Annual reports on United States contributions to the United Nations. 
TITLE III—UNITED STATES POLICY AT THE UNITED NATIONS 
Sec. 301. Annual publication. 
Sec. 302. Annual financial disclosure. 
Sec. 303. Policy with respect to expansion of the security council. 
Sec. 304. Access to reports and audits. 
Sec. 305. Waiver of immunity. 
Sec. 306. Terrorism and the United Nations. 
Sec. 307. Report on United Nations personnel. 
Sec. 308. United Nations treaty bodies. 
Sec. 309. Equality at the United Nations. 
Sec. 310. Anti-Semitism and the United Nations. 
Sec. 311. Regional group inclusion of Israel. 
Sec. 312. United States policy on Taiwan’s participation in United Nations enti-
ties. 
Sec. 313. United States policy on Tier 3 human rights violators. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6213
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TITLE IV—STATUS OF PALESTINIAN ENTITIES AT THE UNITED 
NATIONS 
Sec. 401. Findings. 
Sec. 402. Statement of policy. 
Sec. 403. Implementation. 
TITLE V—UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL 
Sec. 501. Findings. 
Sec. 502. Human rights council membership and funding. 
TITLE VI—GOLDSTONE REPORT 
Sec. 601. Findings. 
Sec. 602. Statement of policy. 
Sec. 603. Withholding of funds; refund of United States taxpayer dollars. 
TITLE VII—DURBAN PROCESS 
Sec. 701. Findings. 
Sec. 702. Sense of congress; statement of policy. 
Sec. 703. Non-participation in the Durban process. 
Sec. 704. Withholding of funds; refund of United States taxpayer dollars. 
TITLE VIII—UNRWA 
Sec. 801. Findings. 
Sec. 802. United States contributions to UNRWA. 
Sec. 803. Sense of Congress. 
TITLE IX—INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY 
Sec. 901. Technical cooperation program. 
Sec. 902. United States policy at the IAEA. 
Sec. 903. Sense of Congress regarding the nuclear security action plan of the 
IAEA. 
TITLE X—PEACEKEEPING 
Sec. 1001. Reform of United Nations peacekeeping operations. 
Sec. 1002. Policy relating to reform of United Nations peacekeeping operations. 
Sec. 1003. Certification. 
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 
In this Act: 
(1) EMPLOYEE.—The term ‘‘employee’’ means an 
individual who is employed in the general services, 
professional staff, or senior management of the United 
Nations, including consultants, contractors, and sub-
contractors. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
affiliated agencies and bodies identified as recipients 
of 
United 
States 
contributions 
under 
section 
1225(b)(3)(E) of the John Warner National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 
109–364), but not including the International Bank 
for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-
national Centre for Settlement of Investment Dis-
putes, the International Development Association, the 
International Finance Corporation, the Multilateral 
Investment Guarantee Agency, and the World Trade 
Organization. 
(9) 
UNITED
NATIONS
SYSTEM.—The 
term 
‘‘United Nations System’’ means the aggregation of 
all United Nations Entities, as defined in paragraph 
(8). 
(10) UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTION.—The term 
‘‘United States Contribution’’ means an assessed or 
voluntary contribution, whether financial, in-kind, or 
otherwise, from the United States Federal Govern-
ment to a United Nations Entity, including contribu-
tions passed through other entities for ultimate use by 
a United Nations Entity. United States Contribu-
tions include those contributions identified pursuant 
to section 1225(b)(3)(E) of the John Warner National 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub-
lic Law 109–364). 
(11) APPROPRIATE
CONGRESSIONAL
COMMIT-
TEES.—The term ‘‘appropriate congressional commit-
tees’’ means— 
(A) the Committees on Foreign Affairs, Ap-
propriations, and Oversight and Government Re-
form of the House of Representatives; and 
(B) the Committees on Foreign Relations, 
Appropriations, and Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs of the Senate. 
TITLE I—FUNDING OF THE 
UNITED NATIONS 
SEC. 101. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) The United States pays billions of dollars 
into the United Nations system every year (almost 
$7.7 billion in 2010, according to the White House 
Office of Management and Budget), significantly 
more than any other nation. 
(2) Under current rules and contribution levels, 
it is possible to assemble the two-thirds majority need-
ed for important United Nations budget votes with a 
group of countries that, taken together, pay less than 
1 percent of the total United Nations regular budget. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(3) The disconnect between contribution levels 
and management control creates significant perverse 
incentives in terms of United Nations spending, 
transparency, and accountability. 
(4) The United Nations system suffers from un-
acceptably high levels of waste, fraud, and abuse, 
which seriously impair its ability to fulfill the lofty 
ideals of its founding. 
(5) Amidst the continuing financial, corruption, 
and sexual abuse scandals of the past several years, 
American public disapproval of United Nations has 
reached all-time highs. A 2011 Gallup poll revealed 
that 62 percent of Americans believe that the United 
Nations is doing a poor job, a negative assessment 
shared by a majority of respondents from both polit-
ical parties. Research polling by another firm in late 
2006 found that 71 percent of Americans think that 
the United Nations is ‘‘no longer effective’’ and needs 
to be significantly reformed, while 75 percent think 
that the United Nations ‘‘needs to be held more ac-
countable’’. 
(6) Significant improvements in United Nations 
transparency and accountability are necessary for 
improving public perceptions of and American sup-
port for United Nations operations. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(7) Because of their need to justify future con-
tributions from donors, voluntarily funded organiza-
tions have more incentive to be responsive and effi-
cient in their operations than organizations funded 
by compulsory contributions that are not tied to per-
formance. 
(8) Catherine Bertini, the former UN Under-Sec-
retary General for Management and director of the 
World Food Program (WFP), has stated that ‘‘Vol-
untary funding creates an entirely different atmos-
phere at WFP than at the UN. At WFP, every staff 
member knows that we have to be as efficient, ac-
countable, transparent, and results-oriented as pos-
sible. If we are not, donor governments can take their 
funding elsewhere in a very competitive world among 
UN agencies, NGOs, and bilateral governments.’’. 
(9) Article XVII of the Charter of the United Na-
tions, which states that ‘‘[t]he expenses of the Organi-
zation shall be borne by the Members as apportioned 
by the General Assembly’’, leaves to the discretion of 
the General Assembly the basis of apportionment, 
which could be done on the basis of voluntary pledges 
by Member States. 
(10) Unlike United States assessed contributions 
to the United Nations regular budget, which are 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
statutorily capped at 22 percent of the total, there is 
no cap on voluntary contributions. 
(11) The United States, which contributes gener-
ously to international organizations whose activities 
it recognizes as credible, worthwhile, and efficient, 
contributes more than 22 percent of the budget of cer-
tain voluntarily funded United Nations Specialized 
Agencies. 
SEC. 102. APPORTIONMENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS REG-
ULAR BUDGET ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS. 
(a) UNITED STATES POLICY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—It is the policy of the United 
States to seek to shift the funding mechanism for the 
regular budget of the United Nations from an assessed 
to a voluntary basis. 
(2) ACTION AT UNITED NATIONS.—The President 
shall direct the United States Permanent Representa-
tive to the United Nations to use the voice, vote, and 
influence of the United States at the United Nations 
to shift the funding mechanism for the regular budget 
of the United Nations to a voluntary basis, and to 
make it a priority to build support for such a trans-
formational change among Member States, particu-
larly key United Nations donors. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(b) CERTIFICATION OF PREDOMINANTLY VOLUNTARY 
UN REGULAR BUDGET FINDING.—A certification described 
in this section is a certification by the Secretary of State 
to the Appropriate Congressional Committees that at least 
80 percent of the total regular budget (not including extra- 
budgetary contributions) of the United Nations is appor-
tioned on a voluntary basis. Each such certification shall 
be shall be effective for a period of not more than 1 year, 
and shall be promptly revoked by the Secretary, with notice 
to the appropriate congressional committees, if the under-
lying circumstances change so as not to warrant such cer-
tification. 
(c) WITHHOLDING
OF NONVOLUNTARY CONTRIBU-
TIONS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Beginning 2 years after the 
effective date of this Act and notwithstanding any 
other provision of law, no funds may be obligated or 
expended for a United States assessed contribution to 
the regular budget of the United Nations in an 
amount greater than 50 percent of the United States 
share of assessed contributions for the regular budget 
of the United Nations unless there is in effect a cer-
tification by the Secretary, as described in subsection 
(b). 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(2) ALLOWANCE.—For a period of 1 year after 
appropriation, funds appropriated for use as a 
United States contribution to the regular budget of 
the United Nations but withheld from obligation and 
expenditure pursuant to paragraph (1) may be obli-
gated and expended for that purpose upon the certifi-
cation described in subsection (b). After 1 year, in the 
absence of such certification, those funds shall revert 
to the United States Treasury. 
SEC. 103. BUDGET JUSTIFICATION FOR UNITED STATES 
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE REGULAR BUDGET 
OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 
(a) DETAILED ITEMIZATION.—The annual congres-
sional budget justification shall include a detailed itemized 
request in support of the contribution of the United States 
to the regular budget of the United Nations. 
(b) CONTENTS OF DETAILED ITEMIZATION.—The de-
tailed itemization required under subsection (a) shall— 
(1) contain information relating to the amounts 
requested in support of each of the various sections 
and titles of the regular budget of the United Nations; 
and 
(2) compare the amounts requested for the cur-
rent year with the actual or estimated amounts con-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
tributed by the United States in previous fiscal years 
for the same sections and titles. 
(c) ADJUSTMENTS AND NOTIFICATION.—If the United 
Nations proposes an adjustment to its regular assessed 
budget, the Secretary of State shall, at the time such adjust-
ment is presented to the Advisory Committee on Adminis-
trative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), notify and con-
sult with the appropriate congressional committees. 
SEC. 104. REPORT ON UNITED NATIONS REFORM. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, 
the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
committees a report on United Nations reform. 
(b) CONTENTS.—The report required under subsection 
(a) shall describe— 
(1) progress toward the goal of shifting the fund-
ing for the United Nations Regular Budget to a vol-
untary basis as identified in section 102, and a de-
tailed description of efforts and activities by United 
States diplomats and officials toward that end; 
(2) progress toward each of the policy goals iden-
tified in the prior sections of this title, and a detailed, 
goal-specific description of efforts and activities by 
United States diplomats and officials toward those 
ends; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(3) the status of the implementation of manage-
ment reforms within the United Nations and its spe-
cialized agencies; 
(4) the number of outputs, reports, or other man-
dates generated by General Assembly resolutions that 
have been eliminated; 
(5) the progress of the General Assembly to mod-
ernize and streamline the committee structure and its 
specific recommendations on oversight and committee 
outputs, consistent with the March 2005 report of the 
Secretary General entitled ‘‘In larger freedom: to-
wards development, security and human rights for 
all’’; 
(6) the status of the review by the General As-
sembly of all mandates older than 5 years and how 
resources have been redirected to new challenges, con-
sistent with such March 2005 report of the Secretary 
General; 
(7) the continued utility and relevance of the 
Economic and Financial Committee and the Social, 
Humanitarian, and Cultural Committee, in light of 
the duplicative agendas of those committees and the 
Economic and Social Council; and 
(8) whether the United Nations or any of its spe-
cialized agencies has contracted with any party in-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
cluded on the Lists of Parties Excluded from Federal 
Procurement and Nonprocurement Programs. 
TITLE II—TRANSPARENCY AND 
ACCOUNTABILITY 
FOR 
UNITED STATES CONTRIBU-
TIONS TO THE UNITED NA-
TIONS 
SEC. 201. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) As underscored by continuing revelations of 
waste, fraud, and abuse, oversight and accountability 
mechanisms within the United Nations system re-
main significantly deficient, despite decades of reform 
attempts, including those initiated by Secretaries 
General of the United Nations. 
(2) Notwithstanding the personal intentions of 
any Secretary General of the United Nations to pro-
mote institutional transparency and accountability 
within the United Nations System, the Secretary 
General lacks the power to impose far reaching man-
agement reforms without the concurrence of the Gen-
eral Assembly. 
(3) Groupings of Member States whose voting 
power in the General Assembly significantly outpaces 
their proportional contributions to the United Na-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
tions system have repeatedly and successfully defeated, 
delayed, and diluted various reform proposals that 
would have enabled more detailed oversight and scru-
tiny of United Nations system operations and expend-
itures. 
(4) To an unacceptable degree, major donor 
states, including the United States, lack access to rea-
sonably detailed, reliable information that would 
allow them to determine how their contributions have 
been spent by various United Nations system entities, 
further contributing to the lack of accountability 
within the United Nations system. 
SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS. 
In this title: 
(1) TRANSPARENCY
CERTIFICATION.—The term 
‘‘Transparency Certification’’ means an annual, writ-
ten affirmation by the head or authorized designee of 
a United Nations Entity, provided to the Department 
of State, that the Entity will cooperate with the De-
partment of State and Congress, including by pro-
viding the Department of State and Congress with 
full, complete, and unfettered access to Oversight In-
formation as defined in this title. 
(2) OVERSIGHT INFORMATION.—The term ‘‘Over-
sight Information’’ includes— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(A) internally and externally commissioned 
audits, investigatory reports, program reviews, 
performance reports, and evaluations; 
(B) financial statements, records, and bill-
ing systems; 
(C) program budgets and program budget 
implications, including revised estimates and re-
ports produced by or provided to the Secretary 
General and the Secretary General’s agents on 
budget related matters; 
(D) operational plans, budgets, and budg-
etary analyses for peacekeeping operations; 
(E) analyses and reports regarding the scale 
of assessments; 
(F) databases and other data systems con-
taining financial or programmatic information; 
(G) documents or other records alleging or 
involving improper use of resources, misconduct, 
mismanagement, or other violations of rules and 
regulations applicable to the United Nations En-
tity; and 
(H) other documentation relevant to the 
oversight work of Congress with respect to United 
States contributions to the United Nations sys-
tem. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(3) ACCOUNTABILITY CERTIFICATION.—The term 
‘‘Accountability Certification’’ means an annual, 
written affirmation by the head or authorized des-
ignee of a United Nations Entity provided to the Sec-
retary of State that the Entity— 
(A) provides the public with full, complete, 
and unfettered access to all relevant documenta-
tion relating to operations and activities, includ-
ing budget and procurement activities; 
(B) implements and upholds policies and 
procedures to protect whistleblowers; 
(C) implements and upholds policies and 
procedures to require the filing of individual an-
nual financial disclosure forms by each of its 
employees at the P–5 level and above and to re-
quire that such forms be made available to the 
Office of Internal Oversight Services, to Member 
States, and to the public; 
(D) has established an effective ethics office; 
(E) has established a fully independent, au-
tonomous, and effective internal oversight body; 
(F) has adopted and implemented, and is 
in full compliance with, International Public 
Sector Accounting Standards; and 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(G) has established a cap on its administra-
tive overhead costs. 
SEC. 203. OVERSIGHT OF UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS 
TO THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM. 
(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to en-
hance oversight of United States contributions to the United 
Nations System and the use of those contributions by 
United Nations Entities, in an effort to eliminate and deter 
waste, fraud, and abuse in the use of those contributions, 
and thereby to contribute to the development of greater 
transparency, 
accountability, 
and 
internal 
controls 
throughout the United Nations System. 
(b) IMPLEMENTATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Department of State shall 
collect and maintain current records regarding 
Transparency Certifications and Accountability Cer-
tifications by all United Nations Entities that receive 
United States contributions and submit that informa-
tion for inclusion in the report required under section 
207. 
(2) NOTIFICATION.—The Department of State 
shall keep the appropriate congressional committees 
fully and promptly informed of how United Nations 
Entities are spending United States contributions. 
(3) REFERRALS.— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of State 
shall promptly report to the Attorney General 
and to the appropriate congressional committees 
when the Secretary of State has reasonable 
grounds to believe a Federal criminal law has 
been violated by a United Nations Entity or one 
of its employees, contractors, or representatives. 
(B) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary of State 
shall promptly report, when appropriate, to the 
appropriate congressional committees, and to the 
Secretary General or to the head of the appro-
priate United Nations Entity, cases in which the 
Secretary of State reasonably believes that mis-
management, misfeasance, or malfeasance is like-
ly to have taken place within a United Nations 
Entity and disciplinary proceedings are likely 
justified. 
(4) 
CONFIRMATION
OF
TRANSPARENCY
BY 
UNITED NATIONS ENTITIES.— 
(A) PROMPT NOTICE BY DEPARTMENT OF 
STATE.—Whenever information or assistance re-
quested from a United Nations Entity by the De-
partment of State pursuant to a Transparency 
Certification is, in the opinion of the Secretary 
of State, unreasonably refused or not provided in 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
a timely manner, the Secretary of State shall no-
tify the appropriate congressional committees, 
the head of that particular United Nations Enti-
ty, and the Secretary General of the cir-
cumstances in writing, without delay. 
(B) NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE.—If and when 
the information or assistance being sought by the 
Department of State in connection with a notifi-
cation pursuant to subparagraph (A) is provided 
to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State, the 
Secretary of State shall so notify in writing to 
the appropriate congressional committees and the 
head of that particular United Nations Entity. 
(C) NONCOMPLIANCE.—If the information 
or assistance being sought by the Department of 
State in connection with a notification pursuant 
to subparagraph (A) is not provided within 90 
days of that notification, then the United Na-
tions Entity that is the subject of the notification 
is deemed to be noncompliant with its Trans-
parency Certification, and 
(D) RESTORATION OF COMPLIANCE.—After 
the situation has been resolved to the satisfaction 
of the Secretary of State, the Secretary of State 
shall promptly provide prompt, written notifica-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ance, along with a description of the basis for the 
Secretary of State’s decision, to the appropriate 
congressional committees, the head of that United 
Nations Entity, the Secretary General, and any 
office or agency of the Federal Government that 
has provided that United Nations Entity with 
any United States contribution during the prior 
2 years. 
(6) REPORTING.— 
(A) REPORTING.—In the report submitted 
by the Director of the Office of Management and 
Budget to Congress pursuant to section 207, the 
Secretary of State shall submit for inclusion a 
section that, among other things, includes a list 
and detailed description of the circumstances 
surrounding any notification of compliance 
issued pursuant to paragraph (4)(C) or (5)(C) 
during the covered timeframe, and whether and 
when the Secretary has reversed such finding of 
noncompliance. 
(B) PROHIBITED
DISCLOSURES.—Nothing 
in this subsection shall be construed to authorize 
the public disclosure of information that is— 
(i) specifically prohibited from disclo-
sure by any other provision of law; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(ii) specifically required by Executive 
Order to be protected from disclosure in the 
interest of national defense or national secu-
rity or in the conduct of foreign affairs; or 
(iii) a part of an ongoing criminal in-
vestigation. 
(C) PRIVACY PROTECTIONS.—The Secretary 
of State shall exempt from public disclosure in-
formation received from a United Nations Enti-
ty that the Secretary of State believes— 
(i) constitutes a trade secret or privi-
leged and confidential personal financial 
information; 
(ii) constitutes confidential personal 
medical information; 
(iii) accuses a particular person of a 
crime; 
(iv) would, if publicly disclosed, con-
stitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy; and 
(v) would compromise an ongoing law 
enforcement investigation or judicial trial 
in the United States. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 204. TRANSPARENCY FOR UNITED STATES CONTRIBU-
TIONS. 
(a) FUNDING PREREQUISITES.—Notwithstanding any 
other provision of law, no funds made available for use as 
a United States Contribution to any United Nations Entity 
may be obligated or expended if— 
(1) the intended United Nations Entity recipient 
has not provided to the Secretary of State within the 
preceding year a Transparency Certification as de-
fined in section 202(1); 
(2) the intended United Nations Entity recipient 
is noncompliant with its Transparency Certification 
as described in section 203(b)(4)(C); 
(3) the intended United Nations Entity recipient 
has not provided to the Secretary of State within the 
preceding year an Accountability Certification as de-
fined in section 202(3); or 
(4) the intended United Nations Entity is non-
compliant with its Accountability Certification as de-
scribed in section 203(b)(5)(C). 
(b) TREATMENT
OF FUNDS WITHHELD
FOR NON-
COMPLIANCE.—At the conclusion of each fiscal year, any 
funds that had been appropriated for use as a United States 
Contribution to a United Nations Entity during that fiscal 
year, but could not be obligated or expended because of the 
restrictions of subsection (a), shall be returned to the United 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
States Treasury, and are not subject to reprogramming for 
any other use. Any such funds returned to the Treasury 
shall not be considered arrears to be repaid to any United 
Nations Entity. 
(c) PRESIDENTIAL
WAIVER.—The President may 
waive the limitations of this subsection with respect to a 
particular United States Contribution to a particular 
United Nations Entity within a single fiscal year if the 
President determines that failure to do so would pose an 
extraordinary threat to the national security of the United 
States and provides notification and explanation of that 
determination to the appropriate congressional committees. 
SEC. 205. INTEGRITY FOR UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS. 
(a) LIMITATION.—(1) No funds made available for use 
under the heading ‘‘Contributions to International Organi-
zations’’ may be used for any purpose other than an as-
sessed United States contribution to a United Nations Enti-
ty or other international organization. 
(2) No funds made available for use under the heading 
‘‘International Organizations and Programs’’ may be used 
for any purpose other than a voluntary United States con-
tribution to a United Nations Entity or other international 
organization. 
(3) No funds made available for use under the heading 
‘‘Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities’’ 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
may be used for any purpose other than a United States 
contribution to United Nations peacekeeping activities, to 
the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugo-
slavia, or to the International Criminal Tribunal for 
Rwanda. 
(b) TREATMENT
OF FUNDS WITHHELD
FOR NON-
COMPLIANCE.—At the conclusion of each fiscal year, any 
funds that had been appropriated for use as a United States 
contribution to a United Nations Entity during that fiscal 
year, but could not be obligated or expended because of the 
restrictions of subsection (a), shall be returned to the United 
States Treasury, and are not subject to reprogramming for 
any other use. Any such funds returned to the Treasury 
shall not be considered arrears to be repaid to any United 
Nations Entity. 
SEC. 206. REFUND OF MONIES OWED BY THE UNITED NA-
TIONS TO THE UNITED STATES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) United States taxpayer funds overpaid to 
United Nations Entities and payable back to the 
United States sometimes remain in the hands of the 
United Nations because the United States has not re-
quested the return of those funds. 
(2) Such funds have been paid into, among other 
United Nations Entities, the United Nations Tax 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Equalization Fund (TEF), which was established 
under the provisions of United Nations General As-
sembly Resolution 973 (1955), and which is used to 
reimburse United Nations staff members subject to 
United States income taxes for the cost of those taxes. 
(3) In recent years, the TEF has taken in con-
siderably more money than it has paid out, with the 
United States apparently overpaying into the TEF 
by $52.2 million in the 2008–2009 timeframe alone. 
(4) According to the United Nations Financial 
Report and Audited Financial Statements released on 
July 29, 2010, ‘‘As of 31 December 2009, an amount 
of $179.0 million was payable to the United States of 
America pending instructions as to its disposition.’’. 
(5) That balance was allowed to accrue notwith-
standing United Nations Financial Regulation 4.12, 
which states that any such surpluses ‘‘shall be cred-
ited against the assessed contributions due from that 
Member State the following year.’’. 
(6) Allowing the United Nations to regularly 
overcharge the United States and to retain those over-
payments, or to spend them on wholly unrelated ac-
tivities, is a disservice to American taxpayers and a 
subversion of the Congressional budget process. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 303. POLICY WITH RESPECT TO EXPANSION OF THE 
SECURITY COUNCIL. 
It is the policy of the United States to use the voice, 
vote, and influence of the United States at the United Na-
tions to oppose any proposals on expansion of the Security 
Council if such expansion would— 
(1) diminish the influence of the United States 
on the Security Council; or 
(2) include veto rights for any new members of 
the Security Council. 
SEC. 304. ACCESS TO REPORTS AND AUDITS. 
The President shall direct the United States Perma-
nent Representative to the United Nations to use the voice, 
vote, and influence of the United States at the United Na-
tions to ensure that Member States may, upon request, have 
access to all reports and audits completed by the Board of 
External Auditors. 
SEC. 305. WAIVER OF IMMUNITY. 
The President shall direct the United States Perma-
nent Representative to the United Nations to use the voice, 
vote, and influence of the United States at the United Na-
tions to ensure that the Secretary General exercises the right 
and duty of the Secretary General under section 20 of the 
Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United 
Nations to waive the immunity of any United Nations offi-
cial in any case in which such immunity would impede 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
the course of justice. In exercising such waiver, the Sec-
retary General is urged to interpret the interests of the 
United Nations as favoring the investigation or prosecution 
of a United Nations official who is credibly under investiga-
tion for having committed a serious criminal offense or who 
is credibly charged with a serious criminal offense. 
SEC. 306. TERRORISM AND THE UNITED NATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall direct the 
United States Permanent Representative to the United Na-
tions to use the voice, vote, and influence of the United 
States at the United Nations to work toward adoption by 
the General Assembly of— 
(1) a definition of terrorism that— 
(A) builds upon the recommendations of the 
December 2004 report of the High-Level Panel 
on Threats, Challenges, and Change; 
(B) includes as an essential component of 
such definition any action that is intended to 
cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians 
with the purpose of intimidating a population or 
compelling a government or an international or-
ganization to do, or abstain from doing, any act; 
and 
(C) does not propose a legal or moral 
equivalence between an action described in sub-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
paragraph (B) and measures taken by a govern-
ment or international organization in self-de-
fense against an action described in such sub-
paragraph; and 
(2) a comprehensive convention on terrorism that 
includes the definition described in paragraph (1). 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress 
that— 
(1) authoritarian regimes often inaccurately 
label peaceful, pro-freedom, pro-democracy movements 
as terrorist movements in order to undermine the le-
gitimacy of those movements; and 
(2) any United Nations definition of terrorism 
should not be used to undermine a peaceful, pro-free-
dom, pro-democracy movement against authoritarian 
rule. 
SEC. 307. REPORT ON UNITED NATIONS PERSONNEL. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall 
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a re-
port— 
(1) concerning the progress of the General Assem-
bly to modernize human resource practices, consistent 
with the March 2005 report of the Secretary General 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
entitled ‘‘In larger freedom: towards development, se-
curity and human rights for all’’; and 
(2) containing the information described in sub-
section (b). 
(b) CONTENTS.—The report shall include— 
(1) a comprehensive evaluation of human re-
sources reforms at the United Nations, including an 
evaluation of— 
(A) tenure; 
(B) performance reviews; 
(C) the promotion system; 
(D) a merit-based hiring system and en-
hanced regulations concerning termination of 
employment of employees; and 
(E) the implementation of a code of conduct 
and ethics training; 
(2) the implementation of a system of procedures 
for filing complaints and protective measures for 
work-place harassment, including sexual harassment; 
(3) policy recommendations relating to the estab-
lishment of a rotation requirement for nonadminis-
trative positions; 
(4) policy recommendations relating to the estab-
lishment of a prohibition preventing personnel and 
officials assigned to the mission of a member state to 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
the United Nations from transferring to a position 
within the United Nations Secretariat that is com-
pensated at the P–5 level and above; 
(5) policy recommendations relating to a reduc-
tion in travel allowances and attendant oversight 
with respect to accommodations and airline flights; 
and 
(6) an evaluation of the recommendations of the 
Secretary General relating to greater flexibility for 
the Secretary General in staffing decisions to accom-
modate changing priorities. 
SEC. 308. UNITED NATIONS TREATY BODIES. 
The United States shall withhold from United States 
contributions to the regular assessed budget of the United 
Nations for a biennial period amounts that are propor-
tional to the percentage of such budget that are expended 
with respect to a United Nations human rights treaty moni-
toring body or committee that was established by— 
(1) a convention (without any protocols) or an 
international covenant (without any protocols) to 
which the United States is not party; or 
(2) a convention, with a subsequent protocol, if 
the United States is a party to neither. 
SEC. 309. EQUALITY AT THE UNITED NATIONS. 
(a) DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVIEW AND REPORT.— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(1) IN GENERAL.—To avoid duplicative efforts 
and funding with respect to Palestinian interests and 
to ensure balance in the approach to Israeli-Pales-
tinian issues, the Secretary shall, not later than 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act— 
(A) complete an audit of the functions of the 
entities listed in paragraph (2); and 
(B) submit to the appropriate congressional 
committees a report containing audit findings 
and conclusions, and recommendations for the 
elimination of such duplicative entities and ef-
forts. 
(2) ENTITIES.—The entities referred to in para-
graph (1)(A) are the following: 
(A) The United Nations Division for Pales-
tinian Rights. 
(B) The Committee on the Exercise of the 
Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. 
(C) The United Nations Special Coordi-
nator for the Middle East Peace Process and 
Personal Representative to the Palestine Libera-
tion Organization and the Palestinian Author-
ity. 
(D) The NGO Network on the Question of 
Palestine. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(E) The Special Committee to Investigate 
Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of 
the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the 
Occupied Territories. 
(F) Any other entity the Secretary deter-
mines results in duplicative efforts or funding or 
fails to ensure balance in the approach to 
Israeli-Palestinian issues. 
(b) IMPLEMENTATION BY PERMANENT REPRESENTA-
TIVE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The President shall direct the 
United States Permanent Representative to the 
United Nations to use the voice, vote, and influence 
of the United States at the United Nations to seek the 
implementation of the recommendations contained in 
the report required under subsection (a)(1)(B). 
(2) WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS.—Until such rec-
ommendations have been implemented, the United 
States shall withhold from United States contribu-
tions to the regular assessed budget of the United Na-
tions for a biennial period amounts that are propor-
tional to the percentage of such budget that are ex-
pended for such entities. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 310. ANTI-SEMITISM AND THE UNITED NATIONS. 
The President shall direct the United States perma-
nent representative to the United Nations to use the voice, 
vote, and influence of the United States at the United Na-
tions to make every effort to— 
(1) ensure the issuance and implementation of a 
directive by the Secretary General or the Secretariat, 
as appropriate, that— 
(A) requires all employees of the United Na-
tions and its specialized agencies to officially 
and publicly condemn anti-Semitic statements 
made at any session of the United Nations or its 
specialized agencies, or at any other session 
sponsored by the United Nations; 
(B) requires employees of the United Na-
tions and its specialized agencies, programs, and 
funds to be subject to punitive action, including 
immediate dismissal, for making anti-Semitic 
statements or references; 
(C) proposes specific recommendations to 
the General Assembly for the establishment of 
mechanisms to hold accountable employees and 
officials of the United Nations and its specialized 
agencies, programs, and funds, or Member 
States, that make such anti-Semitic statements 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
or references in any forum of the United Nations 
or of its specialized agencies; 
(D) continues to develop and implements 
education awareness programs about the Holo-
caust and anti-Semitism throughout the world, 
as part of an effort to combat intolerance and 
hatred; and 
(E) requires the Office of the United Na-
tions High Commissioner for Human Rights 
(OHCHR) to develop programming and other 
measures that address anti-Semitism; 
(2) secure the adoption of a resolution by the 
General Assembly that establishes the mechanisms de-
scribed in paragraph (1)(C); and 
(3) continue working toward further reduction of 
anti-Semitic language and anti-Israel resolutions in 
the United Nations and its specialized agencies, pro-
grams, and funds. 
SEC. 311. REGIONAL GROUP INCLUSION OF ISRAEL. 
The President shall direct the United States Perma-
nent Representative to the United Nations to use the voice, 
vote, and influence of the United States at the United Na-
tions to expand the Western European and Others Group 
(WEOG) in the United Nations in Geneva to include Israel 
as a permanent member with full rights and privileges. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 312. UNITED STATES POLICY ON TAIWAN’S PARTICIPA-
TION IN UNITED NATIONS ENTITIES. 
The Secretary of State shall direct the United States 
Permanent Representative to the United Nations to use the 
voice, vote, and influence of the United States at the United 
Nations to ensure meaningful participation for Taiwan in 
relevant United Nations Entities in which Taiwan has ex-
pressed an interest in participating. 
SEC. 313. UNITED STATES POLICY ON TIER 3 HUMAN 
RIGHTS VIOLATORS. 
The Secretary of State shall direct the United States 
Permanent Representative to the United Nations to use the 
voice, vote, and influence of the United States at the United 
Nations to ensure that no representative of a country des-
ignated pursuant to section 110 of the Trafficking Victims 
Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7107) by the Department 
of State as a Tier 3 country shall preside as Chair or Presi-
dent of any United Nations Entity. 
TITLE 
IV—STATUS 
OF 
PALES-
TINIAN 
ENTITIES 
AT 
THE 
UNITED NATIONS 
SEC. 401. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) In 1989, the Palestine Liberation Organiza-
tion (PLO) launched an effort to evade direct negotia-
tions for peace with the State of Israel by instead 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
pursuing Palestinian membership in international 
organizations, which could imply de facto recognition 
of a Palestinian state by the United Nations. 
(2) The Executive Branch, with significant sup-
port from Members of Congress, successfully stopped 
the PLO’s effort by credibly threatening, as noted in 
a May 1, 1989 statement by then-Secretary of State 
James A. Baker, ‘‘that the United States [would] 
make no further contributions, voluntary or assessed, 
to any international organization which makes any 
change in the P.L.O.’s present status as an observer 
organization.’’. 
(3) The United States success in this case dem-
onstrates that withholding contributions and placing 
conditions on their payment can result in real re-
forms, stop counter-productive developments, and ad-
vance United States interests at the United Nations. 
(4) The Palestinian leadership has recently re-
sumed its effort to evade direct negotiations for peace 
with the State of Israel by seeking recognition of a 
Palestinian state from foreign governments and in 
international forums. 
(5) Efforts to bypass negotiations and to unilat-
erally declare a Palestinian state, or to appeal to the 
United Nations or other international forums or to 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
foreign governments for recognition of a Palestinian 
state or membership or other upgraded status for the 
Palestinian observer mission at those forums, would 
violate the underlying principles of the Oslo Accords, 
the Road Map, and other relevant Middle East peace 
process efforts. 
(6) On December 15, 2010, the House of Rep-
resentatives passed House Resolution 1765, in which, 
inter alia, the House of Representatives: 
(A) ‘‘reaffirms its strong opposition to any 
attempt to establish or seek recognition of a Pal-
estinian state outside of an agreement negotiated 
between Israel and the Palestinians’’; 
(B) ‘‘supports the Administration’s opposi-
tion to a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian 
state’’; and 
(C) ‘‘calls upon the Administration to . . . 
lead a diplomatic effort to persuade other na-
tions to oppose a unilateral declaration of a Pal-
estinian state and to oppose recognition of a Pal-
estinian state by other nations, within the 
United Nations, and in other international fo-
rums prior to achievement of a final agreement 
between Israel and the Palestinians.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(7) Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo, United 
States Deputy Permanent Representative to the 
United Nations, stated on July 26, 2011, ‘‘Let there 
be no doubt: symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the 
United Nations in September will not create an inde-
pendent Palestinian state . . . The United States will 
not support unilateral campaigns at the United Na-
tions in September or any other time.’’. 
(8) On September 16, 2011, the Deputy National 
Security Advisor for Strategic Communications stated 
that ‘‘We would veto actions through the Security 
Council and oppose action through the Security 
Council associated with a unilateral declaration of 
[Palestinian] statehood.’’. 
SEC. 402. STATEMENT OF POLICY. 
It is the policy of the United States to oppose the rec-
ognition of a Palestinian state by any United Nations En-
tity, or any upgrade, including but not limited to full mem-
bership or non-member-state observer status, in the status 
of the Palestinian observer mission at the United Nations, 
the Palestine Liberation Organization, the Palestinian Au-
thority, or any other Palestinian administrative organiza-
tion or governing entity, at any United Nations Entity, 
prior to the achievement of a final peace agreement nego-
tiated between and agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 403. IMPLEMENTATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall direct the 
United States Permanent Representative to the United Na-
tions to use the voice, vote, and influence of the United 
States at the United Nations to advance the policy stated 
in section 402. 
(b) WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS.—The Secretary of State 
shall withhold United States contributions from any United 
Nations Entity that recognizes a Palestinian state or up-
grades in any way, including full membership or non-mem-
ber-state observer status, the status of the Palestinian ob-
server mission at the United Nations, the Palestine Libera-
tion Organization, the Palestinian Authority, or any other 
Palestinian administrative organization or governing enti-
ty, at that United Nations Entity, prior to the achievement 
of complete and final peace agreement negotiated between 
and agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians. Funds appro-
priated for use as a United States contribution to the 
United Nations but withheld from obligation and expendi-
ture pursuant to this section shall immediately revert to 
the United States Treasury and shall not be considered ar-
rears to be repaid to any United Nations Entity. 
TITLE V—UNITED NATIONS 
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL 
SEC. 501. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(1) Since its establishment in 2006, the United 
Nations Human Rights Council has failed to mean-
ingfully promote the protection of internationally rec-
ognized human rights, and has proven to be even 
more problematic than the United Nations Human 
Rights Commission that it was created to replace. 
(2) The United Nations Human Rights Council 
suffers from fundamental and severe structural flaws 
present since its establishment by the United Nations 
General Assembly, such as the fact that it draws its 
members from the General Assembly without any sub-
stantive membership criteria, with the perverse result 
that a number of the world’s worst human rights 
abusers are members of the council. 
(3) For example, the majority of members of the 
United Nations Human Rights Council are rated 
‘‘Not Free’’ or only ‘‘Partly Free’’ by Freedom House. 
Only a minority of members were rated ‘‘Free’’. 
(4) The structure and composition of the United 
Nations Human Rights Council have made it subject 
to gross political manipulation, with the result that, 
during its almost five years of operation, the Council 
has passed over 40 resolutions censuring the demo-
cratic, Jewish State of Israel, as compared to only a 
handful censuring the dictatorships in Burma, North 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Korea, and Syria, just one addressing the severe, on-
going human rights abuses in Libya, Iran, and 
Belarus, and none addressing the severe, ongoing 
human rights abuses in China, Cuba, Russia, 
Zimbabwe, Venezuela, and elsewhere. 
(5) The United Nations Human Rights Council’s 
agenda contains a permanent item for criticism of the 
democratic, Jewish State of Israel, but no permanent 
items criticizing any other state. 
(6) The United Nations Human Rights Council 
has established, or preserved the existence of, a num-
ber of ‘‘Special Procedures’’ mechanisms to address 
country-specific situations or thematic issues. These 
mechanisms 
include 
a 
number 
of 
‘‘special 
rapporteurs’’ whose expenses and staff support are 
paid for by contributions to the United Nations. 
(7) The United Nations Human Rights Council 
has also established an ‘‘Advisory Committee’’ whose 
expenses and staff support are paid for by contribu-
tions to the United Nations. 
(8) Some of these special rapporteurs and mem-
bers of the Advisory Committee have displayed con-
sistent bias against the United States, Israel, and the 
Jewish people, while providing support to human 
rights abusers. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(9) Richard Falk, the United Nations ‘‘Special 
Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Pal-
estinian territories occupied since 1967’’, has com-
pared Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to the 
Holocaust, questioned the veracity of the events of 
September 11, 2001, and posted a cartoon on his blog 
depicting Americans and Jews as bloodthirsty dogs. 
(10) Jean Ziegler, a member of the United Na-
tions Human Rights Council Advisory Committee 
and former United Nations ‘‘Special Rapporteur on 
the Right to Food’’, has accused former President 
George W. Bush and former Israeli Prime Minister 
Ariel Sharon of committing ‘‘state terrorism’’, has 
called for an investigation of Israel by the Inter-
national Criminal Court for ‘‘war crimes’’ following 
Israel’s war against Hezbollah in 2006, has visited 
Cuba and praised the Cuban regime’s provision of 
food to the Cuban people, and has stated that 
Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe ‘‘has history 
and morality with him’’. Ziegler was also involved in 
the establishment of the ‘‘Al-Gaddafi International 
Prize for Human Rights’’, a prize established by, 
funded by, and named after Libyan dictator Muam-
mar al-Gaddafi, and awarded in the past to Fidel 
Castro, Hugo Chavez, Louis Farrakhan, and Roger 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Garaudy, who has denied the Holocaust, questioned 
the veracity of the events of September 11, 2001, and 
supported Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s 
call for Israel to be ‘‘wiped off the map’’. 
(11) Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, a member of 
the United Nations Human Rights Council Advisory 
Committee who has previously served as President of 
the United Nations General Assembly and as foreign 
minister for the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua, has 
implicitly accused the United States of ‘‘terrorism’’, 
has called former President Ronald Reagan a ‘‘butch-
er’’, has called for a international boycott of Israel, 
has stated that the Palestinians were being ‘‘cru-
cified’’ by Israel, has called Israel’s defensive Oper-
ation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip a ‘‘monstrosity’’ 
and ‘‘genocide’’, has urged the United Nations to use 
the term ‘‘apartheid’’ in discussing Israeli treatment 
of 
Palestinians, 
has 
embraced 
Iranian 
leader 
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after Ahmadinejad delivered 
an anti-American, anti-Israel address to the United 
Nations General Assembly, has stated that charges of 
genocide against Sudanese dictator Omar Hassan al 
Bashir are ‘‘racist’’, and has declared Fidel Castro 
‘‘World Hero of Solidarity’’, stating that Castro 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
‘‘embod[ied] virtues and values worth emulation by 
all of us’’. 
(12) Halima Warzazi, a member of the United 
Nations Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, 
has compared Israel to Nazi Germany, and used her 
previous membership in a United Nations apparatus 
to shield Saddam Hussein from censure for gassing 
Iraqi Kurds in Halabja. 
(13) The ongoing five-year review of the United 
Nations Human Rights Council concluded on June 
17, 2011, and failed make any significant reforms to 
its fundamental and severe structural flaws, including 
its absence of substantive membership criteria, or to 
remove the permanent agenda item on Israel. 
(14) On June 17, 2011, John F, Sammis, United 
States Deputy Representative to the Economic and 
Social Council, stated that ‘‘The Geneva process [of 
the five-year review] failed to yield even minimally 
positive results, forcing us to dissociate from the out-
come . . . the final resolution [for the five-year re-
view] also fails to address the core problems that still 
plague the Human Rights Council . . . The United 
States has therefore voted ‘no’ on the resolution . . . 
the Council’s effectiveness and legitimacy will always 
be compromised so long as one country in all the 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
world is unfairly and uniquely singled out while oth-
ers, including chronic human rights abusers, escape 
scrutiny . . . The resolution before us today does 
nothing to address the Council’s failures nor move it 
any closer to the founding values of the UN Charter 
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.’’. 
(15) United States membership in the Human 
Rights Council has not led to reform of its funda-
mental flaws diminished the Council’s virulently 
anti-Israel behavior. The Council has passed fourteen 
resolutions criticizing Israel since the United States 
joined in 2009. 
SEC. 502. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP AND 
FUNDING. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—For each and every fiscal year sub-
sequent to the effective date of this Act, until the Secretary 
of State submits to Congress a certification that the require-
ments described in subsection (b) have been satisfied— 
(1) the Secretary of State shall withhold from a 
United States contribution each fiscal year to a reg-
ular budget of the United Nations an amount that is 
equal to the percentage of such contribution that the 
Secretary determines would be allocated by the United 
Nations to support the United Nations Human Rights 
Council; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(2) the Secretary of State shall not make a vol-
untary contribution to the United Nations Human 
Rights Council; and 
(3) the United States shall not run for a seat on 
the United Nations Human Rights Council. 
(b) CERTIFICATION.—The annual certification referred 
to in subsection (a) is a certification made by the Secretary 
to Congress that— 
(1) the United Nations Human Rights Council’s 
mandate from the United Nations General Assembly 
explicitly and effectively prohibits candidacy for 
Human Rights Council membership of a United Na-
tions Member State— 
(A) subject to sanctions by the Security 
Council; and 
(B) under a Security Council-mandated in-
vestigation for human rights abuses; 
(2) the United Nations Human Rights Council 
does not include a United Nations Member State— 
(A) subject to sanctions by the Security 
Council; 
(B) under a Security Council-mandated in-
vestigation for human rights abuses; 
(C) which the Secretary of State has deter-
mined, for purposes of section 6(j) of the Export 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Administration Act of 1979 (as continued in ef-
fect pursuant to the International Emergency 
Economic Powers Act), section 40 of the Arms 
Export Control Act, section 620A of the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961, or other provision of law, 
is a government that has repeatedly provided 
support for acts of international terrorism; or 
(D) which the President has designated as 
a country of particular concern for religious free-
dom under section 402(b) of the International 
Religious Freedom Act of 1998; and 
(3) the United Nations Human Rights Council’s 
agenda or programme of work does not include a per-
manent item with regard to the State of Israel. 
(c) SPECIAL PROCEDURES.—The Secretary of State 
shall withhold from a United States contribution each year 
to a regular budget of the United Nations an amount that 
is equal to the percentage of such contribution that the Sec-
retary determines would be allocated by the United Nations 
to support the United Nations ‘‘Special Rapporteur on the 
situation of human rights in Palestinian territories occu-
pied since 1967’’, and any other United Nations Human 
Rights Council ‘‘Special Procedures’’ used to display bias 
against the United States or the State of Israel or to provide 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
support for the government of any United Nations Member 
State— 
(1) subject to sanctions by the Security Council; 
(2) under a Security Council-mandated inves-
tigation for human rights abuses; 
(3) which the Secretary of State has determined, 
for purposes of section 6(j) of the Export Administra-
tion Act of 1979 (as continued in effect pursuant to 
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act), 
section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act, section 
620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, or other 
provision of law, is a government that has repeatedly 
provided support for acts of international terrorism; 
or 
(4) which the President has designated as a 
country of particular concern for religious freedom 
under section 402(b) of the International Religious 
Freedom Act of 1998. 
(d) REVERSION OF FUNDS.—Funds appropriated for 
use as a United States contribution to the United Nations 
but withheld from obligation and expenditure pursuant to 
this section shall immediately revert to the United States 
Treasury and shall not be considered arrears to be repaid 
to any United Nations Entity. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TITLE VI—GOLDSTONE REPORT 
SEC. 601. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following: 
(1) On January 12, 2009, the United Nations 
Human Rights Council passed Resolution A/HRC/S– 
9/L.1, which authorized a ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ re-
garding Israel’s conduct of Operation Cast Lead 
against violent militants in the Gaza Strip between 
December 27, 2008, and January 18, 2009. 
(2) The resolution pre-judged the outcome of its 
investigation by one-sidedly mandating the ‘‘fact- 
finding mission’’ to ‘‘investigate all violations of 
international human rights law and International 
Humanitarian Law by . . . Israel, against the Pales-
tinian people . . . particularly in the occupied Gaza 
Strip, due to the current aggression’’. 
(3) The mandate of the ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ 
makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar 
attacks, which numbered in the thousands and 
spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other 
violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian tar-
gets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive 
measures. 
(4) The ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ included a mem-
ber who, before joining the mission, had already de-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
clared Israel guilty of committing atrocities in Oper-
ation Cast Lead by signing a public letter on Janu-
ary 11, 2009, published in the Sunday Times, that 
called Israel’s actions ‘‘war crimes’’. 
(5) The mission’s flawed and biased mandate 
gave serious concern to many United Nations Human 
Rights Council Member States which refused to sup-
port it, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cam-
eroon, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the 
Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slo-
venia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 
(6) The mission’s flawed and biased mandate 
was never broadened or revised by any plenary meet-
ing of the United Nations Human Rights Council, 
and troubled many distinguished individuals who re-
fused invitations to head the mission. 
(7) On September 15, 2009, the ‘‘United Nations 
Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ released 
its report, which is commonly referred to as the 
‘‘Goldstone Report’’. 
(8) The Goldstone Report repeatedly made 
sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations that the 
Israeli military had deliberately attacked civilians 
during Operation Cast Lead. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(9) The authors of the Goldstone Report admit 
that we did not deal with the issues . . . ‘‘regarding 
the problems of conducting military operations in ci-
vilian areas and second-guessing decisions made by 
soldiers and their commanding officers in the fog of 
war’’. 
(10) In the October 16, 2009 edition of the Jew-
ish Daily Forward, Richard Goldstone, the head of 
the ‘‘United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 
Gaza Conflict’’, is quoted as saying, with respect to 
the mission’s evidence-collection methods, ‘‘If this was 
a court of law, there would have been nothing prov-
en’’. 
(11) The Goldstone Report, in effect, denied the 
State of Israel the right to self-defense, and never 
noted the fact that Israel had the right to defend its 
citizens from the repeated violent attacks committed 
against civilian targets in southern Israel by Hamas 
and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations operating 
from Gaza. 
(12) The Goldstone Report largely ignored the 
culpability of the Government of Iran and the Gov-
ernment of Syria, both of whom sponsor Hamas and 
other Foreign Terrorist Organizations. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(13) The Goldstone Report usually considered 
public statements made by Israeli officials not to be 
credible, while frequently giving uncritical credence to 
statements taken from what it called the ‘‘Gaza au-
thorities’’, i.e., the Gaza leadership of Hamas. 
(14) Notwithstanding a great body of evidence 
that Hamas and other violent Islamist groups com-
mitted war crimes by using civilians and civilian in-
stitutions, such as mosques, schools, and hospitals, as 
shields, the Goldstone Report repeatedly downplayed 
or cast doubt upon that claim. 
(15) In one notable instance, the Goldstone Re-
port stated that it did not consider the admission of 
a Hamas official that Hamas often ‘‘created a human 
shield of women, children, the elderly and the 
mujahideen, against [the Israeli military]’’ specifi-
cally to ‘‘constitute evidence that Hamas forced Pales-
tinian civilians to shield military objectives against 
attack’’. 
(16) Hamas was able to significantly shape the 
findings of the investigation mission’s Goldstone Re-
port by selecting and prescreening some of the wit-
nesses and intimidating others, as the Goldstone Re-
port acknowledges when it notes that ‘‘those inter-
viewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian 
armed groups . . . from a fear of reprisals’’. 
(17) Even though Israel is a vibrant democracy 
with a vigorous and free press, the Goldstone Report 
erroneously asserts that ‘‘actions of the Israeli govern-
ment . . . have contributed significantly to a political 
climate in which dissent with the government and its 
actions . . . is not tolerated’’. 
(18) The Goldstone Report recommended that the 
United Nations Human Rights Council endorse its 
recommendations, implement them, review their im-
plementation, and refer the report to the United Na-
tions Security Council, the Prosecutor of the Inter-
national Criminal Court, and the United Nations 
General Assembly for further action. 
(19) The Goldstone Report recommended that the 
United Nations Security Council— 
(A) require the Government of Israel to 
launch further investigations of its conduct dur-
ing Operation Cast Lead and report back to the 
Security Council within six months; 
(B) simultaneously appoint an ‘‘inde-
pendent committee of experts’’ to monitor and re-
port on any domestic legal or other proceedings 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
undertaken by the Government of Israel within 
that 6-month period; and 
(C) refer the case to the Prosecutor of the 
International Criminal Court after that 6-month 
period. 
(20) The Goldstone Report recommended that the 
United Nations General Assembly consider further ac-
tion on the report and establish an escrow fund, to be 
funded entirely by the State of Israel, to ‘‘pay ade-
quate compensation to Palestinians who have suffered 
loss and damage’’ during Operation Cast Lead. 
(21) The Goldstone Report ignored the issue of 
compensation to Israelis who have been killed or 
wounded, or suffered other loss and damage, as a re-
sult of years of past and continuing rocket and mor-
tar attacks by Hamas and other violent militant 
groups in Gaza against civilian targets in southern 
Israel. 
(22) The Goldstone Report recommended ‘‘that 
States Parties to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 
start criminal investigations [of Operation Cast 
Lead] in national courts, using universal jurisdic-
tion’’ and that ‘‘following investigation, alleged per-
petrators should be arrested and prosecuted’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(23) The concept of ‘‘universal jurisdiction’’ has 
frequently been used in attempts to detain, charge, 
and prosecute Israeli and United States officials and 
former officials in connection with unfounded allega-
tions of war crimes and has often unfairly impeded 
the travel of those individuals. 
(24) On September 20, 2009, United Nations 
High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem 
Pillay wrote, ‘‘I lend my full support to Justice 
Goldstone’s report and its recommendations’’. 
(25) The State of Israel, like many other free de-
mocracies, has an independent judicial system with a 
robust investigatory capacity and has already 
launched numerous investigations, many of which re-
main ongoing, of Operation Cast Lead and indi-
vidual incidents therein. 
(26) Several nations have indicated that they in-
tend to further pursue consideration of the Goldstone 
Report and implementation of its recommendations 
by the United Nations Security Council, the United 
Nations General Assembly, the United Nations 
Human Rights Council, and other multilateral fora. 
(27) On September 30, 2009, Secretary of State 
Hillary Clinton described the underlying mandate for 
the Goldstone Report as ‘‘one-sided’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(28) On September 17, 2009, Ambassador Susan 
Rice, United States Permanent Representative to the 
United Nations, expressed the United States’ ‘‘very se-
rious concern with the mandate’’ underlying the 
Goldstone Report and noted that the United States 
views the mandate ‘‘as unbalanced, one-sided and ba-
sically unacceptable’’. 
(29) Israeli President Shimon Peres has called 
the Goldstone Report a ‘‘blood libel’’. 
(30) The Goldstone Report reflects the long-
standing, historic bias at the United Nations against 
the democratic, Jewish State of Israel. 
(31) The Goldstone Report is being exploited by 
Israel’s enemies to excuse the actions of violent mili-
tant groups and their state sponsors, and to justify 
isolation of and punitive measures against the demo-
cratic, Jewish State of Israel. 
(32) On November 3, 2009, the House of Rep-
resentatives overwhelmingly adopted House Resolu-
tion 867, which stated that the House of Representa-
tives: 
(A) ‘‘considers the [Goldstone Report] to be 
irredeemably biased and unworthy of further 
consideration or legitimacy’’; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(B) ‘‘supports the Administration’s efforts 
to combat anti-Israel bias at the United Nations, 
its characterization of the [Goldstone Report] as 
‘unbalanced, one-sided and basically unaccept-
able’, and its opposition to the resolution on the 
report’’; 
(C) ‘‘calls on the President and the Sec-
retary of State to continue to strongly and un-
equivocally oppose any endorsement of the 
[Goldstone Report] in multilateral fora, includ-
ing through leading opposition to any United 
Nations 
General 
Assembly 
resolution 
and 
through vetoing, if necessary, any United Na-
tions Security Council resolution that endorses 
the contents of this report, seeks to act upon the 
recommendations contained in this report, or 
calls on any other international body to take fur-
ther action regarding this report’’; 
(D) ‘‘calls on the President and the Sec-
retary of State to strongly and unequivocally op-
pose any further consideration of the ‘Report of 
the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 
Gaza Conflict’ and any other measures stemming 
from this report in multilateral fora’’; and 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(E) ‘‘reaffirms its support for the demo-
cratic, Jewish State of Israel, for Israel’s security 
and right to self-defense, and, specifically, for 
Israel’s right to defend its citizens from violent 
militant groups and their state sponsors’’. 
(33) On October 16, 2009, the United Nations 
Human Rights Council voted 25–6 (with 11 Member 
States abstaining and 5 not voting, and with the 
United States voting against) to adopt resolution A– 
HRC–S–12–1, which endorsed the Goldstone Report 
and condemned Israel, without mentioning Hamas, 
other such violent militant groups, or their state 
sponsors. The United States voted against the resolu-
tion. 
(34) On November 5, 2009, the United Nations 
General Assembly voted 114–18 (with 44 Member 
States abstaining, and with the United States voting 
against) to adopt resolution A/RES/64/10, which, 
among other things: 
(A) endorsed the United Nations Human 
Rights Council’s resolution A–HRC–S–12–1, 
which endorsed the Goldstone Report and con-
demned Israel, without mentioning Hamas, other 
such violent militant groups, or their state spon-
sors; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(B) requested that the Secretary General of 
the United Nations transmit the Goldstone Re-
port to the United Nations Security Council; 
(C) expressed its ‘‘appreciation’’ to the 
‘‘United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the 
Gaza Conflict’’ for its ‘‘comprehensive report’’; 
(D) expressed grave concern regarding ‘‘re-
ports regarding serious human rights violations’’ 
during Operation Cast Lead, including the find-
ings in the Goldstone Report; and 
(E) recommended ‘‘that the Government of 
Switzerland, in its capacity as depositary of the 
Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of 
Civilian Persons in Time of War, undertake as 
soon as possible the steps necessary to reconvene 
a Conference of High Contracting Parties to the 
Fourth Geneva Convention on measures to en-
force the Convention’’ in the West Bank, the 
Gaza Strip, and ‘‘East Jerusalem’’. 
(35) On February 26, 2010, the United Nations 
General Assembly voted 98–7 (with 31 Member States 
abstaining, and with the United States voting 
against) to adopt resolution A/RES/64/254, which 
built on the determinations of A/RES/64/10. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(36) On March 24, 2010, the United Nations 
Human Rights Council voted 29–6 (with 11 Member 
States abstaining and one not voting, and with the 
United States voting against) to adopt resolution A/ 
HRC/13/L.30, which, among other things— 
(A) called upon ‘‘all concerned parties, in-
cluding United Nations bodies, to ensure their 
implementation of the recommendations con-
tained in the [Goldstone Report]’’; 
(B) requested that the United Nations High 
Commissioner for Human Rights submit a 
‘‘progress report on the implementation of the 
present resolution to the [Human Rights] Coun-
cil at its fourteenth session’’ in May and June 
2010; and 
(C) decided to ‘‘follow up on the implemen-
tation of the present resolution at [the] fifteenth 
session’’ of the Human Rights Council in Sep-
tember 2010. 
(37) On March 25, 2011, the United Nations 
Human Rights Council voted 27–3 (with 16 Member 
States abstaining, and with the United States voting 
against) to adopt resolution A/HRC/16/L.31, which, 
among other things— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(A) called upon ‘‘all concerned parties, in-
cluding United Nations bodies, to ensure the full 
and immediate implementation of the rec-
ommendations contained in the [Goldstone Re-
port]’’; 
(B) recommended that the United Nations 
General Assembly again consider the Goldstone 
Report at its sixty-sixth session, and urged the 
General Assembly to submit the report to the 
United Nations Security Council ‘‘for its consid-
eration and appropriate action,’’ including refer-
ral to the prosecutor of the International Crimi-
nal Court; 
(C) requested that the United Nations High 
Commissioner for Human Rights submit a 
‘‘progress report on the implementation of the 
present resolution to the Human Rights Council 
at its eighteenth session of September 2011’’; and 
(D) decided to ‘‘follow up on the implemen-
tation of the present resolution at [the] nine-
teenth session [of the Human Rights Council] of 
March 2012’’. 
(38) On April 1, 2011, Richard Goldstone, the 
head of the ‘‘United Nations Fact Finding Mission on 
the Gaza Conflict’’ that authored the Goldstone Re-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
port, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that re-
nounced the Goldstone Report’s claim that the Israeli 
military deliberately attacked civilians during Oper-
ation Cast Lead. Goldstone wrote that the Israeli 
military’s investigations with respect to incidents in 
Operation Cast Lead ‘‘indicate that civilians were not 
intentionally targeted as a matter of policy’’. 
(39) Efforts to delegitimize the democratic State 
of Israel and deny it the right to defend its citizens 
and its existence can be used to delegitimize other de-
mocracies and deny them the same right. 
SEC. 602. STATEMENT OF POLICY. 
It is the policy of the United States to— 
(1) consider the Goldstone Report irredeemably 
biased and unworthy of further consideration or legit-
imacy; 
(2) strongly and unequivocally oppose any con-
sideration, legitimization, or endorsement of the 
Goldstone Report, or any other measures stemming 
from this report, in multilateral fora; 
(3) lead a high-level diplomatic campaign in 
support of the revocation and repudiation, by the 
United Nations General Assembly, of the Goldstone 
Report and any United Nations resolutions stemming 
from the report, including: 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(A) United Nations General Assembly reso-
lutions A/RES/64/10 and A/RES/64/254; and 
(B) United Nations Human Rights Council 
resolutions 
A–HRC–S–12–1, 
A/HRC/13/L.30, 
and A/HRC/16/L.31; and 
(4) lead a high-level diplomatic effort to encour-
age other responsible countries not to endorse, sup-
port, or legitimize the Goldstone Report or any other 
measures stemming from the report. 
SEC. 603. WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS; REFUND OF UNITED 
STATES TAXPAYER DOLLARS. 
(a) WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS.—The Secretary of State 
shall withhold from the United States contribution to the 
regular budget of the United Nations an amount that is 
equal to the percentage of such contribution that the Sec-
retary determines would be or has been expended by the 
United Nations for any part of the Goldstone Report or its 
preparatory or follow-on activities. 
(b) REFUND
OF UNITED STATES TAXPAYER DOL-
LARS.—Funds appropriated for use as a United States con-
tribution to the regular budget of the United Nations but 
withheld from obligation and expenditure pursuant to sub-
section (a) shall immediately revert to the United States 
Treasury and shall not be considered arrears to be repaid 
to any United Nations Entity. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TITLE VII—DURBAN PROCESS 
SEC. 701. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) The United States is opposed to racism, ra-
cial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intoler-
ance, and has long been a party to the Convention on 
the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. 
(2) Expensive and politically skewed inter-
national conferences can disserve and undermine the 
worthy goals that they are ostensibly convened to sup-
port. 
(3) The goals of the 2001 United Nations World 
Conference Against Racism—held in Durban, South 
Africa, and commonly referred to as ‘‘Durban I’’— 
were undermined by hateful, anti-Jewish rhetoric, 
and anti-Israel political agendas, prompting both 
Israel and the United States to withdraw their dele-
gations from the Conference. 
(4) The official government declaration adopted 
by Durban I, the ‘‘Durban Declaration and Program 
of Action’’, focused on the ‘‘plight of the Palestinian 
people under foreign occupation’’, and thereby singled 
out one regional conflict for discussion and implicitly 
launched a false accusation against Israel of intoler-
ance towards the Palestinians. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(5) On September 3, 2001, Secretary of State 
Colin Powell explained the withdrawal of the United 
States delegation from Durban I by stating that ‘‘you 
do not combat racism by conferences that produce dec-
larations containing hateful language, some of which 
is a throwback to the ‘days of Zionism’ equals racism; 
or supports the idea that we have made too much of 
the Holocaust; or suggests that apartheid exists in 
Israel; or that singles out only one country in the 
world—Israel—for censure and abuse’’. 
(6) The late United States Representative Tom 
Lantos, who participated as a member of the United 
States delegation to the Durban Conference, supported 
that delegation’s withdrawal and wrote in 2002 that 
the conference ‘‘provided the world with a glimpse 
into the abyss of international hate, discrimination 
and, indeed, racism’’. 
(7) On December 19, 2006, the United Nations 
General Assembly approved a resolution initiating 
preparations for a Durban Review Conference (com-
monly referred to as ‘‘Durban II’’), which was held 
between April 20 and 24, 2009, in Geneva, Switzer-
land. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(8) The chair of the preparatory committee for 
Durban II was Libya, and the co-chairs included 
Iran and Cuba. 
(9) Throughout the preparatory process for Dur-
ban II, member states of the Organization of the Is-
lamic Conference urged that the conference again 
focus criticism on Israel and single out the Israeli- 
Palestinian conflict for discussion, and also urged 
that the conference advocate global speech codes that 
would impose restrictions contrary to fundamental 
freedoms recognized in the provisions of the Universal 
Declaration of Human Rights. 
(10) In testimony before the House of Represent-
atives on April 2, 2008, then-Assistant Secretary of 
State 
for 
International 
Organizations 
Kristen 
Silverberg stated that the United States had decided 
against participating in preparatory activities for 
Durban II because ‘‘[there is] absolutely no case to be 
made for participating in something that is going to 
be a repeat of Durban I. We don’t have any con-
fidence that this will be any better than Durban I’’. 
(11) On September 23, 2008, the House of Rep-
resentatives passed House Resolution 1361, which, 
among other things, called on the President to ‘‘urge 
other heads of state to condition participation in the 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2009 [Durban II] Conference on concrete action by 
the United Nations and United Nations Member 
States to ensure that it is not a forum to demonize 
any group, or incite anti-Semitism, hatred, or vio-
lence against members of any group or to call into 
question the existence of any state’’ and urged all 
United Nations Member States ‘‘not to support a 
2009 Durban Review Conference process that fails to 
adhere to established human rights standards and to 
reject an agenda that incites hatred against any 
group in the guise of criticism of a particular govern-
ment or that seeks to forge a global blasphemy code’’. 
(12) The present United Nations High Commis-
sioner for Human Rights, Dr. Navanethem Pillay, 
who served as Secretary General of Durban II, has re-
peatedly sought to downplay the level of hateful, anti- 
Jewish rhetoric and anti-Israel political agendas 
present at Durban I, describing it as merely ‘‘the vir-
ulent anti-Semitic behavior of a few non-govern-
mental organizations on the sidelines’’ and praising 
the biased 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme 
of Action as ‘‘[t]he legacy of this Conference’’, has re-
peatedly sought to downplay the level of hateful, anti- 
Jewish rhetoric and anti-Israel political agendas 
present at Durban II and its preparatory activities, 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
and has repeatedly praised and urged the full imple-
mentation of the Durban Declaration and Programme 
of Action. 
(13) High Commissioner Pillay has repeatedly 
and publicly criticized nations, including the United 
States, which announced that they would not partici-
pate in Durban II, but has almost never publicly 
criticized governments who succeeded in using the 
conference and its preparatory activities to single out 
Israel for criticism and to attempt to restrict funda-
mental freedoms. 
(14) A United Nations press release on Sep-
tember 8, 2008, regarding an address by High Com-
missioner Pillay, disturbingly dismissed objections 
raised by non-governmental organizations to Durban 
II as ‘‘ferocious, and often distorted, criticism by cer-
tain lobby groups focused on single issues’’. 
(15) During February of 2009, the United States 
actively participated in intergovernmental consulta-
tions on Durban II’s ‘‘draft outcome document’’ and 
engaged in high-level diplomatic efforts to dramati-
cally reverse the path of Durban II by directing it to-
wards meaningful efforts to combat intolerance and 
bigotry and directing it away from efforts to under-
mine the cause of fighting discrimination through 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
singling out Israel for implicit criticism and calling 
for restrictions on fundamental freedoms. 
(16) On February 27, 2009, a State Department 
spokesman stated that, despite United States efforts to 
redirect the path of Durban II, ‘‘the document being 
negotiated has gone from bad to worse, and the cur-
rent text of the draft outcome document is not sal-
vageable . . . A conference based on this text would 
be a missed opportunity to speak clearly about the 
persistent problem of racism’’ and therefore, the 
United States would not participate in further con-
sultations and negotiations regarding the ‘‘draft out-
come document,’’ and would not participate in Dur-
ban II itself unless the ‘‘draft outcome document’’ was 
radically shortened and revised to eliminate objection-
able material. 
(17) On April 17, 2009, the third and final ses-
sion of the preparatory committee for Durban II pro-
posed a final ‘‘draft outcome document’’ that con-
tained a number of provisions advocating restrictions 
on freedom of expression, and that also implicitly sin-
gled out and criticized Israel for racism by reaffirm-
ing, in its very first paragraph, the 2001 Durban 
Declaration and Programme of Action. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(18) On April 18, 2009, a State Department 
spokesman announced that ‘‘the United States will 
not join the [Durban II] conference’’, noting that 
‘‘The current document . . . still contains language 
that reaffirms in toto the Durban Declaration and 
Programme of Action (DDPA) from 2001, which the 
United States has long said it is unable to support 
. . . The United States also has serious concerns with 
relatively new additions to the text regarding ‘incite-
ment’, that run counter to the U.S. commitment to 
unfettered free speech.’’. 
(19) On April 19, 2009, the President stated at 
a press conference that ‘‘I would love to be involved 
in a useful conference that addressed continuing 
issues of racism and discrimination around the globe 
. . . we expressed in the run-up to this conference our 
concerns that if you incorporated—if you adopted all 
the language from 2001, that’s just not something we 
could sign up for . . . our participation would have 
involved putting our imprimatur on something that 
we just don’t believe . . . Hopefully . . . we can part-
ner with other countries on to actually reduce dis-
crimination around the globe. But this wasn’t an op-
portunity to do it.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(20) Canada, Israel, Italy, Germany, the Nether-
lands, Poland, Australia, and New Zealand also did 
not participate in Durban II, and the Czech Republic 
walked out of the Conference during its proceedings, 
never to return. 
(21) Libya was the chair of the Main Committee 
of Durban II, and vice presidents of Durban II in-
cluded Libya, Iran, and Cuba. 
(22) Speaking at Durban II on April 20, 2009, 
Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the 
democratic State of Israel ‘‘totally racist’’ and ‘‘the 
most cruel and repressive racist regime’’, and called 
for Israel’s destruction, stating that ‘‘Efforts must be 
made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists . . . 
Governments must be encouraged and supported in 
their fights aimed at eradicating this barbaric rac-
ism’’. 
(23) In his speech at Durban II, Ahmadinejad 
also propagated anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, say-
ing that ‘‘Those who control huge economic resources 
and interests in the world . . . mobilize all the re-
sources, including their economic and political influ-
ence and world media, to render support in vain to 
the Zionist regime’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(24) Disgusted by Ahmadinejad’s biased and in-
cendiary statements, delegates from about two dozen 
nations walked out of the assembly hall in protest, but 
most delegations remained, and a large number of 
delegations 
and 
observers 
repeatedly 
applauded 
Ahmadinejad’s remarks. 
(25) On April 21, 2009, governments partici-
pating in Durban II adopted by consensus an ‘‘out-
come document’’ that contained a number of provi-
sions advocating restrictions on freedom of expression, 
and that also implicitly singled out and criticized 
Israel for racism by reaffirming, in its very first 
paragraph, the 2001 Durban Declaration and Pro-
gram of Action. 
(26) Throughout Durban II, many speakers sin-
gled out Israel for criticism or called for restrictions 
on fundamental freedoms, including representatives of 
Iran, Libya, Cuba, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Viet-
nam, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Qatar, Al-
geria, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt, 
Lebanon, Yemen, Bahrain, Tunisia, Bangladesh, 
Switzerland, the Organization of the Islamic Con-
ference, the Arab League, the Palestine Liberation Or-
ganization, and a number of other organizations and 
countries. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(27) During Durban II, several speakers who 
sought to draw attention to genuine instances of rac-
ism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, related intol-
erance, and human rights violations by the govern-
ments of Iran, Libya, and China were repeatedly in-
terrupted by the delegations from those governments 
and instructed by the conference’s chair to not refer 
specifically to those governments. 
(28) On December 18, 2009, the United Nations 
General Assembly approved Resolution A/RES/64/ 
148, which urged the ‘‘full and effective implementa-
tion of the Durban Declaration and Programme of 
Action’’ and called for a ‘‘one-day plenary event to 
commemorate the ten-year anniversary [of Durban I] 
during the high-level segment of the General Assembly 
to be devoted to racism, racial discrimination, xeno-
phobia, and related intolerance during its sixty-fifth 
session, in 2011’’. The United States, joined by 12 
other nations, voted against this resolution. 
(29) On December 24, 2010, the United Nations 
General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/65/240, 
authorizing the holding of a ‘‘one-day high-level meet-
ing of the General Assembly to commemorate the 
tenth anniversary of the adoption of the Durban Dec-
laration and Programme of Action, at the level of 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Heads of State and Government, on the second day 
of the general debate of the sixty-sixth session’’ in 
September of 2011. The resolution also states that the 
meeting (commonly referred to as ‘‘Durban III’’) will 
adopt a ‘‘political declaration aimed at mobilizing 
political will at the national, regional, and inter-
national levels for the full and effective implementa-
tion of the Durban Declaration and Programme of 
Action and its follow-up processes.’’. The resolution 
also requests that the United Nations Secretary Gen-
eral ‘‘establish a programme of outreach, with the in-
volvement of Member States and United Nations 
funds and programmes as well as civil society, in-
cluding non-governmental organizations, to appro-
priately commemorate the tenth anniversary of the 
adoption of the Durban Declaration and Programme 
of Action.’’ The resolution also requests that ‘‘the Of-
fice of the United Nations High Commissioner for 
Human Rights and the Department of Public Infor-
mation of the Secretariat . . . launch a public infor-
mation campaign for the commemoration of the tenth 
anniversary of the adoption of the Durban Declara-
tion and Programme of Action’’. The United States, 
joined by 21 other nations, voted against this resolu-
tion. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(30) The Government of Canada announced that 
it would not participate in the Durban III meeting. 
Canadian Minister of Citizenship, Immigration, and 
Multiculturalism Jason Kenney stated that ‘‘Our gov-
ernment has lost faith in the entire tainted Durban 
process. Canada will not participate in this charade 
any longer. We will not lend our country’s good name 
to a commemoration of what has widely been charac-
terized as a hatefest . . . Canada is clearly committed 
to the fight against racism, but the Durban process 
commemorates an agenda that actually promotes rac-
ism rather than combats it.’’. 
(31) The Government of Israel announced that it 
would not participate in the Durban III meeting, 
stating that ‘‘Israel is part of the international strug-
gle against racism. The Jewish people was itself a 
victim of racism throughout history. Israel regrets 
that a resolution on an important subject—elimi-
nation of racism—has been diverted and politicized 
by the automatic majority at the UN, by linking it 
to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action 
(2001) that many states would prefer to forget. The 
Durban Conference of 2001, with its antisemitic un-
dertones and displays of hatred for Israel and the 
Jewish World, left us with scars that will not heal 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
quickly . . . Under the present circumstances, as long 
as the [Durban III] meeting is defined as part of the 
infamous ‘Durban process’, Israel will not participate 
. . .’’. 
(32) On June 2, 2011, the United States publicly 
announced that it would not participate in the Dur-
ban III meeting. The Department of State’s deputy 
spokesman stated that the ‘‘Durban process includes 
displays of intolerance and anti-Semitism, and we 
don’t want to see that commemorated. In our con-
versations about this commemoration, we’ve not seen 
the kind of progress that we think is indicative. We 
remain unconvinced that the conference is moving in 
a new direction.’’. 
(33) The Governments of Australia, Austria, 
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, 
Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, 
and the United Kingdom also did not participate in 
the Durban III meeting. 
(34) On September 22, 2011, at the Durban III 
meeting, the United Nations General Assembly adopt-
ed Resolution A/RES/66/3, a ‘‘political declaration’’ 
which ‘‘[r]eaffirm[ed] that the Durban Declaration 
and Programme of Action... and the outcome docu-
ment of [Durban II]. . . are a comprehensive United 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Nations framework and solid foundation for com-
bating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, 
and related intolerance’’, ‘‘[r]ecall[ed] that the aim of 
[Durban III] is to mobilize political will at the na-
tional, regional and international levels and reaffirm 
our political commitment to the full and effective im-
plementation of the Durban Declaration and Pro-
gramme of Action and the outcome document of [Dur-
ban II], and their follow-up processes, at all these lev-
els’’, and ‘‘welcome[d] the continued engagement of 
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human 
Rights to incorporate the implementation of the Dur-
ban Declaration and Programme of Action into the 
United Nations system’’. 
(35) On September 22, 2011, the White House 
Press Secretary stated that ‘‘Since its inception. . . 
the Durban process has included ugly displays of in-
tolerance and anti-Semitism. . . Last December, the 
United States voted against the resolution establishing 
[Durban III] because we did not want to see the hate-
ful and anti-Semitic displays of the 2001 Durban 
Conference commemorated. Over the last few months, 
we did not participate in negotiations on [Durban 
III’s] Political Declaration document and, like many 
other countries, we were not present when the Dec-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
laration was adopted. We are also deeply dis-
appointed that the rules established for credentialing 
non-governmental organizations to participate were 
used by some delegations to silence voices critical of 
the Durban process.’’. 
(36) Durban I, Durban II, Durban III, and 
their preparatory and follow-on activities, have made 
little or no demonstrable contribution to combating 
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and re-
lated intolerance. 
(37) To date, several million dollars from the 
United Nations regular budget has been expended on 
Durban I, Durban II, Durban III, and their pre-
paratory and follow-on activities. 
(38) The United States is the largest contributor 
to the United Nations system, and is assessed for a 
full 22 percent of the United Nations regular budget, 
which is funded by assessed contributions from Mem-
ber States. 
(39) Funding for Durban I, Durban II, Durban 
III, and their preparatory and follow-on activities 
through the United Nations regular budget has re-
sulted in United States taxpayer dollars being used 
for those purposes. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(40) Congress, through its adoption of the Con-
solidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110– 
161) withheld from the United States assessed con-
tribution for fiscal year 2008 to the United Nations 
regular budget an amount equivalent to the United 
States share of the United Nations Human Rights 
Council budget, including its share of the Council-ad-
ministered preparatory process for Durban II. 
SEC. 702. SENSE OF CONGRESS; STATEMENT OF POLICY. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress 
that— 
(1) the Durban I, Durban II, and Durban III 
conferences, and their preparatory and follow-on ac-
tivities, were subverted by members of the Organiza-
tion of the Islamic Conference and irredeemably dis-
torted into a forum for anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and 
anti-freedom activity; 
(2) by walking out of the Durban I conference, 
and by not participating in the Durban II conference, 
and announcing that it would not participate in the 
Durban III meeting, the United States Government 
upheld and reaffirmed the fundamental commitment 
of the United States to combating racism, racial dis-
crimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(3) the Governments of Canada, Israel, Italy, 
Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Australia, New 
Zealand, and the Czech Republic should be com-
mended for their decision to not participate or cease 
participation in the Durban II conference; 
(4) the Governments of Australia, Austria, Bul-
garia, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, 
Israel, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Italy, New Zea-
land, Poland, and the United Kingdom should be 
commended for their decision to not participate in 
Durban III; and 
(5) the Administration should expeditiously and 
unequivocally announce that it will not participate 
in, support, or legitimize any part of the Durban 
process. 
(b) STATEMENT OF POLICY.—It shall be the policy of 
the United States to— 
(1) lead a high-level diplomatic effort to encour-
age other responsible countries— 
(A) not to participate in, support, legiti-
mize, or fund any part of the Durban process, 
and 
(B) to withhold from their respective con-
tributions to the regularly assessed biennial 
budget of the United Nations an amount that is 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
equal to the percentage of such respective con-
tributions that they determine would be or has 
been allocated by the United Nations for any 
part of the Durban III meeting or its pre-
paratory or follow-on activities, or for any other 
part of the Durban process; and 
(2) lead a high-level diplomatic effort to explore 
credible, alternative forums for combating racism, ra-
cial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intoler-
ance. 
SEC. 703. NON-PARTICIPATION IN THE DURBAN PROCESS. 
None of the funds made available in any provision of 
law may be used for United States participation in any 
part of the Durban process. 
SEC. 704. WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS; REFUND OF UNITED 
STATES TAXPAYER DOLLARS. 
(a) WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS FOR THE DURBAN PROC-
ESS.—The Secretary of State shall withhold from the 
United States contribution to the regular budget of the 
United Nations an amount that is equal to the percentage 
of such contribution that the Secretary determines would 
be or has been expended by the United Nations for any part 
of the Durban I or Durban II conferences, the Durban III 
meeting, their preparatory or follow-on activities, or any 
other part of the Durban process, including— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(1) the ‘‘public information campaign for the 
commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the adop-
tion of the Durban Declaration and Programme of 
Action’’ requested by United Nations General Assem-
bly Resolution A.RES/65/240; 
(2) the Intergovernmental Working Group on the 
Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration 
and Programme of Action; 
(3) the ‘‘group of independent eminent experts on 
the implementation of the Durban Declaration and 
Programme of Action’’; and 
(4) the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of 
Complementary Standards. 
(b) WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS FOR OTHER BIASED AND 
COMPROMISED ACTIVITIES.—Until the Secretary of State 
submits to the appropriate congressional committees a cer-
tification, on a case-by-case basis, that the requirements de-
scribed in subsection (d) have been satisfied, the United 
States shall withhold from the United States contribution 
to the regular budget of the United Nations an amount that 
is equal to the percentage of such contribution that the Sec-
retary determines has been allocated by the United Nations 
for any conference, meeting, or other multilateral forum, or 
the preparatory or follow-on activities of any conference, 
meeting, or other multilateral forum, that is organized 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
under the aegis or jurisdiction of the United Nations or of 
any United Nations Entity. 
(c) REFUND
OF UNITED STATES TAXPAYER DOL-
LARS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Funds appropriated for use 
as a United States contribution to the regular budget 
of the United Nations but withheld from obligation 
and expenditure pursuant to subsection (a) shall im-
mediately revert to the United States Treasury and 
shall not be considered arrears to be repaid to any 
United Nations Entity. 
(2) ALLOWANCE.—Funds appropriated for use as 
a United States contribution to the regularly assessed 
biennial budget of the United Nations but withheld 
from obligation and expenditure pursuant to sub-
section (b) may be obligated and expended for that 
purpose upon the certification described in subsection 
(d). Such funds shall revert to the United States 
Treasury if no such certification is made by the date 
that is one year after such appropriation, and shall 
not be considered arrears to be repaid to any United 
Nations Entity. 
(d) CERTIFICATION.—The certification referred to in 
subsection (b) is a certification made by the Secretary of 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
State to the appropriate congressional committees con-
cerning the following: 
(1) The specified conference, meeting, or other 
multilateral forum did not reaffirm, call for the im-
plementation of, or otherwise support the Durban 
Declaration and Programme of Action (2001) or the 
outcome document of the Durban II conference (2009) 
or the Durban III meeting (2011). 
(2) The specified conference or forum was not 
used to single out the United States or the State of 
Israel for unfair or unbalanced criticism. 
(3) The specified conference or forum was not 
used to propagate racism, racial discrimination, anti- 
Semitism, denial of the Holocaust, incitement to vio-
lence or genocide, xenophobia, or related intolerance. 
(4) The specified conference or forum was not 
used to advocate for restrictions on the freedoms of 
speech, expression, religion, the press, assembly, or pe-
tition, or for restrictions on other fundamental 
human rights and freedoms. 
(5) The leadership of the specified conference or 
forum does not include a Member State, or a rep-
resentative from a Member State— 
(A) subject to sanctions by the Security 
Council; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(B) under a Security Council-mandated in-
vestigation for human rights abuses; or 
(C) the government of which the Secretary 
of State has determined, for purposes of section 
6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 
(as continued in effect pursuant to the Inter-
national Emergency Economic Powers Act), sec-
tion 40 of the Arms Export Control Act, section 
620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, or 
other provision of law, is a government that has 
repeatedly provided support for acts of inter-
national terrorism. 
TITLE VIII—UNRWA 
SEC. 801. FINDINGS. 
Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) United Nations General Assembly Resolution 
302 (1949) created the United Nations Relief and 
Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East 
(UNRWA) with the temporary, strictly humanitarian 
mandate to ‘‘carry out . . . direct relief and works 
programmes’’ for Palestinian refugees. 
(2) UNRWA has acknowledged that it is the 
‘‘only UN agency that reports directly to the UN Gen-
eral Assembly, and whose beneficiary population 
stems from one nation-group’’, and is responsible sole-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ly for Palestinian refugees, while the United Nations 
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is respon-
sible for other refugees across the world. 
(3) UNHCR’s definition of a refugee is, in ac-
cordance with the 1951 Convention Relating to the 
Status of Refugees, any person who ‘‘owing to a well- 
founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, 
religion, nationality, membership of a particular so-
cial group, or political opinion, is outside the country 
of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such 
fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of 
that country . . .’’. 
(4) UNRWA’s much broader definition of a 
‘‘Palestine refugee’’ is any person, and his descend-
ants, whose ‘‘normal place of residence was [the 
former British Mandate of] Palestine during the pe-
riod 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948 and who lost both 
home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 
conflict.’’. 
(5) UNRWA’s overly inclusive definition of a 
‘‘Palestine refugee’’ has resulted in an increase in 
UNRWA’s reported number of ‘‘Palestine refugees’’ 
from under one million in 1950 to over 4.5 million 
today, encompassing multiple generations of descend-
ants of the original Palestinian refugees. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(6) Hundreds of thousands of ‘‘Palestine refu-
gees’’ are citizens of recognized states, including Jor-
dan. 
(7) UNRWA, unlike UNHCR, does not offer refu-
gees the option of resettlement and reintegration into 
their country of refuge or a third country. Efforts by 
UN officials in the 1950s to offer resettlement and re-
integration as an option for Palestinian refugees were 
dropped under fierce opposition from Arab govern-
ments, and have not been taken up since. 
(8) Through its overly inclusive definition of a 
‘‘Palestine refugee’’ and its refusal to offer refugees the 
option of resettlement and reintegration, UNRWA 
contributes to the perpetuation of the suffering of Pal-
estinian refugees, who have been exploited by Arab 
governments and Palestinian militant groups for over 
six decades as a political tool with which to assail 
Israel. 
(9) Almost all of UNRWA’s almost 30,000 staff 
are Palestinian refugees themselves, presenting a clear 
conflict of interest. 
(10) UNRWA’s total annual budget, including 
its core programs, emergency activities and special 
projects, exceeds $1 billion. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(11) The United States has long been the largest 
single contributing country to UNRWA. 
(12) From 1950 to 2010, the United States has 
contributed almost $3.9 billion to UNRWA, including 
an average of over $210 million per year between fis-
cal years 2007 and 2010. 
(13) Section 301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2221(c)) states that ‘‘No contribu-
tions by the United States shall be made to the 
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Pal-
estine Refugees in the Near East except on the condi-
tion that the United Nations Relief and Works Agen-
cy take all possible measures to assure that no part 
of the United States contribution shall be used to fur-
nish assistance to any refugee who is receiving mili-
tary training as a member of the so-called Palestine 
Liberation Army or any other guerrilla type organi-
zation or who has engaged in any act of terrorism.’’. 
(14) Then-Deputy Secretary of State Jacob J. 
Lew testified before the House Committee on Foreign 
Affairs on May 13, 2009, that ‘‘We have the highest 
level of scrutiny in terms of UNRWA’’. 
(15) However, in contravention of United States 
law, UNRWA does not ask its personnel or aid recipi-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ents if they are members of Foreign Terrorist Organi-
zations. 
(16) Even though the United States remains the 
largest single contributing country to UNRWA, until 
2010, UNRWA did not make available its list of staff 
for screening through United States watch lists, in-
cluding that of the Department of the Treasury’s Of-
fice of Foreign Assets Control, refused a United States 
request to do so in 2005, and still does not do so for 
its list of aid recipients. 
(17) UNRWA claims that it has fulfilled its obli-
gations under section 301(c) of the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1961 by screening personnel through the 
United Nations Consolidated List pursuant to United 
Nations Security Council Resolution 1267, but the 
names on that list are largely members of Al-Qaeda 
and the Taliban, not of Palestinian Foreign Terrorist 
Organizations such as Hamas, Fatah’s al-Aqsa Mar-
tyrs’ Brigades, or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. 
(18) 
Former 
UNRWA 
commissioner-general 
Peter Hansen, stated in 2004 that ‘‘I am sure that 
there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll 
and I don’t see that as a crime.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(19) A number of UNRWA personnel have been 
discovered to be affiliated with Foreign Terrorist Or-
ganizations, including, inter alia: 
(A) Issa Batran (now deceased), a com-
mander of Hamas’s al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades 
and senior rocket-maker who taught at an 
UNRWA school in Gaza; 
(B) Humam Khalil Abu Mulal al-Balawi 
(now deceased), who reportedly carried out a 
homicide bombing that killed seven Americans 
and one Jordanian at Forward Operating Base 
Chapman in Afghanistan on December 30, 2009, 
reportedly worked as a physician at an UNRWA 
clinic in Amman, Jordan, and had longstanding 
ties to violent Islamist extremism; 
(C) Said Siam (now deceased), a longtime 
Hamas 
official 
who 
eventually 
served 
as 
Hamas’s Interior Minister in Gaza, and who 
taught at an UNRWA school in Gaza; 
(D) Awad al-Qiq (now deceased), a rocket- 
builder for Palestinian Islamic Jihad who served 
as headmaster of an UNRWA school in Gaza; 
(E) Nahd Atallah, an UNRWA staff mem-
ber in Gaza, who was arrested, convicted, and 
sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment by an 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Israeli military court of using his UN travel 
document to bypass Israeli checkpoints in Gaza 
in order to transport armed Palestinian mili-
tants; and 
(F) an UNRWA teacher who reportedly 
praised homicide bombers and permitted Hamas 
leader Ahmed Yassin (now deceased) to speak to 
an assembly of students at an UNRWA school. 
UNRWA did not terminate the teacher’s employ-
ment, instead only giving him a letter of censure. 
(20) UNRWA staff unions, including the teach-
ers’ union, are frequently controlled by members af-
filiated with Hamas. 
(21) Former UNRWA general counsel James 
Lindsay noted in a 2009 report that— 
(A) ‘‘UNRWA . . . obviously does not take 
‘all possible measures’ in practice’’ to assure that 
United States contributions do not provide as-
sistance to any refugee with ties to Foreign Ter-
rorist Organizations, in accordance with section 
301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; 
(B) ‘‘UNRWA makes no attempt to weed 
out individuals who support extremist positions 
. . . UNRWA has taken very few steps to detect 
and eliminate terrorists from the ranks of its 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
staff or its beneficiaries, and no steps at all to 
prevent members of terrorist organizations, such 
as Hamas, from joining its staff.’’; 
(C) ‘‘[I]t is rare for an area staff member 
. . . to report or confirm that another staff mem-
ber has violated rules against political speech, let 
alone exhibited ties to terrorism. Not surpris-
ingly, external allegations of improper speech or 
improper use of UNRWA facilities are difficult 
to prove, as virtually no one is willing to be a 
witness against gang members.’’; and 
(D) ‘‘[T]here are no formal procedures for 
deregistering or denying services to a properly 
registered refugee, no matter what he or she 
does.’’. 
(22) The late Representative Tom Lantos, in a 
May 13, 2002 letter, expressed his concern that— 
(A) ‘‘UNRWA is perpetuating, rather than 
ameliorating, the situation of Palestinian refu-
gees’’; 
(B) ‘‘UNRWA officials have . . . failed to 
prevent their camps from becoming centers of 
terrorist activity’’; and 
(C) ‘‘for too long, UNRWA has been part of 
the problem, rather than the solution, in the 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
100 
Middle East . . . UNRWA camps have fostered 
a culture of anger and dependency that under-
mines both regional peace and the well-being of 
the camps’ inhabitants.’’. 
(23) UNRWA has long held accounts at the Arab 
Bank and the Commercial Bank of Syria (CBS), fi-
nancial institutions that the United States deems or 
believes to be complicit in money laundering and ter-
ror financing. 
(24) The Arab Bank is reportedly at the center 
of United States investigations into how tens of mil-
lions of dollars have flowed to Palestinian groups that 
allegedly used some of those funds to pay off suicide 
bombers and their relatives, and is also reportedly 
being sued in Federal court by American victims of 
attacks in Israel, with attorneys for the victims accus-
ing the bank of facilitating Acts of International Ter-
rorism. 
(25) On May 11, 2004, the Department of the 
Treasury designated CBS as a financial institution of 
‘‘primary money laundering concern’’ pursuant to 
section 311 of the USA Patriot Act, stating that 
‘‘CBS had been used by terrorists and their sympa-
thizers and acted as a conduit for the laundering of 
proceeds generated from the illicit sale of Iraqi oil’’ 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
101 
and that ‘‘numerous transactions that may be indic-
ative of terrorist financing and money laundering 
have been transferred through CBS, including two ac-
counts at CBS that reference a reputed financier for 
Usama bin Laden.’’. 
(26) On August 10, 2011, the Department of the 
Treasury designated CBS, pursuant to Executive 
Order 13382, for serving as an ‘‘agent for designated 
Syrian and North Korean proliferators’’. 
(27) CBS is controlled by the Government of 
Syria, a State Sponsor of Terrorism. 
(28) The curriculum of UNRWA schools, which 
use the textbooks of their respective host governments 
or authorities, has long contained materials that are 
anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and supportive of violent 
extremism. 
(29) As far back as over forty years ago, former 
UNRWA commissioner-general Laurence Michelmore 
admitted that UNRWA schools were supporting a 
‘‘bitterly hostile attitude to Israel.’’. 
(30) Former UNRWA general counsel James 
Lindsay noted in a January 2009 report that 
‘‘[T]eachers in UNRWA schools were often afraid to 
remove posters glorifying ‘martyrs’ (including suicide 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
102 
bombers) for fear of retribution from armed sup-
porters of the ‘martyrs.’ ’’. 
(31) 
UNRWA 
officials 
have 
compromised 
UNRWA’s strictly humanitarian mandate by engag-
ing in political agitation, propaganda, and advocacy 
agitation against Israel and in favor of Hamas, as 
reflected by the following, inter alia: 
(A) UNRWA officials have repeatedly called 
for the United States and other nations to deal 
directly with Hamas and have repeatedly called 
for political ‘‘reconciliation’’ between Hamas 
and Fatah. 
(B) UNRWA officials have repeatedly casti-
gated Israel for her actions to defend innocent ci-
vilians from rocket and mortar attacks from vio-
lent extremist groups in Gaza and from other 
Acts of International Terrorism, and has repeat-
edly blamed Israel, not Hamas and other violent 
extremist groups, for present restrictions on ac-
cess to Gaza. 
(C) Former UNRWA general counsel James 
Lindsay noted in a 2009 report that: ‘‘Although 
it occasionally issued mild, pro forma criticisms 
of Palestinian attacks (most of which were clear-
ly war crimes), [UNRWA] put more effort into 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
103 
criticizing Israeli counterterrorism efforts (which 
were condemned using language associated with 
war crimes, though any such crimes were far 
from proved) . . . UNRWA never seems to ac-
knowledge that Israel, since its 2005 withdrawal 
from Gaza, has launched strikes on the territory 
largely in order to halt rocket attacks and other 
assaults.’’. 
(D) Lindsay also noted that ‘‘UNRWA— 
through its leaders and press spokespersons—is 
constantly involved in political speech . . . These 
one-sided speeches on political matters do not 
further the goals of a humanitarian and sup-
posedly nonpolitical agency.’’. 
(E) UNRWA Commissioner-General Filippo 
Grandi described as a ‘‘massacre’’ Israel’s May 
31, 2010 naval operation, and use of self-defense 
measures, to seize the Mavi Marmara ship in 
order to enforce its naval blockade of the Gaza 
Strip. 
(F) Former UNRWA commissioner-general 
Karen AbuZayd stated in a 2009 meeting with 
Congressional staff that ‘‘We [UNRWA] are not 
just humanitarian.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
104 
(G) In January of 2009, UNRWA spokes-
man Christopher Gunness called for an inves-
tigation as to whether Israel had committed ‘‘a 
war crime.’’. 
(H) 
On 
December 
30, 
2008, 
former 
UNRWA commissioner-general Karen AbuZayd 
stated that only Israel was responsible for the 
start of the most recent conflict in Gaza. 
(I) On May 25, 2008, in an interview with 
Press TV, which is controlled by the Government 
of Iran, former UNRWA commissioner-general 
Karen AbuZayd reportedly claimed that Hamas 
was free from corruption and ‘‘more popular 
than ever’’. 
(J) On October 5, 2007, former UNRWA 
commissioner-general Karen AbuZayd blamed 
Israel for violent extremist groups in Gaza 
launching rockets and mortars against Israeli ci-
vilian targets, stating that residents of Gaza 
‘‘have absorbed—and continue to experience— 
military incursions in which civilian lives, live-
lihoods, and property have been destroyed, and 
to which they have responded with the contin-
uous firing of Qassam rockets into Israel.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
105 
(K) On March 8, 2007, former UNRWA 
commissioner-general Karen AbuZayd, com-
paring the 1948 Arab-Israeli War with more re-
cent conflicts between Israel and Palestinian 
militant groups, stated that ‘‘[T]here is a strik-
ing historical continuity in the systematic ap-
proach to use overwhelming and disproportionate 
force in the name of security; to separate and ex-
clude Palestinians from the mainstream; to eject 
them from their land; and to occupy Palestinian 
land.’’. 
(L) On January 19, 2005, former UNRWA 
commissioner-general Peter Hansen stated that 
‘‘My job [is] to represent the refugees.’’. 
(M) In 2002, former UNRWA commis-
sioner-general Peter Hansen falsely accused 
Israel 
of 
carrying 
out 
a 
‘‘massacre’’ 
in 
UNRWA’s Jenin refugee camp after Israeli forces 
entered the camp, a base of operations for Pales-
tinian militant groups, to carry out defensive 
operations to halt repeated homicide bombings in 
Israel. 
(N) In 1964, UNRWA allowed its staff to 
attend the conference in Jerusalem where the 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
106 
Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was 
established. 
(32) Despite UNRWA’s contravention of U.S. 
law and activities that compromise its strictly hu-
manitarian mandate, UNRWA continues to receive 
United States contributions, including $237.8 million 
in fiscal year 2010. 
(33) The bilateral ‘‘Framework for Cooperation’’ 
that the United States concluded with UNRWA for 
2010 actually ‘‘commends’’ UNRWA and does not 
commit UNRWA to vetting its aid recipients through 
United States watch lists. 
(34) Assistance from the United States and other 
responsible nations allows UNRWA to claim that 
criticisms of the agency’s behavior are unfounded. 
UNRWA spokesman Christopher Gunness has dis-
missed concerns by stating that ‘‘If these baseless alle-
gations were even halfway true, do you really think 
the U.S. and [European Commission] would give us 
hundreds of millions of dollars per year?’’. 
(35) Former UNRWA general counsel James 
Lindsay noted in a 2009 report that: 
(A) ‘‘The United States, despite funding 
nearly 75 percent of UNRWA’s national budget 
and remaining its largest single country donor, 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
107 
has mostly failed to make UNRWA reflect U.S. 
foreign policy objectives . . . Recent U.S. efforts 
to shape UNRWA appear to have been ineffective 
. . .’’; 
(B) ‘‘[T]he United States is not obligated to 
fund agencies that refuse to check its rolls for in-
dividuals their donors do not wish to support.’’; 
(C) ‘‘A number of changes in UNRWA could 
benefit the refugees, the Middle East, and the 
United States, but those changes will not occur 
unless the United States, ideally with support 
from UNRWA’s other main financial supporter, 
the European Union, compels the agency to 
enact reforms.’’; and 
(D) ‘‘If the [UNRWA commissioner-gen-
eral’s] power is used in ways that are conflict 
with the donors’ political objectives, it is up to 
the donors to take the necessary actions to ensure 
that their interests are respected. When they have 
done so, UNRWA—given the tight financial 
leash it has been on for most of its existence— 
has tended to follow their dictates, even if some-
times slowly.’’. 
(36) The Government of Canada has recently 
placed restrictions on its contributions to UNRWA, 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
118 
(19) The IAEA Director General reported to the 
IAEA Board of Governors on February 25, 2011 that 
the Government of Iran now has approximately 7,000 
centrifuges for enriching uranium, is running almost 
5,000 of them, and has increased its stockpile of low- 
enriched uranium to over 3,600 kilograms, considered 
sufficient for further enrichment into enough high-en-
riched uranium for more than one atomic bomb. The 
Government of Iran has also reportedly produced a 
stockpile of over 40 kilograms of uranium enriched up 
to 20 percent U–235. 
(20) The IAEA Director General has repeatedly 
reported to the IAEA Board of Governors, including 
in his report of February 25, 2011, about the ‘‘out-
standing issues related to possible military dimen-
sions to Iran’s nuclear programme’’. 
(21) The IAEA Director General has repeatedly 
reported to the IAEA Board of Governors, including 
in his report of February 25, 2011, that ‘‘the [IAEA] 
remains concerned about the possible existence in 
Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear related ac-
tivities involving military-related organizations, in-
cluding activities related to the development of a nu-
clear payload for a missile.’’. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
124 
that specified in subsection (c) shall be withheld from the 
United States assessed contribution to the IAEA. 
(e) WAIVER.—The provisions in subsections (c) and 
(d) may be waived if— 
(1) the IAEA has suspended all assistance pro-
vided through its Technical Cooperation Program to 
the countries described in subsection (b); or 
(2) the President certifies that the countries de-
scribed in subsection (b) no longer pose a threat to the 
national security, interests, and allies of the United 
States. 
(f) UNITED STATES ACTIONS AT IAEA.—The Presi-
dent shall direct the United States Permanent Representa-
tive to the IAEA to use the voice, vote, and influence of 
the United States at the IAEA to block the allocation of 
funds for any assistance provided by the IAEA through its 
Technical Cooperation Program to any country described 
in subsection (b). 
(g) REPORT.—Not later than six months after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the President shall transmit 
to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the 
implementation of this section. 
SEC. 902. UNITED STATES POLICY AT THE IAEA. 
(a) ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE.— 
(1) OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE.— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
23:42 Dec 08, 2011
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H2829.RH
H2829
jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS