Haley 'taking names': Report reveals which nations have America's back at UN – and which ones don't
By Ben Evansky | Fox News

Haley hits Iran for supporting groups that use human shields

When Nikki Haley started as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, she warned she'd be “taking names” of countries that do not have “our back.” Now, a newly released annual State Department report on voting records at the world body will tell her who exactly is in America’s corner – and who is not.

The report found that U.N. member states only voted with the United States 31 percent of the time last year on resolutions at the U.N. General Assembly – down 10 percent from the prior year. Reacting to the new report, Haley said in a statement that it was not an “acceptable return” on the United States’ investment and suggested this could factor into aid decisions.

Haley emphasized that U.S. taxpayers pay for 22 percent of the U.N. budget – more, she said, than the next three highest donor nations combined. Haley noted that the U.S. cares more about “being right than popular and are once again standing up for our interests and values” but said:

“Either way, this is not an acceptable return on our investment. When we arrived at the UN last year, we said we would be taking names, and this list of voting records speaks for itself. President Trump wants to ensure that our foreign assistance dollars – the most generous in the world – always serve American interests, and we look forward to helping him see that the American people are no longer taken for granted.”

First published in 1984, “The report to the Congress on Voting Practices in the United Nations” reviews voting of the 193 members of the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) and the 15 members of the Security Council, as well as several other items including resolutions related to Israel.

According to the report, the country that voted least with the U.S. was Zimbabwe – having voted zero times with America. According to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) foreign aid explorer website, Zimbabwe received $58 million in aid for this year.

"Blood Profits" author Vanessa Neumann on the political shift in Cuba and the future of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
Rounding out the bottom 10 nations not aligned with the U.S. were: Burundi, which received $2.9 million in U.S. aid; Iran (no U.S. aid); Syria ($72 million); Venezuela ($230,000); North Korea (no U.S. aid); Turkmenistan ($200,0000); Cuba ($115,000); Bolivia ($115,000); and South Africa ($100 million). All figures are from the USAID explorer website.

As the largest contributor to the United Nations, U.S. taxpayers gave $10 billion in 2016 for voluntary and assessed contributions. Voluntary contributions go to fund agencies such as UNICEF and the World Food Program (WFP). Assessed contributions are obligatory payments made by all member states and based on such things as per capita income and population. It funds peacekeeping and the regular budget of the U.N.

Mark Leon Goldberg, editor of the news and commentary website UN Dispatch, said the latest report isn’t truly representative.

'This is not an acceptable return on our investment.'
- U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley
"This report misrepresents the true extent of cooperation and agreement with the United States at the U.N. because the 2017 report, unlike in past years, excludes decisions that are taken by consensus,” he said. “Votes by consensus represent the vast majority of decisions taken at the U.N. Excluding these decisions from the overall count gives the appearance that the U.N. is a far more adversarial place than it actually is."

The report stated that it indeed used a new updated methodology intended “to capture more accurately the voting conduct of UN member states.” It also stated that votes on Israel skewered “their metrics for countries that oppose these resolutions.” Of the 93 total resolutions that needed a vote, one-quarter of them were on Israel.

According to the report, the country that voted most with the United States in the U.N. General Assembly was Israel. The other nine on the top 10 list were U.S. allies Micronesia, Canada, Marshall Islands, Australia, United Kingdom, France, Palau, Ukraine and the Czech Republic.

Asked if the new report could lead to the U.S. cutting funding to the U.N., Stephane Dujarric, the spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, told Fox News that, “Obviously member states vote the way they want to vote. For the Secretary General the engagement of the United States, engagement with the United States at the United Nations is critical, it is very important.” He concluded “that as for the scale of assessment, that’s a member state issue.”

Jonathan Wachtel, a former director of communications for Haley at the U.S. Mission to the U.N., told Fox News that as the United States is the largest contributor and most powerful member of the world body, “it is understandable that frustration arises when Washington's foreign policy goals come under assault at the institution.”

Miguel Diaz-Canal succeeds Raul Castro as Cuba's new president; Steve Harrigan reports live from Havana, Cuba.
Wachtel continued, “While it is important for the United States to turn to the U.N. to work with other nations to achieve peace and security in troubled parts of the world, it is wrong for the U.S. to simultaneously turn a blind eye to dismissive practices by irresponsible countries.” It is also wrong, he said, for enemies of the U.S. to use the U.N. to boost their power, manipulate the system to get aid and yet work to compromise U.S. sovereignty.

Martin Edwards, a professor at Seton Hall University’s School of Diplomacy and International Relations in New Jersey, told Fox News that the report provided a “nice grandstanding tactic” for Haley but said it raised more questions than answers.

“It’s unclear what this will mean for current foreign aid recipients -- are we really going to give less humanitarian aid to South Sudan? How does that advance our interests?” he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...which-ones-dont.html

How about the fact that we give Mexico $450 million a year in aid and we can't figure out how to pay for the wall. You can buy a lot of bricks and mortar with $450 million.

Nikki is doing a great job of highlighting the bad actors in the U.N. Keep the pressure on, kick butt and keep taking names.

I really love that woman. I am waiting for her to kick butt for those who vote against us and stab us in the back while they have their hand out for more of our tax dollars. Go get em girl!

quote:

Martin Edwards, a professor at Seton Hall University’s School of Diplomacy and International Relations in New Jersey, told Fox News that the report provided a “nice grandstanding tactic” for Haley but said it raised more questions than answers.

“It’s unclear what this will mean for current foreign aid recipients -- are we really going to give less humanitarian aid to South Sudan? How does that advance our interests?” he said.

Well there, Marty, I know that it isn't the answer that you want to hear but.........we don't have to give less humanitarian aid to South Sudan. Not a penny less. Those that just seem to hate the US, despise the policies of the US, and did I mention hate the US, just has to pay a bit more to sustain the aid. The aid can remain the same and the people that hate the US (which folks like you tend to gush over) can just step up and show us that their way really works.

Because right now, we're just throwing money down a hole with the UN, and anytime that the unwashed dare say anything about it, you trot out "humanitarian aid" which isn't a large part of where the UN money goes.

Every time they report on her, she's scowling at the camera. I am grateful for her efforts but she could dial back the anger just a bit.

quote:

Originally posted by ArLEOret:
I really love that woman. I am waiting for her to kick butt for those who vote against us and stab us in the back while they have their hand out for more of our tax dollars. Go get em girl!

I could not think of a better person for this job. Trump chose well indeed!!

My wife and I talk about her- and that Trump will usher her in as the first female President once his 2 terms are up. Not sure about her personal policy, but I like what I see with her at the UN.

Haley 2024!

There's nothing like jumping the gun, guys.

One thing you can be sure of- when you start touting someone as a presidential candidate in an election that will happen years from now, you can pretty much be assured that that person will be nowhere to be seen when that election comes about.

And the last thing I want to see in this forum is nonsense about "the first female president". Who gives a Goddamn about the gender about the person who leads us? This kind of stuff is emblematic of the Left. The best person to lead us is the best person to lead us, regardless of their gender.

quote:

“It’s unclear what this will mean for current foreign aid recipients -- are we really going to give less humanitarian aid to South Sudan? How does that advance our interests?” he said.

well, its obvious (but probably NOT to the expert from Seton) that the aid we've given them up till now has not advanced our cause, so if we zero it out, its status quo

take ALL that aid money and put it to the wall...that way it will be useful and serve OUR interests

I don't know about the UN, but when I was a contractor for a USAID-funded health program, 90% of the money went back to US contractors, not directly to the people for whom the project was intended. Plus the people managing it were not making great decisions for USAID. It was a real eye-opener for me. See books by William Easterly on how ineffective and often harmful foreign aid has been over the decades. And if USAID projects are unlikely to be a good use of resources, I cannot imagine that the UN spends money more wisely, to put it mildly.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Every time they report on her, she's scowling at the camera. I am grateful for her efforts but she could dial back the anger just a bit.

Maybe not anger?

quote:

Mark Leon Goldberg, editor of the news and commentary website UN Dispatch, said the latest report isn’t truly representative.

"This report misrepresents the true extent of cooperation and agreement with the United States at the U.N. because the 2017 report, unlike in past years, excludes decisions that are taken by consensus,” he said. “Votes by consensus represent the vast majority of decisions taken at the U.N. Excluding these decisions from the overall count gives the appearance that the U.N. is a far more adversarial place than it actually is."

According to this genius, we should not count the difficult votes when figuring out who our friends are. Yeah, we should just be glad that tough votes like, say, resolutions naming February 32nd to be "World Narwhal Day" show global solidarity.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Every time they report on her, she's scowling at the camera. I am grateful for her efforts but she could dial back the anger just a bit.

It could be the liberal news picking the pictures.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Every time they report on her, she's scowling at the camera. I am grateful for her efforts but she could dial back the anger just a bit.

Well, yeah, it detracts from her natural beauty.

But it accurately reflects how I feel about the issues she is addressing.

I know it should be less about "feel" and more about the logic and fact of the situation. Yet I cannot deny that I am angry at our nation's current political situation, and the UN is just another facet of that gem. So I identify with her scowl.

I like Haley. But I hope she can lateral transfer to another job when we end our involvement with the UN and then bulldoze the site.
No more US money except for proven, long term supporting allies.
Humanitarian aid only in the event of genuine (not ongoing internecine warfare) catastrophe and then only if WE distribute it, not corrupt locals.
Sending $$$ to Zimbabwe? Hell, no.
Use the saved foreign aid money to help Americans who need it. Our Veterans, for example.