GAO UNITED NATIONS. Cost of Peacekeeping Is Likely to Exceed Current Estimate

Transcription

1 GAO United States General Aounting Offie Briefing Report to the Chairman, Committee on International Affairs, House of Representatives August 2000 UNITED NATIONS Cost of Peaekeeping Is Likely to Exeed Current Estimate GAO/NSIAD BR

2

3 Contents Letter 3 Briefing Setions Briefing Setion I: Bakground 8 Briefing Setion II: U.N. Peaekeeping Costs Are Rising 12 Briefing Setion III:Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for Briefing Setion IV:Regular U.N. Budget Funding of Peaekeeping Ativity 26 Appendixes Appendix I: Projeted U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments for U.S. Fisal Year Tables Table 1: U.N. Peaekeeping Missions as of July Table 2: U.N. Peaekeeping Costs for Table 3: Projeted U.S. Assessments for U.N. Peaekeeping, U.S. Fisal Year Figures Figure 1: Crosswalk Between U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments and U.S. Fisal Year 31 Page 1

4 Contents Abbreviations BONUCA United Nations Peae-building Support Offie in the Central Afrian Republi MICAH International Civilian Support Mission in Haiti MICIVIH International Civilian Mission in Haiti MINUGUA United Nations Mission for the Verifiation of Human Rights and of Compliane with the Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights in Guatemala MINURSO United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara MONUC United Nations Mission in the Demorati Republi of the Congo UNAMSIL United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone UNDOF United Nations Disengagement Observer Fore (Golan Heights, Syria) UNFICYP United Nations Peaekeeping Fore in Cyprus UNIFIL United Nations Interim Fore in Lebanon UNIKOM United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission UNMEE United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea UNMIBH United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina UNMOGIP United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan UNMIK United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo UNOGBIS United Nations Peae-building Support Offie in Guinea-Bissau UNMOP United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (Croatia) UNOMIG United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia UNSCO Offie of the United Nations Speial Coordinator for the Middle East Peae Proess UNSMA United Nations Speial Mission to Afghanistan UNTAET United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor UNTSO United Nations True Supervision Organization in Palestine Page 2

5 United States General Aounting Offie Washington, D.C National Seurity and International Affairs Division B Leter August 31, 2000 The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman Chairman, Committee on International Affairs House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Following ambitious peaekeeping missions in Bosnia, Somalia, and Rwanda from 1993 to 1995, the U.N. Seurity Counil steadily redued the sope of U.N. peaekeeping. However, sine mid-1999 it has expanded peaekeeping ativities signifiantly. For example, the Seurity Counil authorized large U.N. missions in Kosovo and East Timor in 1999, and it approved a mission to monitor a ease-fire between Ethiopia and Eritrea in July In February and May 2000, it expanded the U.N. mission in Sierra Leone; in May 2000, it authorized an enlargement of operations in the Demorati Republi of the Congo; and in July 2000, it enlarged and armed more heavily the mission in Lebanon. Some of these U.N. missions are omplex, with mandates to administer territorial areas, build politial institutions, reintegrate ombatants into soiety, and promote sustainable development. Most peaekeeping ativity is funded from the U.N. peaekeeping budget, 1 to whih the United States ontributes 25 perent. However, two peaekeeping missions 2 and all speial politial missions smaller operations that seek diplomati solutions to end onflits are funded from the regular program budget of the United Nations. Given the reent inrease in peaekeeping ativity, you asked if the ost of peaekeeping would exeed the $2.1 billion provided for it in the 2001 U.N. peaekeeping budget, whih runs from July 1, 2000, to June 30, In response, we briefed your staff on (1) our estimate of the ost of U.N. peaekeeping, as funded from the 2001 U.N. peaekeeping budget, and (2) the major unertainties in estimating this ost. We also provided 1 Eah peaekeeping mission has an individually approved budget, whih runs from July 1 through June 30 of the following year. We refer to the total of these mission budgets as the U.N. peaekeeping budget. 2 The U.N missions in the Middle East and in India and Pakistan are funded from the regular budget, sine they were started in 1948 and 1949, before the establishment of peaekeeping budgets. Page 3

6 B information on the ost of the speial politial missions and the two peaekeeping missions, whih are funded from the U.N.'s regular program budget (see briefing setion IV). We do not ombine these osts with the peaekeeping budget beause the U.N. regular budget and peaekeeping budget are governed by different regulations and over different time periods. This report summarizes the ontents of our briefing. Results in Brief We estimate that the ost of U.N. peaekeeping funded from the 2001 U.N. peaekeeping budget will be about $2.7 billion, whih exeeds the amount urrently budgeted by about $600 million. Our estimate inludes additional appropriations the United Nations will onsider for missions in the Congo and East Timor when budgets for these missions are revised or fully developed later this year. Our estimate also inludes antiipated inreases for expanded operations in Sierra Leone, Ethiopia-Eritrea, and Lebanon. In deiding whether or not to appropriate additional funds for these proposed expansions, the Seurity Counil will need to approve an expanded mandate for eah mission and the Seretary General will have to (1) omplete a report that justifies the inreased ost, (2) submit a revised budget to the U.N. finane ommittee for review, and (3) obtain General Assembly approval for an inreased appropriation. If the General Assembly where eah member state has one vote approves the inreased appropriation, eah member, inluding the United States, is assessed an additional amount. (See appendix I for our projetion of the timing and amount of assessments for the United States during U.S. fisal year 2001, if the United Nations approves additional appropriations.) The major unertainties in estimating the ost of peaekeeping inlude (1) whether eah mission's area of operation is suffiiently seure and will allow planned or proposed inreases in troops and operations to proeed; (2) if so, when the troops might be deployed and operations expanded; and (3) whether the osts for building infrastruture have been aurately foreast. For example, the unertainties in estimating the ost of the Congo mission relate to whether the Seretary General ertifies that onditions on the ground are seure enough to expand operations from 90 observers to over 5,500 troops; when ontributing ountries might provide adequately provisioned troops; and what might be the ost of supporting these troops in inaessible loations. Page 4

7 B Sope and Methodology In onduting this review, we interviewed offiials from the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, the Department of State, and the United Nations. Some offiials we interviewed were the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations, the Diretor of State's Offie for Peaekeeping and Humanitarian Operations, the Diretor of the U.N. Peaekeeping Finaning Division, and the Chief of the U.N. Logistis and Communiations Servie. To estimate U.N. peaekeeping osts for 2001, we obtained U.N. peaekeeping budgets and justifiations from offiials of the United Nations in New York. U.N. offiials were ooperative and forthoming in providing the information we requested. We analyzed the douments, inluding the osts for military personnel, ivilian personnel, and operations. We also obtained information from the United Nations about the nonreurring osts in some of the operations and developed an estimate of the 2001 peaekeeping ost, projeting the number of troops, the timing of deployment, and operational osts. Sine the United Nations pays a standard rate for many ost items, suh as troop reimbursement and ategories of vehiles and airraft, we inreased or dereased the U.N.'s budget estimate based on our projetions about the level of these items and their deployment. For nonstandard osts, suh as infrastruture, we relied on U.N. estimates. We disussed all of our estimates with senior offiials of the U.N. Department of Management in the Peaekeeping Finaning Division and the Contributions Servie and with senior offiials of the U.N. Department of Peaekeeping Operations in the Finane Management and Support Servie and the Logistis and Communiations Servie. We ompared our estimates to their estimates, and disussed the assumptions U.N. offiials made in developing the 2001 peaekeeping budget and the possible inreases due to additional requirements and ativity. All offiials emphasized that their assumptions and budget estimates ontained a high degree of unertainty beause of rapidly hanging situations on the ground. We adjusted our estimates based on the additional information obtained. To augment our analysis, we sought information from the Department of State on its updated U.N. peaekeeping ost estimates for 2001, whih it uses to develop the budget request submitted to Congress. The Department of State did not provide us with this information. On six separate oasions, we requested from State, but did not reeive, information about the projeted troop strength, deployment times, operating osts, ost savings, projeted new missions, and expansions used to derive its updated estimate. State told us it was still negotiating with Congress on the level of appropriations for peaekeeping for fisal year 2001 and did not want Page 5

8 B information on its assumptions provided to Congress at this time. As a result, we were not able to analyze State's estimates or its underlying assumptions. To identify unertainties in the peaekeeping missions that ould affet their ost, we interviewed senior offiials from the U.S. Mission to the United Nations about proposed expansions of peaekeeping, the reason for the expansions, and the unertainties in proeeding with them. We also analyzed State Department douments on these operations, suh as reports and ables. We also examined U.N. Seretary General reports on onditions in the Congo, Lebanon, Kosovo, East Timor, Ethiopia-Eritrea, and Sierra Leone; transripts of Seurity Counil meetings on these ountries; letters from representatives of the warring parties in these ountries; and site reports on these ountries from a variety of soures. We used this information to further adjust our estimates of whether and when U.N. missions might expand operations. Our estimates are subjet to the unertainties assoiated with peaekeeping in eah of these ountries. We onduted our work from April 2000 through August 2000 in aordane with generally aepted government auditing standards. Ageny Comments The State Department's Bureau for International Organizations, the U.S. Representative for U.N. Management and Reform at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, the U.N. Peaekeeping Finaning Division, and the U.N. Logistis and Communiations Servies provided oral omments on a draft of this report. State and the U.S. Mission said the report presented a fair assessment. U.N. peaekeeping is intended to respond to international rises, whih have trajetories that annot be preisely foreast; the osts for U.N. peaekeeping are subjet to these rises and are similarly diffiult to foreast. The United Nations ommented that the report was fair and balaned. Situations on the ground were volatile and therefore final osts for U.N. peaekeeping were determined after final deisions about the missions were made by member states. State, the U.S. Mission, and the United Nations also provided tehnial omments, whih we inorporated into the report as appropriate. As agreed with your offie, unless you publily announe its ontents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from the Page 6

9 B date of this letter. At that time, we will send opies of this report to the Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, Seretary of State, and appropriate ongressional ommittees. Copies will also be made available to other interested parties upon request. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please ontat me at (202) or Tetsuo Miyabara at (202) Maria Oliver also made key ontributions to this report. Sinerely yours, Harold J. Johnson, Assoiate Diretor International Relations and Trade Issues Page 7

10 Briefing Setion I Bakground BriefingSetions BriefingSetionI U.N. Peaekeeping Operations as of July 2000 Soure: U.N. Department of Publi Information, Cartographi Setion and GAO. Page 8

11 Briefing Setion I Bakground As of July 2000, the U.N. had 15 peaekeeping missions ongoing under U.N. Seurity Counil mandates. These operations authorized a troop and ivilian polie strength of 48,404. Ten of the peaekeeping missions have operated for 9 years or less, while five long-standing missions have been deployed for over 20 years. Table 1 lists the urrent missions. Table 1: U.N. Peaekeeping Missions as of July 2000 Name of mission Aronym Duration Authorized strength U.N. True Supervision Organization in Palestine UNTSO June 1948 to present 231 U.N. Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan UNMOGIP January 1949 to present 68 U.N. Peaekeeping Fore in Cyprus UNFICYP Marh 1964 to present 1,250 U.N. Disengagement Observer Fore (Golan Heights, Syria) UNDOF May 1974 to present 1,120 U.N. Interim Fore in Lebanon UNIFIL Marh 1978 to present 7,935 U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission UNIKOM April 1991 to present 1,115 U.N. Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara MINURSO April 1991 to present 311 U.N. Observer Mission in Georgia UNOMIG August 1993 to present 102 U.N. Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina UNMIBH Deember 1995 to present 2,062 U.N. Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (Croatia) UNMOP January 1996 to present 27 U.N. Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo UNMIK June 1999 to present 4,756 U.N. Transitional Administration in East Timor UNTAET Otober 1999 to present 10,790 U.N. Mission in Sierra Leone UNAMSIL Otober 1999 to present 13,000 U.N. Mission in the Demorati Republi of the Congo MONUC November 1999 to present 5,537 U.N. Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea UNMEE July 2000 to present 100 Total 48,404 Soure: Compiled by GAO from U.N. douments. Page 9

12 Briefing Setion I Bakground Cost of U.N. Peaekeeping 1992 to 2001 Dollars in millions 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Peaekeeping budget years Soure: Compiled by GAO from U.N. data. Page 10

13 Briefing Setion I Bakground U.N. peaekeeping osts rose from 1992 through 1995 and then delined until As the United Nations redued the number, size, and ost of its peaekeeping missions, the peaekeeping budgets dropped from over $3 billion in 1995 to under $1 billion in However, in 1999 and 2000, the U.N. Seurity Counil authorized or expanded operations in the Congo, East Timor, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Lebanon, and Ethiopia-Eritrea, resulting in inreased osts. The United Nations has budgeted about $2.1 billion for peaekeeping missions for the peaekeeping budget year that runs from July 1, 2000, through June 30, The missions in the Middle East and in India- Pakistan, whih are funded from the regular U.N. budget, are estimated to ost about $70 million for the biennial budget year from January 1, 2000, through Deember 31, Beause of the different budget yles used for peaekeeping funded under the regular U.N. budget, these osts are not inluded in our 10-year omparison of peaekeeping osts. Page 11

14 Briefing Setion II U.N. Peaekeeping Costs Are Rising BriefingSetionI Cost of U.N. Peaekeeping for 2001 Likely to Exeed Budget 3,000 Dollars in millions 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, U.N. peaekeeping budget GAO estimate a U.S. share Other U.N. members' share a U.N. peaekeeping is assessed on an annual basis. The U.S. share of U.N. peaekeeping is urrently 30.4 perent; the U.S. Congress has apped U.S. ontributions at 25 perent sine Soure: Compiled by GAO from U.N. data. Page 12 s

15 Briefing Setion II U.N. Peaekeeping Costs Are Rising Based on our urrent estimate, the ost of peaekeeping for 2001 will be about $2.67 billion, exeeding the urrent peaekeeping budget by about $600 million. The inreased ost is due to the expansion of four missions Congo, Sierra Leone, Lebanon, and Ethiopia-Eritrea. The missions in Kosovo and East Timor will ost about what was previously estimated, and the remaining missions will ost about $3.4 million less than alloated in the 2001 peaekeeping budget. In addition, osts to support peaekeeping ativities (inluding storage of equipment and supplies at a depot and administrative osts at the U.N. Seretariat to manage operations) total about $51 million. Table 2 summarizes our estimated ost for U.N. peaekeeping for 2001 and the projeted mission hanges. Table 2: U.N. Peaekeeping Costs for 2001 Dollars in millions Mission U.N. Mission in the Demorati Republi of the Congo U.N. peaekeeping budget GAO ost estimate for 2001 a To be determined in September when mission budget is to be prepared. b A revised budget proposal is to be submitted. Projeted hanges a $ 220 Phased deployment to 5,537 peaekeepers. U.N. Mission in Sierra Leone $ Inreased deployment to 16,500. U.N. Interim Fore in Lebanon 140 b 225 Inrease to 7,935 troops. U.N.MissioninEthiopiaandEritrea 172 Deployment of 4,200 troops. U.N. Transitional Administration in East Timor Derease in peaekeepers; inrease in other ativities. U.N. Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo Other missions overed by peaekeeping budgets Support aount Total $2,073 $2,674 To be determined when a mission budget is prepared. Soure: Compiled by GAO from information in U.N. douments and disussions with U.N. offiials. Page 13 s

16 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 BriefingSetionI Unertainties in Congo and Sierra Leone Missions Congo Phase II deployment dependent on more seure onditions Troop ommitments and mission logistis not omplete Sierra Leone Seurity Counil deisions on troop inreases and mandate revisions Provision of adequately prepared troops Page 14

17 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 The major unertainties affeting our ost estimates for operations in the Congo and Sierra Leone are whether onditions on the ground will permit the missions to proeed with proposed expansions, and, if so, when the expansions will our. In the Congo, the Seretary General must determine that onditions are right to proeed with deployment; in Sierra Leone, the Seurity Counil must authorize the expansions. Congo In July 1999, representatives of the government of the Congo, five onerned states, and Congolese rebel groups signed a ease-fire agreement that alled for the United Nations to help stabilize Congo's international borders, provide humanitarian assistane, and disarm ombatants. In August 1999, the Seurity Counil authorized phase I of the mission, the deployment of 90 U.N. liaison personnel, under the U.N. Organization Mission in the Demorati Republi of the Congo. In May 2000, the Seurity Counil authorized a phase II expansion of the mission to monitor the ease-fire with 5,537 troops and observers, provided that the Seretary General determines the areas of operation are suffiiently seure to deploy peaekeepers. Although it is unertain whether phase II will our, our estimate assumes that the mission will proeed to phase II, by April 2001, for the following reasons. Aording to offiials at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, inluding the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, members of the Seurity Counil support the phase II expansion beause instability in the Congo is a major threat to international seurity in Afria. The Congo has international borders with nine other ountries, and an unstable Congo provides a battleground for neighboring states to expand resoure and territorial laims, ondut proxy wars, and undertake rossborder strikes. Aording to Seurity Counil resolutions, a peaekeeping effort is needed to help stabilize the international borders, and there is pressure from the Seurity Counil to move forward as soon as pratial. However, aording to offiials of the U.S. Mission to the United Nations and Seretary General reports, fighting still ours in some of the planned deployment areas, and the situation is volatile. As a result, the Seretary General determined in June 2000 that operations ould not proeed to phase II. Also, aording to a U.S. Ambassador of the U.S. Mission, deployment is likely to be delayed well into the fall of 2000 at least. Other unertainties involve the ost of building airstrips to supply four isolated deployment areas and setting up adequate ommuniations. Page 15

18 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Sierra Leone In July 1999, after years of ivil war, the government of Sierra Leone and the rebels, the Revolutionary United Front, signed the Lome peae aords, under whih they agreed to share power in a oalition government. As part of the agreement, the United Nations was alled upon to assist the Sierra Leone government in implementing its disarmament and demobilization plan for former ombatants. In Otober 1999, the United Nations Mission to Sierra Leone was authorized to deploy 6,000 troops. Aording to the Seurity Counil, from February through July 2000, the Revolutionary United Front repeatedly violated the peae aord, attaked U.N. peaekeepers, and detained as many as 500 U.N. personnel. The Seurity Counil subsequently authorized an inrease in troop strength to 11,100 and then to 13,000. The Seretary General has reommended that the U.N. fore be further strengthened. Although it is unertain whether the Seurity Counil will approve the Seretary General's request for inreased troop strength, our estimate projets that the mission will expand signifiantly and require heavier armament, as have other operations under similar onditions. Senior offiials of the U.S. Mission said troop strength was likely to exeed the last proposal by the Seretary General alling for 16,500. Offiials of the U.S. Mission also said that Seurity Counil members are supportive of an inrease in troop levels beause of the violations of the peae aord and requested the Seretary General to omplete a proposal with speifi tasks and a fore level needed to help the government deal with violations of the peae aord. The Seurity Counil is also negotiating a resolution to establish a speial ourt for Sierra Leone to try rebel leaders on harges of war rimes and atroities. Page 16

19 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Page 17

20 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Unertainties in Lebanon and Ethiopia-Eritrea Missions Lebanon Timing of inreased deployment Level of inreased armament Ethiopia-Eritrea Mission plan and operations not prepared Timing of full deployment Page 18

21 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 The major unertainty in estimating the ost for the mission in Lebanon is whether onditions on the ground will allow the mission to expand its ativities at its urrent pae to help Lebanon regain ontrol over its territory. The unertainties in estimating the ost of a mission in Ethiopia- Eritrea inlude what the sope of operations will be and when the operation might be deployed. The U.N. Seurity Counil in July 2000 authorized 100 military observers to prepare for a peaekeeping mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea, but at the time of our review, the United Nations had not ompleted a budget for the mission. For the mission in Ethiopia- Eritrea, we relied on an earlier mission plan by the U.N. Logistis and Communiations Servie for our ost estimate. Lebanon In 1978, Israel invaded southern Lebanon in retaliation for attaks staged from Palestinian bases in Lebanon. Shortly thereafter, the United Nations Interim Fore in Lebanon was mandated by the Seurity Counil and deployed to help stabilize the situation, assist Lebanon in regaining ontrol of its territory, and failitate the withdrawal of all Israeli fores from Lebanon. In May 2000, Israel notified the Seretary General of its intention to withdraw all of its fores from Lebanon by July Israel ompleted the withdrawal ahead of shedule. Given the seurity vauum reated by the withdrawal, the Seretary General reommended that the mission be reinfored by inreasing its authorized strength from 4,513 troops to 7,935. Although it is unertain whether the mission will ontinue deploying at its urrent pae, our estimate assumed a full deployment with inreased armament by the end of August 2000 beause progress is being made rapidly. Aording to the Seretary General, in late July 2000, Israel leared all issues related to the line of withdrawal, and the Lebanese president and prime minister onsented to the full deployment of U.N. peaekeepers. Also, troop strength had reahed over 5,000, and heavier armament was arriving in the mission area. For example, by mid-july, 42 of 64 requisitioned armored personnel arriers were delivered in-theater. Aording to U.S. Mission offiials, urrent plans are to inrease the number of troops to 6,250. A budget that inorporates all inreases is to be proposed to the General Assembly in September Ethiopia-Eritrea In June 2000, the protrated onflit between Ethiopia and Eritrea that displaed more than 1.2 million people was ended with the signing of an Page 19

22 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 agreement on the essation of hostilities. As part of the agreement, brokered by the Organization of Afrian Unity, Ethiopia and Eritrea agreed to ease hostilities and peaefully resolve ontested borders. They also agreed that a U.N. peaekeeping mission is to assist in implementing the agreement. In July 2000, the Seurity Counil authorized 100 military observers to help plan and arrange for a full peaekeeping mission. The Seretary General has proposed a troop level of 4,200 troops and observers. We based our estimate on this troop level plus an earlier mission plan for Ethiopia-Eritrea. Aording to U.S. Mission offiials, this mission is likely to be deployed within 4 to 5 months. It has the support of the Seurity Counil and is a priority beause it ould help end the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea. However, at the time of our review, a budget had not been prepared. Page 20

23 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Page 21

24 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Unertainties in East Timor and Kosovo Missions East Timor Proposed derease in troop level Proposed requests for infrastruture repair and judiiary assistane Kosovo Possible inrease in judiial reform assistane Page 22

25 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 After onsidering potential inreases and dereases in osts for the missions in East Timor and Kosovo, we estimate that osts will not hange from the urrent budget. The mission in East Timor has undertaken the reation and management of an interim government, and new requirements are being onsidered by the Seurity Counil; however, the military omponent of the operation may be redued, thus offsetting additional osts. The mission in Kosovo is also involved in the reation and management of an interim government, and the Seurity Counil is onsidering expanding its funtions. However, it is unertain whether the Seurity Counil will approve these expansions and proposals have not been ompleted. East Timor The United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor follows a prior mission, the United Nations Mission in East Timor, that was responsible for assisting with voter registration and an eletion on June 11, 1999, that would determine if the region would be integrated with Indonesia or would be independent. Severe violene from the prointegration fations followed the eletion result for independene, and hundreds of thousands were displaed from their homes. In September 1999, the Seurity Counil authorized the deployment of a multinational fore to restore peae and seurity. East Timor was also provided largesale humanitarian relief by the United Nations. In Otober 1999, the Seurity Counil established the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor to deploy up to 1,640 polie; 8,950 troops; and 200 military observers to help establish and operate an interim government. Our ost estimate does not adjust the U.N. budget for East Timor. U.N. offiials are onsidering reduing the number of peaekeepers by over 500 troops in If this redution ours, the mission ost would be less than was budgeted. However, there may also be new requirements that would inrease osts: Aording to a U.N. offiial, at a June 2000 donor onferene held for East Timor, only a small portion of the needed funds was pledged for repairs of roads, bridges, and other infrastruture, and additional support for developing an administration of justie may be required. Aording to U.S. offiials, members of the Seurity Counil support these ativities beause they will help East Timor make a transition from peaekeeping to a fully funtioning state. Page 23

26 Briefing Setion III Unertainties in Estimating U.N. Peaekeeping Cost for 2001 Kosovo In June 1999, the United Nations Mission in Kosovo was authorized under Seurity Counil Resolution 1244 to establish an interim international ivilian administration for Kosovo after the withdrawal from the region of Federal Republi of Yugoslavia seurity fores. As set forth in the resolution, NATO would lead the Kosovo Fore/International Seurity Fore with the authority to enfore military agreements with the former warring parties and to ensure publi safety and order. The U.N. mission was responsible for eonomi and soial reonstrution, building demorati and multi-ethni institutions, ensuring the protetion and right of return of all refugees and displaed persons, and failitating the proess for deiding Kosovo's future status. Our ost estimate does not adjust the budgeted amount for the mission in Kosovo. However, U.N. offiials told us that the mission has been asked to help with loal- and regional-level administration of justie, whih would entail funding judges and proseutors and providing seurity. Currently, the mission is paying for six international judges and two international proseutors, and it is searhing for additional judges and proseutors. There are urrently 234 loal judges and 42 proseutors in plae. Aording to offiials of the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, the U.N. mission did not initially plan to hire international judges and proseutors, but was fored to do so when the Kosovar judges onsistently ruled in favor of their own ethni group or dismissed ases altogether. However, all osts related to hanges in the administration of justie have not been fully formulated. Page 24

27 Page 25

28 Briefing Setion IV Regular U.N. Budget Funding of Peaekeeping Ativity BriefingSetionIV Speial Politial Missions (January-July 2000) Bougainville Papua New Guinea Soure: Compiled by GAO from U.N. data. Page 26

29 Briefing Setion IV Regular U.N. Budget Funding of Peaekeeping Ativity Seventeen speial politial missions were funded from the regular U.N. budget between January and July Speial politial missions are mandated by the Seurity Counil or the General Assembly to undertake a broad range of tasks that are analogous to peaekeeping ativities disarming parties, failitating negotiations between fations, and helping establish and strengthen governments. Speial politial missions are generally smaller than peaekeeping missions and are expeted to omplete their work within a limited period of time, depending on the politial situation in eah ountry. However, some have operated for as long as 5 years, as in Guatemala and Burundi. Page 27

30 Briefing Setion IV Regular U.N. Budget Funding of Peaekeeping Ativity Peaekeeping Ativities in Annualized U.N. Budgets Speial politial missions funded in the regular budget: $45 million 2 peaekeeping missions funded in the regular budget: $35 million Peaekeeping budget: $2,073 million Soure: Compiled by GAO from U.N. data. Page 28

31 Briefing Setion IV Regular U.N. Budget Funding of Peaekeeping Ativity The United Nation's programs and basi operations are funded through a regular biennial budget. This budget inludes funding for limited peaekeeping missions (the Middle East and India-Pakistan) and peaekeeping-related speial politial missions. The estimated ost of peaekeeping ativities funded from the regular budget is about $80 million in alendar year 2000 $45 million for the speial politial missions and $35 million for the two peaekeeping missions. Page 29

32 Appendix I Projeted U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments for Apendixes U.S. Fisal Year 2001 ApendixI The United Nations assesses member states for peaekeeping ativities based on eah member's pro-rated share of the annual peaekeeping budget. However, assessments are not forwarded to members in single annual bills. They are sent out for partial payments at intervals determined by two fators: (1) assessments an only over funding for the duration of eah mission's Seurity Counil mandate typially 6 months and (2) assessments an be made only after both a mission's budget and its mandate have been formally approved. For example, the approved budget of the U.N. Disengagement Fore on the Golan Heights is about $37 million for 2001, but its mandate only runs from July to Deember 2000 (6 months). Thus, member states are assessed about $18.5 million (half of the 12-month budget ost), with eah member state paying its pro-rated share. If the mandate is renewed for an additional 6 months in Deember 2000, the remaining $18.5 million an be assessed. Peaekeeping assessments are due and payable to the United Nations within 30 days of the billing date; however, atual payments often our muh later. Projeting U.N. peaekeeping assessments for the United States for U.S. fisal year 2001 is further ompliated beause the U.N. peaekeeping budget year runs from July 2000 through June 2001, but the U.S. fisal year runs from Otober 2000 through September Thus, there is no budget estimate of peaekeeping osts for the last 3 months of U.S. fisal year Figure 1 illustrates the rosswalk between the U.N. budget and estimated assessments for the United States during U.S. fisal year Page 30

33 Appendix I Projeted U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments for U.S. Fisal Year 2001 Figure 1: Crosswalk Between U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments and U.S. Fisal Year U.N. peaekeeping budget year 2001 U.S. fisal year 2001 July Aug. Sept. Ot. Nov. De. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Calendar year 2000 Calendar year 2001 Assessment billed only for mandate period (typially 6 months, but varies) Assessment billed only for mandate period (typially 6 months, but varies) Soure: GAO. Table 3, whih is based on our estimate of the osts of peaekeeping for 2001, shows our projetion of the timing and assessments for the United States during U.S. fisal year In deriving this table, we made the following four assumptions: Assessments for individual missions are made within 1 month after both the U.N. peaekeeping budget and a mandate are approved. (Aording to U.N. offiials, it may take longer to forward the assessments to individual ountries beause heavy workloads may delay proessing.) Mandates are renewed on the same shedule and the same interval, as in Peaekeeping osts after June 2001 equal the full 12 month ost of the GAO estimate. The U.S. pays its assessment at a rate of 25 perent. (During the U.N. General Assembly meeting in the fall of 2000, the United Nations will review the peaekeeping assessment rate for 2001 to 2002.) Beause of the rules on when assessments an be billed to member states and the differene between the U.S. fisal year and the U.N. peaekeeping budget year, the amounts atually assessed during fisal year 2001 may not equal 25 perent of the U.N. peaekeeping budget. Page 31

34 Appendix I Projeted U.N. Peaekeeping Assessments for U.S. Fisal Year 2001 Table 3: Projeted U.S. Assessments for U.N. Peaekeeping, U.S. Fisal Year 2001 Dollars in millions Current budget (2001) GAO estimate (2001) Projeted U.S. assessments a (based on GAO 2001 ost estimate) Ot Nov De Jan Feb Mar Apr May 2001 June 2001 July 2001 a U.N. peaekeeping is assessed on an annual basis. The U.S. share of U.N. peaekeeping is urrently 30.4 perent; the U.S. Congress has apped U.S. ontributions at 25 perent sine b Amounts assessed may not equal 25 perent of U.N. peaekeeping budget beause of the timing of assessments and the differene between the U.N. peaekeeping budget year and the U.S. fisal year. Projeted mandate expiration /renewal or General Assembly budget review. Aug Sept Total b MONUC $220 $23.3 $46.7 $23.4 $93.4 UNAMSIL $ $ $ $ MINURSO $2.1 $ $2.1 $ MINURCA UNTAET d UNMIBH d UNFICYP UNOMIG UNMIK UNDOF d UNIKOM UNIFIL UNMEE Support aount Total $ $ $60.4 $2.6 $26.3 $135.9 $173.9 $46.7 $48.7 $2.1 $242.2 $72.7 $65.1 $890.4 d Bills not sent until after assessment rate is determined. Soure: Compiled by GAO from information in U.N. douments and disussions with U.N. offiials. (711515) Leter Page 32

35 Ordering Information The first opy of eah GAO report is free. Additional opies of reports are $2 eah. A hek or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Douments. VISA and MasterCard redit ards are aepted, also. Orders for 100 or more opies to be mailed to a single address are disounted 25 perent. Orders by mail: U.S. General Aounting Offie P.O. Box Washington, DC Orders by visiting: Room th St. NW (orner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Aounting Offie Washington, DC Orders by phone: (202) fax: (202) TDD (202) Eah day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To reeive fasimile opies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please all (202) using a touhtone phone. A reorded menu will provide information on how to obtain these lists. Orders by Internet: For information on how to aess GAO reports on the Internet, send an message with info in the body to: info@ or visit GAO s World Wide Web home page at: To Report Fraud, Waste, or Abuse in Federal Programs Contat one: Web site: fraudnet@gao.gov (automated answering system)

36

37 United States General Aounting Offie Washington, D.C Offiial Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Bulk Rate Postage & Fees Paid GAO Permit No. GI00 Address Corretion Requested