The United Nations strongly responded.The United States wanted to withdraw from the United Nations, first paid its contributions, the United States did not want to pay the UN contributions, so threatened the United Nations to withdraw, so that the United Nations exempted its contributions.
This may sound like a joke, but in fact, the United States 'actions on membership dues over the years are even more outrageous than the joke, and it has simply taken the "hegemonic default" to a new level.
How scary is this account? According to the rules of the United Nations, dues are shared according to economic strength. As the number one economy, the United States has to bear 22% of its regular budget and more than 25% of peacekeeping funds. This is the rule and its responsibility.
But as of 2025, the United States owes more than $3 billion in membership fees, including more than 800 million regular budget to be paid this year, as well as peacekeeping funds arrears in previous years.
Some people may think that 3 billion is nothing to the United States, but for the United Nations, it is living money. Let's talk about the United Nations headquarters in new york. Some time ago, due to lack of money, even the employee entrance was closed. It sounded sad to say that it was to save overtime pay.
Not to mention those peacekeeping troops carrying out missions in Africa and the Middle East. Because of insufficient funds, inability to keep up with equipment, and reduced personnel security. They were originally supposed to maintain peace, but now even their own security is affected. This is all due to the debt owed by the United States.
Furthermore, the bullish “retreat” is basically a self-directed political show.
First, the anchor of Fox News shouted on the program, "Either quit the United Nations or blow it up." This shocked the United Nations. You know how many United Nations employees have lost their lives in conflict areas. How can you say such things casually?
Later, the anchor also quickly apologized. To put it bluntly, it was eye-catching. Another Republican senator proposed the "Withdrawal Bill", which looked fierce. As a result, it didn't even pass the preliminary examination of Congress, and it was a hundred thousand miles away from becoming a law.
The UN Secretary-General’s spokesman was lazy and only said not to comment on unchecked bills, this attitude is actually to see through this is a fake trick.
Can the United States really withdraw from the United Nations? Don't even think about it. How valuable is the position of a permanent member of the Security Council? It has veto power and has the final say on international affairs. This is a key bargaining chip for the United States to maintain global hegemony. It is willing to lose it?
Polls also show that only 36% of Republicans support withdrawing from the union, and only 32% of people in the United States feel that the United Nations is useless. The Democratic Party also strongly opposes it. If you really withdraw from the union, there is no way to pass it.
To put it bluntly, calling out to withdraw from the United Nations is to scare the United Nations. It is like a child lying on the ground. The purpose is to force the United Nations to make concessions, either to waive some dues or to reform according to the wishes of the United States.
Then why does the United States have to default on its debts? It's not that they have no money at all, they just don't want to take responsibility and want to use membership dues as a political tool.
On the surface, it's a wrangling between the two parties in China, but the budget can't be passed, but the United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars on military expenditure every year without blinking an eye. What's the difference between these billions of membership fees? In 2022, it will pay US $18.1 billion to relevant United Nations agencies alone, indicating that it is not unable to pay, but deliberately delayed.
The deeper reason is that "America First" is at work. It feels that the United Nations has tied its hands and feet and wants to force the United Nations to obey through debts.
For example, when UNESCO accepted Palestine as a member in 2011, the United States immediately suspended its $60 million in contributions, which is a clear threat.
Some politicians refer to the United Nations as a “spending-out” agency, deliberately blocking payments, in fact, in order to raise votes and take international obligations as victims of domestic political struggle.
The most irritating thing is that the United Nations is really a bit tied-up. According to the Charter of the United Nations, there is no voting right if the total debt owed for more than two years, but the United States is very sophisticated, and it can always pay a little bit, just without triggering punishment, which not only keeps the voting right, but also continues to owe money.
Moreover, the United Nations is indeed inseparable from the United States 'membership dues. Although money arrived late is not as good as money arrived early, it is still better than nothing, so we can only half-coax and half-urge it, and we cannot do it hard.
This makes the United States even more arrogant. While it owes money, it is still pointing fingers at the United Nations. Other countries that pay on time feel unfair. The authority of the United Nations has long been messed up by it.
This hegemonic default by the United States is too harmful. The United Nations has no money and cannot do anything. It is common to freeze recruitment and reduce meetings. Even peacekeeping operations have to be scaled back. Some conflict areas are originally under pressure by peacekeeping troops, and once funds are cut off, war is likely to resume.
What's worse is that it has corrupted the atmosphere. Even the number one major country does not abide by the rules. Other countries will inevitably follow suit, and life for the United Nations will be even more difficult in the future.
Some time ago, Trump complained at the United Nations that the elevator was broken and the teleprompter was not working well. It turned out that the elevator was stopped by an American photographer encountering a safety device. The teleprompter was managed by the White House itself and had nothing to do with the United Nations.
The United Nations doesn't even have enough money to maintain the facilities with the money you owe, so you still have the nerve to complain? Look at China again. It has already paid all this year's membership dues, and the United Nations is particularly grateful. Compared with this, it is self-evident that the United States eats ugly.
In the end, this wave of U.S. operations is the old line of hegemony: both to be the global leader and not want to fulfill the responsibilities of the boss; both to the United Nations to support it and not want to spend money.
But now is not the time of the United States, the trend of multipolarization is becoming more and more obvious, the United Nations is the core platform of multilateralism, the response to climate change, prevention of epidemics, mediation conflict can not be separated from it, if the United States is really to force the United Nations to function, in the end isolated will only be itself.
Hopefully the United States can understand sooner that the rule of law can not win respect, will only break their sign. and hope that the United Nations can improve the rules sooner, don't let this hegemonic rule of law succeed, after all, the world needs the rule of law, responsible big country, not the rule of law.
This may sound like a joke, but in fact, the United States 'actions on membership dues over the years are even more outrageous than the joke, and it has simply taken the "hegemonic default" to a new level.
How scary is this account? According to the rules of the United Nations, dues are shared according to economic strength. As the number one economy, the United States has to bear 22% of its regular budget and more than 25% of peacekeeping funds. This is the rule and its responsibility.
But as of 2025, the United States owes more than $3 billion in membership fees, including more than 800 million regular budget to be paid this year, as well as peacekeeping funds arrears in previous years.
Some people may think that 3 billion is nothing to the United States, but for the United Nations, it is living money. Let's talk about the United Nations headquarters in new york. Some time ago, due to lack of money, even the employee entrance was closed. It sounded sad to say that it was to save overtime pay.
Not to mention those peacekeeping troops carrying out missions in Africa and the Middle East. Because of insufficient funds, inability to keep up with equipment, and reduced personnel security. They were originally supposed to maintain peace, but now even their own security is affected. This is all due to the debt owed by the United States.
Furthermore, the bullish “retreat” is basically a self-directed political show.
First, the anchor of Fox News shouted on the program, "Either quit the United Nations or blow it up." This shocked the United Nations. You know how many United Nations employees have lost their lives in conflict areas. How can you say such things casually?
Later, the anchor also quickly apologized. To put it bluntly, it was eye-catching. Another Republican senator proposed the "Withdrawal Bill", which looked fierce. As a result, it didn't even pass the preliminary examination of Congress, and it was a hundred thousand miles away from becoming a law.
The UN Secretary-General’s spokesman was lazy and only said not to comment on unchecked bills, this attitude is actually to see through this is a fake trick.
Can the United States really withdraw from the United Nations? Don't even think about it. How valuable is the position of a permanent member of the Security Council? It has veto power and has the final say on international affairs. This is a key bargaining chip for the United States to maintain global hegemony. It is willing to lose it?
Polls also show that only 36% of Republicans support withdrawing from the union, and only 32% of people in the United States feel that the United Nations is useless. The Democratic Party also strongly opposes it. If you really withdraw from the union, there is no way to pass it.
To put it bluntly, calling out to withdraw from the United Nations is to scare the United Nations. It is like a child lying on the ground. The purpose is to force the United Nations to make concessions, either to waive some dues or to reform according to the wishes of the United States.
Then why does the United States have to default on its debts? It's not that they have no money at all, they just don't want to take responsibility and want to use membership dues as a political tool.
On the surface, it's a wrangling between the two parties in China, but the budget can't be passed, but the United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars on military expenditure every year without blinking an eye. What's the difference between these billions of membership fees? In 2022, it will pay US $18.1 billion to relevant United Nations agencies alone, indicating that it is not unable to pay, but deliberately delayed.
The deeper reason is that "America First" is at work. It feels that the United Nations has tied its hands and feet and wants to force the United Nations to obey through debts.
For example, when UNESCO accepted Palestine as a member in 2011, the United States immediately suspended its $60 million in contributions, which is a clear threat.
Some politicians refer to the United Nations as a “spending-out” agency, deliberately blocking payments, in fact, in order to raise votes and take international obligations as victims of domestic political struggle.
The most irritating thing is that the United Nations is really a bit tied-up. According to the Charter of the United Nations, there is no voting right if the total debt owed for more than two years, but the United States is very sophisticated, and it can always pay a little bit, just without triggering punishment, which not only keeps the voting right, but also continues to owe money.
Moreover, the United Nations is indeed inseparable from the United States 'membership dues. Although money arrived late is not as good as money arrived early, it is still better than nothing, so we can only half-coax and half-urge it, and we cannot do it hard.
This makes the United States even more arrogant. While it owes money, it is still pointing fingers at the United Nations. Other countries that pay on time feel unfair. The authority of the United Nations has long been messed up by it.
This hegemonic default by the United States is too harmful. The United Nations has no money and cannot do anything. It is common to freeze recruitment and reduce meetings. Even peacekeeping operations have to be scaled back. Some conflict areas are originally under pressure by peacekeeping troops, and once funds are cut off, war is likely to resume.
What's worse is that it has corrupted the atmosphere. Even the number one major country does not abide by the rules. Other countries will inevitably follow suit, and life for the United Nations will be even more difficult in the future.
Some time ago, Trump complained at the United Nations that the elevator was broken and the teleprompter was not working well. It turned out that the elevator was stopped by an American photographer encountering a safety device. The teleprompter was managed by the White House itself and had nothing to do with the United Nations.
The United Nations doesn't even have enough money to maintain the facilities with the money you owe, so you still have the nerve to complain? Look at China again. It has already paid all this year's membership dues, and the United Nations is particularly grateful. Compared with this, it is self-evident that the United States eats ugly.
In the end, this wave of U.S. operations is the old line of hegemony: both to be the global leader and not want to fulfill the responsibilities of the boss; both to the United Nations to support it and not want to spend money.
But now is not the time of the United States, the trend of multipolarization is becoming more and more obvious, the United Nations is the core platform of multilateralism, the response to climate change, prevention of epidemics, mediation conflict can not be separated from it, if the United States is really to force the United Nations to function, in the end isolated will only be itself.
Hopefully the United States can understand sooner that the rule of law can not win respect, will only break their sign. and hope that the United Nations can improve the rules sooner, don't let this hegemonic rule of law succeed, after all, the world needs the rule of law, responsible big country, not the rule of law.