The United States proposes financial threats to influence votes in the United Nations.
Can anyone find information about this amendment regarding the UN and US foreign assistance? The link given on Plogress is wrong; it takes you to bill 316 rather than amendment 316, and I was unable to find any mention of the amendment via Google or Thomas in the few minutes I searched. Or, maybe the link is correct, but Thomas is broken.
I have a hard time believing that someone actually proposed this, and I'd really like to get some more information about it.
According to Plogress, the proposal was to:
prohibit U.S. assistance to a country that opposed the position of the U.S. in the U.N. The term `opposed the position of the U.S.' means, in the case of a country, that the country's votes in the General Assembly and Security Council (if the country is a member) were the same as the position of the U.S. less than 50% of the time.
Do they not have a definition of bribery or a code of ethics in the United Nations, and wouldn't this be violating it? I guess the line between bribery and diplomacy is pretty fuzzy. But this kind of thing certainly wouldn't work in many other contexts. Withholding money and other forms of assistance unless people vote a certain way---what kind of democratic process is that?
Maybe for military assistance, that makes sense. But for humanitarian assistance?
"You don't agree with our policy toward Israel? No Soup For You!"
Luckily, Plogress reports that the amendment failed, with my rep (Barney Frank) voting against it.