As reported yesterday, while in Washington this week Ban Ki-moon asked Congressional leaders to lift the so-called "peacekeeping cap" that Congress imposed on US contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget back in 2000. Since then, the US has been assessed at a rate higher than what it pays, resulting in constant budget shortfalls at the UN.
This is a long and complicated saga, but here's the elevator pitch version:
In the Los Angeles Times today, Lee Feinstein gets to the heart of the conundrum facing Ban Ki-moon as he approaches the conflict in Darfur. Ban will be personally blamed should the blood-letting in Darfur continue at pace, yet the resources to stop the fighting are mainly in the hands of individual member states. True, Khartoum's intransigence remains the number-one obstacle to deploying peacekeepers to Darfur. But these peacekeepers exist mainly in theory at this point. The most Ban can do is cajole and coax key member states to pony up troops for potential deployment to Darfur. If member states refuse his entreaties, Ban and the United Nations will shoulder the blame for "failing to act" in Darfur. This may seem unfair, but it is the reality.