Originally published on the CGS blog on February 13, 2012.
Tomorrow may be Valentine’s Day, but for those of us who care about international affairs funding (or federal funding of any kind, for that matter), today was a day which has long been almost as breathlessly anticipated: the release of the President’s annual budget request for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2013. (I know, not as delightful as Valentine’s Day, but still important.)
President Obama stressed that his overall budget aims to balance many different priorities, such as spurring job growth while reigning in the deficit. But stepping away from that bigger picture, what does the President’s budget request mean for funding for international affairs in the next year?
President Obama has requested $51.6 billion for the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Within that, budget priorities include funding for the “frontline states” (Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq); human and economic security; support for embassies and the U.S. global presence; and support for U.S. allies and contributions to multilateral organizations.
When it comes to U.S. support for the United Nations, the funding outlook is actually pretty good. The President has requested $1.57 billion for the Contributions to International Organizations (or CIO) account, which pays U.S. dues to the United Nations and many other international organizations in which we participate, including NATO and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This is an increase of $19 million over last year’s funding level. The President also asks for approximately $2.1 billion for the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) budget account, which funds peacekeeping missions in countries around the globe including Darfur, Haiti, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The request for CIPA is $270 million higher than last year’s total.
The Obama Administration took the opportunity of the budget release to express strong support for both multilateral institutions such as the U.N., and for U.N. peacekeeping, asserting that:
“The Administration will advance the President’s vision of robust multilateral engagement as a crucial tool in advancing U.S. national interests, accomplished through our contributions to the United Nations, peacekeeping operations and international organizations. Our contributions enable U.S. participation in over 40 international organizations that maintain peace and security, promote economic growth, and advance human rights around the world. Peacekeeping assessments fund peacekeeping activities directed to the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security, and promote the peaceful resolution of conflict.”
Overall, it looks like a pretty good picture for the international affairs budget. I appreciate President Obama and Secretary Clinton’s strong support for the U.N. and peacekeeping, in particular. Now I hope that when the House of Representatives and Senate sit down to craft their annual appropriations bills, they will echo the President’s support for robust funding for the small sliver (roughly 1 percent) of the federal budget that funds America’s relations with rest of the world.
