The U.S. Congress this week approved a bill that seeks to reform the Organization of American States which shows the increasing detachment of this country by an institution that criticizes its growing inefficiency and financial paralysis. The new standard, which only requires the signature of the President Barrack Be-ma to be effective and has been promoted by the influential Senators Bob Mendez and Marco Rubin provides a reduction in the percentage of U.S.annual dues to Regular Fund of the OAS, as well as the reduction and prioritization of commands assumes the organization.
One of the main measures of the new U.S.law requires the Department of State to assess the fee structure so that within five years no Member State pays more than 50% of its mandated contribution to the OAS.” With an annual contribution of 48,512,700 million dollars, the U.S.is the largest contributor to the Regular Fund of the organization; this amount represents nearly 60% of total fees paid by 34 countries of the OAS, in accordance Report on compliance with payment of 2012 dues of the organization. He still Canada, with a contribution of 9.7661 million representing nearly 12% of all fees,Brazil(8,109,400 million, 9.9%),Mexico(6.7552 million million, 8 , 2%) and Argentina(1,964,300 million, 2.4%). The contribution of each country to the OAS Regular Fund is made in proportion to the size of their respective economies.
The eventual reduction in the percentage of U.S.economic participation imposed by the OAS will force Congress to agree to adjust their budgets and make up the 9% in their contribution. One possibility that U.S.would convince these five years to other countries to increase their contributions. The Secretary General, Jose Miguel Insulate, proposed a few months ago a decrease of U. S , so that it was at 49%, and an increase of other major fenders to 51%, not to alter the amount annually paid by Washington This initiative has been supported by the rest of the Member States reluctant to increase their contributions.
The other option includes the 33 member states vote against the U.S.approach, in favor of keeping the fees as they are, leaving the U.S.isolated and in the position of having to obey their congressional mandate breach binding international organization, such as the approval of budgets. This, coupled with the image of all the countries facing the U.S., is the least interested in both the State Department and to the OAS.
The issue of quotas is one of the main obstacles with which the OAS fighting regularly. The problem of delays and defaults by several of its member states delaying some countries to pay their contributions put at serious risk the liquidity of the OAS in 2011, unable to have enough cash to pay a number of its -suppliers, join criticism of nations like Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador who accuse the organization of being subjected to imperialism, as this is the largest contributor to the budget.
It is not the first time that the U.S. Congress voted not only in favor of a reduction in funding of this country to the OAS, but even the absolute disposal of their contributions-the last time, in 2011, the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives. Politicians from both parties have questioned in recent years the strategic vision of the organization, accusing it of financial and administrative paralysis in addition to pursue a political drift, coinciding with the peak of leftist governments in the region, decanted for leading bloc ALBA countries. The OAS waste time attacking our nation and discussing issues that are not relevant to its constitution and its mission, while we, the U.S., contributed approximately 60% of its.
The new rule proposed by theU.S.pursues a reduction assumes OAS mandates and a review of the procedure to accept that is consistent only with the priorities of the Human Rights in
Melendez, along with the now Secretary of State, John Kerry, expressed his displeasure over the management of the OAS Secretary General and administrative and financial paralysis of the institution in a letter to the Permanent Council in November last year.
The proposals in this regard raises U.S. does not differ from those already beginning to implement the OAS. Its secretary general, in recent interviews he has given to this newspaper, has stressed the need to reduce the mandates imposed on the entity and that it will focus on those issues where you really can make a difference”
The issue here is that the OAS has no money to develop all the mandates entrusted to him, therefore, or we increase the endowment or decide what to do with them. The U.S. proposal help in this regard and look forward to working with the State Department and with other countries on this issue, Eli Pains Insular recognized when the United States bill had been approved by the Legal Affairs Committee of the Senate on last April.
The OAS has already decided not to accept more commands and in the coming months, each of its constituent states must submit, to them, are the primary objectives of the organization, for, after pooling, power, depending of these, setting priorities in addressing the existing mandates.
Another aspect that cares for new legislation in the U.S. Congress is transparency when it comes to hiring, firing and promoting employees. In recent years, staffing policy has been questioned Insular. In 2012, the former ambassador to the OAS in Panama, Guillermo Caches called for more clarity in the selection of advisers of the Secretary General and the appointment of members of electoral missions.
The letter from Kerry and Menendez was also signed by Rubio denounced insular recruitment of senior politicians for permanent positions signing contractor in return for substantial fees, assigns, in many cases, offices of high rank. The Secretary General is committed to reducing the number of personnel his Cabinet