The United Nations is facing one of the gravest financial crises in its history. According to the UN Secretariat, by late 2025, only 145 of its 193 member states had paid their assessed contributions in full. That leaves 48 countries behind on their obligations, with total arrears amounting to $1.87 billion. The consequences are severe: the UN has announced that its 2026 budget will be cut by $577 million, a reduction of 15 per cent, and nearly 19 per cent of staff positions will be eliminated. According to Al Jazeera on December 2, 2025.
It happens in a world where all UN members in 2025 spent close to US$ 3000 000 000 000 on arms that create more problems than they solve! This is the immoral global proportion between nonviolence and violence. If maintained, it is extremely hard to see how humanity shall survive.
This ought to create larger headlines in media across the globe than anything having to do with, say, Ukraine or what Trump wrote last night. It doesn’t. It is yet another example of what I have called the world’s conflict and peace illiteracy: People to not know, or value, the world’s most important peace and development organisation that states in its Article 1 that peace shall be established by peaceful means and only when everything has been tried and found without effect can the UN go in and use military force where needed.
This situation is not the result of one or two small states failing to pay. It is driven by the largest economies and most powerful members, whose arrears dwarf those of smaller countries. The imbalance is stark: while member states collectively spend 100 times more on weapons than on the UN’s entire system, they fail to meet even the modest obligations required to keep the organisation functioning.
This table shows clearly that the UN’s financial crisis is not caused by the poorest members. It is the largest economies — the United States, Russia, China, and Mexico — that account for the overwhelming majority of arrears. Smaller states are formally listed as “in arrears” under Article 19 of the UN Charter, which means they risk losing their vote in the General Assembly.
China’s chronic late payment
The United States and Russia are the largest outright debtors, but who would expect them to live up to their obligations vis-a-vis the United Nations? That said, China’s role is distinctive and enigmatic. China is the second-largest contributor to the UN regular budget, assessed at about 15 per cent of the total, or roughly $480 million per year. Unlike Venezuela or Afghanistan, China does eventually pay its dues. The problem is that it pays them months late, often at the very end of the calendar year.
2021: Paid about 2 months late.
2022: Payment confirmed on 23 November 2022, covering regular budget and peacekeeping.
2023: Payment made, but not within the 30‑day due window; UN financial reports show “lesser collections” and the need for liquidity management because of late payments.
2024: Paid nearly 10 months late, final instalment on 27 December 2024.
2025: Pattern of late payment continues, contributing to the UN’s $1.87 billion arrears crisis; as of October 29, still unpaid.
This pattern is not trivial. Because China’s contribution is so large, its late payments create liquidity crises for the UN with, as is seen above, grave long-term consequences. The organisation cannot plan its budget, hire staff, or sustain operations when one of its largest funders withholds payment until the last possible moment.
The enigmatic part is that no other country emphasises the present and future importance of international law, the UN and its Charter as much and as frequently as China does. TFF and I have always emphasised and applauded that; it is a credible and fundamental building block in China’s peace-oriented foreign policies and its various, very welcome, Initiative Documents that sketch out the possible futures of the world, its security and governance. This does not harmonise well with the above-mentioned payment statistics.
Consequences for the UN
The consequences of these arrears and delays are spelt out in the UN’s own announcements and reported widely, including in Al Jazeera’s coverage on December 2, 2025:
- Budget cuts: $577 million will be removed from the 2026 budget.
- Staff reductions: Nearly 19 per cent of UN staff will be eliminated.
- Program impact: Peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and climate programs will be scaled back.
- Credibility: The UN’s ability to act as the backbone of multilateralism is undermined by the very states that claim to support it.
The irony is striking. China, Russia, and others frequently invoke the UN Charter in speeches, presenting it as the foundation of both multilateralism and the emerging multipolar world order. Yet their financial behaviour undermines the institution they claim to champion.
If we want a strong UN and an efficient multi-nodal/polar future for the common good of humanity, the perversion of funding the UN at $1 to every $100 for Militarism must change and change now. And UN members must pay all their dues and do so on time. And to get there, it is time to start a global future discussion, rather than continuing the boring geopolitical-military discourse that offers no solutions but stares at history, today’s events and interpretations of them.
The post The UN’s Financing Crisis: Who Pays, Who Doesn’t, and Why China’s Delays Matter first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.