Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Recent reports indicate a growing concern within the United Nations regarding potential funding cuts and reforms, particularly targeting the U.N. Department of Global Communications. This department often finds itself at odds with U.S. interests and Israel, compelling calls for reassessment.
The urgency for reform surfaces shortly after former President Donald Trump implemented an executive order advocating a comprehensive review of U.N. funding. Trump asserted that the global organization possesses remarkable potential; however, he criticized its operational management, declaring it ineffective.
In a recent statement, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres expressed grave concerns over reductions in U.S. funding, warning that proceeding with these cuts would compromise global health, safety, and prosperity.
Under Trump’s administration, significant cuts have already begun. Notably, he ceased new funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and the U.S. withdrew from the U.N. Human Rights Council. Additionally, in late February, 377 million dollars in grants were terminated with the United Nations Population Fund, which provides essential services related to sexual and reproductive health across 150 nations.
The U.N. Department of Global Communications employs nearly 700 individuals dedicated to utilizing effective communication strategies to share the United Nations narrative globally, covering various languages and platforms. Their mission centers around inspiring international action in support of the U.N. agenda.
Anne Bayefsky, who leads the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and heads Human Rights Voices, articulated concerns to Fox News Digital. She argued that taxpayers ultimately finance the hiring of media professionals to facilitate communications that could undermine U.S. interests by disseminating anti-American and antisemitic messages globally.
When asked about the Department of Global Communications’ role, a U.N. spokesperson clarified that it conducts media outreach, runs a newswire, and maintains the Dag Hammarskjöld Library. The spokesperson elaborated that a significant portion of their personnel operates from 59 U.N. Information Centers worldwide. These centers strive to communicate the U.N.’s objectives and member states’ collective will in the local languages of the communities they serve.
Hugh Dugan, a former member of the U.S. delegation to the U.N., shared insights with Fox News Digital regarding the functioning of these information centers. He remarked that such initiatives demonstrate a form of lobbying by the U.N. directed at its own members, possibly reflecting what some might interpret as a ‘deep state’ dynamic. With public support for the U.N. dwindling in the U.S., Dugan pointed out that the Department of Global Communications struggles within its most crucial audience.
A recent Pew Research Center survey highlighted waning favorability towards the U.N. among Americans, reporting that only 52 percent of respondents had a positive view, down from 57 percent the previous year.
In response to queries regarding the Department’s oversight of communications for other U.N. entities, Under Secretary-General for Global Communications Melissa Fleming disclosed that while her department does not enforce oversight, it organizes regular coordination meetings among communications professionals across the U.N. system. These collaborative efforts focus on crisis management and content strategies, with her department managing the United Nations’ primary social media accounts.
Concerns regarding the nature of U.N. communications persist, as Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of U.N. Watch, identified a pattern of anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric within U.N. communications. He claimed that messaging originating from the Secretary-General and various U.N. social media platforms often perpetuates narratives that could be seen as delegitimizing towards different groups.
U.S. Ambassador-designate to the U.N. Elise Stefanik also recently voiced her concerns. In a tweet, she emphasized the need to cease funding entities within the U.N. that contradict American interests. Referencing an event hosted by the Anti-Defamation League, she asserted that the U.S. will no longer support organizations linked to terrorism, antisemitism, or anti-Israel sentiments.
Examples of the U.N.’s controversial messaging surfaced when Fox News Digital identified multiple Twitter posts that appeared to showcase a one-sided narrative regarding the Israel-Gaza situation. One notable tweet from January advocated for the UNRWA, citing Israeli laws that restrict operations without acknowledging the rationale for these restrictions or the growing list of nations withdrawing funding from the organization.
In another instance, a December post by the World Health Organization, retweeted by the U.N., characterized an Israeli raid on a hospital as part of a systematic effort to dismantle Gaza’s health system. Critically, it omitted key details regarding the rationale behind the Israeli Defense Forces’ intervention, which involved apprehending suspected Hamas members who allegedly stored weapons on the premises.
Despite repeated requests, U.S. State Department officials and representatives from the U.N. were unable to provide specific data on the extent of U.S. financial input into the Department of Global Communications. Nevertheless, it’s clear that the U.S. plays a substantial role in funding the United Nations. In 2022, the U.S. contributed 18.1 billion dollars, accounting for 30 percent of the organization’s total budget. Projections indicate that by 2024, this percentage could decrease to 22 percent for general budgets and 27 percent for peacekeeping finances. Notably, the U.N. has reported that over 40 percent of its humanitarian aid in 2024 came from U.S. contributions.
A spokesperson from the State Department refrained from addressing specific inquiries about whether the funding of the Department of Global Communications serves American interests, instead pointing out a 90-day review initiated by an executive order aimed at aligning ongoing U.S. efforts with priority American policies. This review’s outcomes will be communicated to the public, reflecting a commitment to transparency and accountability regarding the use of taxpayer resources.
