LIZ PEEK: Can Trump Make the UN Great Again despite its globalist agenda?

A new Gallup poll shows that 73% of Americans think the UN does a poor job of "maintaining international peace and security" and 70% say the same about the UN "upholding international law" and "protecting human rights." That's a lousy report card for an organization that spends roughly $70 billion per year.

Elsewhere in the world, the UN scores better, which is not surprising since poor countries, which constitute the majority of members, look to wealthier nations for handouts via the UN. The nations of Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, are especially keen on the sprawling organization.

How does that wealth transfer happen? One way was described by President Trump's UN Ambassador Mike Waltz in recent testimony before Congress: "The UN let countries use peacekeeping missions as cash cows for their militaries. Peacekeepers could bring equipment, park it, never use it, take it home brand new, and get it paid for by the UN." Those operations can employ "10,000 to 18,000 soldiers"; the costs, Walz says, are "quite significant". He is ending that practice - just one step in reforming the bloated UN, whose budget has quadrupled over the past 25 years.

Americans have reason for skepticism, given the frequent votes that go against the U.S. or our ally Israel. For thirty-three years in a row, the General Assembly has voted to end our embargo on Cuba, and for decades it has opposed Israel's attempts to protects its citizens from Palestinian terrorists. Waltz calls the body a "cesspool of antisemitism."

Instead, the UN is hyper-focused on climate change, gender equality and other issues that may scratch a globalist itch, but appear little related to the cause of peace.

Meanwhile, the UN is going broke. Last year the Economist reported: "On May 5th the UN will brief members on a previously unreported $600m (17%) cut to its $3.7bn [administrative] budget aimed at avoiding default this year. It will include a hiring freeze… Yet it may not be enough. A combination of deadbeat members and mad budget rules have led to a liquidity crisis."

The Trump White House has not bankrupted the UN by withholding payments. Instead, it appointed Waltz to drive much-needed reforms and who is, according to Politico, "generally well-regarded, including among many Democrats on Capitol Hill". That's rare praise for a Trump appointee.

Walz is also overhauling UN peacekeeping operations, some of which, as he has said, have been around for "30, 50 or even 80 years." Walz argues such forces are important to provide breathing room for political settlement of a conflict, but it "can't then become an excuse to not have a political resolution. When you have a peacekeeping force, for example, in DRC and Congo, at the cost of a billion dollars a year, that's been there for 30 years", it should end.

Walz is just getting started; reforming an institution so large and complex takes time, which he may not have. Soon the UN will elect a new secretary-general to succeed Portugal's António Guterres, who has served since 2017. Currently, most of the candidates who have stepped forward appear eager to embrace the reforms advocated by the White House, alarmed that President Trump is ready to eviscerate the UN's funding if changes are not made and a U.S.-friendly official not elected.

Finances are not Trump's only weapon. As Politico reported, when the White House announced the creation of the Board of Peace last year to oversee the Israel-Gaza conflict, "U.N. officials and diplomats were really, really unnerved", seeing that Board as some sort of "rival peacemaking institute"…

That could trash the White House's push to Make the UN Great Again and would be disastrous for the UN.