President Donald Trump recently told Politico that he could “very easily” solve the United Nations’ deepening financial problems by encouraging member nations to pay their outstanding dues—if only the United Nations asked him to help. Trump made the comments from Florida and positioned himself as a diplomatic problem solver, even drawing on his own experience strong-arming NATO nations into boosting their military budgets.
But Trump would not say whether the United States itself would pay its outstanding billions to the United Nations. The United States has been the largest contributor to the United Nations in the past, but it has fallen woefully behind on its payments.
How Severe Is the U.N.’s Financial Crisis?
The United Nations is currently experiencing a serious financial crisis that, according to the organization itself, has never been witnessed in recent history. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres wrote to the member states in a letter dated January, warning that the organization might run out of funds as early as July 2026.
Key Facts About the Crisis
The U.N. closed 2025 with a record arrears level of $1.568 billion, more than double the amount at the end of 2024. The U.S. alone has outstanding unpaid regular budget assessments of an estimated $2.196 billion, including unpaid assessments for previous years. In addition to the regular budget, the U.S. also owes around $1.8 billion for peacekeeping activities. Only 36 of the 193 member states of the U.N. had paid their 2026 regular dues in full by the end of January.
The unpaid assessments and outdated financial rules, especially one that forces the U.N. to refund member states unspent funds even if they never contributed, are creating a “Kafkaesque cycle” that is
“draining liquidity and may lead to drastic cuts or disruptions,”
according to Guterres.
Why Is the U.S. Debt Such a Big Issue?
The U.S. has historically contributed around 22 % of the U.N.’s regular budget and an even bigger share of peacekeeping expenses, although a 1993 congressional ceiling restricts U.S. contributions to peacekeeping to 25 % of the total, which increases arrears.
Trump’s administration has also reduced voluntary contributions to several U.N. agencies and sought to withdraw the U.S. from many international organizations, which has further worsened the financial situation.
It is observed that although the U.S. is the biggest delinquent, other countries have also been slow in making payments. Venezuela, for instance, owes around $38 million and has already lost its voting rights in the General Assembly because it has not paid its dues for over two years.
What Would Trump Actually Have to Do to Fix It?
Trump claimed he could call up world leaders—like he says he did with NATO allies—and make them “send checks within minutes.” But this ignores the structural causes of the crisis:
1. U.S. Nonpayment
The U.S. owes billions in mandatory assessments that must be cleared before liquidity is restored. Trump did not offer a plan to pay these arrears.
2. Global Payment Shortfalls
Even if other nations paid on time, the U.N. budget is already strained by rules that force it to return funds it never received and by growing operational costs amid rising global crises.
3. Organizational Restructuring
Guterres and other officials have argued for fundamental budget rule reforms, not just calls for paying dues, to prevent long-term instability.
Without systemic changes, the U.N. may still face a liquidity shortfall by mid-year, making Trump’s “easy” solution appear superficial at best.
How Does Trump’s Rhetoric Contrast With Broader U.S. Policy?
Trump’s suggestion to rally member states stands in contrast with a broader push under his administration to reduce U.S. engagement with multilateral institutions—including withdrawing from the World Health Organization and UNESCO—and to roll back funding for various U.N. initiatives as part of an “America First” doctrine.
Critics argue that while Trump now offers rhetoric about saving the U.N., his administration’s policies have helped create the very crisis he claims he can fix.
What Happens If the U.N. Can’t Solve Its Financial Problems?
If nothing changes, analysts warn of serious consequences:
- The U.N. may be forced to scale back operations worldwide, disrupting peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and development programs.
- Liquidity issues could hinder staffing, program delivery, and even the functioning of the General Assembly and other core bodies.
- In extreme scenarios, the U.N. might struggle to operate out of its New York headquarters or fulfill its budget without drastic member state cooperation.
Why Trump’s Confidence Rings Hollow
Trump’s claim that he could resolve the U.N.’s financial woes “very easily” glosses over the scale of the problem: decades-old budget mechanisms, large arrears from the world’s biggest contributor, and competing geopolitical priorities among member states.
While Trump portrays himself as a problem-solver, the stark warnings from U.N. leadership suggest that the financial viability of the organization cannot hinge on one call from one leader—especially when that leader’s policies have contributed to the crisis in the first place.
Trump’s offer of an easy fix ignores the complex financial realities of the United Nations and the structural roots of its budget crisis. With record unpaid dues, outdated budget rules, and a history of U.S. reluctance to pay its fair share, the challenge is far more than “just making calls”—and the world body’s future may depend on more than presidential rhetoric.
