The liquidity crisis at the United Nations…a hidden threat to global collective security

Many have viewed the liquidity problems facing the United Nations as a technical issue, linked to the complexities of budget and financing procedures. However, this perception ignores a deeper and more dangerous reality, which is that the financial deficit does not merely represent an administrative defect, but rather constitutes a direct factor in undermining and weakening the collective global security system.

The regular budget of the United Nations, especially those related to peace and security operations, sustainable development, and the promotion of human rights, witnessed a decrease from $3.72 billion in 2025 to $3.45 billion by 2026. This reduction resulted in the abolition of about 2,900 jobs in multiple locations around the world, which reflects the extent of the pressures that the United Nations is exposed to at a time when international crises are escalating.

As for peacekeeping operations, the approved allocations for the period (2025-2026) amounted to about 5.38 billion dollars, but they included a deficit of approximately two billion dollars as a result of some countries not paying their scheduled contributions. These reductions come at a historical moment in which armed conflicts are witnessing their highest levels since the end of World War II, which doubles the risk of reducing the resources available for international stability operations.

In this context, the Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations, Ambassador Qasim Iftkar Ahmed, warned that the current liquidity crisis directly affects the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations, and limits the ability of UN forces to protect civilians, deter violence, and prevent its escalation.

These warnings are particularly important given that Pakistan is one of the largest countries contributing troops to peacekeeping missions, and one of the oldest countries to have contributed soldiers under the banner of the United Nations.

Largest shareholder

On the financial level, the United States remains the largest contributor in the history of the United Nations, but its financial arrears exceed $2.2 billion. During the administration of US President Donald Trump, hundreds of millions of dollars previously allocated to fund peacekeeping operations were cancelled, and Washington indicated in 2026 its intention to completely cancel its contribution to these operations, justifying this by its dissatisfaction with the results of the missions in Mali, Lebanon and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The American contribution represents the main pillar of financing UN peacekeeping operations. When the largest funders adopt a selective approach to fulfilling their commitments, stability and predictability are eroded, and UN operations become hostage to political fluctuations. The absence of regular cash flow makes the implementation of field tasks conditional and not guaranteed.

Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Jean-Pierre Lacroix, acknowledged that administrative reform efforts would not be sufficient to compensate for the severe cash shortage. The financial deficit is currently leading to the repatriation of some peacekeepers to their countries, as well as the freezing of civilian staff positions. This was also reflected in the decrease in the frequency of patrols, the restriction of the movement of UN forces, and the decline in their field presence in conflict areas.

Increased risks

Reducing mandatory spending by 15% translates into a practical reduction of about 25% of the number of military and civilian personnel on United Nations missions in Africa, which is equivalent to withdrawing between 13,000 and 14,000 soldiers and police. The United Nations missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, and Central Africa were among those most affected by these financial and personnel cuts.

In many areas, especially in eastern Congo and rural areas of South Sudan, peacekeepers constitute the only organized deterrence barrier between armed groups and vulnerable civilian populations. When this barrier weakens as a result of lack of funding, deterrence declines, and risks to civilians increase, including restrictions on their movement and exposure to acts of violence.

Peacekeeping forces are assigned multiple tasks, including monitoring the ceasefire, reducing renewed violence, and contributing to the settlement of conflicts. The success of these operations is often measured by the number of crises that are contained before they erupt. Although the peacekeeping budget, which ranges between five and six billion dollars annually, appears large on the surface, it remains small compared to global military spending, which exceeds two trillion dollars annually, which reinforces the fact that prevention is much less expensive than intervention after crises escalate.

Peacekeeping operations are characterized by their multilateral nature, their dependence on the approval of the host state, and their reliance on international legitimacy. They provide an enabling environment for political dialogue, support the implementation of ceasefire agreements, and contribute to rebuilding national institutions affected by conflicts. For fragile states, these processes are sometimes the only tool capable of providing a minimum level of stability. Therefore, funding peacekeeping is not an act of charity, but rather a strategic investment in preventing escalation and preventing the spread of crises regionally.

Geopolitical implications

The impact of the liquidity crisis is not limited to a narrow scope, but extends to broader geopolitical repercussions. Instability in Africa and the Middle East could reflect on the sea lanes in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea, and on the energy routes in the Gulf, which are vital arteries for Asian trade and growth. Neglecting fragile states may turn them into hotbeds for arms smuggling, extremist networks, and organized crime, threatening trade routes and global supply chains.

China is the second largest contributor to the United Nations budget, and its role in sending troops is growing. Financial support is often linked to strategic influence within international organization institutions. As for Pakistan, more than 250,000 of its soldiers participated in 48 UN missions across four continents, and 182 of them fell while performing their duties under the UN flag, which reflects the depth of its commitment to peacekeeping operations.

The Pakistani ambassador indicated that the delay in disbursing dues and reducing powers may affect readiness arrangements, rapid deployment and specialized units. Troop-contributing countries depend on regular payments to maintain the readiness of their equipment and ensure internal political support. The continued financial uncertainty may push some of these countries to re-evaluate the level of their participation and sustainability.

Burden sharing

In conclusion, the liquidity crisis raises a pivotal question: Is it a transient crisis linked to a temporary political circumstance, or is it an indication of a deeper structural shift in the concept of collective global security? If financial commitments become subject to immediate political considerations, the neutrality and legitimacy of peacekeeping operations will be eroded. If the largest contributing country declines without being compensated proportionately by other powers, the structure of international stability will gradually shrink.

The choice before member states appears not to be a trade-off between spending and saving, but rather between investing in preventive stability and bearing the costs of unmanaged conflicts. Collective security has historically been based on regular and predictable burden sharing. When this foundation weakens, the deterrence of the United Nations weakens, and the multilateral system is exposed to the risk of gradual erosion, which may open the door to the spread of more complex and destabilizing conflicts globally. About “Aija Times”

---

The credibility of the United Nations

The loss of regular funding not only means a decline in field capabilities, but also threatens the credibility of the United Nations itself. Stable funding enhances morale, ensures readiness, and supports speed of response. In its absence, the element of deterrence represented by the organization in conflict hotspots erodes.

Moving towards smaller missions and more focused on political tracks may be a logical strategic choice, but the success of this shift requires sufficient and thoughtful funding. Without this, reform becomes an arbitrary reduction that weakens rather than enhances effectiveness.

. The reduction in contributions to the United Nations budget comes at a historical moment in which armed conflicts are witnessing their highest levels since the end of World War II.

. America’s arrears, which are the largest contributor in the history of the international organization, exceeded $2.2 billion, and Washington also hinted at canceling its contributions to peacekeeping operations.