The Financial Burden Of Peacekeeping - A study of the US’ financial contribution to the UN Peacekeeping Budget during the presidential periods of Obama and Trump

United Nations Peacekeeping Operations are important instruments in contemporary conflict management. The financing of these operations is a collective responsibility of the UN member states; however, as of 30th of April 2020, outstanding arrears to the UN Peacekeeping Budget was at $2.2 billion. Approximately $1.3 billion is owed by the United States. This financial strain on the UN is not new. As the largest contributor, the US has a long, but varied, history of withholding funds to the UN. President Obama paid the UN assessed rate, while President Trump did not. How can strategic culture explain the level of financial contribution to the UN Peacekeeping budget? In this thesis, I make the case that these policy-decisions can be explained through US strategic culture, applied on an analysis of the Presidential periods of Barack Obama and Donald J. Trump. I argue that the Obama Administration can be categorised as internationalist, while the Trump administration is identified as nationalist. In order to test these theoretical expectations, I categorise speeches and remarks made by the key actors in the Presidential Administration; The President, The Vice President, The Secretary of State, and the Ambassador to United States Mission to the United Nations, through three elements of strategic culture: National identity and the US’ role in the world; The nature of international society; and UN Peacekeeping. By doing an explorative case study using congruence analysis, I find that the Obama Administration shows a high level of liberalism and low level of limited liability; and that the Trump Administration shows a high level of limited liability and a low level of liberalism