UNFPA executive director expresses 'deep distress' at impending cut in United States contribution.

UNFPA Executive Director expresses "deep distress' at impending cut in United States contribution

Rafael M. Salas, Executive Director of the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), has expressed "deep distress' over the decision of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to withhold $10 million of its 1985 contribution to the Fund.

"Withdrawal of a commitment firmly made can only jeopardize the future of multilateral co-operation in population and other development activities', he said. The United States pledge for 1985 was $46 million, the first instalment of which--$36 million--was paid in March.

USAID Administrator M. Peter McPherson said that United States legislation requires that Agency to withhold funding from UNFPA if it participates in management of "a participates in management of "a programme of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization'. On 25 September, USAID announced it would reprogramme the balance of its 1985 pledge to UNFPA because of its participation in managing the family planning programme of China, as there was "sufficient evidence' that implementation of that country's "one-child-per family' policy "has resulted in these abuses'.

Mr. Salas on 26 September stated "categorically' that the conclusions drawn by USAID were "in error'. The charges, he said, had been "refuted by USAID itself, after careful reviews of UNFPA assistance to China' and by the Government of China. A statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry condemned the United States statement as "distorting China's population policy and falsely accusing China of practicing so-called forced abortion'.

Mr. Salas pointed out that the United States, a member of the UNFPA Governing Council, had not raised any questions regarding the Chinese programme during deliberations in June 1985 and previously.

The Fund's policy, he stated, was not to provide assistance for abortions, abortion services or abortion-related equipment and supplies as a method of family planning, and stressed that decisions regarding family planning should be "voluntary and without coercion'.

UNFPA's support of voluntary family planning "is based on the premise that couples and individuals have the basic right to choose freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children'. That policy was based on the consensus of the World Population Conference in 1974 and the International Conference on Population in 1984. The United States had joined the consensus on both occasions.

Cuts in UNFPA funding would seriously affect population programmes around the world, Mr. Salas said. The Fund's contribution to China's population programme was about 8 per cent of its annual allocations; Asia accounted for 46 per cent; Africa, 20 per cent; Latin America and the Caribbean, 9 per cent, and the Middle East, 9 per cent.

The Fund "very much hopes that the United States would contribute to UNFPA in 1986 in consonance with the stated principles and procedures of the United Nations in the field of population, to which the United States has always been a party', Mr. Salas said.

Mr. McPherson said assistance to UNFPA might be resumed in 1986 "under certain circumstances': if the China programme does "punish abuses and thereby prevents coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization'; or if UNFPA were to "radically change' its China programme assistance, and consistent with the legislation, not support or participate in "a programme of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization', such as by supplying only contraceptives.

Photo: Rafael M. Salas UNFPA Executive Director