At a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on April 15, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz and Ambassador for Management and Reform Jeff Bartos offered a snapshot of how Washington is approaching the United Nations — pairing sharp calls for reform with an acknowledgment that the institution continues to deliver where it matters most.
“Back to Basics”
Waltz framed the Administration’s strategy as a return to first principles, rooted in a broader “America First” foreign policy.
As Waltz put it, “the American people returned President Trump to the White House with a clear mandate to put America First.” If the U.S. remains the largest contributor, he said, “the UN must work for American interests.”
“The UN must work for American interests.”
That principle, he argued, translates into a straightforward directive: “Get the UN back to basics, end conflicts, keep the peace and deliver life-saving assistance.”
Lawmakers echoed that framing, with Chairman Jim Risch emphasizing a similar vision. Risch described the UN’s founding purpose as stopping conflict and maintaining peace — “a place where everybody could come together and debate.”
But even as the Administration has pressed for change, Waltz made clear the institution is indispensable, saying, “We need one place in the world where everybody can come and talk,” adding that he wants that forum “right here in the United States.”
“We need one place in the world where everybody can come and talk… right here in the United States.”
“A Remarkable Achievement”
Both ambassadors pointed to tangible reform efforts already underway.
Bartos highlighted a recent UN budget agreement that cut roughly $570 million and eliminated nearly 3,000 posts, calling it “a remarkable achievement” driven by sustained U.S. leadership.
Waltz described how those reforms are translating into practice: consolidating humanitarian logistics so agencies use “the same warehouses, the same ships, the same planes, same back offices,” and closing or downsizing missions that have “outlived their purpose.”
The broader shift, he suggested, is away from “blank checks” and toward more efficient, shared approaches that pair American diplomacy with burden-sharing from partners. Crucially, both officials emphasized that these reforms are only possible through engagement.
A System That Still Delivers
The hearing repeatedly returned to what the UN does well.
“On the humanitarian side, the UN is doing really good work,” Bartos said. “The American taxpayers can be really proud of that.”
“On the humanitarian side, the UN is doing really good work. American taxpayers can be really proud of that.”
Drawing on a recent trip to Africa, he described seeing UN operations deliver aid “at scale in remote locations at a reasonable price.” He added, “Watching that happen on the ground is outstanding… The message that I’ve been delivering to the UN is to focus on what you’re good at.”
Waltz underscored that point in practical terms, noting that even with reduced funding, the U.S. is working through pooled mechanisms to increase efficiency. “While some individual agencies may have been cut, we’re putting funding in OCHA,” he said, referencing a recent $200 million tranche for Sudan.
Reform and Reliance
The hearing also highlighted divisions in Congress over how the United States should engage multilaterally.
Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen warned that recent U.S. voting patterns at the UN risk isolating Washington from allies, noting that she does not “understand how alienating our allies, stepping back on key votes advances U.S. interests.”
“American power [is] strongest when we exercise it with allies,” she said, pointing to instances where the U.S. aligned with countries like Russia and China in UN votes.
“American power [is] strongest when we exercise it with allies.”
She also pressed the Administration on humanitarian funding cuts, particularly for the World Food Programme (WFP), emphasizing the real-world consequences: “We hope that people are not going to starve while they’re waiting” for conflicts to end.
Sen. Chris Coons struck a similar note, urging continued cooperation. “We are better off when we’re acting in concert with our allies at the UN… [to make it] the effective and meaningful partner for peace that it can and should be.”
In addition, Sen. Rosen focused on what retreat could mean for women and girls around the world. She questioned U.S. withdrawal from UN Women, UNFPA and the Office of Special Representative for Sexual Violence in Conflict, particularly in light of the vastly expanded global gag rule.
Essential Role of Technical Agencies
In one of the most direct exchanges, Sen. Mike Lee questioned whether the United States materially benefits from UN engagement at all. Waltz’s response was unequivocal: “If we didn’t invent it, someone else would.”
“If we didn’t invent [the UN], someone else would.”
He pointed to the UN’s role in global standards that underpin everyday systems — from aviation safety through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to intellectual property protections through the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
“When pilots are flying around the world, I want them speaking English… Things like spectrum, space, telecoms… are all regulated internationally. We have to get in there and fight, block, tackle and win.”
He also framed burden-sharing — particularly in crisis zones like Haiti — as a cost-saving alternative to unilateral U.S. action.
The Takeaway
In a hearing dominated by calls to “get back to basics,” with major differences on what that means in practice, one consistent throughline emerged: the UN remains an essential U.S. partner and force multiplier for U.S. foreign policy objectives.
Whether delivering humanitarian aid at scale, coordinating global systems or providing a forum where adversaries can still engage, the UN serves functions no country can replicate alone.
