Eleanor Roosevelt & Human Rights

When Eleanor Roosevelt was chairing the United Nations Committee that was writing the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, UNESCO was asked to obtain information on whether there were indeed human rights recognized by all cultures. This book was the result of the work of UNESCO drawing upon the foremost thinkers in the world on the topic.

A recent broadcast on American History TV (on CSpan) was devoted to the three volume biography of Eleanor Roosevelt. At the end of the video a member of the audience brings up the fact that the United States is withholding its contributions to UNESCO, and that it will lose voting rights by the time of the next UNESCO General Conference unless it restores that funding.

Click here to watch the video.

The CRS has made a report on UNESCO for the U.S. Congress.

Luisa Blanchfield and Marjorie Ann Browne of the Congressional Research Service have produced a report on UNESCO for the U.S. Congress. The report was published on March 18, 2013.

Here are my comments on the report:

The report may leave the impression that the member states of UNESCO granted membership in the organization to the PLO. They granted membership to Palestine. 

In considering whether Palestine has "the internationally recognized attributes of statehood" you might mention that 107 member states of UNESCO elected Palestine to be a fellow member state. 138 members states of the United Nations have also elected Palestine to the status of "non-member observer state", not "observer organization". According to Wikipedia, as of April of this year 132 of the 193 member states of the United Nations have recognized the State of Palestine. 

You might also have noted that -- in spite of the provisions of the law -- the United States has continued to fund a number of UN agencies that include as member states entities that do not have "the internationally recognized attributes of states".  

The United States did not make a "decision to withdraw from the UNESCO between 1984 and 2003." It made a decision to withdraw from UNESCO in 1984. 

The United States made a separate decision to rejoin UNESCO in 2003. It was explicitly stated at that time that the effectiveness of UNESCO justified membership. UNESCO effectiveness had been further improved after 2003, although it has been damaged since 2011 by the United States withholding funds. 

You address several issues being considered with respect to the U.S. withholding funds from UNESCO. One that you might consider is the effect on U.S. foreign policy. I believe many UNESCO member states feel that the United States is acting inappropriately by refusing to accept the vote of the majority of member states. That and the soon to occur loss of the U.S. vote will compromise the Department of State's ability to achieve foreign policy aims in and through UNESCO. 

In discussing the budget of UNESCO, you do not mention the voluntary contributions which have been comparable in magnitude to the assessed contributions. The U.S. contribution of 22% of the regular budget influences the total program of UNESCO, and should be seen as roughly 11% of that total. 

Thank you for your attention. 

Here is a more complete set of comments on the study by Ray Wanner. 

Two Important UNESCO Documents

Americans for UNESCO resolution to restore US UNESCO funding http://j.mp/15aXUS9

U.S. Congressional Research Service 2013 report on UNESCO http://j.mp/12fKhOF

The United States Government Should Restore Funding to UNESCO

Countries that have recognized the State of Palestine.Source: Night w

The United States policy is that a two state solution is needed to resolve the long standing dispute between Israelis and Palestinians. According to Wikipedia, "of the 193 member states of the United Nations, 132 (68.4%) have recognized the State of Palestine as of April 2013.  On 29 November 2012, the General Assembly granted Palestine non-member observer state status in United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19." UNESCO granted membership to Palestine in 2011.

U.S. law requires that the government withhold funding from any United Nations agency that accepts Palestine as a member state. Apparently, two decades ago when the legislation was passed and signed into law, it was felt that recognition of Palestine by UN agencies would militate against the successful negotiation of an agreement between Israel and Palestine settling their disputed border and the management of their territories.

The Need for the Legislation to Be Revised

The legislation is badly worded. The operative portion reads:

"The United States shall not make any voluntary or assessed contribution - (1) to any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, or (2) to the United Nations, if the United Nations grants full membership as a state in the United Nations to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, during any period in which such membership is effective."

It is not clear what constitutes "an affiliated organization of the United Nations". It seems likely that the term would include the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the other International Financial Institutions, the World Health Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, and many other organizations. Nor is it clear what states fail to have "the internationally recognized attributes of statehood". Do Somalia and Syrian Arab Republic meet that definition in spite of their failed governments? Does Palestine not meet that definition in spite of the fact that most of the world's nations have recognized it as a state?

Given this lack of clarity in the provision, it might be that the U.S. Government would have to withhold funding from the World Bank (which includes both Somalia and the Syrian Arab Republic as member states) and other agencies critical to our nation/s interests.

The provision also has no sunset clause so no matter how conditions change in the future it will continue in force until there is an act of Congress to change or repeal it.

There is a simple solution to the revision of the legislation. Amend it to give authority to the President to waive the provision if he finds it to be in the nation's interest to do so. The Congress will of course continue to define the contributions to UN agencies through appropriations legislation and can withhold funding from any international agency that it chooses.

Restore Funding to UNESCO

Last week the administration requested funding for UNESCO in its FY2014 State and Foreign Operations budget proposal:

The Administration seeks Congressional support for legislation that would provide authority to waive legislative restrictions that, if triggered, would prohibit paying U.S. contributions to United Nations specialized agencies that grant the Palestinians the same standing as member states or full membership as a state. Should the Congress pass this waiver legislation, the FY 2014 funding specifically requested for UNESCO would cover the FY 2014 UNESCO assessment and the FY 2013 and FY 2014 Contingent Requirements funding would cover arrears which accrued in FY 2012 and FY 2013. 

 The administration is no doubt referring to UNESCO's programs in education, science, culture and communications. UNESCO has been notably supportive of U.S. policy objectives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan implementing programs supported by voluntary contributions.

Perhaps more important is the fact that there is a huge network of people and organizations worldwide that affiliate themselves with UNESCO's objective of building the defenses of peace in the minds of men. Those networks include national commissions for UNESCO, people and organizations supporting World Heritage sites, educators implementing Education for All, scientists involved in UNESCO's network of biosphere reserves, those involved in UNESCO's regional tsunami warning systems, scientists involved in UNESCO's many water centers and programs, and many others. It is important that the United States continue to show its support for UNESCO's mission so that these people will retain their respect for the United States.

A Civics Lesson: Restoring funding to UNESCO.

The United States is withholding funds from UNESCO since the Organization's General Conference voted to allow Palestine membership. It is doing so because of provisions of the Foreign Relations and Intercourse Authorization passed in 1990 and 1994.

In order to restore funding

• The authorization law will have to be changed either to eliminate the provisions or to allow the President to waive them if he finds doing so to be in the national interest. In the latter case, the president would have to issue a waiver in the specific case of UNESCO.
• Funds would have to be included for UNESCO in the foreign affairs appropriations.

Last year the Obama administration requested the waiver authority and it has also requested the appropriation of funds for UNESCO.

The authorization legislation defines policy -- what the program is to do. It is the province of:

• The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and
• The House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs.

The appropriations legislation is the province of:

• The House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations and
• The Senate Committee on Appropriations,

The 113th Congress convened in January 2013. The response to the administration's requests will depend on the members of this session. In the Senate key committee members are likely to be:

• Barbara Boxer, Democrat, chairwoman of the Foreign Relations subcommittee dealing with International Organizations
• Robert Menendez, Democrat, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations
• Bob Corker, Republican, ranking member on the Committee on Foreign Relations
• Patrick Leahy, Democrat, chairman of the subcommittee on foreign relations of the Appropriations committee (who recently spoke on the floor of the Senate in support of funding UNESCO)
• Barbara Mikulski, Democrat, chairwoman of the Appropriations committee.
• Lindsey Graham, Republican, chairman of the relevant subcommittee of the Appropriations committee.
• Richard Shelby, Republican, vice chairman of the Appropriations committee.

In the House of Representatives the key committee members are likely to be:

• Kay Granger, Republican, chairwoman of the relevant subcommittee of the Appropriations committee
• Nita Lowey, Democrat, ranking member of that subcommittee and ranking member of the Appropruations committee itself. She is a strong supporter of Israel.
• Harold Rogers, Republican, chairman of the Appropriations committee
• Christopher Smith, Republican, chairman of the relevant subcommittee of the Foreign Affairs committee
• Karen Bass, Democrat, ranking member of that subcommittee
• Ed Royce, Republican, chairman of the Foreign Affairs committee
• Eliot Engel, Democrat, ranking member of the Foreign Affairs committee

The Senate, with a Democratic majority, is likely to be more responsive to the Obama administration's requests; the House, with a Republican majority, is likely to be less responsive. The last session of hte Congress was marked by contentious debates and gridlock. It remains to be seen how this session will evolve.

The economic priorities of this Congress should be:

• in the short term, to create jobs and prevent an immediate return to recession
• in the medium term to reduce the federal deficit and improve the debt to GDP ratio
• in the long term to invest in education, technology and infrastructure to promote long term growth.

The foreign policy priorities of the U.S. government are generally to protect the security of the United States and to promote its economy internationally. The immediate concerns will probably be the Middle East and Asia.

It seems probable that in these circumstances there will be a tendency to press for reductions in expenditures on international organizations, including UNESCO. 

The immediate concern of the Congress will be to deal with "sequestration" and the "fiscal cliff". The willingness of the members to compromise now may give some indication of their willingness to compromise during the rest of this year's legislative agenda.

In terms of the broad range of issues before the United States government, funding for UNESCO seems likely to be of low priority. The issues of Israeli policy, peace between Israel, Palestine, and their neighbor countries, and U.S. participation in international organizations will probably be seen as more urgent, and the UNESCO funding issue will probably be resolved in terms of these related issues. Still, there are a number of people working very hard to restore U.S. funding to UNESCO and they may be successful. Restoration of funding to UNESCO before the General Conference this fall is necessary to assure that the U.S. vote will be retained, and this may give some urgency to Congressional action.

Update on the previous post

Here are a couple of articles relating to the last post:

1. "Leading Senator Calls for Change in Self-Defeating US Policy on UNESCO", UN Dispatch, February 8, 2013
2. "Obama’s budget’s surprise: Restore UNESCO funding!" The Washington Post, 02/16/2012

Recall that the executive branch makes a budget request, but it is the Congress that actually appropriates funds. The House of Representatives has a major role, and the Obama administration may face an uphill battle getting funding for UNESCO. Last year it also requested funding for UNESCO, and it was not appropriated.

In terms of foreign policy, I agree with Senator Leahy that U.S. funding for UNESCO enables it to do more to achieve our objectives than would an alternative use of the funds. I don't think that restoration of funding to UNESCO would significantly damage our relations with Israel, and it might help a little with opinion about the USA in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

In terms of domestic policy, the lobby that pushed through the 1990 legislation still exists and will probably oppose any change in that legislation.

Senator Leahy supports U.S. renewal of funding for UNESCO

I just received an email with the following:

Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy

On

The Rescue and Reconstruction of Cultural Antiquities in Timbuktu

 United States Senate Floor

February 7, 2013

 Mr. LEAHY.  Mr. President, there was a lot of attention recently on the French military’s operation to repel Islamic extremists and Tuareg nationalist rebels who had terrorized the local population of northern Mali, including in the ancient city of Timbuktu.  That operation was widely welcomed by local Malian citizens and the international community.  Many of the rebels are believed to be hiding out among the local population until the French soldiers leave, so whether they are ultimately vanquished remains to be seen.  It will depend in large measure on the longer term capability of a multinational force of African troops supported by the United States and others.

Besides terrorizing, torturing, mutilating, and slaughtering innocent people, the rebels destroyed ancient tombs, shrines, and manuscripts dating to a period many centuries ago when Timbuktu was a crossroads for commerce and a center of intellectual pursuits in northern Africa.  I mention this not only to inform those who may be unaware of Mali’s ongoing cultural importance, but also to call attention to the fact that Irina Bokova, director general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, commonly known as UNESCO, has already pledged to reconstruct the damaged mausoleums.  As she was quoted in The New York Times on February 4, 2013, “This is the record of the golden ages of the Malian empire.  If you let this disappear, it would be a crime against humanity.”

There are also little known heroes in this otherwise humanitarian and cultural disaster.  Malian residents, particularly Ali Iman Ben Essayouti, who knew the importance of priceless manuscripts preserved in a library funded by international donors including the Library of Congress and Department of State, managed to carefully move some of them to another location where the rebels did not find them.  As a result, although the rebels burned the library, only a small portion of the manuscripts were destroyed.

The other point of this is that, as many Senators are aware, the United States, once the largest contributor to UNESCO including under President George W. Bush, was forced to sever its support last year due to a 1990s law that prohibits U.S. funding to any United Nations-affiliated agency in which the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) obtains the same standing as a member state.  After UNESCO’s members voted, against the advice of Ms. Bokova, to grant the PLO that standing, the law was triggered and U.S. funding abruptly ended.

This is illogical and self-defeating.  First, although the PLO was a terrorist organization in the 1990s, it is no longer.  Second, by cutting off our contribution to UNESCO we not only empower its other members, including Russia, Iran, and Syria, we also make it impossible to assist the organization in the kind of cultural preservation activities it is now undertaking in Mali, which are clearly in the national interest of the United States.  There are many other examples, including World Heritage Sites like the Great Barrier Reef, which UNESCO designates and protects, today without the support of the United States.  And finally, if U.S. funding is not restored before the end of this fiscal year, we will lose our vote in the organization.  Ironically, despite PLO membership in UNESCO, Israel has paid its dues through 2014.  Presumably, Israeli officials recognize, as we should, that their interests are far better served by participating in a UN agency, not by watching from the sidelines.

Mr. President, regardless of what one may think about Palestinian President Abbas’ effort to obtain UN membership for the PLO, and I am among those who regard it as an unhelpful distraction, cutting off U.S. funding to UNESCO and thereby weakening our influence and empowering our adversaries makes no sense.  It is time we recognize that a law that might have seemed sensible to some people years ago has had unintended consequences that run directly counter to our interests, and should be amended or repealed.

Take Action Now To Assure The USA Funding for UNESCO

This is an update on a recent post.

The United States Government has withheld its funding from UNESCO since last year. It is now time to take action to encourage the government to fund UNESCO again. Write your Senator and Congressman. Sign this petition.

The Problem

Two parts of U.S. law are of specific concern (US Code - Title 22: Foreign Relations and Intercourse / 22 USC 287 - Sec. 287e. Authorization of appropriations; payment of expenses) :

• Pub. L. 101-246, title IV, Sec. 414, Feb. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 70: "(a) Prohibition. - No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or any other Act shall be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof which accords the Palestine Liberation Organization the same standing as member states." (b) Transfer or Reprogramming. - Funds subject to the prohibition contained in subsection (a) which would be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof (but for that prohibition) are authorized to remain available until expended and may be reprogrammed or transferred to any other account of the Department of State or the Agency for International Development to carry out the general purposes for which such funds were authorized." 
• Pub. L. 103-236, title IV, Sec. 410, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 454: "The United States shall not make any voluntary or assessed contribution - "(1) to any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, or "(2) to the United Nations, if the United Nations grants full membership as a state in the United Nations to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, during any period in which such membership is effective."

The General Conference of UNESCO last year admitted Palestine to membership. The United States Government immediately began to withhold payments of assessed and voluntary contributions to the Organization. UNESCO's rules state that the voting privileges of a member state will be revoked if it does not pay its assessed contributions for two years. The General Conference next year will approve the program and budget for UNESCO for the following two years and elect the Director General for the next four years.

The Remedy

The law should be revised to permit the President to waive these provisions if he decides it is in the interests of the United States to do so.

Why the Law Should Be Changed

There are a number of reasons that the law should be changed:

1. It no longer achieves its original purpose. These provisions were included in the Foreign Relations Authorizations to prevent Palestine from being admitted to membership in United Nations organizations. Last year, in full knowledge of the law, the UNESCO General Conference admitted Palestine. Last week, also in full knowledge of the law, the United Nations General Assembly recognized Palestine as a state by admitting is to Non-Member State Observer status. Palestine has announced that it will apply for membership in other UN organizations and experts predict that the applications will be approved.
2. The provisions as they stand are outdated. They became law in 1990 and 1994. At the time the Soviet Union had broken up, and the United States was exceptionally powerful in world affairs. The world has changed. Other countries and coalitions are more influential in United Nations venues. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is two decades older and views about its possible solutions have changed. Most other nations have recognized Palestine as a state.
3. The effects of the provisions may become profoundly contrary to U.S. national interests. If for example the United States were forced to withhold funding from the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, or the World Health Organization by these provisions, especially at times of national security crisis, the national interest could suffer significant damage -- far more than would occur due to admission of Palestine as one of hundreds of members of such an organization.
4. The provisions are unclear as written. What is the difference in meaning between "the same standing as member states" and "full membership as a state". Does granting of Permanent Observer Status to a state trigger the provision? (Palestine was just granted Non-Member State Permanent Observer status to the United Nations. Indeed, Palestine has long been granted a standing invitation to participate as observer in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and is maintaining permanent offices at Headquarters.)
5. The interpretation of "the full attributes of statehood" is also subject to uncertainty. (Belarus was admitted to membership in UNESCO in 1954 although at that time it was a constituent republic of the USSR. The United States Government at the time is reported to have argued that if the constituent republics of the USSR were to be admitted as member states, then the states of the USA ought also to be admitted individually.) And perhaps most importantly
6. The provisions may take the decision on participation in an organization out of the hands of the U.S. government. Not only is it possible for a coalition of foreign nations to elect Palestine to membership in another UN organization, but it might be possible for a single state to make that case that a current member state of an international organization has characteristics that trigger the provisions.

The waiver would of course not delete the power of the Congress to delete funding of any UN family organization from appropriations bills. It would provide the possibility of the U.S. government responding more rapidly to events within the UN system than could the Congress in revision of legislation.

Why the Law Should Be Changes Now

The Administration believes that UNESCO's programs promote U.S. values and interests, and that it is in the national interest to contribute to UNESCO. (So do I.) If the United States does not pay its assessed contributions to UNESCO before the General Conference in October 2013, then it will not be able to vote at that General Conference. Perhaps more important, the voice of the United States will be less influential in UNESCO forums. UNESCO is the main United Nations defending important American values such as Freedom of the Press, equality of educational opportunities for girls, and education that promotes peace and opposes racism. Unfortunately, not all other nations share these values and it is important that the U.S. has a strong voice at UNESCO to defend those values.

Perhaps more important, now that the provision has failed in one venue it will soon be tested in others and may also fail in them. The President should now have the power to act quickly in the national interest in such circumstances.

The Process to Change the Law

There will probably not be a specific vote of the Congress on the proposed amendment. Rather it will be included in a larger bill to appropriate funds, that will probably be approved before March, 2013. Apparently the administration informs the Congress before such bills are voted that even if approved in the Congress, the President will not sign them into law unless they include certain provisions. If the waiver authority is included in the list of required provisions, lacking strong opposition in the Congress, the waiver will probably be incorporated into the bill.

What to do now

I would suggest that you use your social media to tell your friends to support this amendment to the law.

Contact your Representative in the House of Representatives and your Senator and explain your support for this amendment. If you can, explain why UNESCO is important in your state and in your district. Is there a world heritage site there, a geopark, or a bioreserve that benefits from UNESCO networking. If you live in an area at risk of earthquakes or tsumanis, explain why UNESCO's geology and tsumami warning systems matter to your community. If you live in a place in which there are water shortages or subsidence due to depletion of aquifers, explain why UNESCO's hydrology program is important to your community.

Alternatively, if you feel deeply about girls education, explain why UNESCO's program in that field is important to you. If you feel that it is important that people around the world know about the Holocaust, explain why UNESCO's Holocaust education program is critically important. If you are concerned with the loss of biodiversity, or if you love to visit world heritage sites around the world, explain that you value these programs of UNESCO.

Finally sign the petition of the Better World Campaign telling the administration to support UNESCO. You can do so by clicking here!

Take Action Now To Assure The USA Funding for UNESCO

The United States Government has withheld its funding from UNESCO since last year. It is now time to take action to encourage the government to fund UNESCO again. Write your Senator and Congressman. Sign this petition.

The Problem

Two parts of U.S. law are of specific concern (US Code - Title 22: Foreign Relations and Intercourse / 22 USC 287 - Sec. 287e. Authorization of appropriations; payment of expenses) :

• Pub. L. 101-246, title IV, Sec. 414, Feb. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 70: "(a) Prohibition. - No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or any other Act shall be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof which accords the Palestine Liberation Organization the same standing as member states." (b) Transfer or Reprogramming. - Funds subject to the prohibition contained in subsection (a) which would be available for the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof (but for that prohibition) are authorized to remain available until expended and may be reprogrammed or transferred to any other account of the Department of State or the Agency for International Development to carry out the general purposes for which such funds were authorized." 
• Pub. L. 103-236, title IV, Sec. 410, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 454: "The United States shall not make any voluntary or assessed contribution - "(1) to any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, or "(2) to the United Nations, if the United Nations grants full membership as a state in the United Nations to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood, during any period in which such membership is effective."

The General Conference of UNESCO last year admitted Palestine to membership. The United States Government immediately began to withhold payments of assessed and voluntary contributions to the Organization. UNESCO's rules state that the voting privileges of a member state will be revoked if it does not pay its assessed contributions for two years. The General Conference next year will approve the program and budget for UNESCO for the following two years and elect the Director General for the next four years.

The Remedy

The law should be revised to permit the President to waive these provisions if he decides it is in the interests of the United States to do so.

Why the Law Should Be Changed

There are a number of reasons that the law should be changed:

1. It no longer achieves its original purpose. These provisions were included in the Foreign Relations Authorizations to prevent Palestine from being admitted to membership in United Nations organizations. Last year, in full knowledge of the law, the UNESCO General Conference admitted Palestine. Palestine has announced that it will apply for membership in other UN organizations and experts predict that the applications will be approved.
2. The provisions as they stand are outdated. They became law in 1990 and 1994. At the time the Soviet Union had broken up, and the United States was exceptionally powerful in world affairs. The world has changed. Other countries and coalitions are more influential in United Nations venues. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is two decades older and views about its possible solutions have changed.
3. The effects of the provisions may become profoundly contrary to U.S. national interests. If for example the United States were forced to withhold funding from the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, or the World Health Organization by these provisions, especially at times of national security crisis, the national interest could suffer significant damage -- far more than would occur due to admission of Palestine as one of hundreds of members of such an organization.
4. The provisions are unclear as written. What is the difference in meaning between "the same standing as member states" and "full membership as a state". Does granting of Permanent Observer Status to a state trigger the provision? (Palestine has applied for Permanent Observer status to the United Nations. Indeed, Palestine has been granted a standing invitation to participate as observer in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and is maintaining permanent offices at Headquarters.)
5. The interpretation of "the full attributes of statehood" is also subject to uncertainty. (Belarus was admitted to membership in UNESCO in 1954 although at that time it was a constituent republic of the USSR. The United States Government at the time is reported to have argued that if the constituent republics of the USSR were to be admitted as member states, then the states of the USA ought also to be admitted individually.) And perhaps most importantly
6. The provisions may take the decision on participation in an organization out of the hands of the U.S. government. Not only is it possible for a coalition of foreign nations to elect Palestine to membership in another UN organization, but it might be possible for a single state to make that case that a current member state of an international organization has characteristics that trigger the provisions.

The waiver would of course not delete the power of the Congress to delete funding of any UN family organization from appropriations bills. It would provide the possibility of the U.S. government responding more rapidly to events within the UN system than could the Congress in revision of legislation.

Why the Law Should Be Changes Now

The Administration believes that UNESCO's programs promote U.S. values and interests, and that it is in the national interest to contribute to UNESCO. (So do I.) If the United States does not pay its assessed contributions to UNESCO before the General Conference in October 2013, then it will not be able to vote at that General Conference. Perhaps more important, the voice of the United States will be less influential in UNESCO forums. UNESCO is the main United Nations defending important American values such as Freedom of the Press, equality of educational opportunities for girls, and education that promotes peace and opposes racism. Unfortunately, not all other nations share these values and it is important that the U.S. has a strong voice at UNESCO to defend those values.

Perhaps more important, now that the provision has failed in one venue it will soon be tested in others and may also fail in them. The President should now have the power to act quickly in the national interest in such circumstances.

The Process to Change the Law

There will probably not be a specific vote of the Congress on the proposed amendment. Rather it will be included in a larger bill to appropriate funds, that will probably be approved before March, 2013. Apparently the administration informs the Congress before such bills are voted that even if approved in the Congress, the President will not sign them into law unless they include certain provisions. If the waiver authority is included in the list of required provisions, lacking strong opposition in the Congress, the waiver will probably be incorporated into the bill.

What to do now

I would suggest that you use your social media to tell your friends to support this amendment to the law.

Contact your Representative in the House of Representatives and your Senator and explain your support for this amendment. If you can, explain why UNESCO is important in your state and in your district. Is there a world heritage site there, a geopark, or a bioreserve that benefits from UNESCO networking. If you live in an area at risk of earthquakes or tsumanis, explain why UNESCO's geology and tsumami warning systems matter to your community. If you live in a place in which there are water shortages or subsidence due to depletion of aquifers, explain why UNESCO's hydrology program is important to your community.

Alternatively, if you feel deeply about girls education, explain why UNESCO's program in that field is important to you. If you feel that it is important that people around the world know about the Holocaust, explain why UNESCO's Holocaust education program is critically important. If you are concerned with the loss of biodiversity, or if you love to visit world heritage sites around the world, explain that you value these programs of UNESCO.

Finally sign the petition of the Better World Campaign telling the administration to support UNESCO. You can do so by clicking here!

UNESCO chief says U.S. funding cuts "crippling" organization

I quote from an article in the Chicago Tribune:

UNESCO is in its "worst ever financial situation" after its biggest contributor the United States froze funding last year, the director general of the United Nations' cultural agency said on Thursday. 

The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization was plunged into crisis in October 2011 when Washington, an ally of Israel, cancelled its grant in protest at the body's decision to grant the Palestinians full membership. 

The U.N. body had been forced to slash spending, freeze job hires and cut programs after losing the U.S. funding, which had made up 22 percent of its budget, UNESCO's Irina Bokova told reporters. 

The organization, which designates World Heritage sites, promotes global education and supports press freedom among other tasks, had started the year with a deficit of $150 million out of $653 million for its budget over 2012 and 2013, Bokova said.

More......

International Education Impact of U.S. Funding Cut from UNESCO

International Education Impact of U.S. Funding Cut from UNESCO is the topic of a new CEEP report.  The United States withheld its contribution to the budget of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) after the international body voted to grant member state status to Palestine last Fall.  CEEP has just published its report on possible impacts of this action, “UNESCO Without U.S. Funding? Implications for Education Worldwide.”

The new CEEP report presents the facts around the controversy, and includes the perspectives of four leaders in international education.  The four contributors present widely different views on how this will impact UNESCO programs and operations around the world.  They agree cutting the funds for the organization’s educational programs is very likely counter-productive to U.S. interests in international development, health, education, and economic growth.  However, they have different perspectives about what concerns them most and what the U.S. should do next.

Click HERE to read or download the report as a PDF document on the CEEP website.  Click HERE to see the IU media release that was issued about the report.

Petition Asking Congress to Fund UNESCO

There are several petitions available on Change.org asking the Congress to restore U.S. funding for UNESCO. The one with the most signatures reads:

Reinstate funding for UNESCO 

The US has stopped all funding for UNESCO as of Oct. 31, 2011. This is due to an outdated law mandating a cutoff of American financial support to any UN agency that accepts Palestine as a full member. Loss of funding for UNESCO hurts the philanthropic endeavors advance literacy, science, provide clean water and education, including sex education and promoting equal treatment for girls and young women. The loss of US funding for these programs is not only devastating for those in dire straits who benefit directly from them but to the US itself. This action has jeopardized economic benefits provided by UNESCO and has gone counter to our core security interests. Right this injustice immediately!

You can add your name to this petition here.... 

Without Comment

The dean of the journalism department at Baghdad University, Hashim Hasan, in a UNESCO workshop described the struggles of teaching in contemporary Iraq. His classrooms are not equipped with computers. But even if they were, there is no broadband Internet connectivity. And even were there computers and broadband, the university lacks reliable electricity service. Hasan concluded softly reciting a poem he wrote for the UNESCO workshop.

We are the butterflies of the media,
The lovers of pens,
The makers of the photo and the movie.
We fly in the world of dreams,
Render truth accurately,
Seek love and peace.
We are the butterflies of the media,
Our dream is the transparency of the truth,
The happiness of human beings.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/19/EDUC1NN16J.DTL#ixzz1rNNHj73U

More on the U.S. Funding of UNESCO

Public opinion about U.S. funding for UNESCO continues to be alive and well this week.

 

Several articles on the subject appeared including this one from the Minnesota Daily and this one out of Boston University. 

Ambassador Susan Rice on Capitol Hill

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice was on Capitol Hill this week to speak with Members of the House about the FY 2013 Federal Budget.

 

During her time on the Hill, the Ambassador spoke about the current status of U.S. funding for UNESCO. You can find more details here. 

 

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen issued a statement in response, which you can seehere. 

 

How others see the U.S. action against UNESCO

The General Conference of UNESCO last fall voted, over America's opposition, to admit Palestine to membership. In response, and in keeping with laws passed in the early 1990s, the United States is withholding its contributions to UNESCO. Since the U.S. assessed contribution corresponds to 22 percent of its regular budget, this is causing a crisis in the Organization.

Here is a comment on the case by the Turkish publication, Todays Zaman:

Just by looking at UNESCO’s identity motto one can observe that something about the latest US decision is not quite right. 

Here it is: “UNESCO contributes to the building of peace, the alleviation of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information.” And, one may add, it pursues these noble objectives across many underdeveloped countries all over the world. 

How is it possible then that the Obama administration has announced that it will stop payments towards such an institution? The US, also known as the land of possibilities, has knowingly decided to deny their support for an organization that courageously helps people in need all over the world. I don’t mean to be cacophonic, but this resolution implies, and that’s the worst part of it, the taking away of the possibility of a better life for people in need around the world. 

In other words, a lot of programs will be shut down.......... 

The controversy within the position adopted by the US seems to be merely of a legal nature. We know that the US has proved all along to be a loyal ally of Israel. We also know that in the ‘90s two congressional laws were created to expressly prohibit the funding of any UN organization that accepts the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as a full member. The purpose of the laws was to encourage negotiation between Israelis and the Palestinians to reach a just and broad peace. What we might not know is that the laws are reversible, and the US Congress could abolish these laws if it wants to. It could vote at any given time to invalidate them, as declared by the president of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace.

Read the entire article titled "Why US decision to deny support to UNESCO is extremely controversial"
by Eleonora Galasso.

UNESCO Director General Travels Across the USA

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar (left)
with UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova (right)
 at Independence Hall in Philadelphia on Thurs 3/15/12

UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova has continued her 10-day trip across the U.S.A this week with stops Washington, Philadelphia, Chicago, Miami, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.


Two weeks ago in Washington she spoke about the importance of Women and Girls Literacy before a lunch hosted by the UN Foundation and the Women's Foreign Policy Group.


On Thursday 3/15 the Director General was in Philadelphia where she attended an event that highlighted the importance that World Heritage sites can play in promoting tourism and economic development. Later in the day she attended the inauguration of the UNESCO Chair in Learning and Literacy at the University of Pennsylvania.


Over the weekend she was in Chicago where she spoke before the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, met with Senator Richard Durbin, talked to the McCormick Foundation, and held an editorial board meeting with the Chicago Tribune. During her stay she also met with representatives from the IDP Foundation, the Chicago Architecture Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation. 


On Monday of last week the Director General visited Miamiwhere she visited theEverglades and participated in a public-private sector roundtable about World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism.

From there she traveled to San Francisco on Tuesday where she spoke to students at the University of California at Berkeley about freedom of information in the digital age and also met with city officials. On Wednesday she spoke about science education for girls at an event hosted by the Friends of the San Francisco Commission on the Status of Women.

Mon 3/19 Roundtable on Sustainable Tourism in Miami

John Oliver Explains U.S. UNESCO Policy

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show of March 15th broke its normal format in order to devote a major portion to satirize the law which required the United States to withhold funding from UNESCO after UNESCO admitted Palestine to membership.

The public was interested when the USA cut UNESCO funding

	UNESCO strips Dresden of World Heritage site title Vancouver Sun - Jun 25 2009
	Bulgarian diplomat wins UNESCO race Philadelphia Inquirer - Sep 22 2009
	UNESCO adds 7 sites to World Heritage List Ynetnews - Aug 1 2010
	UNESCO to assess mining impact at S.Africa Ninemsn - Nov 16 2010
	US cuts UNESCO funding after Palestinian membership vote CNN - Oct 31 2011
	Palestinian flag raised at UNESCO The Hindu - Dec 13 2011

The upper graph gives the frequency that the term "UNESCO" was used as a search term on Google over the last several years, while the lower graph shows how often the term was used to search Google News over the same period. The graph shows a long term downward trend and seasonal phenomena such as a dip at the end of the calendar year. The decision of the General Conference to admit Palestine to membership and the decision of the United States Government to withhold funding from UNESCO as a consequence of that vote led to a very definite spike in interest in UNESCO. Bad news is news!

The UNESCO Director-General makes the case for UNESCO in the USA

On a visit to the United States, from 13 to 25 March, UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova will travel to Washington DC, Philadelphia, Chicago, Miami, San Francisco and Los Angeles where she will participate in events highlighting UNESCO’s role in promoting lasting peace and more inclusive and sustainable development. She will bring a sharp message focusing on women’s and girls’ education and literacy, on UNESCO’s action for freedom of expression across the world, and on the importance of protecting world cultural and natural heritage, especially in this year commemorating the 40th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention.

The Director-General will inaugurate a new UNESCO Chair in Literacy and Learning at the University of Pennsylvania, where she will also sign an internship programme agreement with the University that will enable graduate students to gain experience in UNESCO’s field offices across the world as well as at Headquarters.

During this visit, Irina Bokova will meet Government officials, representatives of US foundations as well as the private sector, along with multiple media outlets.