November 1, 2011 | Forbes

UNESCO Fiasco

November 1, 2011 | Forbes

UNESCO Fiasco

If the U.S. has one big lever right now within the many organizations of the United Nations system, it is the threat to cut the money with which U.S. taxpayers pay the biggest share of the U.N.’s bills. Yet despite a U.S. threat to cut funding, the assembly of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) voted Monday to grant full membership to the Palestinian Authority. What happened?

The answer may be that the U.N. has little reason to take U.S. threats seriously. That might sound odd, since UNESCO’s decision to seat the Palestinians has indeed choked off U.S. funding for the Paris-based organization. At least for now.

Under U.S. law, the U.S. must deny funding to any part of the U.N. system that grants membership to the Palestinians — at least until they achieve viable statehood by way of negotiating in good faith with Israel. On Monday, following the UNESCO vote, a State Department spokeswoman confirmed that a $60 million U.S. payment for UNESCO, planned for this month, will not be made. Overall, U.S. dues account for 22% of UNESCO’s budget, plus millions in voluntary contributions on top. A a U.S. cutoff should mean that UNESCO will lose about $80 million per year.

But while money talks, so do U.S. diplomats. For the U.S., the UNESCO vote was a debacle, with the assembled states voting 107 to 14 in favor of admitting the Palestinians, and 52 states abstaining. That would have been the moment for the U.S. ambassador to read UNESCO’s assembly the riot act and announce that the U.S. was pulling out, as it did in 1984, under President Ronald Reagan; returning only in 2003, under President George W. Bush.

Instead, the U.S. diplomatic message to UNESCO has been one of apology, regrets and fawning statements of support for a U.N. body that has just slapped the U.S. in the chops. U.S officials have even been hinting that they are looking for some kind of workaround, to get the money flowing again.

In a statement released Monday, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland described UNESCO’s admission of “Palestine” as “regrettable” and premature.” But she went on to say the U.S. “will maintain its membership and commitment to UNESCO.” Most telling, she added that the administration would “consult with Congress to ensure that U.S. interests and influence are preserved.”

Why might the administration now wish to consult with Congress? Congress appropriates the money that the U.S. gives to the U.N., and Congress has the power, should it choose, to change the laws now cutting off funds for UNESCO, and for any other U.N. organizations the Palestinians might now seek to join.

In Paris, America’s ambassador to UNESCO, David Killion, had even sweeter words for UNESCO. In a statement explaining the U.S. vote, he, too, chided the UNESCO vote as  “premature” and ”counterproductive.” But he then went on to expound on Washington’s continuing commitment to UNESCO, and the entire U.N. system, saying “President Obama has made strong multilateral engagement across the U.N. system — including at UNESCO –  a top priority and a core aspect of U.S. policy.”

Sounding more like an envoy of UNESCO than of the U.S., Killion then praised UNESCO for a variety of its programs, and, apparently referring to the U.S. funding cut-off, he came close to issuing an outright apology: “We sincerely regret that the strenuous and well-intentioned efforts of many delegations to avoid this result fell short.”

Killion concluded by hinting that UNESCO might not suffer quite as much as expected: “We pledge to continue our efforts to find ways to support and strengthen the important work of this vital organization.”

As for the “strenuous efforts” of the U.S. administration to head off UNESCO’s admission of the Palestinians, American moves in the run up to the Oct. 31 vote included topping up UNESCO’s coffers. On Oct. 18, with the vote already looming, and the Palestinians fielding a clear majority at the impending assembly, the U.S. tipped $1.77 million in voluntary, extra-budgetary funding into UNESCO’s till. The U.S. Mission to UNESCO is now advertising on its web site that $250,000 of that sum was for Holocaust Education; but the additional $1.52 million went for other UNESCO programs, accompanied by a statement that the U.S. is committed to “combating racism and racial discrimination” — codewords at the U.N. for a host of anti-Semitic initiatives spearheaded by the Israel-trashing “Durban Process.”

And, as UNESCO’s delegates prepared on Monday to cast their votes, U.S. Under Secretary of Education Martha Kanter addressed the assembly. She did not bother to mention that Palestinian TV, schools and summer camps still indoctrinate Palestinian children in hatred of Israel, nor did she note that the Palestinian Authority’s logo shows a map on which Israel has been obliterated. She was there to tell the delegates that over the past year, “great things have happened at UNESCO,” and remind them, after more fulsome praise of the organization, that the U.S., with its “deep and abiding commitment to a stronger UNESCO” is running for reelection to UNESCO’s executive board. Delivering the pro forma warning that UNESCO admission of the Palestinians would be “premature” and “counterproductive,” Kanter went right on to conclude that “This General Conference is an opportunity for us to renew our commitment, because the world needs a strong UNESCO.”

Does it? A truth that seems lost on the current U.S. administration is that UNESCO’s assembly of member states, with its jubilant nose-thumbing vote against American policy and interests, is no anomaly. It is a pretty accurate reflection of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which is substantially mirrored in voting and governing bodies throughout the U.N. system.

At the Security Council, where the Palestinians have also applied for membership, the U.S. wields a veto, and has promised to use it if the Palestinian application comes to a vote. But in the General Assembly, and at the U.N.’s related bodies, such as UNESCO, the U.S. has no veto. And the General Assembly is not, by nature, a freedom-loving body and friend to America. It is a collection of 193 states, currently dominated by such voting blocks as the Non-Aligned Movement (whose New York chapter was chaired in 2009 by Sudan, and whose Vienna chapter will be chaired next year by Iran) and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (headquartered in Saudi Arabia).

The routine at the U.N. is that the U.S., with one vote, pours almost $8 billion a year into this system, and the bulk of the other 192 member states, many of them contributing next to nothing, and some of them extremely hostile to U.S. interests, decide how it will be spent. Right now the U.S. is also shelling out more than $400 million for a $1.9 billion renovation of the U.N.’s headquarters in Manhattan, kitting out U.N. delegates and staff with state of the art equipment and comforts. All this translates into a lavish entitlement system, in which U.N. member states, and the U.N. organizations they largely control, are accustomed to using one hand to poke America in the eye, while holding out the other hand for more U.S. tax dollars.

With UNESCO membership a done deal, the Palestinians are shopping for other U.N. organizations to join. A UNESCO seat confers automatic access to a number of other U.N.-affiliated organizations, including the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva and the U.N. Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Vienna. Palestinian officials have also been floating mentions of applying to the World Health Oragnization (WHO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Bank and beyond.

If U.S. funding cut-offs are seen as credible threats by all these U.N.-affiliated bodies, the Palestinians might quickly run into serious resistance. Instead, what U.N. delegates are witnessing is a U.S. administration praising UNESCO, regretting the funding cut-off, and implying that U.S. officials are toiling behind the scenes to find workarounds to continue supporting UNESCO. That’s not a way to produce better behavior at the U.N., or create a better world. It’s a wide open invitation to a lot more trouble.

Issues:

International Organizations Palestinian Politics