Reader Mail
UNESCO: Love It and Don’t Leave It
In defense of the UN’s “rogue agency” — letters from the U.S. ambassador, and others, with a reply by Joseph A. Harriss.
(Page 2 of 4)
But back to the headline, adorning the cover story of February’s Spectator: “The United Nations’ Rogue Agency.” This is a seriously cheap headline, not least in light of the fact that no attempt is made in the body of the article to assess UNESCO alongside other agencies in the UN system. “Rogue” means the others are going one way, this one is going another. In fact, it is supremely inappropriate to single out UNESCO in this way in light of the Palestine question, as if UNESCO’s leadership had courted Palestine or — unlike other UN agencies — were specially disposed to be sympathetic to the cause of Palestinian membership in the UN system. Whatever the merits of the legislation passed by Congress in 1990 and after that required defunding of UN agencies that accepted Palestine into membership, in the case of most UN agencies membership is by direct election of all member states. That is, it is the same member states who vote in each of the agencies. In effect, the voting group is the UN General Assembly, who as we know have passed many resolutions sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. So whichever agency Palestine decided to join, it was likely to get the same response. The response is from the member states of the international community. It has nothing specifically to do with UNESCO at all. UNESCO was the chosen venue for the first attempt. It is open to Palestine to approach more than a dozen other agencies, where the same states will be voting and likely cast exactly the same vote. To single out UNESCO as “rogue” on the basis of Palestinian membership is in fact, in the absence of evidence that UNESCO’s DG and her team actively sought a Palestinian membership request, either a category mistake or simply an exercise in mendacity.
There is a great deal more to be said. The two Permanent Representatives who have served as our ambassadors to UNESCO since we rejoined — Louise Oliver under the Bush administration, and now David Killion — are amongst the most excellent of our public servants, and have pursued essentially nonpartisan foreign policy in Paris with acknowledged éclat. That was no better demonstrated than when immediately after we defunded, the United States was re-elected to the Executive Board with an increased majority. The many programs that very specifically advance our interests, such as teaching literacy to police in Afghanistan — which Harriss is forced to acknowledge — simply illustrate the immeasurable value of our engaging in this multilateral institution.
So far from presaging a pull-out, the defunding forced
upon the United States and UNESCO by what now appears to have been
naïve politics back in 1990 and a smart asymmetric move by
Palestine needs to be reversed. If with that reversal and the
discussion it has engendered comes a better grasp of the value of
multilateral engagement and the special value of this institution,
so much the better. Perhaps to that end Joseph Harriss’ rogue
article may have served a purpose.
— Nigel M. de S. Cameron
Chair, Social
and Human Sciences Committee
U.S. National Commission for UNESCO
If only UNESCO could embalm the brain of Joseph A. Harriss. It contains a perfect example of cold war mentality from around the time of the Cuban missile crisis — definitely a cultural artifact worth preserving. Harriss is so busy looking for communists and defending U.S. global hegemony that he can’t see the modern UNESCO. We are the UN agency that:
• Teaches police in Afghanistan how to read and write;
• Leads global research in Tsunami warning systems;
• Ensures that the Holocaust is never forgotten; and
• Spearheads Education for All, the movement for universal schooling.
And yes, we’re the first UN agency to admit Palestine. What Harriss misses is that — put to the vote — every UN agency would make the same decision, except for the General Assembly in New York where the U.S. has a veto through the Security Council. At UNESCO, he blames this new global reality on the “aggressive Arab-African regional bloc” and comes dangerously close to racism when he talks of “grinning, gibbering, gesticulating inmates” “taking over the asylum.” Does he always have such an extreme reaction when a vote goes against him? I’m surprised The American Spectator agreed to print such bigoted, undemocratic cant.
But never mind. No one’s perfect, certainly not UNESCO. We’re in the middle of reforming our business processes and management systems so that the excesses Harriss so exhaustively describes can never happen again.
Actually, there’s a lot that someone with his perspective should be cheerful about. The old UNESCO tried to stifle media through the New World Information and Communication Order. The new UNESCO defends media freedom by protesting every time a journalist is killed in the line of duty. Isn’t that what was supposed to happen when America won the cold war?
Sincerely,
— Neil Ford
Director, Division of Public Information
UNESCO
Joseph A. Harriss
replies:
I was delighted when the
editors told me they had received letters reacting to my article on
UNESCO. I expected that they would be the sort of serious,
constructive discussion of the organization’s problems and what to
do about them that the article was intended to stimulate. They did,
after all, come from Mr. Neil Ford, UNESCO’s director of public
information, and Mr. Nigel Cameron, a member of the U.S. National
Commission for UNESCO, and Ambassador David Killion of the U.S.
Mission to UNESCO. Imagine then my disappointment on discovering
that their letters, except for Ambassador Killion’s, contained only
spiteful vociferation and personal attacks.
First, to answer Mr. Ford: After a brief flash of wit concerning the desirability of embalming my brain, he launches into a snide tirade, beginning with preposterously trying to paint me as a commie hunter of the old Cold War school. He also says I cannot see the modern UNESCO. On the contrary, his reaction indicates that I have seen today’s UNESCO only too well. More to the point, a close reading of the article will show that there is no “looking for communists” or “defending U.S. global hegemony,” though clearly Mr. Ford, in keeping with the prevailing UNESCO attitude toward America, certainly does not favor the latter. It is distressing that the UNESCO director of public information, surely an intelligent, articulate gentleman as one would expect, resorts to a cheap ad hominem attack. Indeed, his whole missive is devoted to assailing the author, rather than responding concretely to the facts and issues mentioned in the article. He might usefully even have pointed out errors, if any.
His statement that every UN agency would also have admitted Palestine is a spectacularly unsupported allegation. If he has any, Mr. Ford would do better to give us his empirical evidence for that assertion. That would have gone far to refute, if possible, the point that Palestine chose UNESCO, not some other agency, because they knew it was the weak link in the UN system.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (15) | Leave a comment
More Articles From Reader Mail
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/10/unesco-love-it-and-dont-leave
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi.| 2.10.12 @ 8:12AM
Post American: Amen.
Whitey O'Carr| 2.10.12 @ 9:08AM
What we have here, other than an example of that famous line from "Cool Hand Luke" ("What we have here, is a failure to communicate"), is all the evidence to convict UNESCO of RICO violations. They operate just like the General Court and Democrat party of Massachusetts. Get us out of this organization now!
John786| 2.10.12 @ 9:32AM
The UN is clearly acting to curtail US freedom to act. The honest and correct policy is to defund the whole organisation and leave. Let them get on with their own affairs without the US. A lot of precious money will be saved.
Occam's Tool| 2.10.12 @ 10:56AM
The UN are a group of terrorist supporting, pro-jihad states who seek to abuse children wherever possible. Screw them. Defund, and place the UN in Mecca, where it belongs.
Timothy L. Pennell| 2.10.12 @ 10:59AM
Pop Quiz: Name the last time the Oil For Food Guys at the UN, did ANYTHING that was worth a Shit, and didn't involve Rape, Murder, Standing around while people were being Massacred, or making Under the Table Deals with Dictators that reap Million$ for Their Pockets, while enabling their Benefactors to circumvent any kind of Punitive Sanctions?
Take as long as you need.
Occam's Tool| 2.11.12 @ 7:02PM
1950s--Korean war, TLP. So, the answer is: not in my lifetime or yours. Defund it, and use the money to refurbish NFL stadiums.
Ron| 2.10.12 @ 12:28PM
Across the board there is nothing "good" about the UN period. Just ask anyone who was in The Mog back in the 1990s, or Serbia/Croatia during the same period.
Food riots and seizures of medical supplies were not even protested by the vaunted UN...Warlords just got away with confiscating whatever they pleased.
UNESCO by jumping on board with the "Palestinian Homeland" BS just serves as a puppet for the Jihadist nutjobs...Put them right in Israel even more...Uh, I should be quiet now, because here comes Jack in Wi. with his anti-Jew slurs, and clint will not be far behind with some crap about "chicken hawk, war hawk, whatever hawk" comments about us veterans, and how great Ron Paul will be in pulling everyone out from everywhere...Ron Paul would leave it up to the UN, and we would be royal screwed!
J.C.Eaton| 2.10.12 @ 3:36PM
Mr. Cameron, et al.: Mr. Harriss OWNS you!
david singer| 2.11.12 @ 3:36AM
Mr Neil Ford misleads your readers when he states:
"The old UNESCO tried to stifle media through the New World Information and Communication Order. The new UNESCO defends media freedom by protesting every time a journalist is killed in the line of duty."
Rot - the new UNESCO has not changed at all.
Mr Ford has personally refused to comment on a detailed submission by me to UNESCO claiming the vote to admit Palestine was unlawful.
I had been asked (by another UNESCO information officer) to detail for whom I wrote - which I duly complied with.
Apparently the journals that publish my articles were not thought sufficiently important enough for UNSECO to give a comment.
Would Mr Ford comment on my submission if I was published in The American Spectator? Can I be dismissed without an answer by an all powerful UNESCO because I apparently don't have any clout?
Mr Ford is spruiking spin.
UNESCO has put up a wall of silence on the legality of the Palestine vote - and I can only conclude that they refuse to comment because they agree with my submission - and I have told them so..
That decision has deprived UNESCO of 22% of its budget and is going to affect the lives of scores of millions globally as UNESCO programs are closed down or curtailed.
What press releases will Mr Ford put out when these poor people pay the price for UNESCO not wanting to even discuss a possible way out of the hole UNESCO has dug for itself because of its unlawful admission of Palestine as UNESCO's 195th member state?
Occam's Tool| 2.11.12 @ 7:08PM
The UN is a worthless organization, in general. I am not really interested in knowing the Ivory Coast or New Zealand's response to American action through it. If there is any freedom in the world today, it is due to America, and America alone.
POST American| 2.11.12 @ 10:29PM
"The UN was established by EUGENISTS
-----------------for EUGENICS-----------------.
Every world leader who signed that charter
in 1945 signed on for world government.
Every single one committed TREASON
against their people."
----------WHY DO WE STAND FOR THIS?----------
Tired Taxpayer PRM| 2.11.12 @ 11:01PM
I see no positive good and much evil that comes out of our "investment" in the UN. As a tired taxpayer I demand that we stop funding them, throw them out of New York and sell the building. I am sure Donald Trump could figure out something to do with that piece of real estate.
John Kettlewell| 2.12.12 @ 1:54AM
I gave it a chance. Started reading and then it looked like a defense of the UN and UNESCO. If I'm mistaken then so be it; but to suggest we either engage or 'take a seat on the bench' is a misnomer. It's either engage and pay the UN's bills to subvert sovereignty or be on the bench and no longer foot the bills. To suggest UNESCO is promoting or defending American values is laughable. That was my finishing point.
There is enough history on the UN, the 'masterminds', and the individual agencies to cause a global riot...this of course would require people to be informed. They are fairytale utopians with characteristics of narcissists, psycopathy, arrogance. Any UN article that does not deal directly with their attempt at tyrrany thru psuedo-democracy (or plainly stated, control) isn't worth the time to read. Global governance is the ends, agitprop and propaganda are the means.
If you wish to defend the United Nations, Inc., then you must speak of the control it seeks to impose, as well as the "redistribution" of assets. It's all very whimsical.
Pundit| 2.12.12 @ 9:15AM
I was a big enthusiast for the UN in its first decade. Then I reached puberty. Beside it being a center of bordom,I noticed that if any good came it was as a cover for the US. The idea that Mali or Chad should have a position on Iceland's fisheries is ludicrous. Over the years it has become malignant.
Sebrenica Massacre.Ruanda genocide. the skandels over food and fuel.Self serving beaureaucrats. North South dialogue (developed countries owe the kleptocrats), UN soldiers and officials smuggeling and procuring. UNESCO schools teach anti-semitism (Jews are apes and pigs). New Information order UN should censor inside and outside countries.
It's a farce whose expenses are mostly paid for by us. Ship it to Anwar Alaska.
POST American| 2.12.12 @ 9:48PM
Viz a viz the unelected, PRIVATE,
elite, corporate EUGENICS 'U.N':
"You KNOW this organization is
a PRIVATE, criminal, world plundering,
EUGENICS abomination. YOU KNOW
the elites it represents are psychopaths and creepy capstone EUGENISTS.
You KNOW its age-enda has destroyed
your nation's sovereignty, your culture
---and very soon, you yourself.
----WHY this continuing love affair
with FEAR of standing up to it. ----WHY?
---------------------WHY?----------------------
--Rockefellers --Huxleys ---ROT-childs and
ALLLL of them, even in their best days,
were nothing more than frauds --CON-men
--USURERS and PSYCHOPATHS.
----WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID OF THEM?
WHO are these characters? -----WHY is
NO ONE calling them out? ---WHAT is
this LOVE AFFAIR with FEAR?!"
Really kiddies ---time to CALL the Bluff
--and CALL for JUSTICE.
"--Let us ALL die --or let's DO it!"
-Thomas Carlysle
----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
LET's DO IT