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 3 of 4)
He refers to the Arab-African bloc being a “new global reality.” This does indeed reflect the official UNESCO line and its day-to-day reality on the ground. But what concerns me is that he comes dangerously close to calling me a racist, the lowest of low blows, to which I do not take kindly. But in all due Christian charity, I forgive him. I understand that, in the absence of seriously contesting points I raise, and being unable to express himself with the sort of verbal elegance one might expect of a high UNESCO official representing what claims to be the world’s premier cultural organization, he has no choice but to fall back on rhetoric worthy of a guttersnipe.
He asks, oddly, whether I always have such an extreme reaction when a vote goes against me. While I am flattered that UNESCO might have been voting for or against me personally, the vote actually had nothing to do with me. It was against the member states that considered UNESCO was not the proper forum for deciding the question of Palestinian statehood. Besides the United States, these included such considerable nations as Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Sweden, among others. Your argument about the vote is with them, Mr. Ford, not with me. I am only the messenger of the bad news.
When he refers to an ongoing reform of the “excesses” I describe, I can only accept and applaud Mr. Ford’s candid admission that 1) my article was indeed exhaustively researched, and 2) that these “excesses” need to be corrected. QED.
As to America’s winning the Cold War, I fail to see the connection between that and the fact that UNESCO has again become dysfunctional due to the political and, occasionally, economic corruption made clear in my article. More likely, such incoherence is simply another example of Mr. Ford’s regrettably angry reaction due, no doubt to a sensitive nerve having been touched. Perhaps he would like to cool down and make a positive contribution to a discussion about what can be done to reform that organization? Just a thought. But the present reality is that such reform, as in the 1980s and '90s, will probably be possible only as a result of the salutary shock of America’s complete withdrawal.
Now to British-born Mr. Cameron, a self-described inter-disciplinary scholar, facilitator and communicator who has worked both sides of the Atlantic to considerable advantage. Why he sticks his oar into this debate can only be surmised, since it is not the official reaction of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO. However that may be, he too starts with bilious insults rather than rational discussion, casting aspersions on my intentions as an investigative journalist and unwittingly raising interesting questions about how much he really supports freedom of the press.
He finds fault with my characterization of the director general, Mrs. Irina Bokova, trying to score points by mentioning that the Bush administration supported her during the election. Well, of course. As my article points out, the U.S. and other Western member states certainly were not going to vote for the other candidate, the thuggish Farouk Hosny. No one doubts that Mrs. Bokova is shrewd — most survivors of Eastern European communist regimes are — or intelligent, etc. But the point is that she is unable to control that organization. Unable both because she lacks the forceful personality that requires, and also because UNESCO’s structure makes it virtually impossible for any DG to keep it on track. Its problems are systemic, not the result of any one personality.
He questions the relevance of my mentioning that one ambassador voting for Palestine entry was the daughter of a dictator condemned by the UN itself. Actually, it is entirely relevant to demonstrating 1) the unworthy atmosphere in the conference hall during what was supposed to be a vote with weighty consequences, and 2) that this is the sort of national delegate UNESCO attracts, a frivolous socialite who makes the Paris gossip papers photographed cavorting in night clubs in filmy dresses with plunging necklines. Is this the case with any other UN agency Mr. Cameron can cite?
He questions whether UNESCO’s past is relevant to its present condition. This section of the article puts UNESCO into the shameful context of its past. The point being, if it is necessary to spell this out for some, that there has long been a pattern of unacceptable behavior by this organization. Today’s situation is nothing new.
Mr. Cameron, oddly, states that indeed, UNESCO is badly managed and that this does not particularly shock him. The fact is that “recent controversies” are outrageous, unacceptable, and have stirred significant indignation among the national delegations to UNESCO. That Mr. Cameron is not shocked says more about him and his conception of what constitutes appropriate conduct by a UN agency.
As part of his vituperation, he accuses me of “tabloid journalism.” In response, I submit that we should distinguish between “tabloid” and investigative journalism that intends to make a useful contribution to the public discourse. My article is the latter. I am gratified to see that Mr. Cameron agrees with me that UNESCO is badly managed, and that this inevitably produces unacceptable results. But those results are more than merely “embarrassing.” They are wasteful, sometimes dangerous (cf. the outbreak of hostilities on the Thai-Cambodian border) and bring the organization into disrepute.
Mr. Cameron argues in favor of UNESCO’s “soft power,” a frequent European argument to excuse its absence of any other power. I don’t know much about the problematic substrates he refers to, but his argument would be considerably stronger if he could have cited just a few concrete, tangible instances in which America’s 19-year absence from UNESCO actually harmed its interests. Absent that, it is difficult to justify U.S. membership now, except for those whose jobs and income depend on it.
Finally, I can only be pleased that Mr. Cameron does after all understand that the article is intended to provoke discussion of the need for reform of UNESCO. The best way to concentrate minds on that reform is U.S. withdrawal, as was proved by the reforms it undertook following our withdrawal in 1984.
As to Ambassador David Killion’s contribution, I salute his sincere engagement in his task, as do many other ambassadors to UNESCO I interviewed. The problem is that he understandably — and, I am sure, sincerely — wants to portray these setbacks as victories. My research makes it necessary that I disagree, as my article demonstrates.
His contention that the defeat of Farouk Hosny as director general was a triumph is unconvincing. At best, this is barely snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. But, while the U.S. Mission’s role here was indeed exemplary, that is not the point, which is that Hosny’s very candidature and near victory demonstrates the systemic failure of the organization.
Ditto the embarrassing mess over World Philosophy Day in Iran. The question is not whether the U.S. and other member states were at the last moment able to change that incredibly stupid decision, but why on earth UNESCO decided to hold it in Iran in the first place. Systemic, self-perpetuating failure is the answer.
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
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
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