UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has approved through a secret ballot a new resolution on the status of conservation of the Old City of Jerusalem. Such resolution retains as an endangered world heritage the walled area, home to key Muslim, Christian and Jewish holy sites. Such resolution criticizes Israel for its continuous refusal to let the body’s experts access Jerusalem’s holy sites to determine their conservation status, and only refers to the Jerusalem site by its Arab name.
If Israel had asked for a consensus to be found, thus for publicity to be given to the decisions, Tanzania and Croatia asked for a secret ballot. 10 would vote for the motion, two opposed it, eight abstained and one nation, Jamaica, wouldn’t take part in the vote.
Reactions were to be hostile from what was seen by many as the losing side. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticized the “absurdity” of Wednesday’s decision. The U.S. Ambassador Crystal Nix Hines said the UNESCO resolutions on Jerusalem were “continuously one-sided and inflammatory.” Such decision is all so problematic that the annexation of the area is not internationally recognized. Such resolution comes in opposition to what is denounced by Palestinians as “Judaization” of the Old City through archaeological digs and tourism projects.
International bodies have been for years, against the will of dominant states like the USA or Israel, pushing in the interest, or defense, depending on the point of view, of Palestinians. Grating them through the rule of majority secret ballots and generally through the general assembly of the Institution in question bits and pieces. We could keep in mind resolution 67/19 that recognized Palestine as a non-member observer state, as a good example. Here in line with its previous actions, the UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has advanced, yet another symbolic pawn.
So in spite of the will of the dominant powers in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the interest of the strong doesn’t automatically prevail. And even facing the highly symbolical aspect of such resolution, such comes in addition to many others and may form a movement. A non-Russian actor seems to oppose the USA and Israel. Are International institutions slowly abandoning their post-war legacy to move towards a better representation of all states?
A cura di Ghislain d’Andlau.
