Slashdot Mirror


US Defunds UNESCO After Palestine Vote

gzipped_tar writes "The U.S. withdrew funding after the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's Palestine membership vote yesterday. The decision was triggered by a 1994 US law that requires financial ties to be cut with any UN agency that accords the Palestinians full membership. As Palestine actively pursues entrance to other UN agencies, the defunding list could grow. Interestingly, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) could also be among Palestine's next target, and U.S. is the big supporter of WIPO. A much more disturbing scenario is Palestine joining the International Atomic Energy Agency, cutting American funding to the organization that monitors nuclear proliferation in states like Iran."

19 of 735 comments (clear)

  1. USA against the World? by Calibax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    UNESCO is one of the most highly regarded and wide-spread agencies for cultural preservation in the World. There is a fundamental flaw in a law predicating U.S. contributions to the United Nations and U.N. affiliates on their members voting a certain way. UNESCO does not control its members and how they vote.

    The fact that a majority of UNESCO members want to grant admission to a Palestinian state is no reason for the U.S. to "pick up its marbles and go home." UNESCO would be better with U.S. participation. The U.S. would be better off by participating in UNESCO.

    This law should be repealed before the US has removed itself from every UN organization in the world.

    1. Re:USA against the World? by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Pft.
      The palestians have and regularly trashed historical artifacts belonging to other cultures in the region, they should have never been invited to join it. Canada is looking to defund from it as well, and with good cause.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:USA against the World? by nharmon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't you think this is exactly the purpose they had in mind when they passed this law? To make it as costly as possible to do something the United States does not want them to do?

      And since this is blocking future funding and not current funding, this is less like picking up your marbles and going home and more like simply refusing to come to any more marble games.

    3. Re:USA against the World? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So has Israel, and they were even ejected from UNESCO over it for awhile. Either way, this article isn't about Palestine (or Israel, or anyone else in the middle east) it's about the US having a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons. Regardless of who the parties are, there's no good reason for such inane laws.

    4. Re:USA against the World? by Elbart · · Score: 4, Informative

      The area, on which the UN HQ is located, may be surrounded by NYC, but it is not _IN_ NYC, or the USA for that matter.. The more you know.

    5. Re:USA against the World? by Surt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unless, of course, you are running a democracy, and want your tax money spent in accordance with the people's wishes.
      But you know, ignoring that reason there's no good reason.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    6. Re:USA against the World? by mmcuh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think the current Congress can do anything at all. Certainly not in any issue that has even the slightest chance of being kidnapped by demagogues.

    7. Re:USA against the World? by fredrated · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "tax money spent in accordance with the people's wishes"

      Wow, has that happened anywhere in this country? For example, a large majority of Americans want us out of Afganistan, but don't let that bother you, just keep imagining that in this country we only spend money the people want spent.

    8. Re:USA against the World? by Calibax · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So if certain countries want to have the U.S. removed from certain U.N. affliates, all they have to do is vote the Palestinians as members and the U.S. will defund their contributions. Consequently the U.S will have no vote, and no influence as it's no longer providing any funding.

      Thus the U.S. has given countries who don't like the U.S. some power over the U.S. ability to influence U.N. organizations. The law of unintended consequences.

    9. Re:USA against the World? by Xenkar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is as hilarious as illegal settlements.

      Now for just a moment, imagine this:
      - China has created a settlement near your town/city and has claimed all of the fertile land as its own.
      - In order to provide security for their settlement, they routinely patrol your town in military vehicles and set up checkpoints.
      - They build fences around their settlements and the local water supply. The water pipes that used to go from said water supply to your house have been destroyed.
      - Some gun nut in your region shoots off a mortar at this Chinese settlement.
      - Nothing was damaged but that mortar gave the Chinese quite a fright!
      - The Chinese settlement responds with an invasion of troops and they destroy buildings and vital infrastructure.
      - While you evacuated, they entered your home and decorated the walls with literal bags of human feces even though your toilet works just fine.
      - New settlements are created in order to provide security for the old settlement.
      - Rinse and repeat this same damned pattern over 50 years.

      Now tell me, which do you sympathize with? The Chinese who are protecting their illegal settlements, or your fellow countrymen who have to deal with bullshit?

      Right now we, the citizens of the United States of America, are paying aid to Israel while they continue their occupation of Palestinian lands. The amount varies from year to year but right now it is basically eight defaulted Solyndra loans, four days of our military actions against nations that couldn't even harm us if they wanted to, or 20% of NASA's yearly budget. All so Israeli can use their armored bulldozers to knock down houses of people who couldn't get building permits from the Israeli government.

      In a time where politicians are calling for austerity measures, we should fix the budget with the knowledge that even if the Palestinians will still be screwed over by the Israelis, we won't be going further into debt with China because of it.

    10. Re:USA against the World? by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The United Nations is not an organization that has the best interests of the United States at its core.

      And nor should it be, it should have the best interests of all it's members at it's core, which means that it is inevitable no member will get all their own way all the time, regardless of the size of their dick or their wallet.

      It includes many members would would love to damage the USA in anyway possible.

      It also includes many members that the USA has, or would like to, damage. That's the whole point; "war is the failure of politics", the cold war shows that it is essential to keep talking to your political enemies, even if it is through gritted teeth with nukes pointed at each others heads.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:USA against the World? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except it isn't. Would you like the UN meddling in US internal affairs? What if they 'recognized Puerto Rico as a full member? Not that we wouldn't kick em loose if they ever actually voted for independence but you see the point? The Territories are part of Israel and the UN has been hell bent on this project of erecting a new nation state inside their borders for decades now.

      It's "meddling in internal affairs" if UN issues a demand to US to do something about Puerto Rico; but recognizing it? Besides, UNESCO recognition is not at all the same as UN recognition - in particular, not all UNESCO members are independent states.

      I can understand the opposition to UN membership for Palestine, especially considering the extremist forces currently in power there. At least a vote in UN General Assembly bears some political weight. But UNESCO? It's an organization dedicated to education and culture. If Palestine as a member can do something useful there, why not let them in? It does not give them any real political weight where it matters.

      And yes, they are part of Israel. They were ATTACKED and they won that territory fair and square in war from their enemies who had to accept that in the cease fire agreements they all signed onto and in the cases of Egypt and Jordan they have actually signed full peace treaties and ended the war on those borders. If they eventually get a deal both sides would actually live with they, and they alone, have the power to grant the territories independence. Not anyone else. Of course just today the so called 'moderate' terrorist Abbas redeclared his only acceptable borders to be the entirety of Israel so even he doesn't want to see a new nation state created as anything other than a very temporary political gambit.

      Acquiring territory by conquering it has not been considered legitimate in world politics for a long time. After all, by the same token, you could claim that e.g. France was legitimately won by Nazi Germany, or that Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia was legitimately won by USSR. But U.S. has never recognized either case as legit, and for a good reason. There's this thing called "self-determination", and especially in the case where territory in question was forcibly incorporated into the state it is currently in, it is considered a good enough reason for a nation to seek independent statehood (see also: Kosovo).

      Palestinians for whom the only solution is no Israel are a different story, but that is not the only faction there, and there is a far stretch from recognizing that they deserve a right to their own nation-state on at least some of their historical lands (like those where they are the majority today and have been for the last millenia or so), to "wipe Israel off the map". You - and many other Americans who are similarly radical on this matter - are doing everyone a great disservice by conflating these two points. It only serves to "prove" to less radical Palestinians that there's absolutely no hope for a peaceful resolution that can work for both sides, swinging their votes towards radicals.

  2. Re:We don't support terror organizations by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's because you're using the wrong definition of "terror organizations". You're probably thinking it means "people who target and kill large numbers of civilians, typically in order to push a geopolitical agenda".

    But the definition of "terror organizations" used by major news outlets, including the New York Times, is "People who use violence to oppose the United States and/or Israel". That, by definition, means the US can't support terror organizations. Also, note that the same organization that were "freedom fighters" becomes a "terror organization" as soon as they switch from fighting the USSR to fighting the US.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  3. How about not admitting terrorist groups by CapitalOrange · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its funny how there is so much concern for the lack of funding that may result from this. But there is 0 concern that the Palestinian organization/ terrorist groups (aka Hamas) that make up their government are not forced to comply with the standards established by the organization. It supposed to support peace, freedom right and understanding. I didn't know supporting suicide bombings was a plus on the application. The bottom line is just a couple of weeks ago the Palestinians cheered many returned from jail for committing unspeakable acts of murder on civilians and the UN member countries (most of which are run by thuggish dictators) looked the other way. The UN has a long history of antisemitism, from the Durban conference to multiple other examples. The US foots far too much of the bill for these organizations as it is. If they want to continue in their racist ways, it shouldn't be on our dime. PS this isn't just for new projects, UNSECO won't get another dime going forward. Other agencies should keep this in mind before supporting a group on multiple terrorist list (Hamas) with a full membership in a international body.

  4. Please by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please grant Palestine full membership in WIPO, preferably yesterday.

  5. Re:Discrimination is good for the peace process by jd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AFAICT, the peace process is the least of the issues involved here. UNESCO handles world heritage sites - y'know, like Pompeii which suffered two major collapses in the last week or so due to incompetent maintenance and a lack of funds. The money the Palestinians want is, according to them, going to go to a 5th century church (which is properly World Heritage) that is suffering from horrific maintenance issues and may well collapse without proper backing.

    From the NERD perspective, 30% loss of money = 30% loss of World Heritage. That's a damn lot of history that had been, well, damned.

    What happens between Israel and the Palestinians is, in historical terms and geographical terms, insignificant. Even if you consider the entire history of the entire region plus the rest of the Fertile Crescent, it is a pathetic 3,500 years and a trivial geographical space. It's NOTHING. The US' action has put into danger historical sites that are 70,000 years old - 20 TIMES as old as the entire recorded history for the Middle East - across an entire planet!

    If you want to talk peace processes, then the Irish "Troubles" are recorded as having spanned 5,000 years and involved much of Europe and the US - twice the time the Middle East has even had issues and again many times the area. That was NOT solved by defunding the UN but WAS solved by all parties accepting that peaceful settlements were the way to go. The Basque issue, a mere 30 times older than modern Israel though younger than there have been conflicts in the region, was ALSO recently solved by an increase in mutual understanding and mutual efforts to end the futility cycle. Do you seriously think that either would have be settled today if there had been a blockade on assistance or tolerance of any kind? ESPECIALLY if that blockade had been on people completely unrelated to the parties involved?

    (Would the IRA really have stopped shooting if Britain had decided to bomb the Colosseum in Rome in retaliation for the US sending a senator to Ireland? No? That's the practical upshot of what is taking place, so if the logic of such a move is inherently flawed then substituting in the current participants won't make the logic any better.)

    Look, I fully understand Israel's insecurity and fears, and I respect that it has those for good reason, but nowhere in the history of humanity has anyone solved such issues by taking revenge on innocent third parties. I can't even recall any time in the history of humanity where anyone has solved such issued by taking revenge on those actually involved. If you want peace, you are going to have to do something that works. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing, expecting different results. Insanity won't help Israel be safer.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  6. Re:Why are the Palenstines bad again? by jfengel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about 8,000 rockets launched into Israel in the last 10 years?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel

    Or blowing up a school bus full of kids:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avivim_school_bus_massacre

    Or hundreds of other attacks on unarmed civilians.

    I'm not trying to establish moral equivalence or paint them as the sole bad guys or any other kind of oversimplification. I'm just trying to point out that if you're not aware of why the Palestinians are regarded with deep suspicion, then you really don't know anything at all about the nature of the conflict.

  7. Sound strategy by ChaoticCoyote · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Palestinians are hoisting the U.S by it's own petard. The U.S. government passed the 1994 law as a "do what we say or else" measure, under the false belief that this would force the UN to follow U.S. policy. Instead, the Palestinians are being admitted to UN agencies anway, and we're cutting our own throat automatically.

    It's not the Palestinians who should be worried.

  8. Re:It's the Palestinians who have the Nazi connect by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I actually spent several summers working in Israel, and regularly visited the West Bank. Couldn't get access to Gaza though.

    As for your questions: The West Bank and (especially) Gaza are effectively light-duty concentration camps. (Not dedicated, but high-density with low access to food, water, sanitation, or jobs.) Mass graves tend to draw attention. (And direct killing isn't the system being used here.) The ~10% of the Knesset (none of whom are Palestinian: they have to be Israeli) aren't a major political force of their own. And the random police checks, and the requirement that every Palestinian who wants to enter Israel (which means any of them who want to leave their home town for any reason...) register for travel papers, in person, every year, would be similar in effect.

    Of course, a closer parallel would be with aparthied-era South Africa.

    --
    'Sensible' is a curse word.