UNESCO Commissioner spells out global fallout from Palestine decision

Certainly the 87 member states that did not vote for Palestine's admission, or abstained from voting or simply did not turn up for the vote would not be very sympathetic to such a plea stemming from a decision they did not support.

UNESCO is clearly in a bind.

If the ICJ found UNESCO acted unlawfully, then Palestine's admission would be declared null and void but American funding would be restored. If the ICJ found UNESCO had acted legally, then the loss of American funding would be continued but Palestine's admission to UNESCO would be confirmed.

Given the "out" an ICJ opinion could possibly give UNESCO - it would be acting irresponsibly if it did not approach the ICJ.

I believe that UNESCO could have avoided the dilemma in which it now finds itself - had the Executive Board properly dealt with Palestine's application when it was first presented to the Executive Board.

The action of the Executive Board is to be contrasted with the Committee that dealt with Palestine's application to become a member of the United Nations - where that application failed to convince such Committee to forward it to the Security Council for a vote.

It would be very interesting to learn how Palestine's application could have been recommended by UNESCO'S Executive Board but rejected by the UN vetting Committee - since only States can be recommended for membership to both organizations.

Palestine does not satisfy the criteria for statehood under customary international law as recognized in the Montevideo Convention.

Was this a fatal impediment to Palestine's application to join the UN - but thought to be of no consequence in regard to its application to join UNESCO?

The ICJ might well have something to say on this issue.

Irrespective of what occured at the Executive Board - the vote taken at the UNESCO General Conference has the smell of illegality about it - reinforced by UNESCO refusing to justify the constitutional provision which enabled Palestine to be admitted to membership on the affirmative vote of only 107 member states - rather than the 129 I maintain are required by the Constitution.

In the end some declaratory ruling by the ICJ is necessary to possibly rescue UNESCO from the hole into which it is sinking further every day as its programs are impacted by the sudden withdrawal of American funding.

Ms Cachapero's description of the problems as "ripples" seems set to turn into " whirlpools" - unless UNESCO seeks advice from the ICJ instead of hoping the problem will simply disappear if it maintains its present course of inaction and continuing silence.

Should politics take precedence over the law? That is the question UNESCO needs to face - and answer - without delay.

Hundreds of millions of people losing out on the abandonment or curtailment of projects designed to improve their daily lives seem to make the choice a very easy one.