The UNESCO Decision calls for a further report on this at
UNESCO’s Executive Board meeting in Paris 17 April to 5 May. It is marked as
agenda item 30 on “Occupied Palestine”.
Both Europeans and Israelis should be made well aware at
this affront to their history and culture. Especially omitted from last year’s
resolution were any names evoking the ancient Israelite and continuous Jewish
heritage of the City. These should be well-known to all educators, scientists
and all cultures familiar with the People of the Book.
The resolution at the World Heritage Committee and UNESCO
blamed “Israel, the Occupying Power” and its “so-called Antiquities Department”,
while making no mention of more than forty truck loads of artifact-laden earth
the Muslim Waqf has removed and disposed of without archaeological permission,
examination or concern.
It prefers to mention fabulous Muslim events that have no
factual basis. It omits all mention of Hebrew artifacts containing names of
kings and their ministers showing continuous cultural achievements over three
thousand years.
Gold bell of the High Priest's robe
Who came up with all this? The draft was submitted by
Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, and Sudan, at the behest of the
PA’s policy of cultural nihilism. This turns UNESCO’s role on its head. Such obscurantism
is just what UNESCO was set up to oppose.
Irina Bokova, the Director General of UNESCO in a speech
transmitted to the European Parliament on 30 March said:
“Jerusalem puts us in front of a radical choice. … To deny,
conceal or erase any of the Jewish, Christian or Muslim traditions undermines
the integrity of the site, and runs counter to the reasons that justified its
inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage list.”
She added: “The protection and better understanding of the
Heritage of Jerusalem is part of a broader vision for peace. It is part of a
wider vision to fight against all forms of denial of Jewish history,
de-legitimization of Israel, and anti-Semitism. This work is essential, as European know too
well the ravages of war and anti-Semitism.”
Seal Bulla of King Hezekiah
So why did so few European States, who owe their very civilization
to the Book, vote against the Resolution? Why did so many simply abstain? That
gave tacit support for undermining the foundations of Western civilization.
Only five States voted against the Resolution. How could eight States including
France, Italy and Spain just abstain on such a serious matter?
European foreign policy on UNESCO is coordinated by the EU’s
European External Action Service, EEAS. What do they have to say? A group of
concerned citizens requested all the working documents of EEAS leading up to
this cultural catastrophe. They took the name Jerusalem Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Office, JESCO.
The JESCO Freedom of Information request pointed out that
Israel is the legitimate occupying power by law and history. (The attempt to
use the term “Occupying Power” derogatorily is as invalid as saying that a
person who legal bought a house is an occupier.)
“The site was
temporarily conquered by Arab, then Turkish and the British in WW1, but this
does not give these groups present-day legality to property or other rights,” the
request said. “The League of Nations and
the UN recognized this area as Jewish Homeland.” Under international law
military conquest does not alter property rights.
What was the response of EEAS? All documents were refused. The Memorandum of Understanding between the
European Union and UNESCO is however a public document. As might be
expected many of the 27 articles in the three-page
Memorandum stress the importance of respect for openness, human dignity,
freedom, democracy, the rule of law and in particular freedom of expression and
the media. It also mentions intercultural dialogue, raising awareness about the
importance of education. How is it that not only UNESCO but European Union Member
States have failed so miserably in their duties?
When formulating public policy, European States as
democracies, should have open documents arrived at publicly. There is no excuse
for secrecy that ends up in anti-Semitism and undermining Fundamental Rights
and Freedoms.
The JESCO appeal against this refusal to supply basic information
is still awaiting a reply from EEAS. In the meantime, Europeans and Israelis
should be aware of the forthcoming meeting of the UNESCO Executive Board and contact
their UNESCO representatives. They should make sure the appalling lapses at
UNESCO are reversed. Expunging factual history
and replacing facts with fables is not UNESCO’s mission. Nor is turning UNESCO
into an instrument of cultural jihadism.
