Why the United States is leaving UNESCO

The United States has funded various projects through UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) over the years, supporting initiatives in education, cultural preservation, science, and communication. However, some projects have been controversial or perceived as not aligning with U.S. interests, particularly when they involve geopolitical tensions, ideological differences, or conflicts with U.S. policies. Below are some examples of UNESCO-funded projects that have been criticized as not serving U.S. interests:

1. Palestine-Related Programs

• The U.S. has strongly opposed UNESCO's recognition of Palestine as a member state (2011) and subsequent resolutions seen as critical of Israel.

• Projects like the preservation of heritage sites in Hebron (designated as "Palestinian") and East Jerusalem have been viewed as politically motivated, undermining U.S. and Israeli positions on contested territories.

• The U.S. cut funding to UNESCO in 2011 and withdrew entirely in 2018, citing anti-Israel bias.

2. Historical Narratives Contrary to U.S. Allies’ Positions

• UNESCO's documentation of historical events, such as resolutions describing Jerusalem’s Old City as exclusively Islamic heritage, has been seen as disregarding Jewish and Christian ties, conflicting with U.S. ally Israel’s stance.

• Some memory-of-the-world programs have been accused of favoring narratives aligned with certain political agendas (e.g., documents on the Palestinian Nakba).

• The restoration in Mosul, Iraq of the Al-Nouri Mosque and the Al-Hadba Minaret, destroyed by ISIS.

3. Science & Technology Programs with Geopolitical Rivals

• UNESCO’s support for STEM education in countries under U.S. sanctions (e.g., Iran, Syria) has been seen as indirectly aiding regimes opposed to U.S. interests.

• Collaborative science projects with China under UNESCO’s framework, such as the Man and the Biosphere Program, have raised concerns given U.S.-China tech competition.

4. Media Development in Authoritarian States

• UNESCO’s International Program for the Development of Communication (IPDC) has funded media projects in countries with state-controlled press (e.g., Venezuela, Cuba), which critics argue legitimizes censorship rather than promoting free speech.

5. Cultural Projects Involving Controversial Regimes

• Heritage conservation in countries like North Korea (e.g., the Kaesong monuments) has been criticized as providing prestige to oppressive regimes without demanding human rights improvements.

Why These Are Seen as Against U.S. Interests

• Undermining Key Allies: Projects perceived as anti-Israel or legitimizing adversarial governments (e.g., Palestine, Iran) clash with U.S. diplomatic priorities.

• Ideological Conflicts: UNESCO’s emphasis on "cultural relativism" sometimes conflicts with U.S. values (e.g., press freedom, opposition to authoritarianism).

• Geopolitical Rivalry: Collaboration with China and Russia in UNESCO frameworks contradicts U.S. efforts to counter their influence.

Conclusion

While UNESCO’s mission is apolitical, its projects often intersect with geopolitics. The U.S. has historically opposed initiatives seen as undermining its allies or benefiting rivals, leading to funding cuts and withdrawals. Critics argue that reforms are needed to ensure UNESCO’s work aligns more closely with U.S. strategic interests.