null
Lucia A Keegan  07/21/2006 03:16:29 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  Lucia A Keegan

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS        PARIS 04963

SIPDIS
cxparis:
    ACTION: UNESCO
    INFO:   AMB AMBO AMBU DCM SCI POL ECON

DISSEMINATION: UNESCOX
CHARGE: PROG

APPROVED: AMB:LVOLIVER
DRAFTED: LA:TMPEAY
CLEARED: DCM:AKOSS

VZCZCFRI228
RR RUEHC
DE RUEHFR #4963 2020937
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 210937Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 9707

UNCLAS PARIS 004963 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SCUL UNESCO
SUBJECT:  UNESCO:  FIRST INTANGIBLE HERITAGE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 
PRODUCES INTERNAL EU FRICTIONS AND ELECTS FIRST MEMBERS TO 
INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE 
 
 
¶1.  Summary. The United States participated as an Observer State at 
the first General Assembly (GA) of States Parties to the Intangible 
Cultural Heritage (ICH) Convention from June 27-29.   The GA's most 
important accomplishment was the election, on the final day, of the 
meeting of 18 Convention States Parties to the Inter-Governmental 
Committee (IGC) (see list of States elected at paragraph 4 below). 
The actual voting process, however, was preceded by a protracted, 
highly contentious debate over geographic representation on the 
Committee.  States Parties were divided over two irreconcilable 
principles for determining Committee membership: proportionate 
regional representation (i.e., regions with the largest number of 
States Parties to the Convention would hold the most Committee 
seats) versus equal regional representation on the Committee.  Final 
resolution of this issue has been put off until the next GA meeting, 
set for late October in Algiers, when six additional committee 
members will be elected, raising the Committee's size from 18 to a 
maximum of 24. 
 
¶2.  Summary continued. The alignment of regional groups within that 
debate pitted Western and Eastern European States sharply and openly 
against each other.  No substantive matters were discussed, and none 
will be taken up until the Committee's full complement has been 
reached. The ICH Committee began on a highly politicized note that 
is likely to continue shaping its outlook and work for the 
foreseeable future.  On balance, the U.S. gained useful, firsthand 
insights by participating as an observer at this meeting and, for a 
variety of reasons, should continue to track this process.  End 
Summary. 
 
¶3.  Fierce competition between regional groups for elected positions 
on the Committee provoked deep divisions that infected the meeting's 
atmospherics right up to adjournment.  Representatives of EU States 
-- both States Parties and non-States Parties (such as France and 
Italy) -- worked in unusually close collaboration with the U.S. 
throughout the meeting.  This contrasted sharply with the United 
States' experience at UNESCO last fall during the cultural diversity 
convention negotiations.  Eastern Europe States Parties, which 
outnumber those from Western Europe, found common cause with 
Asia-Pacific States Parties (led by India and China) seeking to 
impose a system of "proportional representation" on the Committee. 
The Latin American States aligned themselves with Western European 
States to advocate a system of "equal regional representation" on 
the Committee.  The Africa Group and Middle Eastern States, though 
less strident than Eastern Europe, nonetheless sided with 
Asia-Pacific States. 
 
¶4.  The centerpiece of this meeting was the final day's critical 
election of 18 States Parties to the Convention to fill seats on the 
IGC.  The breakdown of States elected by Regional Groupings was as 
follows: Group I (Belgium and Turkey); Group II (Bulgaria, Estonia, 
Hungary, Romania); Group III (Brazil, Mexico, Peru); Group IV 
(China, India, Japan, Vietnam); Group V(a)(Gabon, Nigeria, Senegal); 
Group V(b) (Algeria, UAE).  Interestingly, Iran had put forward its 
candidacy within Group IV, but did not get elected. 
 
¶5.  There were a few other noteworthy developments that occurred 
during the three-day meeting.  By design or chance, during the 
morning of the first day of meeting, the French Senate approved both 
the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention and the Diversity of 
Cultural Expressions Convention, moving both instruments one step 
closer to formal ratification.  This development was dramatically 
announced to those assembled.  Japan, China, and Algeria, in that 
order, offered to host the next GA of States Parties, but Algeria 
was ultimately selected because the chair of the meeting was 
Algerian former Foreign Minister Mohammed Benjauoui. 
 
¶6.  The Inter-Governmental Committee once it begins to function 
will, among other things, be responsible for drawing up criteria 
(subject to the approval of the GA of States Parties) for 
determining which "intangible cultural heritages," (as defined by 
the Convention) will be included on two lists to be established and 
maintained.  One list will comprise a "Representative List of 
Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity."  The other will comprise 
a "List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent 
Safeguarding." 
 
¶7.  Begin Comment.  In practice, the Committee's implementation of 
this Convention is likely to encounter many of the substantive 
challenges that have been faced by the World Heritage Committee 
under the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural 
and Natural Heritage.  For this reason, it is possible the two 
processes could begin to feed off of one another for better or 
worse.  The upcoming meeting in Algiers will likely be an important 
barometer for the Committee.  For a variety of reasons, the 
Intangible Heritage Committee's evolution merits continued close 
monitoring by the U.S. for the foreseeable future.  End Comment. 
Oliver