null
Lucia A Keegan  11/07/2006 02:58:46 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  Lucia A Keegan

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS        PARIS 07206

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

DISSEMINATION: UNESCOX
CHARGE: PROG

APPROVED: AMB:LVOLIVER
DRAFTED: POL:DROSTROFF
CLEARED: DCM:AKOSS

VZCZCFRI517
RR RUEHC
DE RUEHFR #7206 3071501
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031501Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 2832

UNCLAS PARIS 007206 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: UNESCO SCUL
SUBJECT:  UNESCO - MUSEUM PROGRAMS UPDATE 
 
 
¶1. The Ambassador met on 3 November with Laurent Levi-Strauss, 
Director of UNESCO's Museums Section.  Levi-Strauss also provided us 
with a memo (which will be forwarded separately by e-mail) detailing 
the current status of UNESCO's museum pilot program. 
 
¶2. Levi-Strauss described the 11 pilot projects and museum 
partnership programs, which are part of UNESCO's program for the 
Preservation of Endangered Moveable Cultural Properties, funded 
principally by the US (US dollars 3.5 million from fourth quarter 
2003 monies). 
 
¶3. Levi-Strauss was very frank about the difficulties he faces at 
UNESCO headquarters, trying to run the programs, "by remote 
control," with no direct power over the way the programs are 
implemented in the field.  At the same time, he noted that the 
implementation rates over the past year have gone up, with 54 
percent for the overall program. 
 
¶4. He described ICOM (International Council of Museums), his 
principal advisory partner, as having a weaker than expected 
professional team, with no capacity for implementing projects.  He 
also said that they lack a network of experts of the same quality 
that ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation 
and Restoration of Cultural Property) or other museum advisory 
groups have.  Levi-Strauss added that the Museum section itself 
often has the needed connections to find experts and trainers, and 
questions the need to pay ICOM for less than satisfactory contacts. 
 
¶5. Levi-Strauss said that many of the field offices 
are having difficulty carrying out their projects, citing, general 
incompetence or poorly trained colleagues and consultants, who are 
unable to deliver minimal results. 
He mentioned Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia and Ghana 
as some of the more poorly run projects. 
 
¶6. In the case of Pakistan, he noted the problems of massive 
disorganization at every level from the Ministry of Antiquities and 
Museums on down, coupled with earthquakes and anti-Western 
demonstrations, which obliged a planned trip to be cancelled.  He 
noted, however, that a workshop would be taking place in Peshawar in 
mid-November in an effort to improve the situation. 
 
¶7. Ambassador Oliver told Levi-Strauss that she was very displeased 
with the overall situation regarding the museum projects, noting 
that the US had not been consulted at all in the original decision 
regarding the choice of projects or countries.  The Ambassador said 
that what we want to know is what we are achieving with the money 
being spent. She said that the US funding was hoped to build greater 
capacity, skills and experience for the museum professionals in each 
country, providing a showcase for projects that would serve as 
success stories and help generate more financing.  Instead, we have 
an inherent problem where UNESCO headquarters is responsible for 
allocating funds, but has no say in the implementation of programs. 
 
 
¶8. The Ambassador said that we have, in these cases, the perfect 
example of UNESCO's move towards decentralization without 
accountability.  Levi-Strauss agreed, saying that the main problem 
is that the directors of the field offices depend on the Bureau of 
Field Coordination (BFC) and not on the program sectors for 
direction.  Levi-Strauss said that the only way he can offset this 
problem today is by developing personal relations with the field 
directors, who are often in place for many reasons, but not 
necessarily for their level of competence. 
 
¶9. Ambassador Oliver told Levi-Strauss that we are interested in 
helping him improve the current situation, but that we need to 
understand better what and where the problems are.  Levi-Strauss 
told her that part of the difficulty is a lack of resources.  He 
mentioned that the US dollars one million allotted for regular 
program activities, 50 percent automatically goes to the field 
offices, and the rest is divided up for the Museum Magazine 
publication costs, ICOM costs and other costs at headquarters.  The 
rest is shared by the 40 field offices, providing them only with 
some US dollars 10,000 each. 
 
¶10. As one way to improve the knowledge sharing within the section, 
Levi-Strauss mentioned an idea that has been proposed of a 
Washington DC-based meeting in 2008, after all the projects are 
completed.  The meeting would bring together the leaders of the 11 
pilot programs, enabling them to meet US museum experts and review 
the projects case-by-case in an effort to improve future work in a 
"lessons learned" approach. 
OLIVER