Shock absorber

Irina Bokova has been director general of UNESCO - the United Nations' education, scientific and cultural organization - since 2009. She was formerly the Bulgarian foreign minister. Last month, the United States withdrew its funding from UNESCO following its controversial decision to admit Palestine as a full member.

DW: The Palestinians have been granted full membership of UNESCO. Did you expect this result?

Irina Bokova: To be frank, I did expect this result because it had already been recommended by the executive board in October. Of course, I know there were many negotiations, consultations, different views. There were countries that thought the Palestinians should first go to New York, others - the majority - that considered it was perfectly legitimate for Palestine to become a full member of UNESCO. So I would say that this was expected.

UNESCO has been already involved with the Palestinian authority for very many years. We have been helping with educational planning, we have also been working on teacher training in the area of preservation of heritage and culture. UNESCO has also been involved in including some of their cultural sites on the World Heritage List.

Earlier this year, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad came to see me and submitted his request to join the four cultural conventions here at UNESCO. Taking into account the fact that their request for membership has been on the agenda for the last 22 years, and following the request of membership of the United Nations, it was to be expected.

Why did UNESCO decide to award membership to Palestinians, despite objections from Israel and the US?

This is a matter decided by the member states. It is not for me as director general to decide; it is purely an intergovernmental process. I think they had the procedural legal arguments. Our organization is autonomous. Of course, it is a specialized agency: it is part of the United Nations family, but we have our own government bodies, we have our own constitution and we have our own separate membership.

We have seen that a number of UNESCO countries joined the United Nations after becoming members of UNESCO. I am talking here about Germany, Japan, Korea and some others. At the same time, of course, there are those countries that put forward political arguments saying that the Palestinian bid is a political project for membership of the United Nations. They argued that it has to go to New York first, and only after careful examination by the Security Council and the General Assembly should a decision be made about full UN membership. In our case, the 107 members of UNESCO decided that Palestine deserved to be a member. It's a purely intergovernmental process.

Will the decision to grant the Palestinians full UNESCO membership affect the peace process in the Middle East?

I wouldn't like to pass political judgments. I repeat the words of the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, which is the common position of the whole UN. Mr. Ban said the establishment of two states is overdue, and any single step that may lead to this is to be welcomed.

I know that now there are different perceptions as to how the vote here may affect the peace process. I know there are those who criticized this step, saying it would jeopardize the peace process. I want to continue to see the integrity of our organization and the universality of our organization. I believe every single member makes a contribution to this organization, not least our biggest donor, the United States.

UNESCO is a platform for dialog and negotiations, including on some issues that are linked to the Middle East. We have taken up some resolutions on the Middle East, concerning the old part of Jerusalem, which is listed as being in danger on the World Heritage List. We have also been active in educational projects in the occupied territories. In most cases, these resolutions were passed with consensus. Even at this general conference, there were a number of resolutions adopted by consensus; that means with the consent of Israel, Jordan and other Arab countries.

UNESCO is too important a platform to be undermined and jeopardized. UNESCO should be preserved as an important platform for dialog. An additional example - the United States, after 18 years of absence from UNESCO, returned to the organization in 2003 under the Bush administration. They came with a very clear understanding in the aftermath of 9/11, when they saw the merits of the organization for dialog and reconciliation, and also as a platform to isolate extremism. The current administration is also very supportive of what UNESCO is doing. So I believe we have to preserve this common approach to the value of UNESCO in this turbulent world.

But the US decided to stop their funding for UNESCO following the announcement. What are the consequences for the organization?

This is an unfortunate development, because the law adopted 20 years ago has been triggered. I understand the position of the current US administration, but the law is the law. I still believe that the world has moved on, and UNESCO has moved on, and it is important that the organization has stable and predictable funding.

For us it is difficult, but it is not a crisis. We have to make cuts and to streamline activities. I see this also as an opportunity for more vigorous reforms in the organization: cutting administrative costs, and releasing the resources for program activities, according to our mandate. I pledged to the general conference that I will be making a very thorough review of every single activity in order to make the organization stronger and more flexible, more relevant and leaner in terms of administration. But this can not substitute 22 percent of our budget.

I have established an emergency fund, to which governments, private institutions and even citizens can contribute. We have a huge amount of support. We have received hundreds of messages and even checks from ordinary citizens. I have also appealed for some voluntary contributions. It is a combination of measures that can help our organization get out of this situation.

The Palestinian Authority is applying for full UN membership. Could UNESCO's decision influence the decision of the UN Security Council?

It is very difficult to say. There are different positions in different countries. Some of those countries that voted in favor of Palestinian membership in UNESCO have declared they will be abstaining in the UN Security Council vote. New York is highly political. Our decision is also political, but I believe there are other reasons and considerations behind the vote.

Interviewer: Blagorodna Grigorova / ji
Editor: Martin Kuebler