Is it another time "strolling in the park"?, Depth | The United States seeks to return to UNESCO next month to compete with China | Seeking to return to UNESCO | The United States

Starting from June 29th, UNESCO will hold a two-day special meeting in Paris to decide whether the United States can return to the organization. According to American media, the United States hopes to repay the outstanding membership fees and return to UNESCO in July, and strives to run for a seat on the organization's executive board in November.

Analysts believe that while the United States' return to UNESCO may have a positive impact, it also raises concerns, particularly about whether it will bring the game of big powers into this specialized United Nations agency. This will be detrimental to enhancing international cooperation and achieving the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and will also weaken the power of global multilateral governance.

Twice "drop out" and twice "return"

UNESCO was founded in 1945 and is headquartered in Paris, France. It currently has 193 member states. As one of the 15 specialized agencies of the United Nations, the organization is committed to promoting international cooperation among countries in the fields of education, science, and culture.

UNESCO's specific actions include developing international standards and norms related to education and science, protecting important historical and cultural sites, and so on. Its main institutions include the General Assembly, Executive Board, and Secretariat.

The United States is a founding member of UNESCO, with annual contributions accounting for approximately 22% of the organization's budget. People originally hoped that with the important position of the United States in UNESCO and its influence on the global stage, it could bring a bright future to global governance.

However, what the United States has brought to the world is repeated astonishment and regret - it has twice withdrawn from UNESCO. As pointed out by American public opinion, geopolitical games have led to accumulated grievances between the United States and organizations more than once.

The first time the United States withdrew from the group was in 1984, when President Reagan announced his withdrawal on the grounds of poor management, corruption, and "favoritism" towards the Soviet Union. In 2002, then President George W. Bush decided to have the United States rejoin the organization. American media believed that the "return" at that time was mainly to unite the international community in carrying out the anti-terrorism war and show goodwill to allies.

The second withdrawal was in October 2017. The Trump administration, citing UNESCO's promotion of anti Israel bias, and Israel have announced their withdrawal from the organization. It is worth noting that before the second withdrawal from the group, the United States stopped paying an annual membership fee of $80 million, citing UNESCO's acceptance of Palestine as a member state in 2011, which violated US domestic law. At present, the United States has accumulated arrears of approximately 600 million US dollars in membership fees.

Compared to the Trump administration's withdrawal, the Biden administration came to power under the guise of returning to multilateral mechanisms and reshaping leadership positions. Since taking office, Biden has announced his return to multilateral frameworks such as the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization. In early June, the US State Department began sending a "return" signal to UNESCO, outlining a timetable for repaying debts and rejoining the group.

US media reported that in March this year, the Biden administration had applied for $150 million in funding in the next fiscal year's budget. Next, the United States will pay the membership fee for 2023 and a donation of $10 million. In the coming years, the United States will gradually repay the previously owed membership fees.

Not willing to be filled by China

Why has the United States gone back and forth more than 5 years after leaving the group?

Zhang Guihong, Director of the United Nations and International Organizations Research Center at Fudan University, believes that firstly, Biden's foreign policy is very different from that of the Trump era, focusing more on promoting global strategy through allies and multilateral means, and engaging in great power competition. Secondly, Washington is concerned that the vacancy left by the United States at UNESCO will be filled by Beijing.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has publicly said that the absence of the United States will allow China to formulate rules of artificial intelligence through UNESCO: "I strongly believe that we should return to UNESCO - not as a gift to the organization, but because what is happening in the organization is actually very important." U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Buzz also believes that UNESCO plays a key role in formulating and shaping global standards of technology and science education, and "returning" will help the United States compete with China.

"The United States regards competition with China as its strategic focus and does not want international organizations to be dominated by China," said Zhang Guihong. "By returning to UNESCO, the United States wants to regain its influence."

Li Youwen, Director of the United Nations and International Organizations Research Center at Beijing Foreign Studies University, pointed out that from the perspective of the United States, when the Trump administration withdrew from the group in 2017, firstly, it did not want to accumulate membership fees and increase debt, secondly, it was related to "supporting Israel", and thirdly, no member of UNESCO had absolute authority, unlike the "five permanent members" of the Security Council who had one veto power, so the United States could not control the situation. Now, the United States believes that China's role in organizations is becoming increasingly significant, reflected in multiple fields such as artificial intelligence, world heritage declaration, cooperation with Africa, and education.

From the perspective of UNESCO, after being elected as Director General of UNESCO in 2017, former French Minister of Culture and Jewish Jew Azoule has been working in the United States, hoping that the United States can "return" and improve the "imbalance" of the organization. She visits the United States almost every year and emphasizes to the US that the organization has begun reform, improved efficiency, and carried out work in the area of "depoliticization". Azuli's efforts are crucial in facilitating the return of the United States.

In terms of the prospect of a "return", Zhang Guihong believes that there should be no significant suspense for all parties to approve the United States' "return". However, Li Youwen believes that given that the United States is still striving to run for a seat in the organization's executive board in November, this may cause controversy.

Li Youwen introduced that the Executive Bureau is a powerful organization responsible for formulating budget drafts for priority matters and supervising the implementation of daily projects. The Executive Bureau also plays an important role in the election of the Director General in two years. According to organizational regulations, if a member state fails to pay its dues exceeding the total of the current and previous years, it will lose its eligibility to serve as a member of the Executive Board. There may be areas for debate on whether the United States is "stepping on the line" in terms of rules.

Another "competitive stage"?

What will happen if the United States ultimately returns to UNESCO?

Li Youwen believes that the United States is, after all, a country with considerable influence in the global field of education and culture. The return of the United States will increase the universality of the organization and enhance its own role in the organization.

If the United States pays its membership fees, it can also increase the overall budget of the organization and enhance its ability to implement plans. Projects involving developing countries, including the UNESCO Africa Priority Program, are expected to be implemented. The increase in budget is also beneficial for the organization to increase the number of employees.

"It needs to be added that there will be a game in this process - the United States hopes to allocate funds to priority areas such as improving freedom of speech and journalist safety. Given that member states jointly decide on the direction of membership fees, the United States will unite with some countries to try to invest money in the places it wants," Li Youwen said.

While it may have a positive impact, the return of the United States also has some alarming and unsettling elements.

"Especially when the United States publicly declares its return to UNESCO with the goal of containing China's influence, it goes against the organization's purpose and is not conducive to enhancing international cooperation and achieving the United Nations' 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." Li Youwen said, "If the United States requires member states to choose sides between itself and China, it is more likely to cause disunity and division within the organization, weakening its influence."

Zhang Guihong believes that whether UNESCO will become another stage of competition between China and the United States, as some Western media have said, depends on the true intention of the United States to "return". If the United States has a narrow vision and only sees UNESCO as a venue for confrontation with China, adopting a hegemonic and bullying approach, it will have a huge impact on UNESCO and be detrimental to global governance.

"But if the United States can correctly view the role of UNESCO and China from the perspective of the international community and the common interests of all mankind, then there is still broad cooperation space between China and the United States." Zhang Guihong said, "After all, UNESCO is a United Nations specialized agency focused on UNESCO affairs, and its political nature is not as prominent. Moreover, China and the United States have common interests and cooperation space in education, scientific research, and other fields. China also hopes to promote various cooperation to ease the tension between China and the United States."

Another concern is whether, as the United States returns to UNESCO, it will "trip" China in cutting-edge fields such as artificial intelligence, leading a series of rule making in the fields of technology and education towards a direction that benefits the United States and the West?

Zhang Guihong believes that this possibility exists. Taking artificial intelligence as an example, in 2021, UNESCO officially launched the Recommendation on Ethical Issues in Artificial Intelligence. "The United States certainly hopes that relevant regulations can be more in line with its own interests."

Zhang Guihong said that in response, China should unite with emerging economies such as India and Brazil to speak out in multilateral settings, so that artificial intelligence not only serves developed countries but also benefits small and medium-sized countries. Reduce inequality through practical actions and promote fair and inclusive globalization.

Li Youwen believes that China has been assisting developing countries in building the capacity of artificial intelligence to empower education, and paying attention to the needs of African countries in this regard. In the future, it can be observed whether the return of the United States to UNESCO will have an impact on this field.

Another time "strolling in the park"?

If the United States were to "return" in July, how long it could stay in the "group" this time would also arouse suspicion from the outside world. After all, the United States will welcome an election next year, and it is not clear whether Trump will make a comeback and perform another "withdrawal" drama.

The United States' record of withdrawing from UNESCO has made the outside world even more uneasy. It has not only withdrawn from UNESCO twice, but also from more than 10 international organizations or agreements since the 1980s. Between repeated horizontal jumps, the pragmatic attitude of the United States towards international rules of "use if applicable, discard if not applicable" is evident.

In mid month, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs made a statement that being a member of an international organization is a serious matter, and the US cannot treat joining an international organization as a stroll in the park, let alone as a geopolitical game field.

Zhang Guihong pointed out that multilateralism has duality - it has value attributes such as democracy, equality, consultation, cooperation, and compromise, as well as tool attributes that provide a platform for negotiation. The United States increasingly uses multilateralism as a tool to serve its own interests. On the other hand, the diplomatic priorities of the two parties in the United States are also different, and regime changes can lead to instability in the United States' participation in international multilateral governance platforms.

Li Youwen pointed out that the United States often talks about "rule based international order", but it is it that leads the way in not complying with international rules. "The United States' international governance capabilities and professional influence are unquestionable, but it is also at the forefront of politicizing and manipulating international organizations. Ultimately, the United States seeks to establish an international order centered on itself, which manifests itself as suppressing other countries and forming cliques in international organizations, making them submit to American values. This is not in line with the international system centered on the United Nations and the international order based on international law, and will also cause the specialized agencies of the United Nations to lose their influence."