Haider Rizvi

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 19 2005 (IPS) — With the rest of the world poised to adopt a new United Nations treaty on cultural diversity, indications are that the United States is once again going to say no to multilateralism.

The 191-member U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) is scheduled to vote on the final draft of the Convention at a meeting at its headquarters in Paris Thursday.

A ballot on Monday found 151 nations in support of the pact, and two against – the U.S. and Israel. Australia and the tiny island nation of Kiribati abstained.

According to the draft text, sponsored by France and Canada, cultural expressions are “distinctive” and countries should be allowed “to maintain, adopt, and implement policies and measures that they deem appropriate for the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions on their territory”.

Though diplomatic efforts to reach a consensus on the language of the draft are continuing, observers say they see no signs of flexibility in the U.S. position.

“This convention could be misused by governments to legitimise their controls over the flow of information,” U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza rice told member governments in a letter early this month.

Rice said the proposed treaty could have a “chilling effect” on the ongoing negotiations at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). “This convention invites abuse by enemies of democracy and free trade,” she added.

But those in support of the Convention argue that governments have the sovereign right to develop policies which nurture cultural growth and artistic expression beyond the dictates of trade agreements.

This approach is already evident in the cultural policies of France and Canada. Both countries have long used subsidies and quotas to protect their media industries against the growing influence of cultural globalisation, or what some call “Americanisation”.

Some observers attribute Washington’s hardened stance on the proposed treaty to pressure by powerful Hollywood companies and other U.S. media giants to resist any restrictions on the international trade in cultural products, including films, books and music.

“This line, however, overlooks the circumstance that unlike wheat or coal, cultural products are also intimately bound with matters of social identity and consciousness,” writes Allen Scott, director of the Centre for Globalisation and Policy Research at the University of California.

“A rhetoric of pure market ideology misses a crucial point here,” he reasons in a scholarly article entitled, “Hollywood in the Era of Globalisation: Opportunities and Predicaments”.

Scott points out that major Hollywood production companies directly control distribution systems in all their principle foreign markets. For example, United International Pictures, a joint venture by Paramount and Universal, owns distribution facilities in as many as 37 countries, including Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia and Japan.

With the 25-member European Union (EU) fully supporting the Convention, its current president, Britain, has tried hard to convince the U.S. to join the treaty, but it is unlikely that Washington will change its mind, according to observers who closely watched the negotiations.

The draft convention had its start in 2001, when UNESCO adopted a “Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity”, which emphasised the principles of pluralism, respect for human rights, promotion of creativity, and international solidarity.

To expand upon the Declaration, the UNESCO General Assembly decided that “the question of cultural diversity as regards the question of the diversity of cultural contents and artistic expression should be the subject of an international convention”.

As a gesture toward embracing greater multilateralism, the U.S. rejoined UNESCO two years ago. Washington had boycotted the organisation for nearly two decades, claiming that that it had been “politicised”.

In her letter to other governments, Rice said the U.S. had reentered UNESCO with the intention of “robustly” engaging in the organisation and contributing to its important work in the fields of education, science and cultural preservation.

“We don’t want to change that, but this convention threatens support in the United States for UNESCO,” she said. “We urge you to get involved and work for us to assure that the convention does not undo all the good work we have done together.”

Currently, Washington funds 22 percent of UNESCO’s budget. It is not clear if the U.S. would also withdraw its financial support from the organisation.

Other recent treaties of international significance that the U.S. has refused to sign include the treaty creating the Hague-based International Criminal Court and the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

The convention on cultural diversity will go into effect after ratification by 30 countries.