08/11/2005 - The Convention on Cultural Diversity has been adopted with a large majority by the UNESCO.

October 20th 2005 was witness to UNESCO’s adoption in Paris, during the 33rd General Conference, of the Convention on “Cultural Diversity” . This historic date has nothing but a simple symbolic value.

In the text, article 5 recognises the right of a nation or a federation of nations (i.e. EU) to practise “adapted” policies for public funding in regards to cultural issues, including Cinema and Audiovisuals. Article 20 establishes that this UNESCO Convention has the same judicial weight as any other international judicial treaties, being necessary from now on to make several adjustments to existing regulations. Knowing the antagonism that precedes the WTO, this will allow for judicial battles to take place. Here are some key points that will help us understand the situation.

In order to create a global ensemble based on free circulation of merchandise with the least possible amount of barriers, the WTO bring together the ministers of commerce. This was done to prevent monopolies and unfair trading. Keeping in mind the exact economic texts, the WTO allows for temporary “exemptions” (5 or 10 years). In 1994, in Marrakech, the WTO agreed upon a 10 year “Cultural Exemption” by demand of the European countries. A bit later, some of the countries which supported France, claimed that these short derogations and the idea of having a “Cultural Diversity” were because of the intrinsic economic fragility of the cultural sector, specially concerning Audiovisuals and Cinema. This concept is far from achieving a unanimous agreement throughout the world, even within the EU. While nations of a Latin tradition consider culture to be of a non commercial “nature”, the Anglo-Saxon ones strongly defend “free exchange” towards anything that can be made profitable.

The WTO debates in Seattle in 1999, took place with some hindrance, and some countries such as France, Canada or Belgium, proposed turning to UNESCO for help, since that was where the ministers of culture were. The concept of “Cultural Diversity” appeared there officially for the 1st time thanks to a proposal of a “Universal Declaration” that recognised the ability to define and establish one’s own cultural and audiovisual policies for the preservation of cultural diversity.

The recent debates in Paris, in favour of its adoption, have been characterised by the USA’s fierce opposition. The current public support policy in the EU prevents the mass invasion of Hollywood films and TV series. To begin with, Condoleeza Rice has provoked hostilities by writing a letter to UNESCO where she said that the Convention was “an attack to Human Rights”. The American representatives threatened to leave the session, by laying down multiple amendments. It is worth mentioning that the USA left UNESCO twenty years ago, during the Cold War, because according to them, it was becoming too “communist”. However, it re-entered two years ago in order to defend its huge financial interests. Evidently, while the USA continues to perform its intimidating totalitarian policies, “Cultural Diversity” is state sponsored, allowing freedom of expression and creation.

The final vote shows a wide adhesion to “Diversity”: 148 votes in favour versus 2 votes against it (USA and Israel), with only 4 abstentions (Australia, Liberia, Nicaragua, Honduras). But for the Convention to be applied, it must be ratified (adopted by the governments and parliaments) by at least 30 member states. No dates have been set yet. But the extension of the cultural exemption until 2010 which the WTO has just decided, will be a natural due date. From here to then... many disagreements can take place within governments, between ministers of culture and commerce (even within the EU), since parliamentary majorities can change from one electoral term to the next. The USA will continue to press many countries within their trade agreements.

A fast ratification is the most important tool for ensuring long-term public funding towards culture. Many politicians have reacted quickly. Such is the case of Viviane Reading, European Comissioner of Communication in her Meetings in Beaune, or the Belgian and French ministers of culture, to confirm their ongoing initiative in favour of “Cultural diversity”. A great number of professional organisations also welcomed the adoption of the Convention, including the liaison of the Coalitions of Cultural Diversity ( see their entire motion), which brings together 500 professional organisations from 31 countries, or the Federation of European Film Directors (see the Declaration).

We must not believe any longer that this is about the Occidental worries of Canada and Europe. Many developing countries have understood and requested even before the voting in UNESCO took place, a budgetary limit that would protect their own diversity. Sponsored “voluntarily” by the rich countries, these developing countries could refuse to ratify it if they were to receive no or very little funding. Another challenge is trying to obtain at the same time the significant ratification by a number of countries and the spectrum of cultures. CINEUROPA is committed to staying up to date on the issue, events, reactions, requests, as well as ratifications in each country, through our Special Reports, until the application of “Cultural Diversity”, the only Convention capable of stopping the loss of national identity, takes place.