The bases of a future consensus are established at UNESCO

On the second day of SYMUN 22, the formal debate in the UNESCO committee chaired by Manuel Tamariz, co-chaired by Julia Martyniewicz and with Alberto Gómez as assistant chair, the delegation of the Netherlands presented a motion to set the agenda, which stated that the topic to be addressed in the next sessions would be the topic Repatriating Artworks: The West's Pending Debt. In this first session of debate, the delegation from the Netherlands stood out, as it made the first allusion to a future alliance between countries in this committee. It is clear that this delegation is eager to resolve the debate in favor of its ideals at any cost.

Then, the Egyptian delegation proposed a debate about the economic consequences that the repatriation of artworks would have in the country of origin as well as the hosting country. Here, Cote d’Ivoire brought out the importance of having artworks in their country of origin, as it can affect the education and knowledge of the people of their own culture.

In the second session of debate, China suggested debating about the cultural value of art pieces. This time, there was a wide gap between the opinions of developed and underdeveloped countries. While some delegations advocated leaving the art in the country that has the best resources to preserve it properly, African and South American countries defended the right of each country to preserve its art and exploit its cultural value. In addition, the UK was cornered on several occasions when countries such as Greece and Jamaica reproached it for still having in its possession their pieces of art even though they already have the capacity to preserve them.

Afterward, thanks to the proposal of the Netherlands, a heated debate was established in regard to the black market and illegal art trading. The unanimous agreement (except for China) of the countries that spoke on the subject, reached the conclusion that this is a major problem that affects all countries. Poland also stressed that the worst consequence of the black market is “to reduce the cultural value of works of art to an economic value only”. However, it was not possible to reach a consensus on the measures and mechanisms that should be implemented to achieve this.

Nevertheless, they did manage to reach the unanimous conclusion that alliances among them are more than necessary, as they would be a key step towards a consensus among the countries. Moreover, in the debate, it was suggested the creation of a large alliance between several countries that would finance and economically help to achieve this goal, as well as the creation of a common economic fund.

To begin with the third session of the debate, the approach of the topic revolved around the possible solutions to resolve the issue. Although the idea of repatriating artwork was common among the delegations, the solutions to the conflict were quite different: countries like Japan, Ethiopia, Syria, and Venezuela were in favor of creating copies of the original artworks. However, the majority of them were in complete disagreement with this solution, as they concur that it would rest on the original pieces and their cultural value.

After two unmoderated caucuses, the delegations were able to express more clear ideas about the possible solutions. The most interesting proposal regarding solutions to this issue was given by Poland, which suggested that a percentage of the art stolen should be repatriated every 5 or 10 years to reduce the economic impact on the hosting countries. Although this solution did not satisfy all countries, it has been a key to reaching a general agreement on the matter that this repatriation process will take time if it is to be effective and in line with the needs of all countries. However, China and Argentina disagreed, as their delegations believe that the best way to proceed in this case is for the artworks to be returned as soon as possible, as all the countries have been waiting for a long time for this to take place.

In the end, the delegations were not able to reach a unanimous consensus on the most appropriate solution, although they did manage to reach the conclusion that in order to resolve this conflict, a financing plan is needed that benefits both the countries of origin and those that currently preserve the works of art. Nevertheless, it has also been concluded that in order to reach an agreement, delegations must not forget that all solutions considered must be adapted to the needs of each country.