The Supreme Court of History? UNESCO as an Arena for Historiographic Clashes

Abstract

Built after the ruins of World War II, UNESCO was conceived from a broad concept of culture. Aimed at countering the powerful national political propaganda machines that emerged in the interwar period, whose primary goal was to project abroad their ideals of civilization, the UNESCO conception project rejects considering culture as an epiphenomenon of the political fact or an ideological superstructure depending upon the economic infrastructure of an era. Contrary to these politocentric perspectives, the signatory states of the UNESCO Charter conceived it with the hope that culture could play a relevant role as a structuring element of the political world. Over time, however, this international pact was eroded, allowing the constitution of internal dynamics that ended up configuring it as a great Tribunal of History, in which some narratives are legitimized or rejected, certain historiographical conceptions are reinforced or rejected, and a universal history imposes itself over Universal History. Moving away from the ideal of constituting a forum to promote concord, knowledge and understanding among nations through culture, UNESCO has come to represent a new battleground for the projection of the soft power of States, via cultural diplomacy. The current research aims to shed light on some of the main historiographical clashes between states for the legitimization of their narratives in the instances of UNESCO.