World Heritage Sites NFHS

World Heritage Sites Nfhs-Free PDF

  • Date:18 Sep 2020
  • Views:4
  • Downloads:0
  • Pages:12
  • Size:518.28 KB

Share Pdf : World Heritage Sites Nfhs

Download and Preview : World Heritage Sites Nfhs

Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : World Heritage Sites Nfhs


World Heritage Sites,Table of Contents,Introduction 3. Proposed Resolution 4,The United Nations 4,The United States 5. World Heritage Convention 6,List of World Heritage in Danger 6. Current List of World Heritage in Danger June 2016 6. Narrow the Resolution 8,In the Arab States 8,In Latin America and the Caribbean 9. In Specified Countries 9,Timeliness of World Heritage in Danger 9.
Affirmative Ground 9,Negative Ground 10,Conclusion 10. Acknowledgements 10,Bibliography 11,End Notes 11,World Heritage Sites. Introduction, In March of 2001 the Taliban erupted onto the international scene by dynamiting. and destroying the famed Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan The Buddhas of Bamiyan. were chiseled out of the cliffs and have survived, the armies of Genghis Khan and the introduction of. Islam but were unable to survive the iconoclastic,Taliban regime of the 21st century i See Figure 1.
The Cultural Landscape and Archaeological,Remains of the Bamiyan Valley have now found its. way on the the United Nations Education,Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO List. of World Heritage in Danger Since the destruction,by the Taliban UNESCO the Afghan government. and locals have failed to reach a consensus on the Figure 1 The taller Buddha of Bamiyan before left. ideal method to rehabilitate the ruination and after the destruction right UNESCO A Lezine. Sadly the destruction of the cultural historical and natural sites is not confined to. the Bamiyan Valley All around the world particularly in the Arab States World Heritage. Sites are under assault In May of 2015 the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant ISIL. scored a colossal victory by taking control of the historic Site of Palmyra in the Syrian Arab. Republic Over the months that followed ISIL continued a deliberate campaign of cultural. desecration punctuated by mass executions in Palmyra s ancient amphitheater to get. publicity attention and vilification from the world s media UNESCO led the charge and. publically denounced the carnage of Palmyra as a war crime As the world howled aghast. over the atrocities in Palmyra ISIL,celebrated with a fresh influx of recruits. and funds raised from the illicit antiquities,sold on the black market The United.
Nations and the rest of the global,community did little as ISIL turned the site. to ruins See Figure 2 By late April 2016,the Russian backed Syrian Army had. Figure 2 Temple of Bel Aug 27 2015 Left and Aug 31 2015. Right UNITAR UNOSAT AFP,managed to retake the site A Rapid. Assessment Mission supported by UN, Security Forces found that statues and sarcophagi were defaced smashed heads. severed and fragments left scattered throughout the site Much of the existing. architecture was severely damaged but a full survey has yet to be completed due to slow. demining operations ii,World Heritage Sites,The destruction of the historic Site at Palmyra.
See Figure 3 is just one example of that irreparable. damage that has been done since the last time the, National Federation of High School held their Topic. Selection Meeting last summer There are five,other sites within the borders of Syria that have. experienced similar levels of destruction during the. last year and with ISIL threatening to move the, Figure 3 A picture showing the Templ of Bel before it destruction throughout the region To be clear. was destroy by ISIS Joseph Eid AFP terrorist extremist organizations such as ISIL and. the Taliban are not the only threat to World, Heritage Sites nor are they the only criteria for a site to appear on the UNESCO List of. World Heritage in Danger The destruction pictured above makes for compelling imagery. and thus are much more likely to reported by the media The world has an obligation to. preserve and protect our shared cultural historic and natural sites for future generations. As Irina Bokova the Director General of UNESCO articulates In a world of change world. heritage is a reminder of all that unites humanity iii Thus. Proposed Resolution, Resolved The United Nations should substantially increase its support for.
one or more sites on the United Nations World Heritage Convention s List. of World Heritage in Danger,The United Nations, The United Nations UN is the optimal actor because they have the most. experience operating under the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World. Cultural and Natural Heritage which guides UNESCO s efforts of World Heritage. protection Since the adoption of the 1972 Convention 178 nations have signed on with. 1 031 recognized properties across the globe The UN controls the meager funds of the. World Heritage Fund US 4 million annually that is used to finance and fund projects. This expertise makes the UN the best actor to support sites on the List of World Heritage. in Danger As Roy Rodriquez author of the 2015 Topic Proposal on Global Malnutrition. argues having the UN as the main actor would allow for debaters to gain a better. understanding of the UN and how if functions as an organization essential knowledge in. today s society iv,World Heritage Sites, It is likely that the Marshall Subcommittee or the Wording Committee will. recommend that the actor should not be the United Nations and be replaced with the. traditional United States federal government Here is a list of several reasons why the. committees should consider using the United Nations. 1 The policy debate community has focused on the United States. government the wording has varied slightly since 1975 1976 with the topic. Resolved That the development and allocation of scare world resources. should be controlled by an international organization v. 2 The policy debate community has not discussed the United Nations since. 2004 2005 with the topic Resolved That the United States federal. government should establish a foreign policy substantially increasing its. support of United Nations peacekeeping operations, 3 The policy debate community has not solely focused on the United Nations. since 1960 1961 with the topic Resolved That the United Nations should be. significantly strengthened, 4 The policy debate community should embrace the United Nations as an. actor as a means to further grow the educational opportunities for all who. participate in the activity at the secondary level and beyond. The United States, Using the United States federal government USFG as the actor would be far more.
palatable to the policy debate community and could be directly substituted for the United. Nations in the proposed resolution, Resolved The United States federal government should substantially. increase its support for one or more sites on the United Nations World. Heritage Convention s List of World Heritage in Danger. This resolution with the USFG as the actor would make very similar to the 2004 2005. policy debate topic of peacekeeping operations, The term support will be one of the most dubious word of this resolution In. general there will be two likely overarching competing interpretations of the term The. negative is likely to argue that the affirmative must provide some kind of concrete. assistance to the endangered site Affirmatives in an attempt to escape likely arguments. will use a definition that does not require concrete tangible physical assistance. World Heritage Sites,World Heritage Convention, The World Heritage Convention is the document that specifically spells out how. States Parties to the Convention get sites recognized on the World Heritage List and doles. out emergency assistance to any site that may need it The Convention requires that the. World Heritage Committee create and maintain a List of World Heritage in Danger. List of World Heritage in Danger, The List of World Heritage in Danger is a term of art created and maintained by. UNESCO via the World Heritage Committee according to Article 11 4 of the World. Heritage Convention which was established to preserve and protect World Heritage Sites. Any site appearing on the endangered list requires major operation for conservation and. for which assistance has been requested Dangers for heritage sites include armed. conflict and war earthquakes and other natural disasters pollution poaching. uncontrolled urbanization and unchecked tourist development Dangers can be. ascertained referring to specific and proven imminent threats or potential when a. property is faced with threats which could have negative effects on its World Heritage. values The World Heritage Committee carefully curates the List of World Heritage in. Danger so that at the time of this writing there are only 48 such sites across the globe As. of June 2016 these would be the sites eligible for affirmatives. Current List of World Heritage in Danger June 2016. Site Name Location Endangered Reason,Abu Mena Egypt 2001 Environmental.
Air and Tenere Natural Reserves Niger 1992 Conflict Environmental. Ancient City of Aleppo Syria 2013 Conflict,Ancient City of Bosra Syria 2013 Conflict. Ancient City of Damascus Syria 2013 Conflict,Ancient Villages of Northern. Syria 2013 Conflict, Ashur Qal at Sherqat Iraq 2003 Development Political. Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati,Georgia 2010 Development. Belize Barrier Reef Reserve,Belize 2009 Environmental Development.
Chan Chan Archaeological Zone Peru 1986 Environmental. Birthplace of Jesus Church of, the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Palestine 2012 Development. Route Bethlehem, Comoe National Park Cote d Ivoire 2003 Conflict Political. Coro and its Port Venezuela 2005 Development,Crac des Chevaliers and Qal at. Syria 2013 Conflict,Salah El Din,World Heritage Sites. Cultural Landscapes, Archaeological Remains of the Afghanistan 2003 Conflict Political.
Bamiyan Valley, East Rennell Solomon Islands 2013 Development Environmental. Everglades National Park Unite State of America 1993 2007 2010 Development Environmental. Fortifications on the Caribbean, Side of Panama Portobelo San Panama 2012 Environmental Political. Democratic Republic of the, Garamba National Park 1984 1992 1996 Environment Political. Hatra Iraq 2015 Conflict,Historical Monuments of,Georgia 2009 Political. Historic Town of Zabid Yemen 2000 Environmental,Humberstone and Santa Laura.
Chile 2005 Political Environmental,Saltpeter Works. Kahuzi Biega National Park Democratic Republic of Congo 1997 Environmental Conflict. Liverpool Maritime Mercantile,United Kingdom 2012 Development. Manovo Gounda St Floris,Central African Republic 1997 Political Conflict. National Park,Minaret and Archaeological,Afghanistan 2002 Political. Remains of Jam, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo Kosovo 2006 Political Conflict.
Mount Nimba Strict Nature,Cote d Ivoire 1992 Development Political. Niokolo Koba National Park Senegal 2007 Political Environmental. Democratic Republic of the,Okapi Wildlife Reserve 1997 Political Conflict. Old City of Jerusalem and its, No Nation Named by UNESCO 1982 Development Political. Old City of Sana a Yemen 2015 Conflict, Old Walled City of Shibam Yemen 2015 Conflict Political. Rainforests of the Atsinanana Madagascar 2010 Development Political. Rio Platano Bioshpere Reserve Honduras 1996 2007 2011 Development Political. Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and,Tanzania 2004 Environmental.
Ruins of Songo Mnara,Democratic Republic of the,Salonga National Park 1999 Conflict Political. Samarra Archaeological City Iraq 2007 Conflict Political. Simien National Park Ethiopia 1996 Environmental,Site of Palmyra Syria 2013 Conflict. Timbuktu Mali 2012 Conflict,Tomb of Askia Mali 2012 Conflict. Tombs of Buganda Kings at,Uganda 2010 Environmental. Tropical Rainforest Heritage of,Indonesia 2011 Development Political.
Democratic Republic of the, Virunga National Park 1994 Environmental Conflict Political. Palestine Land of Olives and, Vines Cultural Landscape of Palestine 2014 Environmental Political. Southern Jerusalem Battir, This list is updated annually If this topic is selected for 2017 2018 the list may be updated. to include new sites or existing sites may be removed with the 40th Session of the. Committee scheduled to meet in Istanbul in July of 2016 The 41st Session has yet to be. World Heritage Sites, scheduled but it can safely be assumed that it will occur sometime during the summer of. Narrow the Resolution, The current List of World Heritage in Danger has 48 sites from across the globe.
which to some may see far too broad to be an effective topic It is likely that throughout. the debate season that the community would self limit the resolution without the. Committee narrowing the topic The following possible limiters could be added to the. end of the resolution,In the Arab States, This UNESCO provided term would limit the affirmative ground to the following. countries Algeria Bahrain Djibouti Egypt Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Libya Malta. Mauritania Morocco Oman Palestine Qatar Saudi Arabia Somalia Sudan Syrian Arab. Republic Tunisia United Arab Emirates and Yemen Effectively this limiter would cover. 15 or nearly one third of endangered sites covering six countries found on the List of. World Heritage Endangered This limiter could be beneficial as the policy debate. community has not focused significantly on this region of the world in the past. Resolved The United Nations or USFG should substantially increase its. The List of World Heritage in Danger is a term of art created and maintained by UNESCO via the World Heritage Committee according to Article 11 4 of the World Heritage Convention which was established to preserve and protect World Heritage Sites Any site appearing on the endangered list requires major operation for conservation and

Related Books