South Korea’s UNESCO Bid Fails: A Stinging Defeat in Historical Justice

South Korea’s bid to spotlight Japan’s longstanding failure to fulfill a promise to have its World Heritage sites address the country’s historical subjection of Koreans to forced labor ended in defeat at a UNESCO vote on Monday — a stinging setback.

The outcome exposed Seoul’s limited influence at UNESCO in highlighting the enduring scars of colonial history and its ongoing pursuit of historical justice.

For the first time, South Korea and Japan confronted each other in a formal vote at the UNESCO World Heritage Committee over a historical dispute stemming from Japan’s colonial rule of Korea from 1910 to 1945.

Seoul lost the vote during the 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held on Monday in Paris.

South Korea’s objective was straightforward: address Japan’s failure to fulfill the commitments it made in 2015 — when 23 sites from Japan’s Meiji Industrial Revolution were added to UNESCO’s World Heritage List — within the UNESCO platform.

During the session, the South Korean government delegation highlighted that the Industrial Heritage Information Center in Tokyo, which opened in March 2020, focused solely on glorifying Japan’s industrial achievements during the Meiji era (1868–1912), while neglecting the colonial-era history of forced labor involving Koreans.

“The materials on display still fail to acknowledge the experiences of Koreans and others who were forcibly brought and made to work under harsh conditions in the 1940s. This is not a minor omission; it erases the lived realities that official narratives too often ignore,” Ha Wie-young, the representative of the South Korean government delegation, said in English during the session.

“We also believe this discussion strengthens the World Heritage system. Interpretation shapes how heritage is understood, and historically grounded, thoughtful approaches are essential to maintaining the (World Heritage) Convention’s credibility and relevance.”

Seven of 23 sites, including coal mines on Hashima Island, also known as Battleship Island, are locations where numerous Koreans were forcibly mobilized and subjected to harsh labor during Japan’s colonial rule over Korea from 1910 to 1945.

Seoul’s last-ditch efforts
During the session, the Korean government delegation made final attempts to persuade other members of the WHC, taking the floor six additional times before the vote to underscore the legitimacy of revisiting Japan’s unfulfilled pledge at UNESCO.

Takehiro Kano, a representative from the Japanese delegation, argued that Japan’s unfulfilled commitments had “nothing to do with Outstanding Universal Value,” and maintained that bilateral dialogue between Korea and Japan — outside UNESCO — was the most appropriate way forward.

“Unlike in previous decisions, the World Heritage Committee did not request Japan to submit a State of Conservation report for examination by the committee, thus concluding the discussion,” the Japanese representative said during the session.

Ha, from the Foreign Ministry in Seoul, immediately responded: “My Japanese colleague mentioned that my delegation is trying to reopen this case. To the best of my knowledge, however, this case has never been closed.”

Expected but bitter defeat
South Korea initially proposed discussing the issue during the 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held on Monday in Paris. Japan later submitted an amendment to exclude the issue from discussion, which was eventually put to a vote.

However, of the 21 World Heritage Committee members, only three supported South Korea’s position, while seven backed Japan’s amendment.

Eight countries submitted blank ballots, and three were deemed invalid. With just six votes required for adoption, Japan’s proposal passed, effectively blocking further discussion of its unfulfilled commitments made in 2015.

South Korea’s defeat at UNESCO was not entirely unexpected, especially given the structural imbalance of power between Seoul and Tokyo within UNESCO.

South Korea ranks 14th in overall financial contributions to UNESCO. Japan ranks third — behind only the United States and China — with around $91.7 million pledged for the 2024–2025 period as of the first quarter this year, compared to South Korea’s $31.9 million.

This funding gap highlights the limits of Seoul’s leverage in key decision-making processes within the institution. The latest session laid bare that disparity.

The South Korean government delegation had to ask the same question multiple times — whether the matter of Japan’s unfulfilled commitments had been formally concluded — as UNESCO officials initially avoided giving a clear answer.

“I haven’t heard anything about my first question, so again: has this case ever been closed? My delegation would like to know what we are trying to do here,” Ha said. “Are we trying to open — or reopen — this case, or has this case never been closed? It’s a simple question.”

Korea’s voice unheard
Lazare Eloundou Assomo, director of the World Heritage Center, offered a procedural explanation that effectively echoed Japan’s claim that Tokyo’s nonfulfillment of its historical pledge did not warrant further review because the issue is not a threat to a World Heritage site and not a threat to its Outstanding Universal Value under UNESCO mechanisms.

“The conclusion of the review did not conclude to take the site back to its status of conservation … for examination by the World Heritage Committee, and this is what both the Secretariat and ICOMOS have concluded and communicated officially,” he said.

“Of course, the Committee takes its own decision. The Secretariat has communicated this clearly, so I hope this time I have been clear.”

Ernesto Ottone Ramirez, assistant director-general for Culture at UNESCO, dismissed the premise, arguing that the notion of a “case” being closed does not apply to the Committee’s work — thereby implicitly rejecting Seoul’s line of reasoning.

“Just to add: we are not a tribunal — there is no case. We don’t discuss cases; we discuss inscriptions and States of Conservation,” Ottone Ramirez said.