The West has not managed to expel Russia from UNESCO, a claim voiced by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and reported by RIA News. Lavrov asserted that removing Russia from UNESCO was never a viable option, highlighting the durability of Moscow’s cultural and educational engagements within the organization. He emphasized that Russia’s initiatives carried out through UNESCO have drawn significant global attention, and, in his view, this influence underpins why Russia does not require disruption of its ties with the agency.
Lavrov also drew attention to remarks made by President Vladimir Putin in November, underscoring the argument that Russia’s cultural and scientific projects under UNESCO have achieved recognition worldwide. He reiterated that these efforts demonstrate Russia’s lasting presence and impact within UNESCO, making withdrawal unnecessary in his estimation. This stance reflects a broader narrative from Moscow about preserving cultural and intellectual channels that translate into sustained international relevance.
On December 15, UNESCO added buildings in Odessa and Chernihiv to its endangered cultural heritage list. Earlier, sites in Kyiv and Lviv had already been flagged as at risk. The designation signals a concern for the preservation of monuments and architectural landmarks amid ongoing regional tensions, while also clarifying UNESCO’s ongoing monitoring of places valued for their historical and cultural significance within Ukraine.
In November, Alexey Pushkov, who chairs the Federation Council Commission on Information Policy and Interaction with the Media, commented on what he described as the impossibility of erasing Russian culture from Europe. His remarks framed a broader debate about cultural influence and historical memory across the continent, suggesting that Russia’s cultural footprint remains influential despite geopolitical challenges.
Putin has previously described the situation as a confrontation with the neocolonial aspects of cancel culture, arguing that attempts to diminish or rewrite Russia’s historical and cultural contributions are politically motivated rather than grounded in objective assessment. The dialogue around UNESCO thus sits at the intersection of culture, diplomacy, and geopolitics, illustrating how cultural institutions can become arenas for broader strategic messaging and national pride. Critics, meanwhile, warn against equating cultural status with political legitimacy, noting that UNESCO’s mandate centers on the protection and promotion of humanity’s shared heritage while remaining responsive to evolving international circumstances.