They'll start with Bethlehem

They've now gone for lunch. Nothing spectacular has happened.
I note a number of name changes, including the transformation of Skellig Michael into Sceilg Mhichíl

Bethlehem up for secret ballot

But with the chair refusing to vote separately on whether an "urgent" nomination is required (remembering that ICOMOS recommended against this aspect - not inscription done "properly") but going instead for the complete text incorporating inscription, urgency, danger list etc. That decision probably favours the pro inscription group?

The whole thing is political nonsense isn't it? How can a site be inscribed when many of its "owners" don't even want it to be inscribed!!

They're already busy for 40 minutes to organize the secret ballot... as if it is the first time ever & as if this is a big surprise this occurs

Can we predict the outcome of the vote?
It needs a 2/3 majority.

Members are:
Algeria, PRO
Cambodia,
Colombia,
Estonia,
Ethiopia,
France,
Germany, AGAINST
India,
Iraq,
Japan,
Malaysia,
Mali,
Mexico,
Qatar,
Russian Federation,
Senegal,
Serbia,
South Africa,
Switzerland,
Thailand,
United Arab Emirates

It seems that the Arab/Islamic countries (6) are PRO and the Europeans (5) are against. I have no idea yet about Asian countries like Cambodia or Thailand, they are very quiet

Don't disagree, but...
This is not an argument to not inscribe. They are custodians after all - not owners - and have far wider responsibilities as such.

You would think that Europe and Latin America/Japan (7/8?) would vote against - but no one really seems to understand the difference between a blank paper and an abstention. As I understand it (I think???) it has been agreed to have a third option ("Abstention") on the paper -this makes a lot of difference of course to the arithmetic of the 2/3rds!

It will be close!

We have an impolite saying in English about an individual or a group of people not being able to "arrange a piss up in a brewery"!! It seems to apply here!

INSCRIPTION!

I think the German delegate will go home now

Yes 13
no 6
Abst 2
So it gets accepted by ONE vote -I think that means that, if one of the abstentions had been "no" it would have failed
Columbia was clapping wildly so presumably voted in favour - or perhaps no one wants to be seen to be a country which voted against!!

13 were PRO, so this means I think that all Asian countries supported it

Quite a political statement of Palestine follows. Not a great idea I think

I think everyone might as well "go home" as it represents a major stage in the further politicisation of World Heritage v objective and considered inscriptions (IMHO)

(although I do get myself an additional visited "tick"!)