Interesting item on a rule change which Japan got made in 2021 regarding nominations for the UNESCO Memory of the World Register (MWR). It was brought about specifically to prevent the registration by China and others of documents related to "Japanese military's wartime sexual slavery system." and only applies to the MWR. This Korean article comments that the same logic should be adopted regarding "controversial" WHS nominations (particularly to Sado Island!) - namely that "registrations would be halted in the event of objections from member countries, allowing dialogue to proceed indefinitely between the countries in question."

"Prime Minister Fumio Kishida's government previously considered delaying the Sado Island nomination but apparently reversed itself after facing growing pressure from ultra-conservatives in the ruling party known for their efforts to whitewash Japan's wartime past."

The specific "Ultra-conservatives in the ruling party" mentioned here was none other than Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (recently assassinated).

https://www.staradvertiser.com/2022/07/28/breaking-news/japans-push-for-unesco-to-list-divisive-gold-mine-delayed/

In another article, the "incomplete" status while vague, generally inferred that what was 'missing' was the full history of the mines that related to the 20th century. The politicization of the committee with such a divisive issue (as in 2015) was to be avoided.

UNESCO is said to have expressed concern to Japan about bringing the conflict between Korea and Japan over historical issues to the World Heritage Committee.

I felt sad for Japanese tax payers for this political game and how government acted to be supportive and not in the same time,

Example of Japanese "Ultra Conservative" views in this article "CULTURE UNESCO Heritage Campaign: Workers Thrived at Sado Mines, Contrary to Korea's Claims"

I looked up the publisher, "Japan Forward" and assumed I would discover a somewhat "fringe" nationalistic group - but no, it is owned by Sankei Shimbun, a reasonably big player in the Japanese Media World (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sankei_Shimbun )...... "JAPAN Forward is a new English-language news and opinion site by Sankei Shimbun, one of Japan's top newspapers, delivering sensible Japanese voices to the (world)" !!!!

Thailand's government approved to host WHC 2023

OK to sign Host Country Agreement with 10MUSD budget to host the meeting of at least 2,300 attendees. This kind of news I expected that Thai government already lobbied WHC members to agree in advance.

https://www.thaipost.net/general-news/206226/

So this will be where the fosaken 2022 WHC will converge?

Meetup 2023 in Thailand?

I plan to be there in February, but that may be a bit early...

Masouleh for 2023? "A team of UNESCO assessors is scheduled to visit Iran in autumn and evaluate Masouleh for possible inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage list,"

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/476021/Masouleh-one-step-closer-to-being-World-Heritage

This article is all kinds of confusing:

BiH could get the first natural Asset registered in the UNESCO Register of Natural Heritage

1. The keep on talking about the "UNESCO Register of Natural Heritage". I guess they mean a natural site for the World Heritage List?

2. They seem to be under the impression this site could be registered (= inscribed?) next year, so in 2023. Even if (1) no official candidacy has been proposed for the site and (2) a complete dossier hasn't been submitted yet. It seems they are still compiling data: "Those who do the revision of the world UNESCO list are very demanding and detailed – we are in regular correspondence with them and as soon as we finish a part of the work, we send it to them for revision and they return to us with suggestions".

3. Bosnia already has a natural site with the Primeval Beech Forests, yet the article talks about the "first natural Asset".

This newspaper, and the people behind the nomination, seem to have an optimistic view of the rapidity of the nomination process.

It's confusing indeed. At least it's already on the Tentative List. They may be aiming for 2024, as they are talking about a deadline in February (2023), when they will know if they are "accepted" (I think they mean they have to submit the dossier and hear whether it's complete or not) - it then takes another year for IUCN to drop by and write a report.
Maybe our Bosnia Herzegovina connaisseurs Jasam & Natasa know more? Would be a good opportunity to open a Bosnia Herzegovina topic (it doesn't have one yet).

Re Martin Brod - Una National Park
A bit more on this
This article in Bosnian (or Croatian?) refers to the source of the above article which was rather poorly reported in the Sarajevo Times. Note (Google Translated) "We wanted to present everything done so far, because we are already in the second third of the complete procedure. We professionally and professionally prepare the complete documentation, but we also implement all other activities, so we eagerly await the answer in February next year".

A better article is this (in English!) from the Croatian Tourist "magazine" the Plitvice Times, It makes it absolutely clear that the stage reached is that "At the meeting of the National Commission for UNESCO, the final document by which Milančev waterfall with a complex of waterfalls located in Una National Park, will be listed on the UNESCO World Heritage List was accepted.".....so still a way to go before presentation of a Nomination to UNESCO which will presumably take place in Feb 2023.

The second article also contains this "interesting" comment "In the forthcoming phase and after harmonization with the institutions of the Republic of Croatia, documentation for inclusion in the World Heritage List will be prepared." So - why is this event being reported in a Croatian media source and why should "harmonization" with Croatia be required? Well, it appears that the northern section of the Bosnian Una-Milančevo buk is only about 30kms from the nearest point in the Croatian Plitvice Lakes NP! I then found this article - "Plitvice Lakes National Park – Croatia and Una National Park – Bosnia and Herzegovina Feasibility study on establishing transboundary cooperation" from 2011 (Very early as the earlier articles talk of the process having started in 2017). Which leaves the question - what is the nature of this "cooperation" with Croatia which still requires "harmonisation" between the 2 countries? Is it to create a Transboundary site via a Bosnian extension to Plitvice Lakes or is it merely to ensure a degree of shared management across 2 nearly adjacent sites which share the same river?? At least the latter would be "necessary" but one might have thought that the former would have been "better" both in terms of managing the 2 sites but also as a demonstration of international cooperation in the region which would have been a major "plus point" to UNESCO/IUCN. However, I have (as yet) found no evidence that a full "Transboundary" extension is to be proposed. I note that there are still border and frontier access issues between the 2 countries along the Una River - This from a few years ago is an example of the sort of tensions existing between the 2 countries in the area which a shared WHS might help defuse!

Masouleh (Iran) confirmed as well: https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/477154/UNESCO-assessing-Masouleh-for-World-Heritage

The Cosmological Axis of Yogyakarta and its Historic Landmarks (Indonesia)

https://jogja.tribunnews.com/2022/09/29/pemda-diy-tunggu-rekomendasi-unesco-terkait-pengusulan-sumbu-filosofijadi-warisan-budaya-dunia