When Culture Becomes Strategy
World Heritage tags are often greeted with jubilation—front-page headlines, local pride, a sense of belonging to something larger. Yet beneath the celebration lies a harder truth: heritage is political. It decides whose history is preserved and whose is left out, who benefits and who remains invisible. Far from neutral, UNESCO’s listings shape national prestige, invite global scrutiny, and sometimes ignite open conflict.
Vietnam’s Ha Long Bay captures this tension. For tourists, it is postcard beauty; for locals, it is livelihood; for UNESCO, it became a test case. Construction and unregulated development began eroding the fragile landscape until global intervention forced Hanoi to pause. For the fishermen, hoteliers, and politicians around the bay, the debate was not simply about conservation—it was about power, growth, and accountability. That is what World Heritage status often means: a stage where memory collides with modernity.
UNESCO and the Politics of Recognition
The World Heritage system, created in the 1970s, promised to safeguard the treasures of “all humankind.” But the process has always been entangled with diplomacy. To nominate a site is not just cultural—it is strategic. Governments prepare dossiers, lobby committees, and trade influence. Recognition confers legitimacy, but it also creates obligations, sometimes uncomfortable ones.
Different countries have played the game in different ways. China has actively pursued Silk Road sites, inserting the Belt and Road narrative into UNESCO’s very architecture. This is more than archaeology; it is statecraft, projecting a civilizational continuum that reinforces Beijing’s modern ambitions.
Europe offers another story. Venice, threatened by overtourism, was almost blacklisted by UNESCO as a heritage site “in danger.” The embarrassment was enough to force Italy’s hand, pushing it to finally restrict cruise ships. Here, UNESCO was less trophy, more whip—a reminder that heritage status comes with external pressure.
In the Middle East, heritage has been inseparable from sovereignty. Every UNESCO resolution concerning Jerusalem’s holy sites becomes a lightning rod. For Israelis and Palestinians alike, recognition or omission carries the weight of history. Heritage in this context is not background—it is battleground.
Beyond Tourism: The Economics of Memory
Governments know the financial stakes. Inscription means visibility; visibility brings visitors; visitors bring revenue. The World Bank has long noted that heritage can be an engine of growth, particularly in developing economies. But tourism is only part of the equation.
A UNESCO tag changes how a country presents itself. It strengthens city branding, bolsters arguments for cultural diplomacy, and even influences environmental debates. The Alto Douro Wine Region in Portugal is a telling case. Once inscribed, local communities successfully resisted a hydroelectric dam project that threatened the landscape. Heritage gave them international backing, turning local protest into a global cause.
This is why heritage is more than preservation. It is about shaping the present economy and the choices nations make for the future.
India’s Heritage Diplomacy: Between Pride and Pressure
Expanding the Map
India today stands with 44 World Heritage Sites, placing it among the top five countries globally. They range from Mughal tombs and Buddhist caves to the Himalayas and Western Ghats. Each new listing is celebrated as proof of India’s civilizational depth. The Maratha Military Landscapes, added in 2025, were hailed as recognition of Shivaji’s forts and the military genius of an empire. But they also sparked political debate in Maharashtra, where heritage and regional identity often walk hand in hand.
The Business of Memory
Numbers reveal the economic pull. Heritage tourism in India was worth nearly USD 32 billion in 2024, and projections suggest it may almost double in the next decade. Globally, the heritage tourism industry exceeded USD 700 billion that year, with the Asia-Pacific leading the pack. These figures explain why governments—from Delhi to Bhopal to Guwahati—see heritage as not just culture but commerce.
Politics of Inclusion
Recognition also shines a light on communities left out of the national story. The 2024 inscription of the CharaideoMoidam in Assam—burial sites of the Ahom dynasty—was more than a cultural nod. For the Northeast, historically neglected in India’s imagination, it was validation. It folded the region into the national heritage narrative while reinforcing India’s Act East policy, which seeks to integrate the Northeast with Southeast Asia.
Oceans and Ideas
India’s ambitions stretch beyond monuments. Through Project Mausam, launched in 2014, New Delhi sought to revive ancient maritime links across the Indian Ocean. Though modest in funding, it was symbolically important—casting India as a cultural anchor in a region where China pushes its Maritime Silk Road. Heritage, here, is Indo-Pacific diplomacy.
Fragile Foundations
Yet India’s own heritage sits uneasily with development pressures. Pollution scars the Taj Mahal. Hampi sees illegal construction. Khajuraho groans under unmanaged tourism. Studies repeatedly warn that sites in the Global South are particularly vulnerable—climate change, rapid urbanisation, and weak governance erode them faster than they can be saved. For India, the challenge is stark: can it use heritage as an engine of growth without grinding the heritage itself into dust?
Heritage and Modernity: The Double Bind
This is the catch. Heritage offers visibility and revenue, but modernisation often destroys it. Governments chase growth—roads, dams, factories—yet each project risks undercutting the very monuments that draw global respect.
Vietnam’s Ha Long Bay stands as a warning; Ethiopia’s Lalibela churches tell a similar story; India’s forts and temples confront it daily. Education, tourism, infrastructure, and identity all collide in these sites. Nations must navigate competing pressures, deciding whether to privilege short-term development or long-term legacy. The answers reveal how societies see themselves—and whose voices count in that vision.
Looking Ahead: Heritage in a Fragmented World
The geopolitics of UNESCO listings reflects the contradictions of our age. On the one hand, heritage strengthens identity, attracts tourism, and affirms civilizational narratives. On the other hand, it exposes nations to outside scrutiny and complicates their sovereignty.
For India, this duality is pronounced. Each new site inscribed affirms its cultural richness and bolsters its soft power. Yet the same recognitions come with expectations—better conservation, stronger governance, greater inclusivity. The pride surrounding the Maratha forts or the CharaideoMoidam coexists with anxiety: can India protect what it celebrates?
Globally, heritage is moving into the heart of politics. Climate change will bring new battles over fragile landscapes. Regional rivalries will seek validation in cultural history.
Transnational cooperation will depend as much on shared memory as on trade routes.
The question is not whether heritage will shape geopolitics—it already does. The question is whether nations will use it as a bridge to foster cooperation, dialogue, and responsibility, or as a weapon in disputes over belonging.
In this struggle between heritage and modernity lies a quiet but profound diplomatic challenge. Monuments do not speak, but the way nations use them tells us how they see themselves—and how they want the world to see them.
Leave a Reply