UNESCO is Powerless

In a quote taken from an article on UNESCO, Francesco Bandarin, director of UNESCO's World Heritage Centre, admitted that UNESCO only had moral power and could not place restrictions upon countries.
It's interesting that we are studying UNESCO so in-depth, when they really have no power. Moreover, the article raised an important fact: the sites listed on UNESCO only account for a small fraction of sites in the world that require protection. The problems lies in the fact that countries place certain sites up for nomination. Therefore, countries can pick and choose which sites are important to cultural heritage. How is this fair to the world, if heritage belongs to us all? Countries are picking and choosing what deserves to be preserved and what should be left to detriorate. I believe that countries purposely pick and choose what will become a UNESCO site in order to generate money. If a site is listed on the UNESCO World heritage list, the more likely tourists will visit the site and the surrounding area.

The site of Iwami Ginzan is a specific example of a country attempting to utilize UNESCO to generate money. While the site had no "outstanding universal value" it still won the bid to become a World Heritage Site.

From article: As one conservationist responsible for a British World Heritage site, who preferred not to be named, put it: "A site that will not be of interest to paying visitors isn't going to be a priority. Unesco wants people to go there. They call it public education. We call it tourism."

The problem still remains that UNESCO has no political power over sites. If a country chooses to take control over a site, then UNESCO will put in "In Danger" yet they cannot actually do anything to stop destruction other than lobbying for protection. One could argue that promoting awareness can be just as beneficial to the preservation of sites, however UNESCO has only a small fraction of sites that need to be protected on their list. If cultural heritage needs to be protected, then why be so stingy on which sites are accepted?

Only one site has even been delisted from UNESCO when Oman descided to deplete the The Arabian Oryx Sanctuary by 90%. Instead of actually placing sanctions on Oman, UNESCO simply delisted it. Now, because of UNESCO not coperating with Oman to ENSURE a solution be made, the population of the Onyx has gone from 450 to only 4 mating pairs left. Is this at all acceptable?

UNESCO is of course aware of the issue, but the absolutly need to gain some form of autonomy over the sites that they sign to the list, otherwise the sites are only protected on paper and countries can still do what they please with them.