while also writing that "The absence of a field visit, plus the limited details of the Palestinian report, meant that ICOMOS "could not fully evaluate" the proposal or confirm that the site met the qualifications for inscription." and that "The actual text of the decision states that ICOMOS was not able to fully evaluate the site due to the absence of a field visit." and "The threats and violations reflect a long-standing and complex political situation" requiring "a political response". Professor and author Lynn Meskell compares the negotiations to list Hebron with the case of Battir, noting that Palestine had documented acts of vandalism, site damage and other attacks on the property and that the Palestinians requested the secretariat for a danger listing to ensure safeguarding and international standards of conservation. Orly Noy, writing for +972 Magazine, says that UNESCO considers whether a site is worth inclusion in the list and which national entity it falls under, that the resolution does not deny the Jewish connection to Hebron or the Tomb of the Patriarchs and that resolutions about Hebron recognize the fact that the city is holy to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam; but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that a Jewish connection to the site had been denied. In a pre-emption of the Palestinian nomination, in February 2010 the Israeli government had adopted the National Heritage Sites project including the Cave of the Patriarchs as well as other Palestinian sites; the moves was heavily criticized by the Obama administration,  and has been described as "ignor[ing] much of the cultural heritage of the land that cannot be characterized as exclusively Jewish". Subsequently in 2017, the U.S. announced that it was leaving UNESCO citing anti-Israel bias and Israel followed suit. This followed resolutions on Jerusalem in 2016 and the listing subject of this article. Washington’s arrears at the time were over $500 million. Their departure took effect at the end of 2018. As Daniel Marwecki concluded in a 2019 analysis of why the U.S. and Israel left UNESCO, "the current episode in the diplomatic drama of how the Israel-Palestine conflict unfolds on the stage of UNESCO needs to be seen historically and in terms of the changing American strategic and tactical outlook towards the UN."