No Longer Lost in the Wilderness:

This article seeks to analyze and explain the UNESCO’s procedures for the protection of cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq through comparative method and use of library resources. Cultural heritage in these countries has been always prone to destruction and theft due to armed conflicts. The terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq seek to eradicate the culture and identity of these two countries through destruction of cultural heritage (cultural cleansing) or illicit trade of cultural heritage. UNESCO has focused on combating cultural crimes within a special procedure, known as “Cultural Heritage Regime”, in order to protect the cultural heritage. According to the analysis of the present paper, UNESCO has failed to prevent the destruction of the cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq. However, this organization has been successful in reconstructing cultural heritage of Syria and Iraq. It also has acted successfully in cooperating with relevant institutions in order to confront with cultural crimes. Having regard to the UNESCO’s legal procedure, most of the rules applied to the status of cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq are related to the international rules for the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflicts, which include the UNESCO’s 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Heritage in the Event of Armed Conflict and its protocols, as well as customary international humanitarian law. Regarding the declarative procedure, UNESCO has played an important role in alerting the international public opinion in order to protect the cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq.

The article analyzes the actions of occupation of the territory of the Republic of Artsakh by Azerbaijan following the 44-day war and the ongoing destruction of cultural heritage within the context of grave crimes against humanity (genocide, ethnic cleansing, torture, aggression, war crimes). It examines them under the clauses of the Rome Statute and other international regulations regarding the protection of cultural heritage in times of war and in occupied territories. Additionally, it identifies the grounds according to which the destruction of the cultural heritage of the people of Artsakh can serve as a basis and evidence of the "violent" aspect of the displacement of Artsakh Armenians. The article presents the processes of destruction of Artsakh's tangible and intangible heritage or suspension of cultural practices as examples of violations of the fundamental right to culture of Artsakh Armenians and serious crimes against humanity. The paper attempts to link the policy processes of destroying the cultural heritage of Artsakh, implemented at the state level by Azerbaijani authorities, with the actions of forced displacement, considering them as mechanisms for the implementation of a unified anti-Armenian policy within the framework of the broad concept of cultural heritage. As a result of the study conducted, having analyzed the clauses of the Rome Statute and a number of international treaties regarding displacement and destruction of heritage, as well as the ongoing destruction of cultural heritage of Artsakh by Azerbaijan, we can claim that systematic destruction of the values of both tangible and intangible heritage of Artsakh and the elements of identity related thereto, as well as the processes of forced displacement of a part of Artsakh Armenians following the 44-day war, creating an atmosphere of threat and total distrust, are grave crimes against humanity (including genocide, ethnic cleansing, torture, acts of aggression, war crimes, and actions humiliating human dignity) and factors contributing to the total depopulation of Artsakh Armenians. The overarching goal of the policy of systematic destruction of Artsakh's cultural heritage by Azerbaijan was not only the conquest of the territory but also the change of the ethnic composition of the territory and the expulsion of the people of Artsakh from their homeland. Moreover, we can claim that under the Rome Statute and other international regulations, the destruction of the cultural heritage of the people of Artsakh can serve as a basis and evidence of the "violent" aspect of displacement of Artsakh Armenians. The right to culture of Artsakh Armenians, including the right to communicate, enjoy, and pass on the heritage to the generations, was undermined by the forced displacement and destruction of the cultural heritage. Taking into consideration the significance of cultural heritage in terms of collectivity as well, the great role it played in ensuring the identity and social unity of Artsakh Armenians and their loss as a result of displacement, we can affirm that as a result of the processes mentioned, Artsakh Armenians were deprived of their natural right to recreate and ensure the continuity of their identity.

Perishing Heritage:

Conflict over cultural heritage has increasingly become a standard part of war. Today, systematic exploitation, manipulation, attacks, and destruction of cultural heritage by state and non-state actors form part of most violent conflicts across the world. Such acts are often intentional and based on well-planned strategies for inflicting harm on groups of people and communities. With this increasing awareness of the role cultural heritage plays in war, scholars and practitioners have progressed from seeing conflict-related destruction of cultural heritage as a cultural tragedy to understanding it as a vital national security issue. There is also a shift from the desire to protect cultural property for its own sake to viewing its protection as connected to broader agendas of peace and security. Concerns about cultural heritage have thus migrated beyond the cultural sphere to worries about the protection of civilians, the financing of terrorism, societal resilience, post-conflict reconciliation, hybrid warfare, and the geopolitics of territorial conflicts. This volume seeks to deepen public understanding of the evolving nexus between cultural heritage and security in the twenty-first century. Drawing on a variety of disciplines and perspectives, the chapters in this volume examine a complex set of relationships between the deliberate destruction and misuse of cultural heritage in times of conflict, on the one hand, and basic societal values, legal principles, and national security, on the other.

Since the 1990s, situations in which culturally significant heritage sites serve as symbolic targets for intentional attacks, leading to the 'destruction of enemy communities,' have frequently occurred. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), established to prosecute serious violations of international humanitarian law within the former Yugoslav territories, addresses prominent cases of intentional attacks and destruction of cultural property during the armed conflict, specifically targeting the annihilation of ethnic identity. This article examines the implications and limitations of international legal norms regarding the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflicts, focusing on the Dubrovnik Old Town shelling incident, a representative case of cultural property destruction prosecuted by the ICTY. Firstly, the intentional destruction of cultural heritage is undeniably a significant violation of values that the international community must protect. The pursuit of individual criminal responsibility for the destruction of cultural heritage within the international criminal tribunal signifies a substantial advancement in international efforts to protect cultural heritage during armed conflicts. The negative impact of the intentional destruction of cultural property on human dignity and universal human values is undeniable. However, ensuring effective protection of cultural property in the current normative context, where attacks on cultural property for military purposes may be justified, remains challenging. Secondly, military necessity, rooted in customary international law, limits attacks on enemy forces to military objectives, focusing on the centralization of enemy forces, balancing the military necessity of concentrated attacks on enemy forces with humanitarian considerations to protect civilian objects. However, determining what qualifies as a military objective can be challenging, as it depends on the circumstances of combat and operations. Regardless of whether the principle of proportionality is applicable, evaluating the military necessity from the perspective of cultural heritage protection is crucial. ICTY recognizes that even when military necessity justifies attacks on civilian objects, the intentional destruction of cultural heritage can have a significant impact on the psychological well-being of civilians and may upset the balance with military superiority. Thus, careful consideration is necessary when assessing the military necessity in cases where the protection of cultural property, with a higher need for protection than general civilian objects, is involved. Moreover, even if a target has dual-use, being considered a military objective, evaluating proportionality in the attack is essential to prevent harm to civilians, in accordance with the principle of proportionality. In conclusion, the intentional destruction of cultural heritage should be treated as a threat to the common values of the international community, necessitating appropriate legal and policy responses in line with the actual circumstances of the armed coflict. Military commanders should not only view attacks on cultural heritage as inevitable collateral damage but also recognize the gravity of such acts as war crimes and consider them strategically within military operations.

This article considers whether there are any gaps within the legal framework protecting cultural heritage from attacks conducted by non-state armed groups. It first looks at the existing obligations of states vis-a-vis non-state armed groups with regard to the protection of such heritage, in particular their obligations stemming from the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. It also examines the obligations of non-state armed groups with regard to cultural heritage, clarifying their obligations under international humanitarian law, including customary international norms, and other sources of international law. Finally, this article discusses accountability mechanisms, in particular with the application of international criminal law to prosecute the members of non-state armed groups who have conducted attacks against cultural property.

Several national and international initiatives and responses to promote and protect cultural heritage have emerged in the wake of the revolutionary movements—or the so-called Arab Spring—in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) that turned into armed conflicts in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq. The destruction of cultural heritage differs in form and extent between regions and countries. A steady stream of photos and articles have been produced to document the damage, highlighting the cultural history and significance of specific areas, buildings and monuments (e.g. Ali, 2013; Brodie, 2015; Casana, 2015; Casana & Panahipour, 2014; Cunliffe, 2012, 2014; Danti, 2015; Fisk, 2008; Kila, 2013; Newson & Young, 2017; Stone, 2013, 2015). Efforts have also been made to encourage the preservation and conservation of endangered cultural heritage sites in an attempt to strengthen and maintain the identity and memory of those sites among local people (Al Quntar, 2013; Al Quntar, Hanson, Daniels, & Wegener, 2015; Munawar, 2017a). It has been argued that these initiatives to safeguard heritage in the midst of conflict are new forms of colonialism and have already been reinforced by over a century of Western archaeological excavations that have deepened imperialist agendas in the Middle East. The ruination and devastation that have occurred—and are still occurring—in Syria and Iraq have drawn attention to many studies that are concerned with the preservation and conservation of damaged cultural heritage. This chapter focuses on the initiatives of the world community that are concerned with the destruction of cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq in an effort to clarify the forms of intervention (i.e. workshops, training, press releases, petitions, lectures, etc.), their temporal duration (i.e. short, mid, long term), timing (i.e. dates of establishment and implementation, etc.), and physical location (i.e. locally, nationally, regionally, and internationally). The chapter goes on to analyze to what extent the world community’s efforts have succeeded in safeguarding cultural heritage sites from damage or destruction and how research projects have overlapped in their approaches. To conclude, it demonstrates how social media platforms, such as Facebook, Blogs, YouTube, and so forth, have been utilized to preserve cultural heritage.

INTRODUCTION. In recent decades, there has been an escalation of armed clashes in the territories of African states, the states of the Middle East and Central Asia with the participation of military formations, international terrorist groups that everywhere use the practice of attacking and looting cultural property as a military strategy. In this regard, of scientific and practical interest is a comprehensive study of the legal and organizational foundations of international legal regulation of the protection of cultural property during armed conflicts, evaluation of their effectiveness and identification of promising tasks for the development of additional measures and strategies for the preservation of cultural heritage, taking into account new challenges and threats.MATERIALS AND METHODS. This paper examines the provisions of key international treaties, decisions of the main bodies and specialized agencies of the UN, which together form the existing international legal regime for the protection of cultural property in armed conflict. The author also analyzes the jurisprudence of international criminal justice bodies on bringing individuals to justice for deliberate attacks on cultural sites as part of hostilities. Special attention is paid to the study of scientific works of both domestic and foreign scientists, within which international legal concepts are formed, designed to resolve existing problems in the current international legal regulation of the issue under study, as well as to form promising concepts in the framework of the development of the doctrine of international law. The methodological basis is made up of general scientific and special research methods.RESEARCH RESULTS. According to the results of the study, it was found that during the XX century states have consistently developed norms for the protection of cultural property from threats associated with armed conflicts, while the XXI century was marked by best practice in the application of the rules on liability for attacks on cultural property in situations of armed conflict in the activities of international justice bodies. In addition, it was determined that for the first time in the history of UN peacekeeping, the UN Security Council tested the mandate of the Multidisciplinary Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali, in which the peacekeeping contingent, among other things, performed the tasks of protecting, safeguarding and restoring cultural heritage sites together with UNESCO. It seems significant to identify and generalize the prospects for the development of new international legal measures for the preservation of cultural heritage for future generations, taking into account the changing nature of armed conflicts, the intensification of the activities of international terrorist groups and the growing practice of destroying the centuries-old cultural heritage of peoples in the framework of the so-called “cultural cleansing". The topical aspect of the study was the establishment of new approaches of states to the protection of cultural heritage as a means of ensuring international peace and security.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The publication presents the author's objective assessments of the established international legal framework, judicial practice of international criminal justice bodies, as well as doctrinal approaches of both domestic and foreign scientists on the issue of international legal regulation of the protection of cultural property during armed conflicts. Separately, the forms of international legal cooperation of states at the UN site within the framework of the UNESCO profile organization for the development of modern regulatory and organizational foundations for the interaction of the competent authorities of states to prevent and suppress the destruction of cultural heritage, as well as the looting and illegal export of cultural property in the event of an armed conflict, especially terrorist groups.

Syrian Cultural Property in the Crossfire:

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Cultural values are part of human dignity and civilian life. Cultural property must be primarily protected during armed conflicts as well as during peacetime. Unfortunately, in armed conflicts, culture has often been one of the primary victims of conflict. As a matter of fact, the parties to the conflict usually target the cultural heritage militarily or politically in order to demoralize the targeted society and show their superiority. During the armed conflicts, many cultural heritages, many of them world heritage, have been destroyed or damaged. The destruction of cultural heritage fuels violence, hatred and revenge among people and undermines the foundations of peace by impeding reconciliation even when conflicts are over. The protection of cultural property in international law is regulated in many international documents. However, the first international regulation prepared by UNESCO on the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict, “The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict” has a special importance. International law requires the protection of cultural heritage in armed conflicts. Recent history, however, provides numerous examples of the deliberate destruction or its use to secure a military objective. This leads to questioning whether international law provides adequate protection to cultural heritage in times of armed conflict. The study aims to examine what should be understood from the concept of cultural property in terms of international law, what the international regulations are in this regard and whether these regulations are sufficient, on the basis of the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Properties during Armed Conflicts, and to make some observations and comments.

The Aftermath of Destruction of Cultural Heritage: Factoring In Cultural Rights in Post-Conflict Recovery Processes

This article undertakes a comparative analysis of the two main international legal instruments providing for offences against cultural property and cultural heritage in times of armed conflict in order to assess existing gaps and lacunas, and to make suggestions on how better to advance the protection of cultural property through international criminal law. The International Criminal Court Statute takes a very retrograde attitude to this kind of crime – which the author calls the civilian-use approach – whereas the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict seems far more innovative, preferring a cultural-value oriented approach. The author concludes that the latter approach is more appropriate and that, at present, the most effective tool for pursuing war crimes against cultural property is Protocol II to the 1954 Hague Convention. It is thus crucial to promote ratification by a large number of states and to encourage states to adopt implementing legislation that may allow domestic judges to prosecute the most serious crimes against cultural heritage on the basis of jurisdictional criteria provided for in Protocol II to the 1954 Hague Convention.

Intentional destruction of cultural heritage by extremist non-State actors—be it by the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL) in Syria, Iraq, and Libya, or Boko Haram in Nigeria—is on the rise. Using the destruction of cultural heritage in Mali in 2012–13 as a case study, this chapter argues that the creation of the self-proclaimed independent State of ‘Azawad’ in Mali became a ‘test case’ for the United Nations’ will and capacity to prevent further destruction of world cultural heritage, and it also analyzes the legal foundation of the 2013 French military Operation Serval in Mali. It also discusses the responsibility to protect as applied to cultural heritage, evaluates the subsequent deployment of the United Nations MINUSMA, and evaluates the mandate given by UN Security Council Resolution 2100 (2013), the first in UN history that included comprehensive protection of cultural and historical sites as a task of a UN peacekeeping operation. Therefore, the chapter reviews critically not only the mandate of MINUSMA, but also its potential relevance concerning future culture-embedded UN peace missions, and also contributes to the debate of the usefulness of more ‘robust’ cultural protection action by the United Nations.

Located at numerous historical interfaces (i.e. between Eastern and Western Christendom, and between the Ottoman and Habsburg empires), Bosnia and Herzegovina boasts an exquisite cultural heritage, with a rich ethnic and religious diversity. Unlike other Yugoslav countries, Bosnia and Herzegovina was home to a demographic patchwork comprising three principal ethno-national/ethno-religious groups: Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims), Bosnian Croats (Roman Catholics) and Bosnian Serbs (Orthodox Christians). This proved to be the trigger point for a very aggressive race for territory and ethno-national exclusivism in Bosnia after the breakup of Yugoslavia. This, among other things, resulted in the systematic and deliberate destruction of cultural and religious heritage during the 1992–1995 Bosnian War.