ABA Panel Discussion on Protecting Cultural Property in Wartime

On November 3, 2010, the ABA's Art and Cultural Heritage law section will sponsor a panel discussion on protecting cultural property in the event of armed conflict at the ABA's International Law Section Fall Meeting in Paris.

Panel members include Irina Bokova (invited) , UNESCO's chief, Karl von Hapsburg of the Blue Shield, Hays Parks of the US Department of Defense (invited) and Jiri Toman from Santa Clara University.

Patty Gerstenblith of DePaul University will serve as panel chair.

Interestingly, Karl von Hapsburg is also the grandson of his namesake Karl, the last Austro-Hungarian Emperor, who is on track to become a Saint of the Roman Catholic Church. Karl, like his father, Otto, has been very prominent in EU affairs. Otto gave up his claims to the crown in 1961 so that he could return to his native Austria. See http://www.antiquesatoz.com/habsburg/habsburg-family.htm and http://www.insidethevatican.com/articles/otto-von-habsburg.htm#G1277239881828

Mother of All Conspiracy Theories: "Cultural Cleansing in Iraq"

The Iraq Crisis List has publicized a new book entitled, "Cultural Cleansing in Iraq Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered."

According to Iraq Crisis,

Convention sees accidents of war and poor planning in a campaign to liberate Iraqis. The authors argue instead that the invasion aimed to dismantle the Iraqi state to remake it as a client regime.

See https://lists.uchicago.edu/web/arc/iraqcrisis/2009-11/msg00011.html

As further set forth in Iraq Crisis description, this nefarious plan was supposedly accomplished in a manner that would have made Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin proud-- with US government complicity in the extermination of Iraqi intellectuals and in the destruction of Iraq's cultural heritage.

The archaeological commmunity has certainly used gross exaggeration about the looting of the Iraq Museum and archaeological sites as a "wedge issue" to further both an anti-collecting ideology and to shame Western governments into spending millions to fund their work "to save Iraqi archaeology." See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/11/myths-of-babylon.html and http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/11/babylon-revisited.html Yet, the allegations in this new book take matters to a whole new level.

Meanwhile, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has blamed the recent bombings of government buildings in downtown Baghdad on members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party allied with the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq. See http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/10/25-1 Perhaps, the authors of this new work might also want to consider the part these groups played in creating the post-Invasion chaos that Iraq only seems to be leaving behind ever so slowly.

WW II Veteran Returns Books to German Embassy

The New York Times has carried an AP Story about a former GI returning books he found at the end of WW II to the German Embassy. See http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/10/06/us/politics/AP-US-Law-Books-Germany.html

At the time, he thought he was "liberating" some souvenirs. Today, however, such activities are frowned upon, at least officially.

In any event, it is nice that Germany finally has received back the books, though I suspect they are of limited monetary value.

Will the gesture encourage others to return similar "liberated items?" Perhaps. As WW II Veterans leave us, their children may be less attached to such items, and hence may be more inclined to follow suit, at least in cases where they know their significance.

Culture and Conflict: The United States and the 1954 Hague Convention

The Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation and the United States Committee for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield have announced a conference on Oct. 22-23, 2009, about the domestic and international implementation of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. See http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/events/lcchp-events/culture-conflict-conference

Both these organizations were instrumental in getting the United States Senate to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention, see http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/search/label/1954%20Hague%20Convention and the topic is an important one.

I also understand that there will be an earlier, invitation only "closed forum" on domestic implementation of the 1954 Hague Convention with government decision makers as well.

This begs the question why such secrecy is necessary and again suggests that archaeological organizations often seem to get "behind the scenes" access not readily available to others. Surely, despite protestations to the contrary by some elements within the archaeological community, see http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/08/caari-vp-ellen-herscher-response-to.html , archaeologists do lobby, and quite effectively at that.

US Ratifies the Hague Convention: More Successful Lobbying By Archaeological Community

The Safe Corner Blog reports that the US has deposited its instrument of ratification of the Hague Convention. See:http://safecorner.savingantiquities.org/2009/03/us-ratifies-hague-convention.html

This marks the end of a successful campaign by the archaeological community to press the US Government to formally accept the document. For a past entry on this issue, see: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/us-senate-finally-ratifies-1954-hague.html

The AIA and related groups should be commended for their efforts on this issue. What is odd, though, is that some in the archaeological community continue to deny that archaeologists "lobby" even where it should be self-evident that they do so, and are quite effective at it.

Russians and Georgians Trade Charges Over War Damage

The Art Newspaper reports that Russia and Gerogia are trading charges over war damage to cultural sites within Georgia and the break away region of South Ossetia. See: http://www.theartnewspaper.com/article.asp?id=16452

It seems churches and monasteries were hit especially hard. Presumably, this is due to the sheer number of such structures and the lack of many other targets of cultural significance. Apparently, there simply are more historic religious structures in the area than anything else given Christianity's long history in Georgia and the general lack of development in the border region.

Certainly, the damage that has been reported to cultural sites seems to be more of the collateral sort. There does not appear to be the sort of destruction directed at religious structures that occurred in the Balkans during the breakup of Yugoslavia. This probably should not be too surprising. Both the Russians and the Georgians are adherents to the Orthodox Christian faith.

In another move, the Georgian government has decided to convert an old museum in Gori dedicated to Stalin (who was born there) into a "museum of Russian aggression." Presumably, this move is yet another slap at Putin and the current Russian government. As noted elsewhere in today's New York Times, Russia has started to rehabilitate Stalin into a nationalist hero. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/27/world/europe/27archives.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=todayspaper ("Last year, the Kremlin promoted a study guide for high school teachers that deems Stalin “one of the most successful leaders of the U.S.S.R.,” while describing his “cruel exploitation” of the population. Mr. Putin himself has acknowledged the losses under Stalin, but has said Russians should not be made to feel ashamed of them.")

US Senate Finally Ratifies 1954 Hague Convention

Patty Gerstenblith, the President of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation, sent out the following announcement:

The Archaeological Institute of America, the Lawyers’ Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation, and the U.S. Committee for the Blue Shield announce that the United States Senate voted on September 25 to give its advice and consent to ratification of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.
The United States now joins 121 other nations in becoming a party to this historic treaty which establishes the principles for protecting cultural sites, monuments and collections during both armed conflict and military occupation. By taking this significant step, the United States demonstrates its commitment to the preservation of the world’s cultural, artistic, religious and historic legacy.

The Library of Congress "Thomas" search engine (http://thomas.loc.gov/) indicates that the 1954 Hague Convention was acceded to with the following "understandings:"

Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein),-

720SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO UNDERSTANDINGS AND A DECLARATION

The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, concluded on May 14, 1954 (Treaty Doc. 106-1(A)), subject to the understandings of section 2 and the declaration of section 3.-720

SECTION 2. UNDERSTANDINGS

The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is subject to the following understandings, which shall be included in the instrument of ratification:

(1) It is the understanding of the United States of America that ``special protection,'' as defined in Chapter II of the Convention, codifies customary international law in that it, first, prohibits the use of any cultural property to shield any legitimate military targets from attack and, second, allows all property to be attacked using any lawful and proportionate means, if required by military necessity and notwithstanding possible collateral damage to such property.

(2) It is the understanding of the United States of America that any decision by any military commander, military personnel, or any other person responsible for planning, authorizing, or executing military action or other activities covered by this Convention shall only be judged on the basis of that person's assessment of the information reasonably available to the person at the time the person planned, authorized, or executed the action under review, and shall not be judged on the basis of information that comes to light after the action under review was taken.

(3) It is the understanding of the United States of America that the rules established by the Convention apply only to conventional weapons, and are without prejudice to the rules of international law governing other types of weapons, including nuclear weapons.

(4) It is the understanding of the United States of America that, as is true for all civilian objects, the primary responsibility for the protection of cultural objects rests with the Party controlling that property, to ensure that it is properly identified and that it is not used for an unlawful purpose.

-720SECTION 3. DECLARATION

The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is subject to the following declaration:With the exception of the provisions that obligate the United States to impose sanctions on persons who commit or order to be committed a breach of the Convention, this Convention is self-executing. This Convention does not confer private rights enforceable in United States courts.

It is my own understanding that the United States Military already largely followed the Convention anyway. Presumably, the Senate's "understandings" reflect current US military views on how the Convention should be applied in practice.

While the Senate's ratification is thus probably largely symbolic, the Lawyers' Committee, the AIA, the U.S. Committee for the Blue Shield and others still deserve credit for encouraging action on an instrument that has been languishing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee since 1999. Still, one must recognize that the 1954 Hague Convention has been spectacularly unsuccessful in preventing damage to cultural property in places like the Balkans and most recently, Georgia. Only the real commitment of national authorities, military commanders, and the troops on the ground can ensure cultural property is indeed protected as much as possible given the exigencies of war.

Georgia on My Mind

Tom Flynn ("ArtKnows") has a comprehensive report about the distrubing situation in Georgia on his blog: http://tom-flynn.blogspot.com/2008/08/fog-of-war-obscures-state-of-cultural.html

I'm a bit surprised that Saving Antiquities for Everyone ("SAFE") (http://www.savingantiquities.org/) only has this link on its website: http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=5071. The story from a Russian source ("Interfax") reads like old fashioned Soviet "Agitprop" to me.

Georgia has a long and rich history. Recently, the Sackler Gallery at the Smithsonian Institution held a spectacular exhibit of ancient grave goods called, "Wine Worship and Sacrifice: the Golden Graves of Ancient Vani-- Treasures from Georgia." See: http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/online/Gold/default.html Hopefully, the destruction of cultural sites is not as bad as some of the initial reports suggest. In any event, this seems to be another situation where the existence of the 1954 Hague Convention meant little to the combatants.

LCCHP Program on the Fate of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict -- Interesting, but Incomplete

What do you get when you go to a program sponsored by an interest group founded by a well known lawyer for the archaeological community, a law firm that specializes in restitution of Nazi spoils and a well known and respected historical preservation group? Answer: a well done, but incomplete view of cultural property issues and conflicts from WW II to the Second Gulf War.

The underlying theme of the program put together by the Lawyer's Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation was one of contrasts. Unlike our nation's heroic preservation efforts in WW II, Donald Rumsfeld and the Bush administration dropped the ball in protecting Iraq's cultural artifacts in Gulf War II. We, therefore, need to make preservation of cultural property in conflict a high priority. In particular, the US must accede to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property.

Certainly such a narrative has some popular appeal, but I am not sure it is entirely accurate. To the sponsor's credit, they did invite several panelists associated with the military who did question aspects of it. Sure, the "monument men" (and women) of WW II did a good job of gathering artifacts looted by the Nazis, but they were very few in number (only about 50), particularly given the immense size of the invading force and the territory they needed to cover. Moreover, the WW II military benefited from being able to draft knowledgeable people, particularly from the museum world. In contrast, today's military is much smaller and there does not seem to be many academics willing to volunteer to serve as modern "monuments men" or women.

The military panelists were somewhat less forthright on issues of targeting. Sure, they highlighted the fact that US forces did their utmost to avoid targeting cultural treasures in Gulf War II. On the other hand, they failed to acknowledge that WW II is filled with examples of priceless cultural treasures being bombed to oblivion. Monte Cassino and Dresden are only two such architectural and artistic treasures that have been forever changed as a result. Thus, in my opinion, our armed force's record in WW II is simply not as good as was advertised nor is the record of our forces in Gulf War II anywhere as bad as is often portrayed.

While all this is well and good, the program predictably glossed over any fact that might call into question the archaeological community's support for the cultural nationalism of source countries. Thus, no one dared suggest that the looting of the Iraq Museum may have been at least in part motivated by the Shia majority's desire to strike at the Baathist regime's blatant use of the symbolism of Iraq's past to justify its tyrannical rule. Moreover, while one panelist spoke eloquently of the destruction of Croat and Bosnian cultural monuments in the Balkans in the 1990's, no one connected these depredations to the hyper-nationalism of the Serbian government. One instance recounted was particularly vicious. Serbian militia blew up a historic mosque in Foca, Bosnia and used the rubble to cover a mass grave of Bosnian Muslim victims from the town. The intent was clear. Ethnic cleansing topped off with cultural cleansing. With such facts, it is hard to ignore the way governments use and abuse artifacts of the past for their own political purposes. Yet, the program managed to do just that.