Protecting cultural heritage under fire The fragile role of international law

Protecting cultural heritage under fire: The fragile role of international law

The deliberate targeting of cultural heritage during armed conflict remains a grave concern. International law provides crucial instruments for protection, anchored by agreements such as the 1972 UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. These conventions represent a foundational effort to safeguard sites of historical and artistic significance, recognizing their intrinsic value beyond purely monetary terms.

However, the effectiveness of these legal frameworks is consistently challenged by violations and a lack of comprehensive enforcement. So far, numerous international resolutions have condemned attacks on historical and cultural sites and sought to establish mechanisms to prevent the destruction of national and global heritage during war. Recent experiences, however, show that these mechanisms face serious challenges in practice. Repeated actions by Israel in Jerusalem and attacks on the city’s cultural heritage, along with disregard for warnings from UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee, exemplify these challenges.

Despite repeated recommendations for Israel to refrain from excavations and destructive activities in the historic city and to cooperate with UNESCO monitoring missions, these directives have largely been ignored. The international community’s inability to prevent damage to the historic city of Odesa during the war in Ukraine further demonstrates that even World Heritage designation does not necessarily protect sites in active conflict zones. Widespread destruction of cultural heritage in Syria and Iraq by ISIS, coupled with a lack of effective legal prosecution, has limited UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee to advisory roles during crises. However, it seems that effective post-conflict support can be realized, as seen in the reconstruction of Mosul in Iraq, the Mostar Bridge in Bosnia, and the Buddha statues in Afghanistan.

In one of the few effective international legal prosecutions, the destruction of historic mausoleums in Timbuktu, Mali, by extremist groups led to a prison sentence for the perpetrator. Nevertheless, to date, no head of state or commanding military officer of a hostile party has been convicted of such crimes. During the recent Israeli attacks on Gaza, a significant portion of Islamic world heritage was damaged. UNESCO’s efforts were largely limited to registering a site related to Christian history—the Monastery of Saint Hilarion (Tell Umm Amer / Monastery of Saint Hilarion) in Gaza. This occurred despite the high importance of Islamic heritage sites in Gaza. It should be noted that the selection and nomination of World Heritage sites is the responsibility of the member state, in this case largely influenced by the priorities of the Palestinian representation at UNESCO.

In this context, the recent war of Israel and the United States against Iran, conducted without authorization from the UN Security Council and, in the case of the U.S., without Congressional approval, conflicts with fundamental principles of international law. This war has highlighted serious concerns about the safety of Iran’s cultural heritage. Some of the country’s most significant historical sites were damaged, including Golestan Palace in Tehran and the historical complex of Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Isfahan, which encompasses Ali Qapu Palace, Chehel Sotoun Palace, and Shah Mosque (Imam Mosque). These sites, all listed as UNESCO World Heritage, constitute part of humanity’s cultural heritage, and any damage to them represents not only a national loss but also a blow to the shared cultural heritage of the world. From a legal perspective, Article 5 of the 1954 Hague Convention stipulates: “Cultural property shall not be the object of attack unless it has been used for military purposes and such use makes it a legitimate target.”

This article clarifies that cultural property should not be targeted unless it has been used for military purposes and thus becomes a legitimate military objective. In practice, this provision can be misinterpreted to justify attacks on cultural sites under vague claims of military necessity. For instance, hostile parties have justified attacks near Golestan Palace by claiming that a local police station within the site’s perimeter was targeted.

Local communities, however, know that this station serves only internal security functions, such as preventing theft, and does not constitute a cross-border military objective. It is clear that the Convention requires explicit clarification that, under no circumstances, should historical sites, particularly World Heritage sites, be subjected to attacks during armed conflicts.

Without such clarity, various pretexts can be used to justify harm to cultural heritage. Despite these limitations, UNESCO’s successful experiences demonstrate that the protection of cultural heritage during crises is possible. The reconstruction of Mosul, the Mostar Bridge, and the Buddha statues shows that international cooperation and serious legal follow-up can produce tangible, lasting results. While existing laws and conventions cannot guarantee full protection of historical sites, they play an important role in shaping global public opinion and highlighting the plight of countries facing the destruction of cultural heritage. Strengthening these legal frameworks and fostering international collaboration is essential for the effective protection of global heritage.

It is, however, deeply concerning that despite the issuance of an international arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court against the Prime Minister of Israel for crimes committed in Gaza, no practical steps have been taken to enforce this warrant. Ultimately, this inaction has contributed to the continuation of the war against Iran and the destruction of Iran’s World Heritage sites. Therefore, we must recognize that preventing destructive actions against World Heritage cannot rely solely on amending convention provisions; effective solutions require global cooperation, serious legal follow-up, and respect for international law. Hoping for peace and the protection of cultural heritage for all.

Mostafa PourAli is Former Director General of World Heritage Registration, Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism, and Handicrafts

source: tehrantimes.com