scholarly journals International protection of the cultural heritage in case of armed conflict

Locus Amoenus ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 249
Author(s):  
Francesc-Josep de Rueda i Roigé
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Protection

International Criminalization of Offences Relating to Cultural Property

2019 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Danil Sergeev
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Cultural Value ◽  
Direct Connection ◽  
International Protection ◽  
International Instruments

The article evaluates current conditions of international criminalization of offences relating to cultural property and makes a brief historical review of developing international protection of cultural property and elaborating a corresponding notion. Having analyzed the international instruments, the author concludes that offences relating to cultural property may include deliberate seizure, appropriation, demolition as well as any other forms of destruction or damage to objects and items protected under the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict committed during international and non-international armed conflicts. These offences do not include such possible acts toward universal cultural values committed either beyond any armed conflict or without direct connection with it. Taking the examples of destruction of Buddhas of Bamiyan, Nimrud, Palmyra, and mausoleums of Timbuktu, the author states that international criminalization of offences relating to cultural property is insufficient, because it does not encompass such cases when objects or items of cultural value are damaged or destroyed under the control of national administrations or with their knowledge.

Culture, conflict and armed non-state actors: cultural heritage protection in a changing operating environment

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Dunkley
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Operating Environment ◽  
Content Type ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

PurposeThis paper examines the implications, for States Parties, of the 1954 Convention safeguarding regime in the context of contemporary non-international armed conflict and ANSAs, with a general focus on the Middle East and in situ cultural property.Design/methodology/approachAs the nature of conflict changes and armed forces become further engaged in supporting peacekeeping operations and deliver training to host nation security forces, and human security becomes an increasingly important function of military operations, the protection of cultural heritage (as an expression of a people's identity) becomes a significant contribution to individual operations.FindingsInternational obligations to States Parties for the in situ protection of cultural heritage, under both International Humanitarian Law and HC54, become an ever increasing important responsibility for armed forces to help deliver.Research limitations/implicationsWhile NATO is increasingly focussed on the defence of western states parties from threats posed by the Russian Federation, and observing a commercially and military assertive China, a recent report issued by the Pentagon noted that the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is regrouping in Iraq faster than in Syria and could regain territory in six to twelve months in the absence of sustained military pressure.Practical implicationsPreservation in situ is used by heritage professionals to refer to the protection of a cultural heritage asset in its original location while the in situ protection of cultural property is a cornerstone topic of the 1954 Hague Convention Special Protection category. The Convention was drafted with international armed conflict in mind but the initial signatories to the Convention had sufficient foresight to consider non-international armed conflict and its potential effect on in situ cultural property by parties to the conflict, including Armed Non-State Actors (ANSA)Social implicationsUN Security Council Resolution 2449 (December 2018) recognized the negative impact of the presence, violent extremist ideology and actions on stability in Syria and the region of both Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Al-Nusrah Front (ANF). This includes not only the devastating humanitarian impact on civilian populations but also the unlawful destruction of cultural heritage.Originality/valueANSAs comprise individuals and groups that are wholly or partly independent of State governments and which threaten or use violence to achieve their goals, such as Islamic State. As such, the military operating environment has changed since 1954.

Kevin Chamberlain, War and Cultural Heritage. Pp. 333. Leicester: Institute of Art and Law, 2004.

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 281-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Hladík
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Scholarly Article ◽  
Book Editor

When I was asked by Dr. O'Keefe, Book Editor of the International Journal of Cultural Property, to review “War and Cultural Heritage” by Kevin Chamberlain I immediately agreed because I wished to see the first scholarly article-by-article commentary on the 1999 Second Protocol (“the Second Protocol”) to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (“the Convention”) as well as another commentary on the Convention and the 1954 First Protocol.

The Hague Convention of 1954: History, Significance and Compliances

1992 ◽  
Vol 267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Angel Corzo
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
The Past ◽  
Unesco Convention ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

ABSTRACTThe UNESCO Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, signed at the Hague in 1954, is a document that reflects 20th century thinking on the means to safeguard the world's cultural heritage. It is our task to transform it into one that anticipates the challenges of the 21st century. First, then, we should pay homage to those individuals who had the spirit and the resolve to formulate the Convention and its Protocol. Second, we should admit that the Convention's effectiveness has been minimized in the past, largely due to a Euclidean conceptualization of the problem when in fact during war the axioms become spontaneously non-Euclidean, non-linear and highly chaotic. Clearly there is a need to reevaluate its premises in fresh ways, and to strengthen it in the context of the New Age that shall define the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document