Facebook Twitter Linkedin Envelope

Threats to Heritage

The Blue Shield believes that even though damage to cultural property in conflict and natural disasters cannot be completely prevented, it can be limited. Proper preparations in peacetime, or acting in certain ways during and after conflict or emergencies, can mitigate some of the risks, limiting the damage. All of these preparations and activities, however, involve understanding the risks that heritage faces.

Based on current research (listed in our Document Library), the Blue Shield has identified key threats to heritage in conflict and disaster. These are a combination of types of damage and motivations for its destruction: it is only by understanding this combination that we can think about how to stop or mitigate each one. The threats primarily relate to tangible cultural heritage, like buildings, museum and library collections and archives, but it is important to also remember that the cultural rights of people are also affected by a conflict or a major environmental disaster. (For more on heritage destruction and cultural rights see our Law Library).

  • A threat (or hazard) is something that has the potential to cause damage or loss of value (here to cultural property)
  • Vulnerabilities are weaknesses that threats can act on.
  • The risk is how likely the threat is to occur and how great the consequence would be if it occurs, given the vulnerability.

So, for example, collateral damage is a threat, and it is considered reasonably likely to occur in conflict.
A national museum may be particularly vulnerable to being hit, and the consequences of loss if it is are very high, given the importance of its collections.

Therefore the risk of collateral damage to a national museum in conflict is high, and efforts should be dedicated towards mitigating the risk, such as those suggested in the 1954 Hague Convention. These include: identifying the museum as protected cultural property under Article 1 of the Convention, proactively implementing safeguarding measures in the museum in the event of conflict, and informing armed forces of the museum’s location to minimise the chances of collateral damage. (Read more about Risk Management in Cultural institutions in ICCROM’s ABC Method: a risk management approach to the preservation of cultural heritage).

The ruins of the well known belfry of Arras (Pas-de-Calais, France)

Lack of military awareness

A considerable amount of heritage has been damaged and destroyed by fighting simply because the armed forces were not aware of it, or of its importance.

A number of factors have worked to change this and increase awareness, including:

  • the negative press following the destruction of heritage in Iraq after the 2003 invasion by Coalition Forces, and the widespread coverage of heritage destruction in Syria;
  • the increased violence in Iraq after key heritage sites were destroyed;
  • the loss of community goodwill in Afghanistan after some sites were accidentally damaged;
  • the positive coverage of NATO’s heritage protection during Operation Unified Protector;
  • the raising of awareness raising by organisations such as the Blue Shield.

Since the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, most western military forces have accepted that warfare has changed and that troops require a much greater understanding of the place and population where they are deployed than previously considered necessary. NATO, for example, has developed what it calls its ‘Comprehensive Approach’ in which a better understanding of culture and cultural property can be seen as a mission relevant priority. With this change in mind-set has come a realisation within armed forces that partnership with heritage experts is essential. Following environmental disaster, as well, the military need to know if there are particular issues to take into account – for example, what can be cleared up immediately and what should be left for later expert attention.

Photo: The ruins of the well known belfry of Arras (Pas-de-Calais, France). Vintage postcard from 1915. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons

See key documents on CPP and the military in our Document Library , or see recent reports and documents by armed forces in our Document Library.

Read More Collapse
Map Showing Areas to Be Spared Destruction During World War II: Tubingen

Lack of planning

If cultural property protection is not identified as an issue either before an armed conflict, or when prioritising activity following an environmental disaster, no resources will be allocated to it. No preparations will be made for its protection (such as practicing emergency evacuation in museums), and no military unit will be allocated any responsibility for it. This may well lead to a situation where cultural property is ignored, damaged, destroyed, and/or looted.
 
Read More Collapse
photo of Bamiyan buddha statue before and after destruction

Specific (or Deliberate) targeting and damage

 
 
Read More Collapse
Destroyed buildings looking over a damaged Clock Tower in Raqqa

Collateral and accidental damage

It has been suggested frequently that most cultural property is destroyed during conflict through collateral damage (the unintentional or incidental damage, affecting facilities, equipment or personnel that are not justifiable military objectives) or accidental damage (the unintentional or incidental damage affecting facilities, equipment, or personnel). That is to say, either via the process of expected damage to something nearby that was not the actual target; or via entirely unintended damage. Shrapnel scarring on buildings, for example, is a common example of collateral damage if the target was not the building itself, but perhaps something nearby. On the other hand, aiming at a building in order to target those inside is deliberate damage, as the building is targeted in order to reach the people.
Read More Collapse

Enforced Neglect

 
Read More Collapse
Satellite image of recent military fortifications

Deliberate reuse of sites

Read More Collapse
Heavily damaged building

Development

Read More Collapse
stacks of art and boxes in a church

Looting and pillage

Read More Collapse
Scroll to Top
The ruins of the well known belfry of Arras (Pas-de-Calais, France)

Lack of military awareness

A considerable amount of heritage has been damaged and destroyed by fighting simply because the armed forces were not aware of it, or of its importance.

A number of factors have worked to change this and increase awareness, including:

  • the negative press following the destruction of heritage in Iraq after the 2003 invasion by Coalition Forces, and the widespread coverage of heritage destruction in Syria;
  • the increased violence in Iraq after key heritage sites were destroyed;
  • the loss of community goodwill in Afghanistan after some sites were accidentally damaged;
  • the positive coverage of NATO’s heritage protection during Operation Unified Protector;
  • the raising of awareness raising by organisations such as the Blue Shield.

Since the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, most western military forces have accepted that warfare has changed and that troops require a much greater understanding of the place and population where they are deployed than previously considered necessary. NATO, for example, has developed what it calls its ‘Comprehensive Approach’ in which a better understanding of culture and cultural property can be seen as a mission relevant priority. With this change in mind-set has come a realisation within armed forces that partnership with heritage experts is essential. Following environmental disaster, as well, the military need to know if there are particular issues to take into account – for example, what can be cleared up immediately and what should be left for later expert attention.

Photo: The ruins of the well known belfry of Arras (Pas-de-Calais, France). Vintage postcard from 1915. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons

See key documents on CPP and the military in our Document Library , or see recent reports and documents by armed forces in our Document Library.

Cultural/Society

Cultural property is central to the cultural and social life of communities and at a national level is frequently used as the ‘stage’ for aspects of intangible cultural heritage (for example, national ceremonies often take place at historic buildings). There can, of course, be ‘negative’ issues involved in these associations of tangible and intangible heritage: ISIS used the Roman Theatre at the World Heritage site of Palmyra for mass executions in 2016. More frequently, however, cultural property helps preserve national and local traditions and culture while helping to build a community’s association with its heritage, and thereby creating identity.

Photo: Roman Theatre at Palmyra, 2010

By Bernard Gagnon, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons