Blue Shield and the armed forces

“While geopolitics, national borders, critical infrastructure and military installations constitute the physical geography of conventional warfare,
CP [cultural property] constitutes critical elements of the human domain of its geography. If this holds true, and if culture and identity politics do remain at the center of armed conflicts, we can expect CP to play an increasing role in conflict geographies. 
​A strong argument can thus be made for placing CP broadly viewed – including historical buildings, sites of worships, monuments –
​at the heart of the human domain concept, and thus the Special Operations doctrine.”
​
NATO SPS CPP Outcome Report, NATO and Cultural Property: Embracing New Challenges in the Era of Identity Wars, 2017, P30​
Blue Shield is working with armed forces and heritage professionals to develop understanding of the responsibilities of both parties under International Law. Cultural property protection in armed conflict and following environmental disasters can only be effective when there is a true partnership between heritage professionals, governments, and those deployed. Armed forces across the world are becoming increasingly aware of the role of cultural property in conflicts, both in terms of its loss, but also its potential to prolong the fighting, evidenced in a number of military publications. 

The Blue Shield believes there are four times when heritage professionals need to work with armed forces to protect cultural property:
  1. Long-term general education/ongoing activity, such as awareness training, provision of CP geospatial data, and preparation and practice of appropriate emergency measures for protecting cultural heritage;
  2.  Specific pre-deployment activity, such as provision of specific training and information for the area of operations;
  3. Support during conflict, for example offering advice on providing emergency conservation for damaged heritage, or identifying potentially looted objects;
  4. Post conflict/stabilisation, for example, supporting local authorities in returning to, or enhancing, pre-conflict/disaster norms of CPP with local communities, and, when requested, provision of emergency aid, repair, and conservation required to mitigate any damage inflicted by the conflict.​
Blue Shield will assist any genuine initiative by any nation state or warring faction to work towards the goal of protecting CP. It is not the place of the Blue Shield to assess the status of the conflict or pass judgement on its conduct: the same principle applies during complex or other emergencies. Blue Shield representatives will, in principle, meet with appointed representatives of any nation state or warring faction that declares its sincere intent to work positively to protect CP. Any such meeting would, of course, only address CPP. The Blue Shield respects the principles of international humanitarian law under which we operate, and we encourage others to do likewise. The same principles apply to equivalent circumstances during complex or other emergencies.
Why should armed forces protect cultural property?

Cultural property protection is increasingly seen as what the armed forces refer to as a ‘force multiplier’: protecting it may not lead to mission success, but failure to protect it can make a mission more difficult, and there are number of important reasons to protect it:
  • Law
  • Cultural/Political Associations
  • Opposition Funding
  • Economic Stability
  • Post-conflict Social Stability
  • Community Support

Law

First, cultural property protection is mandated under customary international law, and in particular the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and its two Protocols (1954/1999). The armed forces of those countries that are parties to such law as the 1954 Hague Convention and the 1998 Rome Statute have direct legal responsibilities under IHL. However, even the armed forces of those countries that have not ratified such IHL have obligations regarding cultural property protection under customary international law – common practice regarded as legally binding.

​Cultural/Political Associations

Cultural property can become a direct target on the battlefield because of its cultural associations. For example, many sites were deliberately targeted in the Balkans Wars, and some of those responsible were prosecuted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia. Understanding these relationships – or failing to understand them- can have direct impact on mission success. 

Opposition funding

The looting of cultural (and civilian) property during conflict may provide funding for parties involved in conflicts. By restricting such looting, the armed forces can choke-off a strand of funding for the opposition and potentially save lives and shorten the conflict.

Economic Stability

Post-conflict social stability

community support
​Cultural property frequently has value to local and national economies, and can contribute to economic stability. Tourism is one of the world’s fastest growing industries. A desire to see other people’s culture and heritage is a major element of tourism and in many countries is a large part of a tourism industry that provides a significant proportion of the national economy. The World Bank called tourism and cultural heritage “drivers of poverty reduction and shared prosperity“. If it is damaged and destroyed unnecessarily, then a key facet of economic stability may be removed, undermining political agendas and, in certain circumstances, requiring the military to remain deployed for longer.
​When cultural heritage is deliberately targeted, this can inflame social tensions, and prolong, and even intensify, the conflict. In Iraq, following the 2006 bombing of the al-Askari mosque in Samarra, 32 retaliatory attacks were carried out, with a corresponding loss of life for both troops and civilians: the event is often considered the start of Iraq’s descent into civil war. Such activity may require an occupying or peacekeeping force to remain deployed for longer than anticipated or desired .
Unfortunately, there are recent examples of armed forces in conflict, or troops deployed to help following environmental disasters, failing to protect cultural property or, worse, unintentionally damaging it. Such actions can alienate the local community and can have serious, negative, implications for the military mission. In some cases, this has led directly or indirectly to mission problems, bad publicity, and, in extremis, to an escalation of hostilities and casualties.
References for Law:
  • Read more about the laws protecting cultural property in our Law Library or visit the the BSI website. 

References for Cultural/Political Associations:
References for Opposition Funding:
References for Economic Stability:
References for Post-Conflict Social Stability: