“Protecting cultural heritage from armed conflicts in Ukraine and beyond” by the CULT Committee of the European Parliament. The study examines methods to safeguard cultural heritage from armed conflicts in Ukraine and beyond, analysing international law, policy frameworks, and past conflicts. Moreover, it provides recommendations for EU Member States to enhance protection.
Here is a quick overview based on the document and the Executive Summary:
Key findings
-
“Cultural heritage is often targeted and may even be at the centre of armed conflicts.”Cultural heritage, including tangible and intangible objects, is frequently targeted in armed conflicts. Damage or destruction can occur due to collateral damage, military reasons, ideological motives, or economic gain. Breakdowns in the rule of law can also lead to looting.
-
“Cultural heritage protection is key to peace, security and the sustainable development of societies.”The EU faces threats to its cultural heritage, legal order, security, and external relations, including the war in Ukraine, necessitating the reconceptualisation of mechanisms and tools to protect cultural heritage.
-
“The protection of cultural heritage in armed conflict has a solid basis in international law. It is covered by international humanitarian law, but also human rights law, cultural heritage law and criminal law.”The EU and its Member States are obligated to safeguard cultural heritage in armed conflict, utilising a complex regulatory framework that involves international obligations, regional treaty law, EU instruments, and domestic law.
-
“International initiatives to protect cultural heritage in Ukraine are numerous, and many actors are involved with overlapping mandates.” Initiatives aim to monitor damage, provide emergency relief, train professionals, digitise inventories, and support the cultural sector, but the lack of coordination and standards poses risks of duplication.
-
“Projects to safeguard or restore conflict-affected cultural heritage have major social impacts, and participation of local communities is key to their success.” Cultural heritage can fuel conflicts when claimed as exclusive national heritage. There is a need for more independent monitoring of attacks on cultural heritage. Post-conflict recovery projects require the full integration of local communities to achieve a lasting impact on reconciliation.
Solutions
“States should have measures in place before a conflict breaks out. “
Such measures include:
1 The creation of inventories;
2 The development of strategies for relocating collections (to refuges or safe havens);
3 The formulation of emergency protocols to safeguard against fire or structural damage. In addition to measures focused on local cultural heritage, steps should also be taken to preserve foreign cultural heritage. These include:
-
Training military personnel and law enforcement on protecting cultural heritage;
-
Establishing regulations for the potential prosecution of offenses against cultural heritage;
-
Stopping the trade of looted cultural artifacts from conflict regions.
“Cultural heritage protection should be integrated within the international system forhumanitarian aid and peacekeeping.” Emergency response protocols often overlook the role of cultural heritage in recovery. Integrating it into emergency coordination systems and peacekeeping missions is crucial for providing adequate protection and facilitating a broader, coordinated response.
“Independent monitoring of the impact of armed conflicts on cultural heritage would enhance
accountability for war crimes, as well as post-conflict peacebuilding efforts.” The Core International Crimes Evidence Database (CICED) has highlighted the need for a comprehensive system to monitor cultural heritage during armed conflicts, thereby enhancing responses to crimes and injustices.
Recommendations
1 “Address emergencies in Ukraine”
-
Identify and address notable gaps in emergency relief, such as the digitalisation of inventories.
-
Increase awareness of exported cultural objects that may be sold on the market with forged provenances.
-
Advocate for a well-defined approach to the post-war recovery of cultural heritage and encourage its integration into the National Recovery Framework Plan for Ukraine.
-
Safeguard and promote the cultural rights of Ukrainian refugees in EU Member States.
2 “Close the accountability gap”
-
Ensure the monitoring of attacks on cultural heritage is independent.
-
Ensure that heritage-related crimes related to heritage are addressed by the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) and included in submissions to the CICED.
-
Ensure that the national laws in EU Member States and any tribunal established specifically for Ukraine facilitate the prosecution of offences against cultural heritage.
-
Consider implementing measures to prevent EU entities from directly or indirectly supporting the unlawful removal of cultural objects or excavating archaeological sites, including through cooperation with individuals or organisations involved in such unlawful behaviour.
3 “Coordinate measures and policies at the EU level”Establish a dedicated EU body to oversee the safeguarding of cultural heritage.
-
Incorporate the protection of cultural heritage within the wider context of emergency relief and humanitarian aid.
-
Incorporate cultural heritage considerations into the mandates for EU peacekeeping missions.
-
Ensure coordination between national law enforcement and pertinent EU agencies regarding issues related to illegal trade.
-
Establish regulations for safe havens to temporarily protect collections from m conflict zones, thus preventing ambiguities regardingabout their legal status.
4 “Ensure that preparatory measures are in place in EU Member States”
-
Further, support the establishment of inventories and their digital transformation within cultural organizations and heritage sites throughout the EU.
-
Support the creation of policies and legislation for (emergency) preparedness across the EU.
-
Advocate for the formation and training of (sizeable) dedicated units in the military and law enforcement, including border control.
5 “Address the illicit trafficking of cultural objects from conflict zones”
-
Increase awareness of the presence of looted cultural objects from conflict zones circulate on the EU market.
-
Establish mandatory due diligence requirements for the trade of cultural goods to mitigate the risks linked to the trade of looted cultural objects from war zones.
-
Develop an open access database of national legislation concerning cultural heritage, or assist in an update of the existing (outdated) UNESCO database.”
6 “Focus on community participation and memorialisation in the recovery and reconstruction phase”
-
Involve local communities in the decision-making processes for recovery and reconstruction at every stage and level
-
Integrate peacebuilding actions, such as those focused on memorialisationon, in recovery projects.”
Our take
“Protecting cultural heritage from armed conflicts in Ukraine and beyond” is immensely useful, as it not only identifies problems and solutions surrounding the complexities of cultural heritage in conflict but also provides valuable insights into the broader implications of these issues. In addition, it clearly explains and defines the terminology and background of heritage, as well as the problem at hand. The information presented is comprehensive and easily accessible, which makes the topic available to a broader public.
I want to learn more:
Report on protecting Ukrainian cultural heritage
Download: Protecting cultural heritage from armed conflicts in Ukraine and beyond (also attached)
Committee on Culture and Education.
