Not possible! armed conflicts are blind!

Many times cultures were destroyed. Society had to restore/recover/saved it.

Ultimately, Society's goodness prevails!

The effective protection of cultural property is almost impossible under conditions of armed conflicts. Even New rules for the protection of cultural property in armed conflict were established, we had a massive destruction by Islamic State, for example. It seems it is not sustainable approach!

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/article/other/57jq37.htm

During conflicts almost all norms and proper behaviors of society fail to function. I do not see any truth to the existence of such laws and its effectiveness. Let alone protecting materials, the law does not have power to impose proper persecution of prisoners of conflicts. Those who control an environment changes everything from culture, historical artifacts and human life solely based on what they want.

We see these things in the territories controlled by an organization called ISIS and its affiliates around the globe which have no any normal behavior of what a human society is. They not only intentionally destroy artifacts of history and culture, they mutilate human beings. Recently, we witnessed a group of Ethiopians, who escaped political prosecutions and abuse from their country and wanted to go to Europe,  butchered like animals in the deserts of Libya by such groups. 

More important is the protection of common and innocent people who have nothing to do with the conflict. When peoples' protection is not ensured protection of cultural property is extremely difficult. More than armed conflicts, industrial development, pollution, population pressures of a country put the cultural treasures at high risk.

No protection can be guaranteed, BUT do not bomb site lists and an awareness of the rules of war and future prosecution  for war crimes  can help to some extent.  ISIS and the Taliban (in Bamiyan) sadly offer proof of the opposite  especially at world heritage sites.

Hello Amir,

In a recent war, one of the warring factions destroyed all of the religious artifacts that did not support its beliefs. Even though the artifacts were centuries old and had historic value for those who were not of that particular faith. They knew they were going to lose the war and so it became an even greater priority to destroy any remnants of competing religious symbols.

How do you stop such acts from occurring? Is it a crime against humanity? 

Daryn

Dear Bimo,

Well done!

UN and UNESCO are doing toward heritage protection."“Enhanced protection” is one of the features of the 1999 Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict."

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/armed-conflict-and-heritage/

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/armed-conflict-and-heritage/protection-of-cultural-property/enhanced-protection/

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Dear @Amir, here is the fine resource Protection of Cultural Heritage in times of Armed Conflict: The International Legal Framework Revisited! "However, despite international hard and soft law specifically addressing its protection, loss of cultural heritage has continued. In even the most recent conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Iraq cultural heritage has again been lost, and a ‘cultural disaster’ occurred in Afghanistan. It is clear that the world still contains many areas of significant instability and no doubt human conflict and military action will continue. This brings sharply into focus the efficiency of these international laws and their ability to protect our precious cultural heritage.This paper sets out the background to the international protection of cultural heritage and provides details of the specific measures to protect such property in times of armed conflict, together with a critical evaluation of their effectiveness."

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MqJICEL/2007/1.html

The key is that both sides have to agree.  One good example of this is the Japanese battleship Mikasa.  The US Navy said that they would not bomb her if the Japanese did not try to protect her.

Dynamic leadership and effective governance can protect the society and culture from strengths of arms.

In contrast, powerful country through the use of armed conflicts, can affect and destroy the weak country. World has witnessed!

Yes, protecting non-combatant civilians should be top priority as long as folks  think that military options will make a positive contribution to their goals.

Dear @Subhash

This reminds me of a debate I participated during my school days: Which is mightier pen or sword?

Your question reveals duality of modern armed conflict. On the one hand we have all the legal acquis to protect and save cultural property in the area of conflict. Most of them signed after the WWII basing on the negative experience of Nazis and Red Army stealing goods or devastating the properties (eg. Pabst Plan over Warsaw). On the other hand we have very unfortunate experiences from Iraq or Afghanistan, where museums were robbed before the Army could secure them. And the collateral damage of course - despite the international law regulations include a certain signs to mark historical buildings etc. in order to save them from accidental bombing you have no influence on wether they'd be taken by ones armed forces and used as a shelter, and so become a potential target. If you ask me, if there's a way to protect them - well I tell you: yes, there is. But if you'd ask me if it is effectiwe - the answer is: no. And it won't ever be.

I think that war has changed. War used to be mostly about acquisition of territory and expansion of power. In that context, the victor would want to acquire the cultural treasures of the loser as well, ideally all of them, although the victor might not take particular care of not destroying them.

Modern war is more about ideology or religion and in that context, I agree with Ian that the goal is the suppression and ultimately annihilation of the "other" ideology or religion and hence its culture. The destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan by the Taliban and the destruction of ancient statutes at the Mosul Museum by ISIS are examples.

I guess this is bad news for Amir because ideologically motivated fighters not only do not care about the preservation of cultural heritage of the enemy, they actually aim to destroy it.

Dear @Amir, here is fine paper about Destruction of Cultural Heritage in Bosnia. "The massive intentional destruction of cultural heritage during the 1992-1995 Bosnian War targeting a historically diverse identity provoked global condemnation and became a seminal marker in the discourse on cultural heritage. It prompted an urgent reassessment of how cultural property could be protected in times of conflict and led to a more definitive recognition in international humanitarian law that destruction of a people’s cultural heritage is an aspect of genocide..."

Next example of Balkan's destruction of Cultural Heritage is destroyed Serbian heritage in Kosovo! "In total, 156 Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries were destroyed between 11 June 1999 and 19 March 2004, after the end of the Kosovo War and including the 2004 unrest in Kosovo. Many of the churches and monasteries dated back to the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries..."

http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781409437048

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyed_Serbian_heritage_in_Kosovo

Prevention of armed conflicts, in the first place, is an achievable goal. What is needed is a worldwide opinion against wars & against the hot heads that keep playing these deadly games. The protection of human life is far more important than anything else. Look very well at the wars that are going on & you will see that they are fought for the devil's sake. I do not see any war, at present, which proceeds for a noble cause and since these are "dirty" wars, then anything is expected including destruction of cultural property. In short, many brains need an overall change towards "real" peace & here comes the role of the respected scholars. I do not count upon the "corrupt" politicians.   

Sure it is. Prevention of property depends on how develop the brain of conflict parties is. Knowledge, sense and good will should prevail.