Description
The deliberate destruction of cultural heritage by groups such as ISIS, epitomised by the world-broadcasted devastation of Palmyra in Syria, has prompted urgent debates about military intervention to protect humanity's cultural legacy. This paper examines the conditions under which just war theory might legitimise armed intervention specifically to safeguard cultural heritage, asking whether a "cultural humanitarian intervention" is morally and legally conceivable.
While cultural heritage protection features prominently in jus in bello norms, its status as a jus ad bellum concern remains critically underdeveloped (Brunstetter 2019). This paper addresses a series of foundational questions to establish a framework under which military operations to safeguard heritage would be acceptable within just war principles: Can threats to heritage constitute sufficient reason to trigger an armed operation? Is the use of lethal force justifiable against those who deliberately destroy cultural heritage?
After analysing the conditions under just war principles (Foradori et Rosa 2017; Frowe et Matravers 2023), I examine the revived concept of "cultural Responsibility to Protect" (cultural R2P) (Lenzerini 2016).
This study highlights tensions about the scope of security, more precisely between national and human security, sovereignty, human rights and armed violence.
Bibliography:
Brunstetter, Daniel R. 2019. « A tale of two cities: the just war tradition and cultural heritage in times of war ». Global Intellectual History 4(4):369‑88.
Foradori, Paolo, et Paolo Rosa. 2017. « Expanding the peacekeeping agenda. The protection of cultural heritage in war-torn societies ». Global Change, Peace & Security 29(2):145‑60.
Frowe, Helen, et Derek Matravers. 2023. « Conflicts in Heritage Protection ». P. 33‑50 in Heritage and War. Ethical Issues, directed by W. Bülow, H. Frowe, D. Matravers, et J. L. Thomas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lenzerini, Federico. 2016. « Terrorism, Conflicts and the Responsibility to Protect Cultural Heritage ». The International Spectator 51(2):70‑85.
