War and Cultural Property: The 1954 Hague Convention and the Status of U.S. Ratification

Abstract

In May of 1954, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (Hague Convention) was adopted in an attempt to curb the destruction of movable and immovable cultural property during war. Recent conflicts, such as the continuing war in the Balkans, remind us that the Hague Convention is as relevant today as it was fifty years ago. Although this Convention is the most comprehensive and internationally recognized treaty to protect cultural property in time of war, the United States remains one of the few signatories that has yet to ratify it. In January 1999, former President William J. Clinton forwarded the Hague Convention to the Senate with the recommendation that it ratify the Convention and part of Protocol I. Although this presented perhaps the first real opportunity in nearly half a century for the United States to join one hundred countries and ratify the Hague Convention, its fate remains uncertain. Generally oriented towards the United States' policy and practice, this article broadly discusses the Hague Convention, its history, its weaknesses and strengths, and the current status of U.S. ratification.

Decolonizing Museums: Toward a Paradigm Shift

“…Repatriation. The transformation in museum practice wrought by the process of repatriation has already been extensively discussed, most recently in the Annual Review of Anthropology by Nash and Colwell (2020; but see also Bruchac 2010, Colwell-Chanthaphonh & Piper 2001, Echo-Hawk & Echo-Hawk 1994, Haas 1996, Krmpotich 2014, Mihesuah 2000, Powell 2014 Nash & Colwell 2020). Yet, this lack of attention could change imminently as universities are coming under scrutiny for their major collections of ancestors' remains ( Joyce 2022).…”

Dismembering/disremembering the Buddhas

“…The central issue in this discourse revolves around why the Western public seemed so afflicted about the fate of stones, while they remained indifferent to the real and apparent human suffering in Afghanistan. This is, in actuality, a debate that reaches far back to the first attempts to devise a law of war and the inclusion of cultural property in these attempts (Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Piper, 2001;Fechner, 1998). As mentioned in Discourse 1, the Taliban themselves raised this point and condemned others for so hurriedly coming to the aid of stones, while ignoring the lives of Afghans.…”