Accountability needs to be central to the management of cultural heritage. Iraqi and international institutions should work to develop an ethics-based framework for cultural heritage management and protection.
Heritage predation offers an important and underused lens through which to view Iraq’s post-2003 politics. As this paper has shown, the politicization and appropriation of cultural heritage are closely tied to elite-based politics. Given the importance of heritage to shaping Iraq’s society and future, and as a constituent element in its politics and security, there is an urgent need for cultural property to be taken more seriously in domestic and international policy agendas.
As previous chapters have indicated, a major consequence of the muhasasa quota system has been the transfer of power over heritage matters to semi-state and non-state institutions. This has resulted in huge sections of Iraq’s cultural heritage falling under the control of political parties and religious groups rather than that of central state institutions. Entire regions and territories have been divided into political party-controlled fiefdoms, while in the north of the country the KRI has strengthened its 1990s status as a self-governed, semi-autonomous region.
Interventions by particular groups, whether in Babil, the KRI, Samarra or anywhere else in the country, are designed to shape particular cultural sites, entire districts and provinces in line with certain religious and political agendas. Heritage predation is thus sectarianizing Iraq’s formerly rich cultural history. The repercussions of those actions will shape Iraq’s political trajectory in ways likely to further entrench sectarianism and to increase the long-term risk of social disorder.
The muhasasa system and its impact on governance have also impeded cooperation between disparate and competing heritage-related institutions. In the current politicized context, the responsibility falls on political elites themselves – rather than Iraqi archaeologists, architects or heritage managers on their own – to address the future protection and continuity of Iraq’s cultural property. Whether the political elites responsible for heritage predation have a desire to engage in ensuring the celebration of cultural property as a national good, however, remains questionable.
The capture of Iraq’s cultural resources by political parties means that key institutions such as the SBAH will likely remain underfunded and weak. Funding the basic protection of archaeological sites, strengthening capacity and rehabilitating sites have become enormously difficult, with the SBAH now encouraging international organizations to undertake work that prior to 2003 it was largely doing itself. However, international organizations cannot replace domestic state institutions, and the neglect of large sections of cultural heritage under the SBAH’s circumscribed authority inspires little confidence in future Iraqi stewardship of the heritage and archaeology sectors. International cultural institutions and donors also have a responsibility to work towards peace, neutrality and impartiality. These concepts should be operationalized in a ‘do-no-harm’ code of conduct and ethics-based principles that should be developed for the international heritage sector, especially in relation to conflict-affected contexts.
To address Iraq’s cultural heritage crises and its ongoing, mostly unaddressed, emergencies – not least including the legacies and impacts of four decades of conflict – policymakers in Iraq need to elevate cultural heritage to the highest level of priority. Rather than dismissing cultural heritage as an issue of little relevance in the context of more pressing day-to-day concerns, central state actors and others who preside over Iraq’s national interests must develop effective partnerships to protect, safeguard and ensure the continuity of heritage – and to cultivate its potential economic role in income and employment generation. Cultural heritage, in this sense, should be viewed as an economic resource, offering the prospect of supporting Iraq’s long-term prosperity and nation-building. In this context, heritage management and protection should also be treated as important for national security interests.
