Dear Mr. Boylan & All:

I thank Mr. Boylan for an extremely helpful message.  (This message is
definitely a lotus blossom, rising from the murky river bottom created
by far too much crap flung back and forth during the past few days.)

I have some questions which I hope might clarify the varied legislative
texts quoted throughout your message.  As these are questions focused on
facts or theory . . . with no expectation of answers necessarily.
[Note: I invite contributions that explore these facts/theories without
hostility or political bashing.  If one feels a response cannot be
academic/neutral, one shouldn't reply.  I'm confident the Museum-L
moderators would agree.]

Questions:

(1)  In Section III, Articles 43 and 56, Fourth Hague Convention of
1907: The term "military authority" is used, charged with the obligation
to maintain order and protect people and properties.  What is the
definition in the Fourth Hague Convention of "military authority"?  Is a
"military authority" the victor in war as opposed to those currently
engaged in warfare?

(2) As you've indicated, the US was party to the 1935 Treaty of
Washington ("Roerich Pact").  This raises a similar question as above.
That "the treasures of culture be respected and protected in times of
war and peace" does not provide specific guidelines concerning at what
stage during or following war this is meant to take place.  Further,
unless there is more not included in your original message, there is no
specification concerning what party or parties are meant to enforce
this - the invading military force or a third party (such as UNESCO).
So, are there specifics in the Treaty of Washington?

(3) The Lieber Code (Articles 19, 22 and 35), again, raises the same
question: At what stage is the US military meant to protect
non-combatants, property, hospitals, churches, classical works of art,
libraries, collections, precise instruments from harm?  After all, a
bunch of dead soldiers are of no use.  So, perhaps they must secure the
sector (or theater of operations) before they can urn their attention to
protection (of non-combatants and non-military sites)?

(4) Naturally, World War II would be raised as an example, as Eisenhower
had leading scholars in Civil Affairs.  However, general descriptions of
the method are not proof that the method worked.  So, I ask: How many
non-combatants, hospitals, churches, classical works of art, libraries,
collections, precise instruments, etc. WERE harmed during World War II?

Ultimately, Is this proof that legislators are sadly out of touch with
the reality of the battlefield?  Or, perhaps, this is proof that
military personnel have "battle blinders," wanting nothing more than to
start and end the fight, no matter the consequences?  Heady questions .
. .

Sincerely,

Jay Heuman
Visitor & Volunteer Services Coordinator
Joslyn Art Museum
2200 Dodge Street, Omaha, NE, 68102
342-3300 (telephone)   342-2376 (fax)

"You can’t lock up art in a vault and keep
it frozen for posterity.  Then the artist is
betrayed, history is betrayed."
                                      Walter Persegati

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).