On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Sophia Labadi wrote: ++++ [CLIP] ++++ > ICOM-CC said: > 'ICOM-CC urges the so-called Coalition Forces to act according to The Hague > Convention'. > > This is just a rhetorical question: > Neither the USA nor the UK have ratified the 1954 Hague Convention. Why then > would they act according to it? > > Sophia. > ================================== Sophia: Not a rhetorical question at all, in fact. It is true that neither country has ratified either the 1954 Hague Convention, nor the First Protocol (which has the effect of making illegal almost all actual or purported "transfers of ownership" of cultural property in war zones.) However: 1. Iraq is a party to both, so the Convention applies to the territory, (the "lex situs" rule under both international and national law) and arguably therefore to everyone within the territory and all actions by them regardless of their nationality, 2. The United States Defense and State Departments jointly formally recommended in about 1996 that the President should seek to ratify the Hague Convention (though not the First Protocol - presumably due to objections from the art and antiquities trade). The Convention was duly sent to the senate for ratification in 1998, but successive Foreign Relations Committee Chairmen (of both Parties0 have failed to even table the proposal for debate. 3. At the 1999 Diplomatic Conference which agreed to update the Hague Convention through a Second Protocol the United Kingdom also stated that it now supported Ratification of the Convention (though not the Protocol) and subject to Ministerial;l approval hoped to Ratify alongside the USA. 4. The publicly stated policy of both The USA and the UK is to comply with the principles of the Hague Convention even though neither country is yet formally a party to it. To me, the puzzle is why has there been such apparent chaos, looting and destruction in West Baghdad, with the military authorities arguing that nothing could be done about this immediately. In total contrast, following standard US military principles, the US Marine Corps which are in charge in East Baghdad seems to have moved immediately to assert and maintain law and order, so looting, arson etc. has been kept under control. (For example, though little publicised by the international press, who are largely holed up in hotels in the Business and Government Quarter in West Baghdad, the local medical chief this afternoon reported in a TV interview that all 12 hospitals east of the River Tigris were immediately guarded and continue to function, with little or no looting.) Unfortunately the national museum was on the wrong side of the river, where there seems to have been quite a different interpretation of United States and International Military and Humanitarian Law from that applied by the commanders of the Marines in East Baghdad. Patrick Boylan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html