On 9 April 2003, before the eyes of the world, in the middle of Baghdad, Iraqi citizens and U.S. military personnel pulled down a statue of Saddam Hussein. United States forces had begun to penetrate Baghdad days before against disintegrating opposition. "The regime in Baghdad effectively ceased to function" on 9 April 2003. For the U.S.-led coalition, the invasion of Iraq appeared to be reaching a successful conclusion.
Yet elsewhere in Baghdad, a tragedy was beginning to unfold. Between 9 and 12 April 2003, unknown persons stole thousands of artifacts from the Iraqi National Museum. The museum, the largest and most modem of its kind in the Middle East, contained three-quarters of the archaeological artifacts discovered in Iraq during the preceding eighty years -a collection ranging into the hundreds of thousands of items. Exaggerated initial reports suggested the entire collection was lost. Investigation, however, revealed the actual loss was far less in terms of raw numbers, and the museum staff had previously hidden many of the most valuable items elsewhere. Nevertheless, the damage to the cultural heritage of Iraq, and the world, was severe.
The criticism leveled at the U.S. military was also severe. Certain experts complained they had previously warned U.S. government officials of the museum's vulnerability to looting in the event of war. Critics noted the United States did secure certain other buildings in Baghdad, including the oil ministry. In one oft-cited incident, a Marine officer allegedly denied multiple requests to stop the looting or to deter the looting by moving troops closer to the museum. United States forces finally secured the museum on 16 April 2003, four days after the museum staff returned, and four days after media reports of this incident.
Criticism of strategy or priorities aside, do critics have a colorable argument that the United States violated international law by failing to secure the Iraqi National Museum against looters prior to 16 April 2003? Specifically, did the United States violate its obligations under the laws pertaining to military occupation and the protection of cultural property?
This article addresses these questions by first examining the legal regime for the protection of cultural property during armed conflict. Next, it reviews the regime for protecting cultural property in time of peace. The article then reviews applicable international law relating to military occupation. Finally, it applies these rules to the Iraqi National Museum incident, concludes that there is cause for concern, and suggests that greater attention to this area of the law might help prevent similar instances in the future.
