Cultural Destruction and its Implications
by Nada Shabout

Cultural Destruction and its Implications

Cultural destruction is neither a new phenomenon nor limited to times of aggression and armed conflict. It is in fact an act that takes place somewhere in the world on a daily basis. At times, even acts celebrated as forms of renewal would constitute a form of cultural destruction as they impose the removal of aspects of history through facilitating the growth of new neighborhoods or demolishing certain dilapidated areas to build new and improved structures. Arguably, and dependant on the specific circumstances, they are acts proposed to enhance life. Extent and intent of destruction and its threat of obliterating history, memory and identity, however, is a different issue.

Studies focused on cultural destruction resultant from World War II has demonstrated the fatal effect of the loss of heritage, be it in form of historical buildings, public monuments, or contents of museums. While today’s debate surrounding museums and their ethical conduct necessitate a reevaluation of the definition and role of the museum, as an institution a museum takes on a particularly added importance in a state of war. The numerous combat disasters of the 20th century resulted in the loss of irreplaceable human heritage. In consequence, awareness of the value of cultural patrimony and the importance of its recovery and protection resulted in the development of several agencies to safeguard and monitor cultural heritage.

Nevertheless, current cases of undocumented destruction taking place in different parts of the world attest to the contrary; the unprecedented destruction of heritage in Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Iraq, as well as cases of non-combat destruction in Iran, Pakistan and other parts of Asia. Iraq’s case following the 2003 invasion brought the issue of cultural protection back into the forefront. Debates evaluating the adequacy of international laws protecting cultural property during and after arm conflicts were initiated in relation to the United States obligations towards Iraq. There are three recognized legal sets of treaties designated to the protection of cultural heritage in time of war and its aftermath. “These are the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907; the Geneva Convention of 1949 and its two Protocols; and the Hague Convention of 1954 and its two Protocols. Together, they respond to four threats to cultural heritage: deliberate attack, incidental damage, pillage, and outright theft.” (1)

Iraq essentially presents a prime contemporary example of a cultural disaster for a number of reasons. As a point of departure, Iraq displays one of the longest histories that span that of humanity, awarding it the designation of the “cradle of civilization,” a label that was continuously stressed particularly during the months leading to the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. This fact means that Iraq’s soil is loaded with layers of historical evidence in the form of archeological sites that are mostly unexcavated. These sites thus present possibilities of new and unknown knowledge about various historical periods. Furthermore, while ancient artifacts are claimed as humanity’s heritage which is traced to the dawn of civilization, Iraq’s modern heritage presents an essential example of its modern negotiation of a nation, and thus a vital tool and alternative for self assessment in view of today’s celebrated sectarian strife.

Second, and of particular significance, is that the case of Iraq demonstrates the devastating reality of the infectivity of world efforts to stop a predicted case of cultural pillaging. The world’s archeological community has been quite vocal about the legal responsibility of the United States towards the protection of Iraq’s heritage, both movable and immovable. As an occupying power and the most dominating member of the coalition forces, the United States has been criticized for its complicity in view of what is seen as its deliberate neglect to stop the looting of Iraqi institutions. Three members of the White House Cultural Advisory Committee, Martin E. Sullivan, Richard S. Lanier and Gary Vikan, resigned in protest of U.S. military’s conduct and failure to protect Iraq’s historical heritage. The coalition forces have been accused of violating the Hague Convention of 1954 on the protection of cultural heritage in times of war, to which the United States is a non-party, as well as UN Security Council Resolution 1483 of May 22, 2003, reaffirmed in October 16, 2003 in Resolution 1511. Both Resolutions emphasize the temporary role of the Coalition Authority, as well as the necessity of the protection of Iraq’s heritage through establishing a ban on international trade in Iraqi cultural property.

Manipulating Identity through Cultural Destruction

Nevertheless, one must acknowledge that Iraq’s cultural destruction had in effect started much earlier and in various forms, and cannot be exclusively blamed on the U.S.-led invasion. From the beginning of the 20th century, various projects of modernization have contributed to the loss of a number of historical structures to allow for Westernized but modern articulations. Further, every “revolution,” military coop and new government made a point of leaving its mark through removal and replacement. Reconstruction projects are always of particular concern as they require demolishing old parts to make room for the new. Visual culture is never neutral as it is the main venue for displaying identity, which is in itself necessarily always ideologically constructed. Thus it has been the custom through out history and civilizations that cities are reshaped in images that express the ruling body’s ideals and policy. Baghdad was no exception. Examples of cultural manipulation of public space and architectural structures prior to 2003 are abound. Moreover, Gulf War I and II witnessed major pillaging of Iraq’s cultural institutions and many works that appeared on the black market were never returned to Iraq. The long decade of sanctions heavily contributed to Iraq’s cultural loss through lack of concern, funds for maintenance and preservation.

Nevertheless, what designates the destruction in Iraq that followed 2003 as fatal is the scale and depth of loss on all levels, multiplied by lack of concern and action to retrieve the lost and save what remained. Exasperating the situation is the US official position. For instance, in response to the devastating images that shocked the world, on April 2003 the US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld blamed destruction on the fact that democracy is “untidy,” in a speech where he declared that “Freedom’s untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things,…They are also free to live their lives and do wonderful things. And that’s what’s going to happen here.” (2) Destruction of culture thus continues today where archeological sites’ integrity are constantly threatened and damaged by military machinery and looters operating openly as evident in the many satellite images available on the internet. Ancient works are surfacing and being traded in different parts of the world. Very few incidents of apprehending and confiscating stolen works are sited, but those are then highly celebrated and constantly offered as examples of action whether on behalf of the Iraqi government or the supervising coalition forces. The fact, however, remains that the damage occurring daily is beyond comprehension and so overwhelming making it extremely difficult to maintain a comprehensive record, particularly as most information are not made public. In addition, misinformation and rumors only further complicate issues. (3)

Iraq’s Modern Culture

Within this dearth of information, even less is known about the destruction of Iraq’s modern heritage. The case of Iraq’s Modern Art Museum is a case in point. The Saddam Center for the Arts (Markaz Saddam Lil Funun) was effectively Iraq’s Museum of Modern Art. Very few people outside of Iraq knew that. In fact even inside of Iraq the Center never had the same status as the Iraqi National Museum (of antiquity) for the general public. One of the reasons for the lack of interest can be attributed to connecting contemporary visual production in Iraq to Saddam’s propaganda apparatus. The Center has been officially renamed by the new Iraqi government as the Iraqi Museum of Modern Art (IMoMA).

Situated on Haifa Street in Baghdad, the Museum is housed in a massive structure of five levels in the shape of a ziggurat. The structure was originally designed and conceived as a mega commercial center in one of the phases of the Haifa Street redevelopment project. Rifat al-Chaderchi designated the style that dominated the redevelopment as "regionalized International Style," which sought to synthesis modernity and tradition, on the one hand, and create contextual harmony on the other. The designers thus employed “traditional Iraqi architectural vocabulary,” including riwaq, arches, shanashil, courtyards, and ornaments. The shape of the structure with its upper stories stepped back and planted terraces oscillates between a Mesopotamian ziggurat and Babylon’s Hanging Gardens. (4)

In 1986, operated and maintained by the Ministry of Information and Culture, the Saddam Center for the Arts was established as Iraq’s museum of modern and contemporary art. In addition, it became the officially designated institution to handle all concerns relating to modern and contemporary art, including artists, organizing and monitoring local and international exhibitions (in terms of permissions, funding, etc.). It thus became the only official representation of the arts in Iraq, particularly as it contained the collections of two earlier museums.(5) These are the original National Museum of Modern Art of 1962, known as the Gulbenkian Museum as it was funded by their foundation, and the Museum for Pioneer Artists established in 1979 by the Ministry of Information and Culture. (6)

The structure was severely damaged by looters and fire in April 2003. Without security and protection from the occupying powers after the collapse of the Baath regime, its collections of approximately 8,000 modern and contemporary Iraqi paintings, sculptures, drawings and photography, dating from late 19th century until April 2003, were entirely looted. (7)Information I gathered at the time from sources inside of Iraq indicated that while some works were smuggled outside of the country, most works were still on the market for sale in Baghdad. At an early stage after the invasion, about 1,300 works were found at the National Gallery’s basement. They have since been stored at a facility administered by the Ministry of Culture, without restoration (which they desperately need), authentication or archiving. (8)

While the fate of the collection is tragic enough, what exasperated the situation further is that the collection’s archive disappeared with the works as well. (9)Rumors, and they are abound, stated that eye witnesses noticed key works being carried out of the Museum hours after the invasion and before the looting had started. In fact, some reports from Iraq listed a number of entire collections were shipped out of Iraq on the eve of the invasion. One case, for instance, is the large retrospective collection of the works of Shakir Hassan Al Said, many of which were then exhibited in Amman-Jordan and Paris-France, among other cities since 2003. While the executive of Al Said’s estate, the art dealer and owner of Al-Athar Gallery in Baghdad, reported the return of the collection to Iraq and obtaining all necessary permissions to include works of key Iraqi artists in the exhibition he organized in Paris, the absence of an official archive means that many works cannot be traced or repatriated. (10)

Many concerned individuals, including myself, sought venues of funding to buy back the works in 2003. Since 2003, important works by Jawad Salim, Faiq Hassan, Khalid al-Jadir and many other Iraqi leading artists have surfaced in Amman, London and New York. The works are offered for sale at varying prices that seems to increase with time. The most disappointing factor, however, is the ease and disinterest with which the advertising and sale of these works is conducted.

Current Trajectories

The current Iraq situation in 2006 has not improved. Baghdad seems to be consumed by the political mayhem and struggle for power that not much attention is left for the cultural realm. Consequently this neglect has encouraged looters to deal and traffic the stolen works from the Iraqi Museum without any concern to legal penalties. Of interest is that initially there was some consideration to the legal implications of such an act. In fact I have recently discovered that in late 2003 and 2004, my contacts and partners in Baghdad were pressured to abandon aiding me in gathering information concerning the stolen works. From the beginning artists and other concerned individuals claimed to know who had stolen works and where they were kept. Art dealers in particular were involved. Many claimed to be protectors of the works until a time when the Museum can be reestablished. Thus the act of compiling a list of the stolen works was perceived as potentially threatening to future possibilities of selling the works. Today reconstructing the Museum’s archive is no longer seen as an immediate threat as nothing has hindered the sale of works.

The sad situation is that in June 2003, it was possible to travel around Baghdad and few other provinces where works were said to be and buy them back for less than a $100,000.00. In the early days following the invasion, key works were found in local popular markets. Few artists, gallery owners and dealers scouted the neighborhood markets, with various intentions, where many works were for sale and for ridiculously low prices. (11)A prime example is Jawad Salim’s wooden statue of “Motherhood,” purchased for the mere price of $200. The statue was found at one of Baghdad’s local market by artists Salah Abbas and Taha Wahaib who along with two other artists contributed financially to the purchase. (12) The incident instigated the four artists to form a Committee for Recovering Iraq’s Culture, which later included a number of Iraq’s renowned modern artists, such as the sculptor Mohammed Ghani. (13) They were able to recover about 100 important works by renowned artists. Unfortunately the lack of funds ended their chances of recovering more works, particularly that prices were rapidly multiplied and the continuous instability allowed for easy trafficking of the works. Moreover, increased interest in modern Iraqi art is providing a lucrative market for the looters. (14)

A number of the Museum’s works are effectively beyond salvaging. Several Iraqi artists visited the Iraqi Museum of Modern Art immediately following its destruction. They found it in ruins with mounds of shattered sculptures and broken or empty frames where canvases were hastily cut out. They reported finding many of the precious works of the various collections being sold on the streets of Baghdad for a fraction of their value. Others witnessed the looters in the galleries of the Museum removing everything possible and destroying the rest. Wood was collected for fuel, be it that of statues or canvas stretchers where canvas was torn out and thrown in the fire. Bronze works were sold for a quarter dollar per kilo and cut as needed and melted. The artist Salah Abbas reported a bird tower seen in the neighborhood of the Museum constructed from six canvases by the renowned artist Shakir Hassan Al Said and a bed frame constructed from four paintings on board by the artist Mohammed Muhr al-Din. (15)

Today, and while destruction and loss continues, we are faced with further challenges. Iraqi modern art works from the Museum, stolen and retrieved, are now scattered all over the world, although a large number could be found in Amman, Jordan. Moreover, the flood of forgeries that have appeared in Baghdad and Amman of certain Iraqi artists in demand, such as the work of Faiq Hassan, has further complicated the endeavor. Moreover, in regards to recovered works there are several issues of concern. On the practical side, the lack of electricity has been a continuous problem; particularly that practically all of the works were severely damaged. Today, three years after the invasion, electricity is available on an average of two hours a day, creating a brutal challenge to any efforts of armature preservation. The matter of the dispersed, recovered works at various places inside and outside of Iraq without official documentation through an official body working in collaboration with or under supervision of the Iraqi Ministry of Culture has become more urgent. From the outset it presented risks of their complete loss with time. Now, as many Iraqis’ distrust with their current government increases, particularly without providing an enforced policy or institution capable of handling the issue, they have the option of retaining the work without necessarily ever reporting it.

Sadly, many of the individual’s apprehensions are of great merit. For example, a current case regarding five works by the Iraqi artist Faiq Hassan exemplify concerns shared by most Iraqi intellectuals. In 2005, and in view of rumors of forgeries, the Qatar Ambassador to Jordan at the time, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim, asked the Orfali Gallery in Amman to authenticate his recent purchase of five works by the late Faiq Hassan. (16) While the gallery validated the authenticity of the paintings, they also informed the Ambassador that the works were the property of the former Saddam Center for the Arts, as attested to by a number of Iraq’s prominent artists and historians that were consulted. (17) The main evidence used to locate a work within the Center’s collection an ink stamp and inventory number located at the back of the canvas. During the 1990s many works did not necessarily bare the stamp of the Cetner’s logo, but instead were initialed M.S. (Markaz Saddam) in a thick, black text. In the case of the five mentioned works, the looters had loosely covered the back of works with black paint to cover up the Center’s archival information. (18) The Ambassador thus asked the Orfali Gallery to be the custodians of the paintings until a suitable time when they could be returned to Iraq. A committee of twelve artists and historians was formed to witness the act and they all signed an agreement to that effect.

News of the incident eventually reached the Iraqi Ministry of Culture who immediately started negotiations for their return. While the Minister of Culture, Mufid al-Jazaa’ry, agreed that the five paintings should remain at the gallery in Jordan for safe-keeping and preservation. Recently, however, the Ministry has sent several correspondences through the Iraqi Embassy in Amman demanding their return. Mistrust of the current government triggered by the evident instability is perceived by the aforementioned committee as a reason for alarm, causing them to reject the return of the works at the present time to Iraq. At this moment, a special Iraqi convoy from the Ministry is en route to Jordan to receive the works in what is to be a publicized ceremony. (19) Iraqi intellectuals in Jordan, including those on the mentioned committee, fear the works’ inevitable loss in view of the lack of professionalism, the complete environment of distrust in which these acts are conducted, as well as the information received from Baghdad that indicates a complete unavailability of facilities or procedures for preserving and storing the works. The result of this situation is yet to be determined. Unfortunately, the stated concerns are all valid. On the other hand, entrusting a private institution- a Jordanian gallery on which Iraq has no jurisdiction- is in itself of concern as well.

In the final analysis, the systematic destruction of Iraq’s cultural heritage continues exemplifying what could be easily perceived as an ideological process of identity erasure. At a historical moment of identity confusion, sectarian strife and political instability, when Iraq’s national fabric is in question and its geographical and social coherence is under the threat of manipulation, cultural manifestation of history and identity provide a vital example of solutions and harmony.

NOTES:
1. Protocol for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, signed May 1954, 249 U.N.T.S. 358. See Nafziger 2003.
2. As quoted in “Destroying Iraq’s Heritage…Yet Again,” April 13, 2006, uruknet.info, http://WWW.uruknet.info/?p=m225618hd=1&size=1&I=e.
3. For example, in a panel on the destruction of cultural heritage in Iraq on June 14, 2006 at the Second Congress of Middle Eastern Studies (WOCMES-2) in Amman, Jordan, all the panelists who are academics at U.S. and European universities (including myself) were accused by Iraq’s former Deputy Minister of Culture of not thoroughly researching the topic as much of the information was incorrect and/or incomplete. While the charge might hold some truth in relation to misinformation, the fact remains that very little can be authenticated under Iraq’s current circumstances which include a lack of security, ideological political battles and the occupier’s agenda.
4. For details see Sohiko Yamada, "Baghdad: Breaking Tides" in Process: Architecture (Tokyo) no. 58, Medinat Al Salam: Baghdad 1979–83 (1985), 15–19, and 75.
5. For details on the history of Iraqi modern art see Shakir Hassan Al Said, Fussul min Tarikh al-Haraka al-Tashkiliah fi al-Iraq (Chapters from the History of Plastic Art Movement in Iraq), part 2 (Baghdad: Ministry of Culture and Information, Dar al-Hurriyah lil Tibaa’, 1988).
6. The collection of the Museum for Pioneer Artists was moved to the Center in the 1990s following Gulf War I for protection.
7. The exact number of works in the collection is an ambiguous matter that seems to vary from one report to another. In several personal correspondences with the Iraqi Ministry of Culture I was told that the collection contained about 8,000 works. Muayyad Damerji, the Iraqi Cultural Council, however, reported at the UNESCO Experts’ Meeting on the Safeguarding of the Iraqi Cultural Heritage at the British Museum that “the Galleries of Modern Art, which had housed the works of pioneering Iraqi artists, were also looted and destroyed and only about a fiftieth of the collection was saved. One room in the Iraq Museum is now used for storing what survives, namely about 250 to 300 of an estimated 4000 paintings, many of them ripped and cut up because they were too big to move.” See UNESCO 2003. http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/iraqcrisis/reports/
IraqLootingSessionRencontre07072003.doc.
8. There are certain rumors that the collection of retrieved works has been documented, but I am still awaiting an official response to this effect.
9. I am currently in Jordan as a receiver of a 2006 fellowship from the American Academic Research Institute in Iraq (TAARII) working on constructing an archive of the collection of the Museum through available catalogues from the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the memory of Iraqi artists currently in Jordan who had intimate knowledge of the collection, including Rafaa al-Nassiri, and Mohammed Ghani.llowing Gulf War I for protection.
10. See Baghdad-Paris: Artistes d’Irak at Musée du Montparnasse
11. Information cited here was collected from various interviews and encounters with Iraqi artists in Baghdad in June 2003 and in Amman, Jordan since.
12. The statue was found in al-Midan—khan al-m’dalal for antiques (next to al-Haydarkhana), where items were brought from al-Shawakah. Interview with Mohammed Znad by author, Amman, Jordan, June 21, 2006, and statement and various news articles by Salah Abbas, 2003.
13. Mohammed Ghani initially contacted the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) pleading for financial support and help in continuing his campaign, organized immediately after the invasion, to buy back some of the stolen works in the neighborhood surrounding the Museum. Failing to secure any aid from the CPA or NGOs, he approached and solicited funds from friends, personal acquaintances, and other concerned individuals within the Iraqi community. He enlisted his eager students and colleagues to locate and purchase stolen works. Individuals who donated funds for the effort were bind by an agreement, retained by Ghani, establishing them as the temporary custodians of the specific works purchased with their money until the Museum is reinstituted. In return, they were promised to be publicly acknowledged as donors for the arts. Interview with Mohammed Ghani by author, 2004.
14. Recent information I received from several interviews stated that a number of the artists involved in the Committee were unfortunately lured by the skyrocketing prices of the works that they too compromised and traded with the stolen works. In fact the role of a large number of Iraqi artists in facilitating the trade is yet to be determined but there are many indications to it.
15. Salah Abass, “Contemporary Visual Art in Iraq: the Beginning and the End,” unpublished material, courtesy of the author.
16. Orfali Gallery and Art Center was established in 1993, and is one of the leading galleries in Amman.The gallery specializes in artists from the Arab world, but has also hosted exhibitions from England, Italy and New Zealand. More importantly, owned and run by an Iraqi expatriate, it has become Iraqi artists’ main venue of exhibition and a friendly place of gathering. http://www.orfali.net/.
17. Aside from expertise of the individuals involved, including Mohammed Ghani and Nadhim Thamer, the prominent Iraqi architect and Dean of the School of Arts and Science at the Jordan Ahliyyeh University, Dr. Ihsan Fethi, provided photographs of the said paintings that he had personally taken at the Museum in Baghdad two years prior to its pillage. Interviews with Dr. Ihsan Fethi and Ms. Rana Snober, the director of the Orfali Gallery, by the author.
18. Al-Orfali Gallery granted me permission to view the works. One was only hastily painted black with wide, washy strokes from the left corner covering the specific information but without much concern to the over all effect.
19. As informed by the Iraqi Ambassador to Jordan, Mr. Atta Abd al-wahab, at the Orfali Gallery on June 17, 2006.

Nada Shabout is an Assistant Professor of Art History at the University of North Texas. She holds a PhD from the University of Texas at Arlington (1999), a MA in the Humanities, a BA in Architecture, and a BFA. Her work, Modern Arab Art: Formation and Developments c.1940s-1990s is currently under consideration with the University of Florida Press. In addition to curating the traveling exhibition, Dafatir: Contemporary Iraqi Book Art, Shabout has published numerous articles on modern and contemporary Iraqi art with a focus on the relationship between visual production and the politics of identity. Her current project is Recovering Iraq’s Modern Heritage: Constructing and Digitally Documenting the Collection of the former Saddam Center for the Arts.