Iraq
63. This inquiry was prompted by reports of widespread
looting in Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the war; there was
particular concern over the fate of cultural treasures held by
the National Museum in Baghdad. It now seems clear that reporting
of the situation was complicated by a number of factors: the incompleteness
of the Museum's information about its collection (something which
still plagues attempts to assess the problem); the removal of
items in the collection for safe-keeping before the Gulf war in
1990 (and not yet returned); the illicit removal of items by members
of the previous regime over a long period; and an apparent mix
of professional and targeted theft (from the Museum's vaults)
and more casual looting (from its galleries) in the inevitably
confused period following the arrival of Coalition troops in Baghdad.[103]
64. There was inevitable concern that a proportion
of these items could end up coming through the UK, given the global
significance of the London art market. The British Art Market
Federation told us that legitimate trade in Mesopotamian antiquities
had collapsed to virtually nothing in the aftermath of the Iraq
war and the related establishment of specific legislation aimed
at preventing illicit trade in cultural property sourced in Iraq.[104]
The UN Security Council has maintained restrictions on the import
and trade in unlawfully removed Iraqi cultural property. In the
UK, the Iraq (UN Sanctions) Order 2003 brought these restrictions
into effect on 14 June 2003 (with a maximum penalty of 7 years
imprisonment).[105]
65. When we discussed looting in Iraq with the DCMS
in July 2003, the most recent discovery had been the theft of
the Museum's collection of "very important" cylinder
seals (numbering some 4-5,000 artefacts). It is unclear whether
the latest estimates — of 3,000 missing items — treat
this theft of cylinder seals as a single entry. Such figures therefore
have to be treated with caution as the underlying loss —
in terms of actual numbers of individual objects, value, national
importance and scholarly or archaeological significance —
must be subject to wide variation.[106]
66. The DCMS's most recent analysis of the situation,
requested by the Committee in November 2003, reveals that:
a) The original scale of losses at the Museum
was thought to be as high as around 170,000 items, but this has
now been re-estimated at around 3,000 items, of which 30 or so
are considered to be highly significant items, probably stolen
by professional thieves.
b) Many of the missing artefacts may never be
recovered at all since they were probably stolen several years
ago by senior figures in the Ba'ath regime: Saddam's eldest son,
Uday, is known to have made huge profits from the international
trade in antiquities.
c) The amnesty put in place by Coalition forces
has resulted in almost 2,000 items being returned, including key
pieces, such as the Sacred Vase of Warka, dating from around 3000
BC, one of the greatest treasures of Mesopotamian antiquity.
d) The Nimrud gold treasure was located intact
in the vaults of the Central Bank of Iraq in early July 2003.
It is intended to exhibit the Treasure in the US, Japan and in
Europe to raise funds for the Baghdad Museum and the Iraq's archaeological
sites.
e) When the security situation in Iraq is more
stable, the British Museum plan to lead an international team
of conservators who will spend three months working in Iraq helping
train museum staff and promoting the spread of best practice.
f) Recent press reports indicate that three London
antiquities dealers have been arrested in a secret police operation
for allegedly dealing in artefacts looted from Iraq. In connection
with the arrest, Police recovered an Assyrian stone relief looted
in 1991 after the Gulf War from the palace of Ashur Nasir-pal
II in central Iraq.
g) There have been reports of a major seizure
of further consignments of looted artefacts from Iraqi museums
and sites in France and Kuwait (where 33 cuneiform tablets were
taken from a dealer from Sardinia).
h) The new Iraqi Culture Minister, al-Jazairi,
has announced an official enquiry into the looting of museums
and libraries during the recent conflict.[107]
67. There has been widespread concern on the question
of the integrity of Iraq's archaeological sites for an extended
period and DCMS told is that "it is true to say that, although
looting has been common in Iraq since the 1990 Gulf War, the recent
conflict has escalated the situation and, despite best efforts
of Coalition authorities, a high level of looting continues".[108]
The 10,000 or so documented archaeological sites in Iraq are mostly
in remote desert regions and therefore have been difficult to
protect within available resources (the civilian guards employed
by the Iraqi State Board of Antiquities were not allowed to carry
firearms and were generally in a minority of one in the face of
multiple armed raiders).[109]
The British School of Archaeology wrote in September 2003 that:
"the looting and destruction of sites apparently continues
more or less unabated". The lack of border patrols, by either
the Coalition forces or Iraq's neighbours, was identified as a
key area for action to check the free flow of looted material
out of the country.[110]
68. DCMS reported an informal deal between the Coalition
Provisional Authority (CPA) cultural staff (from DCMS) and army
commanders in the CPA regions, guards will be provided for the
50 most important sites (as identified by international scholars)
and to monitor the more remote sites through the deployment of
helicopter flyovers and site visits by nearby troops. The DCMS
also said that action to ensure that salaries are paid to site-guards
from the Iraqi State Board of Antiquities and that the Coalition
Provisional Authority is currently bidding for funds to double
the number of guards on archaeological sites, to arm them and
to equip them with transmitter radios and all-terrain vehicles
so that they can monitor vulnerable sites in conjunction with
local police forces.[111]
The Government believes that the return of normal archaeological
activity to Iraq will alleviate the problem as archaeologists
often make provision for security of their own. This effectively
means that the best way to reduce looting is to stabilise Iraq
more generally; an objective with which few would quarrel.[112]
69. We received evidence that there were questions
over the Government's consideration of Iraq's cultural status,
and the importance of its heritage for the whole world, in the
run-up to the conflict. The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Archaeology
wrote to the Prime Minister in February 2003 and, while recognising
the paramount importance of military and humanitarian concerns,
asked that consideration be given to Iraq's sites and museums
and their status in terms of world heritage archaeological significance.
Further letters to Government, and other contacts, failed to elicit
a response until April. Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, Chairman of
the Group, recorded his "concern and puzzlement" at
this lack of response especially as he had not been able to identify
the source of the advice that Government later said was received
on these matters.[113]
70. The Secretary of State recognised that there
had been some confusion during preparations for military action
but reiterated to the Committee that the MoD had consulted "widely"
with the archaeological community.[114]
The Standing Conference on Portable Antiquities recommends a review
of UK policy and practice for military planning and post-conflict
security, in relation the cultural heritage.[115]
71. While we have concern at the picture this evidence
paints, and the outstanding questions, it seems clear that at
least some British troops on the ground were clear about Iraq's
significance within world history. As Lieutenant-Colonel Tim Collins
told the Royal Irish Battle Group on the eve of the conflict,
"Iraq is steeped in history. It is the site of the Garden
of Eden, of the Great Flood, and the birth of Abraham. Tread lightly
there."[116]
18 
