Next September ICCROM will offer for the third time the very successful course dedicated to the protection of cultural heritage in times of conflict. The course will be based in the heart of Rome and the participants will have a unique chance of attending a great course in an amazing setting.


Here some details from ICCROM:

Background
Armed conflicts world wide continue to involve deliberate or accidental damage to cultural heritage. Conflicts result in the weakening of governments and societies and endanger the core values that hold communities together. The protection and recovery of cultural heritage can play a crucial role in rebuilding societies and in overcoming the sense of loss and displacement.

Notwithstanding, in times of conflict, any operation will be delayed as ensuring security and safety of people takes precedence.  As a result, it is essential for the concerned professionals working in these areas to understand how and when to intervene to secure or recover cultural heritage while law enforcement, peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts are under way.

Objectives
Analyze patterns in present-day conflicts, especially in relation to their interactions with cultural heritage;

• Explore the values associated with cultural heritage and the impact that conflict has on them;
• Assess and manage risks to cultural heritage in conflict situations;
• Secure, salvage and stabilize a variety of cultural materials;
• Take peacetime preparatory action to improve response in times of conflict;
• Critically examine the applicability of international legal instruments, and of conservation ethics and principles in times of conflict;
• Communicate successfully with the various actors involved, and work in teams.

Methodology
The course will comprise of interactive lectures, group activities, practical sessions, simulations, site visits and case studies. Participants will be asked to develop case studies drawing from their own experience and work context.

Participants
The course is aimed at those who are actively involved in the protection of cultural heritage within a variety of institutions (libraries, museums, archives, sites, departments of antiquities or archaeology, religious and community centres, etc.). It is also aimed at professionals from humanitarian and cultural aid organizations, as well as military, civilian and civil defense personnel. Those with experience in conflict situations are particularly encouraged to apply.

A maximum of 22 participants will be selected.

Course fee: 900 € (Euro).

For full details or to apply, visit ICCROM’s website: First Aid to Cultural Heritage in Times of Conflict

Liberia 77 is a project dedicated to a country and its people. This West African country devastated by military coups and civil wars for a brief time was home for Jeff and Andrew Topham, now two Canadian photographers but then only two kids that moved with the family to the Monrovia, the capital city of Liberia in 1976, to follow their father’s job.

It is in this period that the passion for photography was transmitted to them by their dad who documented the family’s life in Africa with his camera. Those pictures of the late ‘70s became part of the brothers’ identity and the physical, visual support of their memories.

In 2010 Jeff and Andrew decided to go back to Monrovia to see and understand what happened to the country in 20 yeas of civil unrest. This experience allowed them to reconnect emotionally with their childhood but it also inspired the documentary film project titled Liberia77.

In the quest for their own personal memory, they realized that the photographic memory of the country had disappeared during the civil wars, when the possession of photographs was interpreted as a sign of wealth and could cost ones life. To avoid getting into trouble people burned their albums, their family pictures and also the collections of museums were destroyed, leaving the country deprived of an important part of its heritage and its national and individual memory.

The dynamic relations between seeing and knowing were broken by the conflict. Liberians are now missing an important tool to share and transmit history to the new generations. Fragments of their identities are gone forever and this project is trying to start the difficult task of restituting to the nation some of these fragments, collecting images and creating a new photographic archive.
Jeff and Andrew need support for their amazing project so please if you are interested in donating pre-war photographs of Liberia, click here.


Patrizia

Read more:
Two Photographers’ Mission to Retrace a Lost Liberia
The Liberia '77 Photo Repatriation Project
Retracing ‘Normal-Day’ Liberia via Images: Two Canadians Recollect Pre-War Imagery

_She first took interest in the construction of cultural identities while doing her BA in International Relations at Tufts University in the mid 1990’s. Her interest was sparked by a debate then growing in the EU on the role of culture in establishing a comprehensive European identity embodied in the creation of traditional nation-state symbols for the EU such as a flag and anthem. She was intrigued by how this discourse was defining new boundaries of exclusion and inclusion and she studied the topic by looking at evolving attitudes towards Roma communities in the EU and towards relations with Turkey.

After obtaining her BA, she had a chance to observe the complexities of post-disaster work (post-conflict and natural catastrophe) during an internship with the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs in Geneva before doing a Masters jointly taught at the University of Bath, Sciences Po and the Sorbonne in Paris on contemporary European political culture.

Subsequently she worked for three years at UNESCO. First she worked under Máté Kovács (today at the Observatory of Cultural Policies in Africa) working on the project “A Cultural Approach to HIV/AIDS Prevention and Care”, then under Yudhishthir Raj Isar in the Cultural Policies for Development Unit, and finally under Katerina Stenou (now chargée d’affaire UNESCO- Kazakhstan) when she managed the UNESCO Cities of Peace Prize (2000-2001). 

Her time at UNESCO coincided with a period during which the organization was attempting to implement its mandate in relation to the Dayton Peace Agreement in Bosnia-Herzegovina bringing together ministers of education and culture from the former Yugoslav Republics to discuss ways ahead and avenues for cooperation.  She decided to use a vacation to visit the heritage reconstruction projects in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in Serbia. Amongst others, she attended presentations of the Mostar Bridge reconstruction and of the ARS-AEVI museum projects and spoke to heritage professionals working at a number of cultural institutions in Sarajevo and Belgrade.  This trip was fundamental in her thinking on the issue of culture and conflict; through it she became aware that many cultural heritage reconstruction projects that aimed at reconciliation were unwittingly contributing to entrenching the lines of division and resentment created by the conflicts.

In 2002, she moved to London to research this topic under the guidance of Professor Patrick Boylan, this resulted in a dissertation evaluating attempts to use cultural heritage as a tool for mediation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. From 2003-2005 she worked as the coordinator of the European Cultural Foundation's UK National Committee and as a researcher at both International Intelligence on Culture (directed by Rod Fisher) and the Center for Creative Communities (directed by Jennifer Williams). During this time she was able to explore issues around the role of culture in an enlarged EU (through a series of seminars organized at Chatham House) and the various funding avenues available for projects that involved the arts and creative practices in managing conflict within communities.

Dacia moved to Cambridge in 2005 to do a PhD. At first she had in mind to do a thesis comparing the impact of war on cultural heritage in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Spain. Yet, on discovering vast amounts of largely neglected archival material on the reconstruction of cultural heritage in post-war Spain, she decided to focus entirely on her own country of origin, one in which she was able to read not only the language itself but also the various subtleties of sub-text and censorship. Her study of Spain lead her to discover the importance of references to cultural heritage in war-time propaganda,  its rhetorical and visual violence, as well as the destructive dimensions of many post-war reconstruction policies. In 2006 she founded the Cambridge Post-Conflict and Post-Crisis Group (PCPC) in an effort to create links across disciplines within the university and between the various fields of practice – such as NGOs and military personnel - and academia. This group organized a two-day international conference in June 2008 “The Culture of Reconstruction” inaugurated with a lecture by Paddy Ashdown. Through the group between 2009 and 2011 Dacia ran a series of workshops together with Dr Naoise Mac Sweeney entitled In the Wake of War.

In 2008 Dacia became a research associate on the EU funded research project Cultural Heritage and the Reconstruction of Identities after Conflict (CRIC), based at the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research at University of Cambridge, and lead by Dr. Marie Louise Stig Sørensen.

_Reconstructing Spain
CRIC researcher Dr Dacia Viejo-Rose from the University of Cambridge
discusses various dimensions of the reconstruction of cultural heritage
More videos on the CRIC projects

_
Since January 2012, she has taken up a three-year British Academy Post-doctoral Fellowship to do research on the topic of cultural violence/violence against culture. With this project she hopes to gain a better understanding on the motivations and intentions that underlie deliberate attacks on cultural heritage..

_Publications:

Her first book, titled Reconstructing Spain: Cultural Heritage and Memory after Civil War (Sussex Academic Press, 2011) has just been released – the book will be officially launched on 16 February at the London School of Economics (LSE). She was a contributor and guest editor for the Cultures and Globalization Series, volume 4. Heritage, Memory and Identity (Sage, 2011), a contributor for volume 1 in the series Conflicts and Tensions (Sage, 2007) and has an article in a recent volume of the Memory Studies (October 2011).

She has also contributed several chapters for forthcoming publications of the CRIC research.

Laurence Lepetit

NATO Allied Command Transformation (ACT), the International Military Cultural Resources Working Group (IMCURWG) and the Austrian National Defense Academy (NDA) recently conducted a Pilot Course on Cultural Property Protection. From the 29th of November to the 2nd of December, NATO and NATO partner personnel gathered at the Austrian National Defense Academy in Vienna to attend this training event.

Professionals from 13 countries and diverse backgrounds composed the audience. The participants were not only members of national armed forces, but also civilians operating in the field of cultural heritage protection, archaeologists and historians. 

The course was designed to enhance NATO’s Cultural Property Protection (CPP) capabilities and to establish a new structured and institutionalized forum of discussion. The lectures addressed a number of issues. For instance, on the opening day the conversation focused on the value and utility of CPP and on the way in which it should be implemented in the Military Decision Making Process. 

The Austrian approach was taken as an example of good practice, recognizing that only a limited number of armed forces are effectively complying with the principles accepted by international customary law and articulated in the 1954 Hague Convention and its protocols.

A number of case studies were presented to illustrate both good and bad practice (Afghanistan, Iraq, Macedonia, Libya). Members of the Blue Shield emergency assessment mission to Libya (Dr. Kila, Karl von Habsburg and Dr. Walda) presented the results of their investigations and described their efforts to compile a non-strike list. A list that was then forwarded to NATO and might have been at the base of the care and attention paid by the Alliance in avoiding sites of cultural relevance during the ‘surgical strikes’ on the Libyan territory.


Members of the Austrian Armed Forces briefly introduced the principles of international law that are regulating the protection of cultural property in times of conflict. In addition to this, the Austrian Defence Academy engaged the participants in a practical exercise based on a scenario commonly used for the ordinary training of their National Army.

During the course, Dr. Laurie Rush and Dr. James Zeidler presented the activities of the CENTCOM Historical/Cultural Action Group. They described a variety of training tools developed for the US Department of Defense to raise awareness among military personnel and contractors about the importance and value of protecting cultural property.  Though, what I appreciated the most was the fact that their presentations were not structured simply as self-promoting discourses (all too common…). On the contrary, what I found most useful was their ability to use case studies to demonstrate how the lack of knowledge is frequently the primary cause of destruction and damage of cultural property. Mistakes that could have easily been avoided by informed commanders and trained soldiers. Starting from the description of  real situations that the military had to face in Afghanistan and in Iraq, a series of lessons were drawn. In particular it was possible for them to stress the importance of designing and institutionalising specific training modules on heritage issues. The message was that only through knowledge and awareness damages can be minimised if not prevented.

The course was not structured to deliver a complete and exhaustive training on CPP matters. It appeared more like a round table where, after each presentation, the audience would come alive with questions and suggestions to find a way forward. What was clear, by the end of the week, was that at both national and international level there is a general and widespread lack of concrete measures to enforce and implement of the provisions of the 1954 Hague Convention. One fundamental question was also that there is not a commonly agreed definition of the professional figure of the Cultural Property Advisor or Specialist. It seems that the rising awareness of the fact that cultural heritage should be taken into consideration during military operations has created a new professional niche. However, until this professional figure is not formally defined the risk is that all the efforts of good will made by NATO (or by any national military force) will be vain and might result in a further loss of credibility. 

To close the course CDR Hallett introduced one of the tools that could be used by anyone who felt the need to stimulate a change of approach within NATO. He presented the Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Centre  and its database. By registering to the database it is possible to submit observations, sugestions and comments on specific issues related to NATO operations. The database can then be accessed and all the entries queried. Obviously, the contributions submitted need to meet certain criteria to be taken into consideration and included in the database, but once accepted they are analysed and become part of a corpus of information that can be beneficial to others and that can eventually stimulate a process of change within the Alliance. It is hard to predict how effective this tool might be. However, for those who believe that we are in desperate need of a radical change in the way in which the military are approaching cultural heritage issues, it might be worth a try!

Patrizia

Last week NATO TV posted on its website these two video to report on Libya and the state of its cultural heritage after the air raids of the Alliance. It is very difficult to tell if no damage occurred because NATO adopted the No-Strike list compiled by the Blue Shield or by pure chance. However, the NATO campaign, with its 9,300 airstrikes over Libya (from March to October 2011), managed to spare numerous sites even those that were militarily relevant. An example of precise targeting is given by Hafed Walda,  research fellow at Kings College in London, and  member of the Blue Shield assessment mission, who recently spoke about  Rasaimergib Fort. Here NATO had to take out a number of radars placed on the hilltop and managed to destroy the target without affecting the ancient Roman arch in its proximity.

Media Release - November 22, 2011
by the Association of the National Committees of the Blue Shield (ANCBS)
and the International Military Cultural Resources Working Group (IMCuRWG)

1) The final detailed report is now online:  
http://www.blueshield.at/libya_2011/11-2011/mission_report_libya_11-2011.pdf

2) Eight pictures (including the "famous" hole in the bank safe) taken by Karl von Habsburg 
are for free use by journalists reporting on this Libyan mission: 
http://blueshield.de/libya2-gallery.html

Heritage Sites in Eastern Libya(e.g. Benghazi, Cyrene, Ptolemais, Apollonia)


The recent conflict in Libya called for emergency assessment missions to determine the cultural heritage situation. Since independent confirmation about damage and looting had been rarely available thus far, two organizations involved in international protection of cultural heritage, Blue Shield and the International Military Cultural Resources Work Group, organized two missions to meet with Libyan officials and obtain a first hand impression of the situation.

The first mission (September 28 – 30) to Tripoli, Leptis Magna and Sabratha had been very successful and highly welcomed by Libyan heritage professionals; see the detailed report: http://www.blueshield.at. Therefore the same team decided to travel a second time to Libya, focusing now on Eastern Libya. 

The second mission (November 12 – 16) started in Benghazi and took the eastward road along the Mediterranean coast for about 250 km until Tokra. The team visited sites, monuments, museums, libraries, and archives in 10 towns, among them the famous UNESCO World heritage site in Cyrene

Major cases of damage: 

Benghazi: inspection of the bank vault (see gallery), from which the most valuable coin treasure had been stolen; only 8 coins have been recovered so far.

• Cyrene (see gallery): Only minor damage to the site; no damage to report on the ethnographic collection, the library and the archives.
• Darnah: The museum (see gallery) was vandalized, but there were few thefts. The palace of King Idris is suffering from the activity of the squatting.
• Susa (Apollonia): Break in at the museum and the theft of 4 important vases. The site and the storehouses remain unharmed.
• Umm al Shuga: Severe damage from illegal digging (see gallery).

Reports from other places in Libya were mainly positive, e.g. the site and the museum of embattledSirte was not harmed.

Overall it has to be stated that in this part of Libya there had been taken good precautionary measuresby local authorities in mid February. The team encountered many good examples of protecting the sites by guards and hiding valuable items by antiquity staff and local civilians.

About the mission

Planning this mission began immediately after returning from the first mission. There were a number of obstacles as the logistical problems of travel and the weak communication infrastructure.  The team flew via Istanbul to Benghazi on November 12, and has returned by the same route on November 16.

The team in Libya:

• Karl von Habsburg, President, Association of National Committees of the Blue Shield (ANCBS)
• Dr. Joris Kila, Chairman, International Military Cultural Resources Work Group (IMCuRWG); University of Amsterdam
• Dr. Hafed Walda (Research Fellow at Kings College in London, former director ofexcavation in Leptis Magna)

Home base (background research, coordination, communication):

• Dr. Thomas Schuler, President, Disaster Relief Task Force (DRTF) of International Council of Museums (ICOM)

This Media Release is authorized by the team members.

Media contact:

Dr. Thomas Schuler
Tel: +49 371 2601007
Fax: +49 371 2600743
Email: th.schuler <at> t-online.de

On the 5th and the 6th of November the American Academy in Rome hosted the conference Saving Cultural Heritage in Crisis Areas. The conference was held at the amazing venue of Villa Aurelia, build by Cardinal Girolamo Farnese atop the Gianiculum in the seventeenth century and now property of the American Academy. This event, organisedby C.Brian Rose, James B. Pritchard, Lucy Shoe Meritt and Laurie Rush with the support of the Getty Foundation and of the Andrew Mellon Foundation brought together a number of experts and leaders in the field of cultural heritage to explore case studies and new actions to prevent damage and protect culture and cultural heritage in times of crisis.

The welcoming statement of the Ambassador of the United States to the Republics of Italy and San Marino was followed by a first session dedicated to the topic of Disaster response. Aparna Tandon (ICCROM Project Specialist) opened the session with a moving presentation of the activities carried out by ICCROM in Haiti after the earthquake. She vividly described the situation found upon her arrival and illustrated the numerous challenges she had to face to set up an ICCROM training course trying at the same time to take advantage of the opportunity to rescue art and artifacts collections. 

The second speaker, Patrick Daly (Asia Research Institute, Senior Research Fellow) explored the ways in which Cultural Heritage could and should be part of a coherent post disaster action. Bringing as a case study the impact that the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami had on the cultural heritage of indonesian affected areas, he explored examples of  response and recovery that saw the involvement of the community and integrated cultural heritage in response and recovery actions. What I personally found interesting was the comprehensive approach of this paper that looked at the problem from different angles and  took into consideration all cultural aspects of the community life, for instance, including in the picture considerations on intangible heritage, religious and gender issues. Constntly keeping in touch with reality the author also mentioned the ethical challenges that he had to face, in particular in the initial post-disaster phase when the priorities are set and a numeber of forces are working against cultural efforts.

After this session dedicated to disaster response, the conference moved in a different direction and dedicated the following sessions mainly to the presentation and discussion of the Preservation of Cultural Heritage in Conflict Zones. A number of papers looked at this topic from a range of different perspectives, presenting studies from Iraq, Libya and Albania, or looking at Prevention and Protection through Education and Documentation.
It is in this context that His Excellency Omar S. Sultan,  Afghan Deputy Minister of Information, Culture and Tourism, spoke about the preservation of cultural heritage in Afghanistan and in particular of the Early Buddhist Site of Mes Aynak. In his talk he introduced a number of issues related with site protection and management to prevent the illicit traffic of antiquities and the widespread looting of archaeological sites. His Excellency proudly spoke about the importance of cultural heritage in the promotion of national integrity and identity. His presentation showed a series of stunning images of the most recent archaeological discoveries in the Logar province and discussed the preservation strategies for the archaeological sites threatened by mining development. This talk gave a lot more than a mere description of the current situation in Afghanistan it also sent a positive message about the efforts made nationally and internationally to help Afghanistan stressing the importance of cultural resources as much as any other resource. As his excellency said  "A well-functioning national management of cultural heritage is a crucial element of rebuilding the Afghan national state".

The first day of the conference was closed by a contribution from the General Pasquale Muggeo (Comandandte, Carabinieri Tutela Patrimonio Culturale). The General described to the audience the unique experience of the Carabinieri in the protection of Cultural Property and stressed the importance of international agreements and cooperation.

The second day of the conference featured a number of unique presentations.  Many were related to the different strategies adopted to include Cultural Heritage Protection in military training. Lieutenant Colonel Hodzic, as chief og the Education and Training Development Department, spoke about the programmes of the Peacekeeping Institute of Sarajevo (Bosnia-Hezegovina). While Brian Rose and Laurie Rush illustrated the various training tools adopted to train the US troops about cultural heritage issues both before and during deployment.

More incredible images were shown by Sarah Parcak and Roberto Nardi. Both internationally recognised professionals constantly dealing with archaeological sites in danger. The first one illustrated how the application new technology like remote sensing and satellite imagery can help monitoring archaeological sites affected by heavy looting. The second one described how an amazing archaeological site, like Zeugma in Turkey, can be rescued and preserved by the raising waters of the Euphrate Dam even when working against time and in extremely difficult conditions.

In the afternoon James Lessard and Christina Luke brought again the 'local communities' into de debate, presenting their personal and professional experience in mediating and engaging with local communities to achieve knowledge raise awareness and be able to complete their extremely diverse projects. Each single session was followed by a lively debate and stimulating discussion.

It is very difficult to summarise in a comprehensive way these two incredibly intense days. Each panelist approached the audience to share and discuss their points of view, and certainly the final round table was the moment in which the audience more actively engaged in the conversation. In fact, the organisers decided to close the conference with a session titled Conversations that Matter.  
Chaired by Christopher S. Calenza, Director of the American Academy in Rome, Brian Rose, Laurie Rush and Mounir Bouchenaki made some conclusive remarks and discussed the observations coming from the audience in light of their great experience in the field. 

Patrizia

For more details:
Conference Programme

On the 31st of October, during the 36th session of UNESCO General Conference, the UNESCO Member States voted on whether to grant Palestine full membership to the Organization.  The Palestinian bid received 107 "yes" votes (including France - plus many African, Arab and Latin American counties), with 14 countries voting against (including US, Canada, Germany and Australia) and 52 abstaining (including UK, New Zealand and various Europeans). The 107 votes were sufficient to satisfy a two-thirds majority of countries present and voting and admit Palestine as a member state to UNESCO. During the voting, the atmosphere in the hall was electric. The crowd was told by the Chair to be quiet on a number of occasions, as people cheered and applauded the yes votes. There was a definite feeling throughout the vote that the majority of those present were rooting for Palestine. (CF the video of the vote published below by CultureconflictCooperation). Palestine has been demanding the status of member state since 1989. 

Financial consequences for UNESCO

The consequences for the Organization in admitting Palestine are pretty serious. The US government, in compliance with US law, has now withdrawn all funding from the Organization. As the US is currently the Organization’s largest contributor, this represents a cut of 22% in its regular budget ($80 million from the $653 million annual budget). According to the Palestinian Ambassador to UNESCO, the writer, historian and poet Elias Sambar, it would appear that a number of countries took the US threat to withdraw funding if Palestine was admitted as an insult to their sovereignty and actually pushed the vote in favor of Palestine. To get a complete overview of the legal situation and the firm position of the Congress against the Palestine accession to the position of Member State, you can read the article of Lara Friedman in the Huffington Post

Irina Bokova issued a statement asking the US to reconsider their position as UNESCO will not be able to complete its work in critical areas, such as achieving universal education, supporting new democracies and fighting extremismis (read the statement), without US support. The US will not leave the Organization all together; they are just ceasing funding so they will lose their voting rights after two years. Paradoxically, on November the 2nd (two days after the vote), the US was re-elected to the UNESCO Executive Board to serve another four-year term. David Killion, the US Ambassador to UNESCO emphasized that it was as a strong sign of commitment of the US towards the Organization’s values and actions.

The World Heritage Committee

In February this year, Palestine presented the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem to the World Heritage Committee for World Heritage listing. The site of Bethlehem is the premium Palestine cultural attraction with record numbers of pilgrims and tourist visits. At that time, as Palestine was not a recognized state under UN definition and as a matter of consequence not a signatory member of the World Heritage Convention[i], the proposal was not admissible under the World Heritage Convention of 1972 regulations. 



This vote in UNESCO will now allow Palestine to propose its own sites without the mediation of a third country.  It is worth noting that the Old City of Jerusalem was inscribed in the World Heritage list in 1981 as a submission from Jordan.

Another nomination on the Old Town of Hebron is in preparation. Accordingly, an international symposium will be held in Paris on the 25th and 26th of November in the Institute du Monde Arabe on the historic and architectural heritage of Hebron. The symposium is organized by the International Committee for the preservation and the promotion of the Old City of Hebron (www.hebronheritage.com) is led by two French Mayors and the Mayor of Hebron itself. At the heart of the demand is the well-known site of the Cave of the Patriarchs or the Cave of Machpelah, known by Muslims as the Sanctuary of Abraham or Ibrahimi Mosque. A question that will probably be raised in the next few years regards which country, Palestine or Israel, has the right to present this site to the World Heritage Committee for listing, as it has cultural and religious meaning for both communities.

UN Status

It was very unlikely that Palestine would be offered the status of member in the UN on the 11th of November despite the UNESCO precedent, but as Mr Sambar has pointed out it is very common in UN history that there is a period of time between the recognition of a country by UNESCO and by the UN. As a matter of fact, Germany itself was admitted to UNESCO in 1948 and obtained UN membership in 1972.

Laurence Lepetit

Note: 
[i] Article 13 of the World Heritage Convention of 1972 “Article 13
“The World Heritage Committee shall receive and study requests for international assistance formulated by States Parties to this Convention with respect to property forming part of the cultural or natural heritage, situated in their territories, and included or potentially suitable for inclusion in the lists mentioned referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 11. The purpose of such requests may be to secure the protection, conservation, presentation or rehabilitation of such property”

After five intense weeks of work, on Friday 28 October, the second edition of the  International Course on First Aid to Cultural Heritage in Times of Conflict came to a close. Once again, with the support of its partners, ICCROM was able to deliver an innovative and lively training experience to 18 internationally selected cultural heritage professionals.

Each week was dedicated to the exploration of a specific theme, and each day the participants had to face new practical and intellectual challenges. Looking at  the course schedule and at the number of international experts involved in the sessions, it is possible to understand what an amazing opportunity it was for me to be involved in such a project. Every day, for the last few weeks, I was in the class together with the participants and I had the chance to get invloved in all the activities designed  to make sure that each one of them would be able to take back home a 'tool kit' filled with practical skills and intellectual knowledge. However, I  feel that what made this experience unique was the contribution of each single participant. . They came to Italy with their incredible professional and personal back ground and they constantly shared their experiences and reflections  with their colleagues, the ICCROM staff and the teaching team.

It is impossible to summarise in a few lines these five weeks, and as for last year, the end of the course is  only the beginning of a new phase in our professional development. Therefore, I invite all the First Aiders to take advantage of this blog to keep sharing. I really hope that we will be able to create an new network of professionals, something real and active in the field of cultural heritage protection in times of conflict.  I also hope that you will always find this as a welcoming space where you can share your ideas, propose new projects and advertise your professional skills.

GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL AND KEEP IN TOUCH!
Patrizia