With both American and Iraqi casualties mounting in the Middle East, the past four weeks of Operation Iraqi Freedom have proven without a doubt that war is a terrible thing. A commonly ignored side effect of war, though, is the destruction inflicted upon cultural and historic landmarks and memorabilia. This was demonstrated last week when Baghdad's National Museum of Antiquities was looted by civilians who ran off with prized artifacts dating as far back as ancient Mesopotamia.
In response to the looting, three members of the White House Cultural Property Advisory Committee, Martin E. Sullivan, Richard S. Lanier and Gary Vikan, resigned in protest of America's inability to safeguard the museum. Not only were the advisors' actions rash and worthless, they also focused on comparatively insignificant facets of a bloody conflict.
The three advisors, all appointed under former president Clinton, were rightly upset. The loss of irreplaceable artifacts is a tragedy and a hard blow for a country that has years of tough reconstruction in front of it. But what is more of a loss -- a young Marine leaving behind a wife and newborn baby or an ancient clay pot? Without a doubt, the loss of life overshadows the loss of material possessions any day.
That is not to say the loss of the museum's treasures is insignificant. It isn't. Regardless, however, of the worth of the artifacts, the sanctity of human life remains more important and should remain the focus of the Coalition Forces. If the material heritage of Iraq can be saved without veering attention from the important issues -- keeping Americans safe, finding Saddam, destroying the reigning regime -- then so be it. But the minute that Americans lives are put at risk, such as a small number of soldiers facing a large population of looters, the value of the inanimate objects becomes null.
Furthermore, who is to say it was even the American army's responsibility to get involved? Yes, it is arguable that America started this war and thus Americans are responsible for the repercussions thereof. Sullivan, the committee chair, even went as far to say that President Bush "is burdened by a compelling moral obligation to plan for and try to prevent indiscriminate looting and destruction."
Let's face facts though. This is a case of Iraqi civilians, destroying Iraqi treasures, on Iraqi land. American forces are not there to babysit a now freed people. They are there to remove a worldwide threat and give a nation liberty and freedom. What they do with that freedom -- whether it be to preserve the history of bygone civilizations or to destroy the memory of their past -- is not up to the United States.
If Iraqis wish to preserve their past then they need to stand up and do so. They are an injured and embroiled country, yes, but they are still a people with choices. The looters had the choice to not destroy national treasures. In fact, some have even returned their bounty following days of remorse and anguish.
Unfortunately, when the looting occurred, the police infrastructure was destroyed by the war. The Iraqi police, however, are now back into action -- let them do their jobs. The innocent people of Iraq still have some options left to them. They can protect their remaining museums and let it be known that looting and pillaging will not be tolerated from anyone. They can arrest the looters, not only capturing and imprisoning those who would kick their own country when it's down but also reassert their power in Iraq. This will be the first step in helping Iraqis regain their own law and order in their homeland. It's a win-win situation.
Value and involvement aside, the actual actions of the advisors must be called into question. Yes, they had good intentions at heart. Good intentions, nonetheless, are nothing unless acted out correctly.
The advisors' resignations did nothing but turn their good intentions into pointless symbolism. If they truly wanted to make a difference, Sullivan, Lanier, and Vikan would have been much more effective had they actually done their job. The President, the military and the public are much more likely to listen to three presidential appointees laying out a clear-cut plan of action to save Iraq's artifacts than three has-beens whose only plan of attack was to quit when the going got tough.
Now, the three advisors are useless. They have done nothing to help the plight of the Iraqi people. They have done nothing to further the cause they were appointed to defend. Simply, they have done nothing.
In his letter of resignation, Sullivan noting that "The tragedy was not prevented, due to our nation's inaction." It can be argued that the guilt of inaction falls in the laps of the American army, but factually and clearly the guilt lies in the laps of the Iraqi civilians, and most blatantly the laps of the cultural advisors.
The looting of the museum is a loss for everyone, most importantly the Iraqi people. Still, in the end, the Iraqi people are getting something far more worthwhile and significant them their history. They are getting a future.
(Maggie Bowden is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at mbowden@cavalierdaily.com)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 2 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
