Development through the Inter-American System of New Mechanisms to Enable Cultural Property Protection Protocols

1. Development through the Inter-American System of New Mechanisms to Enable Cultural Property Protection Protocols

2. Areas proposed for implementation: disaster response, peacekeeping, and stability operations These areas do not necessarily fall under International Humanitarian Law and CPP protocols may not apply These operations can involve major response forces operating under unstable conditions collocated with cultural sites In addition to tactical maneuvers, basic operations such as logistics support can cause extensive damage to cultural sites The incorporation of CPP mechanisms during disaster response, peacekeeping, and stability operations can mitigate damage and produce diverse socio-economic benefits The Inter-American System provides feasible scope Why Develop New Mechanisms for Cultural Property Protection (CPP) in the Americas

3. Many supporting institutions do not exist Many entities face resource constraints The concept of CPP protocols under International Humanitarian Law makes implementation unlikely Natural & non-natural disasters pose significant risk Military and security forces primarily deploy in disaster response and peace support operations CPP conceptual support in Latin America & Caribbean Many regional entities network within region Selected Factors in Cultural Property Protection (CPP) in the Americas

4. Ratifications of the 1954 Hague Convention Establish Blue Shield National Committees & International Military Cultural Resources WG Network Develop Mechanisms to Apply Cultural Property Protection to Disaster Response, Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Interaction on Training and Technologies Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage International Efforts on Cultural Heritage Regional Organizations with Related Mandate Overview of Cultural Property Protection (CPP) Initiatives

5. 21 OAS (22 CALC) countries entered but lacks 13 CARICOM countries (Barbados sole entrant) Supported by OAS General Assembly Resolutions and other Facilitates CPP capabilities development and application to other CPP initiatives Support includes: UNESCO Division of Cultural Objects and Intangible Heritage, Lawyers’ Committee for Cultural Heritage Protection (LCCHP), and WATCH I. Ratifications of the 1954 Hague Convention

6. Establishment of functioning NCBS network where few currently exist for meeting CPP initiative goals Establishment of functioning network of IMCuRWG national and regional officials Creates support networks to enable CPP concepts Both Association of National Committees of the Blue Shield (ANCBS) and IMCuRWG officials have considered proposals and defined support exists 27 Countries have been consulted on these proposals II. Establish National Committees of the Blue Shield (NCBS) & International Military Cultural Resources WG (IMCuRWG) Network

7. III. Develop Mechanisms to Apply Cultural Property Protection to Disaster Response, Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Precedents exist: Roerich Pact and Inter-American Convention to Facilitate Disaster Assistance OAS & Inter-American Juridical Committee mandates Sub-Regional mechanism options The process is in the first stage of development with meeting with the rapporteurs planned in concept ICRC International Disaster Response Laws, Rules, and Principles (IDRL) Program Working Paper

8. CPP doctrine development International Institute of Humanitarian Law Workshop Application of technology to CPP programs, policies and procedures Networking of technological capacities for CPP support Affiliated training such as UN Protection of Civilians Public CPP dissemination through media, conferences and other means Columbian Red Cross evaluation of CPP concept implementation IV. Interaction on Training and Technologies

9. Expanded focus to incorporate intangible cultural properties Holistic evaluation of effects to include economic and social recovery Smithsonian Institution and USCBS efforts on Haiti Cultural Recovery Project V. Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage

10. Development of international network of supporting organizations: UN, ICRC, OAS, ANCBS, ICOMOS, … Shaping the participation of other communities: General Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers Linking with organizations with associated interests: Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping VI. International Efforts on Cultural Heritage

11. IAS entities exist to facilitate CPP mechanisms Human Rights Initiative Military Legal Committee of the Americas Regional Security System and other Sub-regional defense entities System of Cooperation Among the American Air Forces (SICOFAA) and other service entities IAS Regional Disaster Response Organizations VII. Inter-American System (IAS) Entities with Related Mandates

12. Andean Committee for Disaster Prevention and Response (CAPRADE) Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA) Center for Coordination of Natural Disaster Prevention in Central America (CEPREDENAC) Specialized Meeting on Social and Natural Disaster Risk Reduction, Civil Defense, Civil Protection, and Humanitarian Assistance (REHU) Summit of Latin American and the Caribbean Integration and Development (CALC) Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) Inter-American Disaster Response Regional Organizations with Interest

13. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Review Career Progression Training Programs: Joint Military Attaché School, Naval Postgraduate School, Peacekeeping & Stability Operations Institute, Foreign Service Institute, … Professional Organizations and Publications: Foreign Area Officers, Journals such as Culture & Conflict Review Dissemination within Organizations Formal Professional Military Education Domestic Considerations

14. Main Point Development of New Mechanisms to Enable Cultural Property Protection Protocols through the Inter-American System Is Complex and Long Term, but All Entities Involved Have Been Supportive