Archeological Ethics - Essay Example

Archeological Ethics Archeological Ethics Introduction In 2003, at the height of the War on Terror, American military personnel discovered rare, historic and contemporary books, parchment scrolls and documents related to the Iraqi Jewish community. Now known as the Iraqi Jewish Archive, this collection of materials was found in the flooded basement of Mukhabahrat (Iraqi Intelligence) headquarters (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). The materials were packed into boxes and sacks and moved to a close location where they were minimally dried. The materials were reviewed by Dr. Harold Rhode, an authority on Middle Eastern and Islamic Affairs, led the review and preliminary sorting of the materials during retrieval, after which they were packed into 27 metal trunks (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). The CPA (Coalitional Provisional Authority) organized for the archive to be frozen, which stabilized its condition and prevented more mold growth. Upon the request of the CPA, archeologists from the NARA (US National Archives and Records Administration) went to Baghdad in 2003 to evaluate the status of the archive and come up with recommendations for their preservation. The archive contains sixteenth to twentieth century Jewish modern books, audio tapes, rare books, parchment scrolls, correspondence and documents, and pamphlets (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). Languages used in the materials were Hebrew, Arabic, Hebrew-Arabic, and English (very few items). The Hebraic materials includes a diverse mix of artifacts, ranging from Bibles and commentaries, parts of a partially destroyed Torah scroll, holiday and daily prayer diaries, and children’s Bible and Hebrew language primers (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). The printed books were published in various locations, including Livorno, Venice, Warsaw, and Baghdad, with most being from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Rare artifacts include: What seems to be Abraham Brudo’s Birkat Avraham, published in 1696 in Venice; and the Ketubim edition of the deistical Third Rabbinic Bible that was published in 1568 by Giovanni di Gara in Venice (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). Arabic artifacts include not only handwritten, but also printed artifacts associated with Iraq’s Jewish community, some generated by the Jewish community and others from official government agencies. There are also items that seem to lack any link to the Jewish community, including a collection of the law of Jewish Law #77 and the organization of the Jewish community #36, etc (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). Condition of the Archive In the rush to quickly collect and protect the materials, some were packed haphazardly and were not arranged to match their original shapes (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). Consequently, many collections of bound text blocks and loose documents are crumpled, distorted, and similarly destroyed. Many boards are separated from their bindings, and it seems that during the time they were submerged under water the leather covering them became detached. This resulted in the bare binders board becoming exposed (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). Further, there are many loose fragments and pages that were removed from their original locations. The damage caused by handling and packing the wet artifacts can be remedied in most cases, although it will take a lot of time, and it will not be entirely possible to mask evidence of past damage. After artifacts had been removed from the water, about three weeks elapsed before they were frozen, leading to varying levels of mold growth (Stone, Bajjaly, & Fisk, 2008). This caused some permanent staining, although it does not appear that in most instances the mold was so advanced that the paper was seriously affected. The materials also have multiple rust stains (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). In general, the artifacts’ condition is moderate to poor. Although some pamphlets, document files and books seem intact and whole, many others are just fragments with loose or missing parts. There is a lot of physical distortion that can be eliminated using conservation treatment (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). In addition, most inks seem to be in a stable state – legible with no sign of bleeding or feathering – despite the lengthy period of submersion in water. The exceptions are inks on parts of the scroll, where it is evident that the ink bled. The text, nevertheless, is still legible (Renfrew & Bahn, 2012). Why it is Controversial The archive has raised political, cultural, and legal issues that will not go away for some time. The main arguments on the archive involve the proposal to return it to Iraq, where it was found. Iraqi people and the Iraqi government believe that since it was originally in their country and was taken away during a conflict, they deserve to have it back (Westall & Saul, 2013). On the other hand, Jewish politicians, religious leaders and people believe that such a huge collection of materials detailing their history and heritage should not be preserved in foreign lands (the United States). The arguments have been back and forth so far, and it is unlikely that a solution will be reached soon. Both parties have adopted hard-line stances with regards to the matter, and a lot of ground will have to be ceded before any amicable settlement is reached (Renfrew, 2009). Jews all over the world have picketed, used the media to back their claim to the archive, and even created online petitions to urge the US government to take the collection to Israel (Insoll, 2007). Such petitions contain messages asking the American government NOT to return the archive to Iraq. They reason that doing so would magnify the injustice done to Iraqi Jews, who owned it before it was stolen from them through an intentional state policy of ethnic cleansing and torture. Jews say that the archive must be returned to its original owners and guaranteed proper care and preservation. They propose that it should be taken to Israel, where most Iraqi Jews lives. The legal circumstances are a bit complicated. Jews seem to have an advantage here because they have strong legal grounds for saying that the archive contains the cultural heritage and property of the Iraqi Jewish diaspora (Rothstein, 2013). However, Iraqi officials and people have built their case that shows that there is no evidence to suggest the collection belongs to Iraqi Jews. The case, which is quite solid, postulates that in modern times the only known location of the archive is and has been Iraq. It dismisses Jewish arguments as historical blabber that cannot be proven by anyone. Everybody knows where the archive was before it was taken to the United States; let it be returned there (Atassi & Schwartz, 2012). On the other hand, the moral argument appears open-and-shut. In so far as, the collection belongs to anyone, to the average person it obviously belongs to Iraqi Jews. The Baathist regime stole it from them, and to them it should be returned (Cohen, 2014). In addition, all, if not most, Iraqi Jews now reside outside Iraq. Well, except for about seven who may or may not be alive in Baghdad. Considering this situation, Jews argue, why would the archive be returned to Iraq where it has no cultural or historical significance? It belongs to Iraqi Jews and should be taken to Israel (Guttman, 2013). The result of this debate is likely to be determined, in part, by the use of political pressure to support the moral argument. Amidst all the arguments and counterarguments, most scholars claim that the main issue is that the almost extinct Iraqi Jews want to gain recognition and acceptance from the world for their story (Guttman, 2013). They believe that other Jews take their story for granted, and reclaiming the archive would give them the stage to act their story and publicize it. According to some researchers, Iraqi Jews want to seize this opportunity to educate people on how they were forced to leave Iraq and the circumstances surrounding their exit (Guttman, 2013). The humiliation, persecution and mistreatment they suffered would be forgotten and become meaningless if the last reminder of their stay in Iraq is lost to the same people who perpetrated such acts against them. Having your history stored in military facilities when you live as free people in that country is the ultimate form of humiliation, according to Iraqi Jews. This must be remediated (Montgomery, 2013). On the other hand, Iraqis argue that the regime responsible for such acts is not in place now, and why would a whole country be robbed of historically-significant artifacts because of past events? Why should Iraqi people have to pay for the sins of the Saddam regime? That is not morally, ethically or legally right (Guttman, 2013). Iraqi politicians and people regularly cite an agreement signed in 2003 between the CPA and the US National Archives after the archives were moved to the United States for preservation and display. The pact stated that the collection would be returned to Iraq once preservation and display were complete (Middle East Librarians Association, 2003). Jaber Khalil Ibrahim, who headed Iraq’s State Board of Antiquities and Heritage at that time, wrote a letter to the chairman of the CPA, Ambassador Paul Bremer, which authorized the removal of the archives (Middle East Librarians Association, 2003). However, there was one condition: “the documents are returned to Iraq following the restoration.” Iraqis have a very strong legal argument here, but Jewish activists plan to use political pressure to nullify this contract. They argue that there is no agreement set in stone and that all contracts can be amended, revised, renegotiated, and nullified (Middle East Librarians Association, 2003). With several American politicians joining the movement, Jews appear to be winning the battle; at least for now. According to Charles Schumer, a senator from New York, the archive was taken from Iraqi Jews and therefore do not belong to Iraq people or its government. In 2013, Steve Israel (democrat) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (republican) started collecting signatures on a petition asking the State Department to rethink its decision to return the archive (Ledger, 2005). There seems to be no way out of this situation at the moment, and it is unlikely an agreement will be reached in the near future. The State Department is also adamant that it should return the archive to Iraq because it must honor its agreements with the Iraqi government (Ledger, 2005). According to one State Department official, the US government is not some rogue entity that just violates pas at will to serve individual interests He adds by stating the archive should and will be returned to Iraq. The battle continues. My Assessment This matter is highly complex and controversial because of the dynamics involved. The outcome of the back and forth arguments depend on one thing: politics. No matter the agreement signed with the Iraqi government, US politicians have the power to overturn it whenever they wish. Of course, there will be implications, some even severe. However, this is a storm in a teacup compared to other past controversial issues. In my view, the following things are clear: a) The US government is bound, at least for now, by the agreement with the Iraqi government. b) The Iraqi government, therefore, has a legal advantage, at least for now, over the Jewish community. c) The Jewish community has a political advantage, which can hand the archive to them in an instant. As to the rightful owners, it is a thin line between the ethical aspect and the legal circumstances. Legally, the Iraqi government deserves to have the archive returned to the country. Morally and ethically, the collection is of huge cultural and historical significance to the Jewish community. There is no place for the archive in Iraq since Iraqi Jews no longer live there, and the country is unstable for the most part. I think that the archive should be returned to Iraq because of the contract it signed with the US government; the law should always be upheld. In the end, however, politics will win; all other arguments will be nullified by the actions of US and Iraqi politicians. Resolution The archive should be returned to Iraq. Afterwards, it will be up to the Jewish community to find a solution with the Iraqi government Merriman, 2004). The US government should honor the agreement and exit the stage, leaving the two parties to sort out the issue together. The US government should not wade into the issues involved simply because some politicians are sympathetic to the Jewish plight (Merriman, 2004). This solution might cause conflict between the Jewish community and the US government, and between the Iraqi government and the Jewish community. Talk of betrayal and inconsideration might dominate the headlines, but this is the right thing to do (Merriman, 2004). Sentimental views approaches will not make the problem go away. It is possible that the Jewish community and the Iraqi government might reach an agreement in the future. It is also possible that the Iraqi government just wants to win the battle involving the return of the archive; in future it can be taken to Israel or back to the United States. All in all, the proposed solution seems to be the right thing to do, considering current circumstances. References Atassi, S., & Schwartz, J. (2012). Archives, Museums and Collecting Practices in the Modern Arab World. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Cohen, B. (2014, May 19). Why the Iraqi Jewish Archive Belongs in America. Algemeinercom RSS. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/05/19/whythe-iraqi-jewish-archive-belongs-in-america/ Guttman, N. (2013, November 3). Should Iraqs Jewish Archives Stay in U.S.? The Jewish Daily Forward. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://forward.com/articles/186632/shouldiraqs-jewish-archives-stay-in-us/?p=all Insoll, T. (2007). The Archaeology of Identities: A Reader. London: Routledge. Ledger, D. (2005). Remembrance of Things Past: The Iraqi Jewish Archive and the Legacy of the Iraqi Jewish Community. New York: Wiley-Blackwell. Merriman, N. (2004). Public Archaeology. London: Routledge. Middle East Librarians Association. (2003). The Iraqi Jewish Archive Preservation Report. Chicago: Middle East Librarians Association. Montgomery, B. P. (2013). Rescue or Return: The Fate of the Iraqi Jewish Archive. International Journal of Cultural Property, 20(02), 175-200. Renfrew, C. (2009). Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership: The Ethical Crisis in Archaeology ([Nachdr.]. ed.). London: Duckworth. Renfrew, C., & Bahn, P. G. (2012). Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice (6th ed.). London: Thames & Hudson. Rothstein, E. (2013, November 10). The Remnants of a Culture’s Heart and Soul. The New York Times. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/arts/design/iraqi-jewish-documents-at-the-nationalarchives.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1& Stone, P. G., Bajjaly, J., & Fisk, R. (2008). The Destruction of Cultural Heritage in Iraq. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. Westall, S., & Saul, J. (2013, November 26). Tug-of-war Erupts over Planned Return of Jewish Archives to Iraq. Reuters. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/26/us-iraq-jews idUSBRE9AP0VR20131126 Read More