In every continent of the world cultural genocide by forced dispersal (which the modern world has coined the clinically neutral term "ethnic cleansing") is one among the evils that have reap humanity of its rich benevolent nature in the society. Although civilization has helped in refining/bleaching many diabolical/evil practices of man, but the evil culture of war as an option in conflict has not change. What differentiates today's tribal and ethnic conflicts from those previously of nation states, is the extent to which erasing not only ethnic identity but also ethnic memory has been raised to the status of a legitimate goal. This is quite different from the 1000 years of systematic looting which was part and parcel of the military system. Museums, historic sites, libraries, archives, places of worship and community gathering have become prime targets.
Thomislav (1995) noted that the damage to Croatian cultural property spread throughout some 200,000 habitations and counted as follows: Churches and Monasteries: 262 damaged, 65 destroyed; 90 archives and libraries destroyed; 37 museum damaged, 4 destroyed; 500 monuments damaged, 107 destroyed; 223 historic sites damaged, 60 destroyed. Imagine that such fairly detail survey is carried out on African continent, one can picture the kind of damage done to her rich cultures, given the rate of wars/conflicts has experienced (and still experiencing).
War stories usually divulge man’s inhumanity against his fellow man. The damage sometimes caused by war is mostly irreversible and the society that experienced it is never the same. Rich cultures of so many nations have been affected by war with certain aspects of it grossly altered or good cultural values abandoned. By definition, war can be described as one of the man-made disasters caused by human rivalry between two groups over certain ‘issues’ of critical concern/interest to the society. Such issues may be of economic, social, political, or cultural implications to the society. The inability to settle such differences is what usually results in the use of arms against one another.
Studies conducted on the area of war in the recent past have like Albertyn et-al (2003) indicated that, virtually all wars (regional conflicts) have economic and political reasons knitted in them as major causes. The Nigerian civil war, Liberia civil war, DR Congo conflict, Ivory-coast, Kenya election crisis are all conflicts/wars in Africa that their causes had economic and political reasons reprehensibly ingrained in them. Take economy for instance, either the resources are being managed to the benefit of one person, or a group is being marginalized and do not have a fair share of the country’s wealth. Mineral resources like petroleum, gold, diamond, and uranium to mention just a few have never been a blessing to any developing world especially in Africa. Such resources have always been a source of continual pain to the region that possessed it, most especially when viewed in terms of the good returns such valuable resources would have brought to the development of that region or country. Using Nigeria for example, the Niger delta region has been unstable for so many decades all because of oil. Recently, the reason for the unending war in Daafur region in Sudan has been widely acclaimed to, or linked with the oil discovery in the region. This one of likely reasons while in 2001, the United Nations imposed a trade embargo on diamonds and timber from Liberia; the U.N. Security Council extended the embargo in 2004, citing the NTGL's failure to meet necessary conditions, including maintaining control of Liberia's timber regions and freezing the assets of certain allies of Charles Taylor, former Liberian rebel leader/president.
Politically, the desire of many African leaders to stay in power has led to full blown war between them and the opposition side. The result of this is apparent political instability which leads to economic backwardness due to either frequent change of economic policies or lack of conducive atmosphere for initiating policies, talk more of implementing policies that will sustain the economy.
Countries like DR Congo, Chad, Ivory Coast, Somali, and even Sudan and Uganda, and recently in Kenya; just to mention a few, have experienced one form of political crisis/war at certain periods in their histories. While some of them (countries) are relatively peaceful now, other countries are still hoping for the day peace will reign over arms.
No parameter has been adequately employ to exactly measure or quantify the rate of damage cause by war to the society that had experienced it. However, whenever the issue of war takes the central stage in a discussion, its effects is mostly measured in terms of human/material damages it brings to that society. In that respect, it is easier to link such physical damages to the economic and political set back of the region, country, or place while the issue of culture is often forgotten or if remembered taken as the least.
What is the effect of war on culture?
The damage usually done by war has never had exception to any aspect of the society. In terms of culture, it (war’s) effects is on two- folds: directly or indirectly.
The direct effect of war on culture is that:
i. It tends to damage the cultural institutions like museums which are responsible for preserving the valuable materials of great importance to the history of that region.
ii. It brings a total break down in the communication of important cultural values to the next generation.
iii. War garnishes the unpleasant atmosphere for un-cultured cultural trends as well as bad values to infiltrate the original/good cultural values of the people, which were originally preserved and protected with passion in the society.
iv. War also permits the influx of foreign cultural ideas which are imposed directly or indirectly on the people of that region.
v. At worst, war can erase a people’s culture by reaping a society of all its cultural values/assets (art practices, institutions of cultural education, channels of cultural communication etc.). In that way, the society relied on a borrowed cultures surrounding it, since the people may have apparently lost memory of their cultural practices.
On the other hand, the indirect damage of war on culture is mostly seen in the inter-connectivity of other aspects of the society which, if tempered with, will affect culture in a multi-dimensional ways. Take economy for instance, economy which has been ravaged by war gives little or no room for some important aspects of culture like art practice to thrive. The excess hunger makes people (artists) to think of what to feed.
What programme has UN in times of war to reduce the damage on culture to prevent cultural extinction of such regions?
Base on the current/previous media reports from various war zones, it is obvious that UNESCO does not have such a plan or programme on ground yet. During war, humanitarian services range from provision of basic human needs like food, water, shelter, clothes, beds and any of such things that can urgently ameliorate the suffering of people in that region. At best, refugee camps are provided with educational materials for children to continue learning. The kind of education given to children at this period is remarkably different from the one received in organized schools. Besides, the training atmosphere does not warrant the education/inculcation some of basic cultural values in the children. While in such conditions, some children manage to learn, other camps are frequently invaded by rebels or enemies disrupting the learning system against the interest of the learners. In view of this, UN ‘s most priority is to prevent loss of lives of the innocent ones, most of which are women and children or old men who can not hold arms during war.
What can UNESCO do to Revive Cultural Industry of a Region or country after war to Prevent Cultural Extinction in Africa?
Although, war times are highly unpredictable, considering the unsafe/tense atmosphere which is characterized by turmoil, confusion, hostilities of all sorts, UNESCO can still do a little to aid in the area of cultural preservation. UNESCO can create a temporal cultural unit that will be responsible for the storage of cultural pieces (artifacts). Such a unit will performs roles like collection, registration, documentation as well as temporal storage of cultural materials/relics like ethnographic/archeological materials, products of artistic value, etc. details of such cultural product, no matter how little they are, will be documented based on the scanty information received. This will help in tracing the location of such materials, identifying the cultures that produced them and or, returned them to the appropriate cultural institutions in that region or country. This arrangement will serve as a back-up plan that will possibly contribute to reviving the cultures of that region or country after war.
This arrangement may sound unachievable since war times or conflict periods have total disregard for any formal arrangement or constituted authority. However, during such period, formal arrangement are usually achieved through informal means. In view of this, the peace keeping force in charge of field operations, health workers under emergency teams (WHO or Red Cross officials) as well as other humanitarian workers who serve as volunteers in such region will be sensitized on the need to work together and include this as part of the mission. In this way, UNESCO will achieve meaningful results in this aspect.
Reference:
Albertyn, R., Bicker, S. W., van As, A.B., Miller, A.J.W., Rode H. (2003), The Effect of War on Children in Africa; Pediatrics Survey International, Vol-19, Number 4, www.springlink.com. Retrieved on 12/11/2010, 11:05 am.
CIA World Factbook (2002) The Economist, Frontline/world/Liberia-No More War. Fact/pbs-http://www.pbs.org. Retrieved on 12/11/2010, 1:47pm.
