Disentangling Strategic and Opportunistic Looting: The Relationship between Antiquities Looting and Armed Conflict in Egypt
Yüklə 1,14 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
|
Keywords:
antiquities looting; Egypt; armed conflict; strategic looting; opportunistic looting; open source data; ARDL
Antiquities looting has become increasingly prominent in news headlines. Newspapers around the world show headlines reporting antiquities looting from Israel, Cambodia, China, Greece, Italy, Egypt, Peru, Syria, and the United States. Though reports of antiquities looting are found in all regions, many seem to be especially concentrated in areas of armed conflict. Indeed, many headlines suggest that a relationship exists between antiquities looting and armed conflict. Headlines such as “Syria’s Historical Artifacts Aren’t Just Being Destroyed by ISIS, They’re Being Looted” imply that parties involved in armed conflict are using antiquities as a source of funding” ( Robins-Early 2015 ). Although over 50% of archaeological sites globally have reported at least some degree of looting ( Proulx 2013 ), evidence on the extent to which antiquities looting is related to armed conflict is largely qualitative (e.g., case studies) or journalistic ( Baker and Anjar 2012 ; Brodie 2003 ; Di Giovanni et al. 2014 ; Hanson 2015 ; Howard et al. 2015 ; Losson 2016 ). Recent news articles on antiquities looting discuss antiquities looting as a source of funding for ISIS based on journalistic evidence that “by some estimates, these sales now represent ISIS’s second largest source of funding” ( Di Giovanni et al. 2014 ). While there is indeed evidence that ISIL has engaged in systematic antiquities looting ( Keller 2015 ), it is less clear whether ISIL represents a unique case or whether they should be viewed as the norm. Other articles argue that the sales made in the international illicit trade in antiquities could prolong or intensify conflict by providing a readily available source of goods to trade for weapons ( Baker and Anjar 2012 ). These articles do not Arts 2018, 7, 22; doi:10.3390/arts7020022 www.mdpi.com/journal/arts Arts 2018, 7, 22 2 of 26
distinguish between antiquities looting in support of conflict (e.g., as a source of funding for terrorist groups, a way to sustain a conflict by maintaining a supply of weapons, etc.) and antiquities looting that results from armed conflict but that is opportunistic in nature. Only a handful of articles have tried to disentangle this relationship and even they have had to rely on individual newspaper and magazine articles ( Howard et al. 2015 ). A few scholarly articles have also connected the trade in art and antiquities to prolonging conflict ( Brodie 2003 ); however, they tend to begin their discussion after the object has already been looted or discuss looting as part of the broader trafficking supply chain in conflict areas ( Bogdanos 2005 ; Brodie and Sabrine 2018 ). The evidence presented in such articles is important; however, if antiquities looting is indeed concentrated in areas of armed conflict, then it is also important to quantitatively assess what, if any, relationship exists between them. Systematically analyzing quantitative data to look at patterns across incidents and time is one way to complement journalistic and qualitative research. In this vein, several groups have worked to record and quantify looting and other damage to archaeological sites using satellite imagery, particularly in the Middle East ( Bowen et al. 2017 ; Casana and Laugier 2017 ; Contreras and Brodie 2010 ; Cunliffe 2014 ; Fradley and Sheldrick 2017 ; Isakhan 2015 ; Lauricella et al. 2017 ; Parcak et al. 2016 ). While these efforts have accumulated large quantities of data, these have been collected with varying methodologies and goals that are often only tangentially related to conflict. 1 Further, only one study has used satellite imagery to explicitly look at the relationship between archaeological site damage and conflict. 2 Cunliffe ( 2014
) has recorded 18 forms of site damage at two sites in Syria over a 50-year period (imagines from the late 1960s, 2003–2004, and 2009–2010) and compared the extent of damage at these sites during times of peace to times of conflict. However, only one form of damage is directly related to looting and the qualitative comparison between times of peace and times of war does not differentiate between the multiple possible interrelated relationships that could exist between armed conflict and archaeological looting. Two potentially interrelated relationships are especially important to consider: strategic antiquities looting in armed conflict and opportunistic antiquities looting in armed conflict. These relationships reflect two temporal orderings: antiquities looting preceding armed conflict (strategic) and armed conflict preceding antiquities looting (opportunistic). Antiquities—defined broadly in this research as any object over 100 years old located in the ground or embedded in a fixture of an archaeological site—have intrinsic value. Because of this value, they could be used to fund violent campaigns or to send political messages that attack cultural identity ( Van der Auwera 2012 ). Both cases represent strategic antiquities looting. By contrast, during armed conflict there can be a breakdown in social order that can lead to increases in crime in general, including antiquities looting. Antiquities looting in this case is opportunistic and akin to other types of crime resulting from a vacuum in social order, which may be committed for a variety of reasons. This study assesses the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict in Egypt to demonstrate the utility of quantitative data and methods for this area of research. Drawing on two criminological theories that look at the interaction between offenders and the settings of crime—routine activity theory and the CRAVED principles 3 —this study looks at both the overall relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict and their temporal ordering in Egypt from 1997 to 2014. Autoregressive Distributed Lag Models (ARDL) with a bounds testing approach are used to assess 1 There is no consensus or standard methodology for recording and/or quantifying damage to archaeological sites using satellite imagery, which makes it difficult to triangulate findings across studies. See, for example, the debate between Parcak et al. ( 2016
) and Fradley and Sheldrick ( 2017
). 2 While Parcak et al. ( 2016 ) refer to the political and economic situation in Egypt in their assessment of archaeological site looting in Egypt from 2002 to 2013, the focus of their study is on quantifying looting on satellite imagery and providing an overview of how the extent of looting pits changed over this time period. The political and economic crises in Egypt over this time-period provide important context for their findings rather than whether looting is related to the conflict. 3 CRAVED stands for concealable, removable, available, valuable, enjoyable, and disposable. See below for in depth discussion of each principle. Arts 2018, 7, 22 3 of 26
these relationships with a newly collected time series dataset derived from open source news articles. The findings suggest that there is evidence of a relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict and that there is some evidence of strategic looting (compared to opportunistic looting) in these data. These findings also point to both the utility of empirical methods in assessing the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict and the need for quantitative data that can more accurately capture looting incidents (or attempts) rather than media reports of looting. 1.1. Strategic and Opportunistic Looting in Armed Conflict Routine activity theory ( Cohen and Felson 1979 ) and the CRAVED principles ( Clarke 1999 ) together provide a theoretical framework for why certain objects or places are targets for illicit activity (e.g., looting) more often than others. Cohen and Felson ’s ( 1979
) routine activity theory requires that three elements be present for a crime to occur: a motivated offender, the lack of capable guardianship, and suitable targets. Crime is more likely to occur when these three elements are present in time and space. Target suitability includes such things as the aesthetic or material value of the target, how difficult it is to remove (inertia), how exposed or visible the targets is, and how easily accessible a target is to a given offender ( Felson and Clarke 1998 ). Clarke ’s ( 1998
) CRAVED principles expand on this idea of target suitability by focusing on the idea that certain objects or natural resources can be considered “hot products”. A “hot product” is any kind of stolen good (including food, animals, and works of art) that is easily Concealable, Removable, Available, Valuable, Enjoyable, and Disposable (i.e., CRAVED) ( Clarke 1999 ). Together, these theories can help to explain how archaeological sites are targeted. Archaeological sites often cover large geographic areas, while there are typically few resources available for monitoring. Given their size, archaeological sites are both difficult to police and are typically areas of low priority. Thus, it is difficult to establish guardianship over archaeological sites. These sites also contain a plethora of potentially valuable objects, particularly in a country like Egypt, where cultural heritage is everywhere. According to Mohamed Ibrahim Ali, Egypt’s minister of state for antiquities, “when you dig, you find something” ( Boyle 2014 ). This makes archaeological sites eminently suitable targets for theft and looting. Finally, a motivated offender is anyone that is able, willing, or trying to commit a crime ( Cohen and Felson 1979 ). Looting of archaeological sites provides a living for some people ( Matsueda 1998 ), a way to make extra income for others, or an opportunity to engage in another illegal activity ( Teijgeler 2013 ), creating a supply of motivated offenders. As such, the combination of a large number of archaeological sites and objects available with little to no guardianship could create a motivated offender from any person or group in need of a quick and discrete form of funding ( Teijgeler 2013 ). Particularly when viewed as a source of “hot products”, archaeological sites are suitable targets for any motivated offender. Antiquities are objects that can be looted, transported, and either disposed of into other illicit networks or sold at a high market value with little concern for getting caught. The lack of effective regulation over antiquities looting and trafficking makes them easily disposable (a key element for Clarke in the creation of “hot products”) and makes them effective sources of revenue for funding conflict before and during the fighting (see e.g., Ross 2015 ). Both theories can provide a framework for understanding how antiquities looting can both support armed conflict and be a consequence of armed conflict. 1.1.1. Strategic Antiquities Looting in Armed Conflict An increase in looting prior to or during a conflict could suggest that one or more parties (ethnic group, terrorist organization, etc.) is selling or trafficking antiquities to acquire funds to support or sustain a conflict or violent action. 4 As mentioned above, it is difficult to maintain guardianship over 4 While it is more likely that an increase in antiquities looting would signal a rise in local conflict, it is possible that an international organization could loot antiquities in one country to fund a conflict or violent action in another. Documents from
Arts 2018, 7, 22 4 of 26
archaeological sites during times of peace and are even then eminently suitable targets for crime by motivated offenders. In armed conflict, capable guardianship is more difficult to maintain as the priorities of the government shift to address the greatest need. Nationally, archaeological sites are more likely to be overlooked during conflict as local law enforcement are deployed elsewhere ( Teijgeler 2013 ). Internationally, existing regulations are both easy to bypass and ineffective at stopping trafficking in looted objects during conflict. With regard to motivated offenders, actors in armed conflicts and trafficking networks intentionally and rationally choose how to finance their actions, using whatever resources are accessible “unless these clash with honestly held religious or ideological positions” ( Passas and Jones 2006 , p. 1).
They prefer easily acquired objects because these do not require any special skills and are a reliable source of revenue ( Freeman 2011 ). The choice of archaeological sites and antiquities is strategic and intended to fund current and future activities. The strategic value of antiquities for conflict financing makes them a suitable target for looting in armed conflict. Antiquities can be seen as a natural resource that is exploited, or what Clarke calls a “hot product” ( Clarke 1999 ). Although Clarke (
) does not specifically consider “hot products” in the context of conflicts, objects that meet the CRAVED principles would be good resources to exploit for financial needs as conflict is just a specific need. For example, objects that are concealable, removable, available, valuable, and disposable will be most useful in financing an armed conflict. 5 Antiquities are easily concealed, making it easier to get them on the market before the looting is noticed. Looting archaeological sites (i.e., digging holes) does not require any special skills, which makes antiquities easily accessible ( Freeman 2011 ). The high concentration of potentially valuable objects within archaeological sites makes them a reliable means of acquiring funds. Most important, though, is their value as a commodity and their disposability. From an organizational perspective, access to large quantities of easily accessible natural resources is a good source of funding. However, not all resources are equally valuable in times of conflict—quick trades or sales are not always possible, so commodities that retain their market value are better sources of funding. Plentiful resources with little market value or a small return on investment are not a good source of funding for conflict because they must be sold quickly. Commodities, like diamonds or antiquities, maintain their market value and have a high return on investment—and are therefore favored because they can be sold or held as needed. Both diamonds and antiquities have thousands of categories, the most valuable of which will have a narrow market. Once they enter the market, higher-end items will be noticed; however, their sale will also have a high return. Lower-end diamonds and antiquities can also be sold in bulk at consistent prices. Both can also be used as currency for illegal goods and services ( Wilford 2003 ) and are excellent “storage assets” because they retain their market value over time ( Hardouin and Weichhardt 2006 , p. 306). The exact nature of the relationship between natural resources and armed conflict (e.g., predicting the onset of conflict or an increase in the duration of conflict) is debatable and depends on many factors (type and location of resource, degree of ethnic fragmentation in a country, type of conflict, analytic method etc.) ( Ross 2015 ). For example, “contraband” goods ( Angrist and Kugler 2008 ), lootable resources ( Lujala et al. 2005 ; Ross 2006 ), and resources capable of increasing rebel “fighting capacity” in civil conflict ( Lujala 2010 ; Ross 2012 ) are more likely to be associated with an increase in the odds of the onset of armed conflict, as well as increasing the duration of conflict. Regardless of whether exploiting or looting resources leads to the onset and/or prolonged duration of armed conflict, using natural resources in an armed conflict is a strategic decision for either side of a ISIL’s “department of artifacts” confirm antiquities looting as a source of income for the organization during the peak of their territorial control in Iraq and Syria ( Keller 2015 ). It is not clear what role antiquities looting currently plays since ISIL has lost a significant amount of their territorial holdings. 5 Enjoyment may also be relevant, but it is of secondary importance because the purpose of conflict financing is to obtain and sell objects quickly to secure funds. Arts 2018, 7, 22 5 of 26
conflict. The desired outcome could be control of a contested resource (e.g., oil) or use to increase a group’s fighting capacity (e.g., obtaining weapons, equipment, etc.) ( Andersen et al. 2017 ). In Syria, both pro-government and opposition groups have engaged in a variety of methods to increase revenue, including archaeological looting, kidnapping, smuggling of basic goods and contraband (drugs), and control of oil production ( Hallaj 2015 ). The large-scale systematic looting did not occur until after the onset of conflict in May 2012, whereas local looting and the sale of artifacts were an earlier source of funding ( Hallaj 2015 ). Though it remains unclear if such local looting preceded the onset of the conflict, both local and systematic looting have been strategically used as a revenue source in Syria ( Hallaj 2015 ). 1.1.2. Opportunistic Antiquities Looting in Armed Conflict Armed conflict may also increase the extent of antiquities looting by increasing opportunity and altering the perceived risks and rewards associated with engaging in this type of crime. The difficulty in monitoring and protecting archaeological sites during conflict makes it easier for objects to reach the illegal markets. During times of armed conflict, a breakdown in authority can further decrease capable guardianship, which both affects the motivation of the offenders and the suitability of the target. Where prior to conflict the perceived (or actual) cost of committing a crime like looting may have been too high, the decrease in capable guardianship may lower the perceived risk. The aftermath of a terrorist attack or the confusion accompanying a riot or large protest can create a vacuum of social order, decreasing both guardianship and perceived risk. Given the potential existing lack of guardianship, it may also be the case that at an individual level, previously available and more profitable options (legal or illegal) for individuals become unavailable or too difficult to pursue during armed conflict. In such a case, looting would be considered an opportunistic crime with easier access, high rewards, and little to no consequences. Archaeological sites become suitable (and possibly ideal) targets during armed conflict not only for the ease of access and low perceived cost, but also for the objects themselves. As mentioned above, it takes little skill to loot objects from an archaeological site, making them easily removable. The prevalence of archaeological sites makes them readily available to loot, while the action of looting is difficult to detect. It is easy to fake an object’s provenance (history of ownership), which allows them to move through a gray market (a market that conducts both legal and illegal transactions) to the buyers in legal markets ( Kersel 2006 ; Mackenzie 2011 ; Proulx 2013 ). 1.2. Egypt as a Case Study A number of countries in the Middle East with a rich cultural heritage could serve as the case study for this research; however, Egypt has three characteristics that make it a good case study. First, Egypt has a long and rich cultural heritage and is invested in attempting to protect and preserve it. Second, because Egypt is invested in its cultural heritage, it is more likely to report when antiquities are looted, which is essential for data collection. Third, Egypt’s armed conflict events from 1997 to 2014 have relatively well-defined start dates, which are helpful when trying to disentangle the two possible relationships between antiquities looting and armed conflict. This date range covers the end of one armed conflict in Egypt that spanned from 1993 to 1998 and the beginning of a second conflict in Egypt spanning from 2011 to present day. Each reason is discussed in more detail below. 1.2.1. Egypt’s Cultural Heritage Cultural heritage is everywhere in Egypt and integral to its economic wellbeing. Egypt has a history of preserving its cultural heritage and because almost all the cities are built in the presence of heritage sites, they use the preservation of these sites to their advantage by marketing their history to tourists ( Coben 2011 ; United Nations Development Programme UNDP ). As tourism makes up a large part of Egypt’s economy, it is in the country’s interest to both preserve the quality and quantity of its cultural heritage. To maintain the quality of the sites, the country periodically shuts down
Arts 2018, 7, 22 6 of 26
the pyramids to mitigate environmental changes resulting from the press of tourists. For example, the humidity caused by people breathing in a burial chamber can lead to changes in the pH balance of the imagery ( Golia 2014 ). Egypt has also invested in their cultural heritage by getting them on the UNESCO World Heritage list. Egypt is home to seven UNESCO World Heritage Sites and has another 33 proposed heritage sites under consideration ( UNESCO World Heritage Centre UNESCO ). Despite Egypt’s best efforts, the sheer quantity of cultural heritage in the country makes preservation a difficult task. Cultural heritage includes all objects in museums and storage facilities, the great monuments, and antiquities in archaeological sites (both known and unknown). Egypt has numerous archaeological sites, many of which are tourist destinations and while the Ministry of Antiquities has compiled a list of archaeological sites in Egypt, it is not readily available to the public. Egypt also almost certainly has numerous sites that have not yet been identified or discovered. As such, known and unknown archaeological sites contain a plethora of antiquities that are potentially suitable targets for looting. Egypt is invested in protecting its cultural heritage and has a long history of attempting to protect and preserve its cultural heritage from the destruction of conflict and from looters. Their strategy for reducing the looting of antiquities, especially from archaeological sites, is to pass stricter laws with harsher penalties, increase security measures, and place checkpoints at every Egyptian port ( El-Aref 2005 ). Unfortunately, there has been no systematic evaluation of these measures, so it is unclear how effective they are. 1.2.2. A Brief History of Armed Conflict in Egypt This section provides a brief history of armed conflict in Egypt to provide context for the analysis discussed in the next section. Egypt has a long history of multiculturalism and armed conflict tied to tensions between religious groups and non-state actors, particularly between Coptic Christians and Muslim groups ( Kepel 2003 ; Murphy 2002 ). This section focuses only on those events taking place between 1993 and 2014 to provide the context for both conflicts that are partially covered in the time period of the study (1997–2014). From 1993 to 2014, Egypt experienced two major armed conflicts along with scattered incidents of terrorism and unrest, all of which related to changes in the Egyptian Government. Neither conflict is completely contained in the period of study, which may affect the results of the analysis (see below for more information on this). Starting in the 1990s, the Egyptian Government underwent a massive neoliberal reform, from a primarily state-operated economy to a globalized capitalist system very quickly ( Schwartz 2011 , p. 33). While the government was creating a capitalist foundation for the country, it was not advancing Western ideals of equal rights for citizens ( Schwartz 2011 ). Thus, while Egypt as a country was doing well economically, dissatisfaction with the government was growing from both the Islamist groups and the disenfranchised lower classes of society. Islamist groups took issue with the secular influence of the West on the government and wanted to create an Islamic state ( Schwartz 2011 , pp. 33–34). The lower classes and disenfranchised (e.g., women and Coptic Christians) took issue with the lack of rights and fair living wages ( Masoud 2011 ; Schwartz 2011 , pp. 33–36). From 1993 to 1998, the Egyptian Government was engaged in an intrastate conflict with the al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya. While this conflict ended in 1998, the actions of the al-Gama movement resonated with other Islamist groups like the Tahwid wal Jihad (United and Holy War) that conducted terrorist attacks in 2004–2005 ( Fletcher 2008 ). From 2011 to the present day, Egypt has been involved in a period of intrastate armed conflict incidents stemming from the Arab Spring and the uprising in Egypt of 2011 (the “Lotus Revoution”—see Teijgeler 2013 ). The Arab Spring began in other countries in 2010, but did not impact Egypt until a year later, when President Hosni Mubarak was ousted as a result of large scale uprisings (involving both the Islamic Group and Coptic Christians) that demanded his resignation ( Masoud 2011 ). The initial impetus of the uprising involved many, and sometimes contradictory, goals. While both Coptic Christians and Islamist groups called for Mubarak’s resignation, Coptic Christians wanted more equality and higher wages (especially for women). Meanwhile, the Islamist
Arts 2018, 7, 22 7 of 26
Group disdained the secular government and wanted a return to an Islamic rule ( Bowker 2013 ; Gerbaudo 2013 ; Masoud 2011 ; Schwartz 2011 ). From the ousting of Mubarak in 2011 to the Supreme Council of Armed Forces’ (SCAF) assumption of leadership in 2012, Egypt experienced a security vacuum ( Teijgeler 2013 ). Local law enforcement (including the Tourism and Antiquities Police) disappeared or were released from their duties and thousands of prisoners were released from jails across the country ( Teijgeler 2013 ). Although the police had mostly returned to their duties by 2012, their enforcement and investigation of looting was at best sporadic ( Teijgeler 2013 ). The role of the military has been central to the incidents of intrastate conflict as it has consistently had the most power and influence, after the government ( Gerbaudo 2013 ). They have at times supported the uprisings and at other times suppressed them. The Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) assumed leadership of the government after Mubarak resigned until Mohammed Morsi was elected President in 2012. Morsi was then ousted in a military coup in 2013 due to his inability to find a credible alternative to an Islamic state and perceived ineptitude ( Gerbaudo 2013 , pp. 104–5). The former military chief Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has now held the position of President since 2014 ( Basil 2014 ). 1.2.3. Reports of Antiquities Looting in Egypt Egypt’s investment in its cultural heritage makes it more likely to report instances of looting, theft, or destruction. It has a long history of reporting to market countries like the United States and international bodies like the International Council of Museums (ICOM) and INTERPOL when its cultural heritage is in danger. Such reports lead to the development of memorandums of understanding prohibiting the import, export, and sale of antiquities from Egypt by individual nations and the issuance of Red Lists of prohibited or stolen antiquities by international bodies ( International Council of Museums ICOM ). Egypt also reports to news outlets on cultural heritage crimes. From 1997 to 2014, there were 150 news reports in English language outlets that mentioned the looting, theft, destruction, return, or repatriation of antiquities in Egypt. This is likely an underestimate of the number of reports that went to news agencies since it only includes English news sources. Several Egyptian archaeologists and international scholars also continue to try to report individual instances of archaeological looting as they find them. 6 Although this may seem like a small number of reports for a 17-year period, it is still more news reports than other countries, apart from Iraq and Syria (see discussion on data below). The number of news reports in the Arab Spring was more than four times that of all the other years combined, which suggests that media reports will only continue to become more common as time passes. This investment and commitment to reporting events also makes it more likely that news reports contain data that can be quantified. Combined with Egypt’s plethora of antiquities and its clearly defined armed conflicts, this tendency to report events makes Egypt a good choice for a case study looking at the relationship between armed conflict and antiquities looting. Yüklə 1,14 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|