Iran’s cultural heritage faced significant threats and damage amid recent hostilities involving Iranian forces and those of the United States and Israel, according to an interview with Dr. Jebrael Nokandeh, Director-General of the National Museum of Iran. The conflict resulted in damage to 149 historical buildings and archaeological sites across 18 provinces, reflecting the scale of destruction sustained during the fighting.

Dr. Nokandeh characterized the damage as a deliberate assault on Iran’s historical memory, highlighting the country’s unique position as a cradle of civilization with over ten thousand years of continuous cultural development. He emphasized that Iranian cultural heritage forms part of humanity’s shared legacy and is the responsibility of the international community to protect under both legal and moral obligations.

During the recent conflicts, including a 12-day war and subsequent hostilities, museums across Iran implemented emergency measures to safeguard invaluable artifacts. Drawing on experiences from previous conflicts such as the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, museum professionals refined their protocols for artifact evacuation, conservation, and emergency documentation. These efforts allowed institutions to respond more effectively to wartime conditions, despite challenges such as limited access to equipment and disruptions caused by the conflict.

Approximately 3,508 movable artifacts, including coins, sculptures, ceramics, and archaeological objects, were relocated to secure storage at the National Museum of Iran. However, protecting immovable heritage presented additional challenges. Large stone monuments and architectural installations were shielded using fire-resistant materials, scaffolding, sandbags, and sloping protective roofs designed to disperse debris and blast impact. These methods, rooted in international best practices developed since World War II, have also been applied in other conflict zones such as Ukraine.

The prioritization of objects for relocation followed a careful risk assessment framework that considered factors including the vulnerability, national significance, material composition, and practicality of moving each item. Precious metals and fragile items such as manuscripts were given precedence due to their susceptibility to theft or damage. Despite the logistical difficulties posed by wartime conditions, all movable artifacts were successfully secured, and the National Museum itself sustained no damage. Conversely, prominent historic sites such as Golestan Palace, Chehel Sotoun Palace, and the Saadabad Cultural Complex were reported to have incurred damage.

The National Museum prominently displayed the Blue Shield emblem during the conflict, in line with the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. While Dr. Nokandeh acknowledged that such symbols cannot physically prevent destruction, he underscored their value as a legal and diplomatic tool that documents compliance with international cultural protection obligations. He also noted the significance of international advocacy, including public statements by the US Committee of the Blue Shield condemning attacks on Iranian heritage, as evidence of ongoing support for cultural preservation across political divides.

Dr. Nokandeh further highlighted the indirect threats posed by modern weaponry, noting that even without direct hits, the blast waves from missiles can cause substantial damage to historic structures. This recognition reinforces the need for continuous evaluation and adaptation of conservation and protection strategies to meet the evolving realities of warfare.

The experiences shared by Iran’s cultural heritage professionals underline the complex challenges faced by museums and heritage sites during armed conflict and emphasize the importance of international cooperation to safeguard humanity’s cultural legacy.