by Carl Islam, LLM (Exon)(International Business Legal Studies), Diploma in Art Law (Institute of Art & Law) (London), Barrister & CMC Registered Mediator – Contentious Probate & Cultural Heritage Disputes – 1 EC Barristers, Temple, London.
This is one of the legal issues that I will discuss in my forthcoming book about the ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’
See also the ‘Cultural Genocide’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk, on which I argue that, while excluded from the Genocide Convention, the concept of ‘Cultural Genocide’ is a useful tool for courts to link the destruction of cultural heritage with:
(i) the Crime of Genocide; and (ii) Crimes against Humanity.
Culture is a shared set of values, ideas, and behaviours that enable a social group to function and survive. Cultural heritage maintains identity, social cohesion, and a sense of security through intangible practices, including rituals, music, language and skills, and tangible property such as artefacts, archaeology and places.
Roosevelt’s four freedoms link cultural behaviour – to freedom from fear and want.
Targeting cultural heritage is an act of power that legitimises one group while diminishing others, and is often a precursor for the most offensive form of cultural destruction – ‘Genocide’.
Hence, there is an unspoken connection between:
(i) the deliberate destruction of cultural heritage as a strategy by an invading force in war and occupation; (ii) Ethnic Cleansing; and (iii) Genocide.
The intentional destruction of cultural heritage is therefore an offence against humanity as a whole.
My copy of ‘Making Amends for Historic Wrongs – Reparative Justice and the Problem of the Past’ (2025) (OUP) by Mayo Moran arrived last week, and forms part of the research reading for my book, which I am on schedule to complete by the end of June this year.
The public mood about ‘Reparative Justice’ which influences policy and political decison-making is changing. On page 2 of her book Mayo Moran states:
‘There is nothing new about the pursuit of justice after atrocity. In the aftermath of mass violence and abuse, survivors typically sought rectification, amassing evidence and pleading their cases to political leaders and sometimes even to courts. But they almost always failed. Political leaders were largely unmoved by their pleas, and courts pointed to numerous barriers and told them to go away. … However, beginning in the late 1980s, that ground started to shift. …. After many decades of inertia, the tide has discernibly turned in favour of return … Courts and other bodies are also showing themselves to be far more supportive of return [i.e. of cultural artefacts]. … For the purposes of the discussion here, the salient fact is that the meaning of the past and its significance as a matter of justice is now at the forefront of public debate, even when that significance is being disputed.’
The scope and embrace of the Principles of ‘Reparative Justice’, extend far beyond the return of cultural artefacts, and include civil claims for compensation as a result of wrongs done during an illegal war of aggression, or period of occupation.
As I warned on Tuesday, as a result of this illegal war, a ‘Humanitarian Crisis’, which could become a ‘Humanitarian Catastrophe’, is now unfolding in the Gulf States, where millions of foreign nationals (including expatriates), and migrant workers from all around the world, are trapped.
While as far as I am aware, Iran has not attacked any de-salination plants in the Gulf States, this commentator predicts that Israel will launch ‘false flag’ operations to destroy de-salination plants in these states, in order to rally other states, who e.g. are NATO members, to enter the war on their side.
See also my blog – ‘Can Humanitarian Mediation provide a Diplomatic Offramp?’
Tragically, Starmer and most UK parliamentarians appear to be taking the UK in the wrong direction.
Instead of:
(i) staying out of this widening and potentially global conflict; (ii) proposing Humanitarian Mediation; and (iii) offering to act as a ‘Humanitarian’ Mediator,
the UK Government appears militarily to have decided to plunge the UK into an illegal war of choice.
In other words Starmer, with what appeared vocally at PMQ’s on Wednesday, to be the almost universal support of members of the House of Commons of all parties, appears to have decided to escalate the war.
I am trying to understand why rational, intelligent, and well informed political actors, would in effect decide to ‘pour petrol on the fire’ of an illegal war, that is likely to result in a Humanitarian Catastrophe in the states of the UK’s allies – i.e. the Gulf States.
What these politicians do not appear to have grasped is that such a crisis may end in:
(i) civil unrest; (ii) a break down in law and order; (iii) civil insurrection; and (iv) the overthrow of the Gulf Monarchies, by their own people/militaries.
So, I am wondering how educated Starmer, his ministers, and parliamentarians are, about the ‘demographic make-up’ of the Gulf States; and the risk of ‘political instability’ resulting from a ‘Humanitarian Crisis’ becoming a ‘Humanitarian Catastrophe’, as an inadvertent consequence of escalation.
Can someone please explain, since logically the price in deaths throughout the Gulf States, as a result of food and medical supplies not getting in, and of lack of clean water, is likely to be high if this turns out to be a protracted war.
That is because nothing can get in at scale by either sea or air, and in effect, the only way out for most civilians trapped in the Gulf, is south through Oman.
Oman may not allow refugees fleeing in their thousands from the Gulf States, to enter their country.
The route may also close if Yemen joins the war.
I hope that I am wrong!
Let’s see what happens.
Caveat – This post is written in my capacity as a graduate of one of the UK’s top schools of Political Science, and not in any professional capacity.
Comments added since:
AI (05.03.2026) – ‘As of March 2026, a rapidly worsening humanitarian crisis is unfolding across several Gulf states following an escalation of regional violence involving Iran, Israel, and the United States. While the Gulf has historically been a hub for stability, recent retaliatory strikes have brought direct conflict to its territory, leading to civilian casualties and infrastructure damage in countries including the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
The Guardian +3Current Humanitarian ImpactInternational relief agencies, including UNOCHA and the British Red Cross, have raised alarms regarding the following developments:
Civilian Casualties & Displacement: Strikes have hit residential areas, schools, and hospitals across the region. In some areas, residents have been forced to flee or are sheltering in place due to ongoing drone and missile attacks.
Targeting of Infrastructure: Energy facilities, ports, and airports in Oman, Kuwait, and the UAE have been targeted, disrupting essential services and the movement of goods.
Vulnerability of Migrant Workers: Millions of expatriate workers from South and Southeast Asia (including India, the Philippines, and Pakistan) are at severe risk. Several governments have initiated massive evacuation and repatriation plans for their citizens trapped in affected zones.
Operational Constraints: Airspace closures and insecurity have severely restricted the movement of humanitarian personnel and the delivery of life-saving supplies across the region. unocha +5
Regional Context
Conflict Escalation: The crisis intensified following US and Israeli strikes on Iran in late February 2026, which prompted widespread retaliatory attacks by Iran and its allies against US-allied Gulf states.
Economic Disruption: The targeting of the Gulf’s trade and energy sectors threatens its status as a global hub for finance and tourism, further compounding the regional instability.
Resource Strain: The UN Relief Chief has warned that the “daunting” humanitarian fallout is draining the resources and political will needed to save lives in a region already home to millions of displaced people.’
Ai (05.03.2026) – ‘President Emmanuel Macron ordered the deployment of
the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle to the Mediterranean
and Middle East on 3 March 2026, to protect French allies and secure critical
maritime trade routes during the escalating U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict.
Key reasons for the
deployment include:
Protecting Regional Allies: France is
fulfilling defense agreements with
It also serves as preparation for possible evacuation operations of French and EU citizens in Lebanon and the UAE.
Defending Cyprus: France is sending additional assets, including the frigate Languedoc, to protect Cyprus after attacks on British military bases on the island.’
“The Islamic Republic of Iran… denies its armed forces
launched a drone toward the Republic of Azerbaijan,” the general staff of
the armed forces said in a statement, according to state TV, which also blamed
Israel.
“Such actions by the Zionist regime, aimed at disrupting relations between Muslim countries in various ways, are not unprecedented.”
Humanitarian Mediation provides a diplomatic offramp by pivoting from unachievable strategic military objectives toward urgent, shared humanitarian concerns, such as protecting civilians and ensuring aid access.
By addressing immediate suffering, Humanitarian Mediation creates and protects a space for dialogue, building ‘habits of cooperation’ between adversaries that can eventually form the basis for renewed political negotiations.
When traditional diplomacy falters due to hardline political stances, humanitarian mediation offers several practical paths forward:
(i) ‘Pivoting to Interests over Positions’ – While political positions may be irreconcilable, parties often share underlying interests, such as maintaining legitimacy or managing public health crises.
(ii) ‘Building “Habits of Cooperation’ – Small, technical agreements, such as prisoner swaps, hostage returns, or the reopening of aid corridors, demonstrate that dialogue remains legitimate and that conflict can be managed through words rather than violence.
(iii) ‘Creating Neutral Forums’ – Mediators provide a safe, neutral platform for communication without the fear of prejudice. This allows antagonists to test ideas and explore compromises in a confidential environment.
(iv) ‘Providing a Humanitarian Cover’ – Negotiations that might be politically impossible can sometimes proceed under a humanitarian mantle.
Humanitarian mediation is distinct from traditional peacebuilding because it is often faster, more informal, and focused on immediate problem-solving rather than long-term political restructuring.
The primary aim is improving the protection of civilians by mitigating violence, preventing forced displacement, and improving access to basic services.
Humanitarian relief operations and political tracks are increasingly viewed as inseparable; unless diplomacy and humanitarianism advance together, neither is likely to succeed.
While effective as an offramp, Humanitarian Mediation faces significant challenges. It can be seen as ‘performative’ if it lacks consistent backing from states and donors.
Additionally, agreements emerging from transactional arrangements, such as those that exclude the voices of women or civil society, can be difficult to sustain long-term.
See; – ‘Douglas Macgregor: A New World Emerges: Iran Will Win & Israel May Not Survive’: https://lnkd.in/esc_ic2S – ‘Saudi, Qatar Capture MOSSAD MEN Involved In Attacks? Iran Drops Israel Bombshell After Aramco Strike’: https://lnkd.in/eCjt_Vrq – ‘Israel’s imminent attack on Iran forced US to join war, says Rubio’: https://lnkd.in/eiT_BgS5 war-attack-trump-b2930752.html -‘This is an illegal war’:https://lnkd.in/eXeWXSSZ – ‘Statistical probability of regime change in Iran is almost Zero!’: https://lnkd.in/diQPaQMY
AI (03.03.2026) – ‘A
humanitarian and logistical crisis is unfolding across the Gulf as of March 3,
2026. Following major escalations in the Middle East conflict, millions of
foreign nationals, including migrant workers, tourists, and transit passengers—are
currently trapped due to sweeping airspace closures and attacks on
regional infrastructure.
Over 13,000 flights have been cancelled,
leaving tens of thousands of travellers stuck in major hubs like Dubai,
Abu Dhabi, and Doha.
An estimated 24 million migrant
workers from South and Southeast Asia are at high risk. Countries like
the Philippines and Indonesia are monitoring the situation closely,
with some nations considering large-scale evacuations if conditions deteriorate.
Several European and Asian governments have
issued “Shelter in Place” orders, advising their citizens to stay
indoors and avoid land travel to neighbouring countries like Oman unless
specifically instructed.
Reports indicate missile and drone
strikes have caused damage at Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and Kuwait airports,
complicating exit routes.
While some limited flights resumed on
March 2nd via carriers like Emirates and Etihad, the vast majority of foreign
nationals remain unable to leave.’
AI – ‘Multiple U.S. embassies in the Middle East have explicitly stated they are not in a position to evacuate or directly assist American citizens departing their host countries as of early March 2026. This follows escalating regional conflict and the closure of several diplomatic posts.
Business Insider +1Key details from recent official alerts include:
Israel (Jerusalem & Tel Aviv): The U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem stated on March 2, 2026, that it is “not in a position at this time to evacuate or directly assist Americans in departing Israel”. Citizens were instead directed to register for private shuttles to the Egyptian border operated by the Israeli Ministry of Tourism, though the embassy warned it cannot guarantee safety for those using them.
Lebanon (Beirut): The U.S. Embassy in Beirut issued a Level 4 “Do Not Travel” advisory and warned that American citizens “should not rely on the U.S. government for assisted departure or evacuation”. All consular services, both routine and emergency, have been suspended as the embassy footprint was reduced to essential personnel only.
Qatar (Doha): The U.S. Embassy in Doha confirmed on March 2 that it is not evacuating or directly assisting Americans departing the country at this time, as local airspace remains closed.
Kuwait & UAE: Both the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait and the U.S. Mission to the UAE have ordered the departure of non-emergency government personnel and advised private citizens to have departure plans that do not depend on U.S. government help. U.S. Embassy Jerusalem (.gov) +8
Why are evacuations not being provided?
Closed Airspace: Major airports, including Ben Gurion in Israel and Hamad International in Qatar, have suspended civilian flights, making commercial or government-assisted air travel impossible.
Active Hostilities: Ongoing missile and drone strikes have created significant safety risks that prevent the U.S. government from guaranteeing the safety of departing citizens.
Embassy Closures: Several embassies have shut down or evacuated their own staff following direct attacks, such as the drone strike on the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh.
American citizens currently in these regions are advised by the U.S. Department of State to shelter in place, maintain a personal safety plan, and monitor local media.’
