December 20, 2016
	I know, that these are very emotional times, people are struggling to cope with the overwhelming reality of war and conflict, can’t easily distinguish between right or wrong, and I understand, that , depending on the very individual perspective, one may see and perceive things completely differently. However I feel that some degree of politeness and respect between all stakeholders would be really helpful in these days. The conservation community should try to speak with one voice, aim at more inclusive, consensual views, if not for anything, then for the sake of getting heard and listened to by a world which seems to run on a completely different agenda. 
	I do not think that Professor Lebeau’s statement reflects well such a professional attitude. It sounds offensive, and is, in my opinion also short-sighted and condescending. Not for the first time, though. Shirin also target UNESCO in the past:  in an otherwise thoughtful statement named “Restoring Palmyra: Yes! Hastily: No!!!  A motion aimed to encourage UNESCO to act as a neutral organization” from last spring the wording was obviously chosen in an offensive manner as well. 
	I think we all may have had different reasons to accept the DGAM invitation and come to Damascus for this conference, I cannot speak for others, many of them very distinguished colleagues with close relation to Syrian Cultural Heritage. For me personally, it was mainly the last and 9th point of the London Declaration, dating back to 2015, attached here FYI , endorsed and presented by UNESCO at the 39th session of the WH Committee in Bonn: 
	“The conference participants recommend that every decison-maker, organization and individual concerned) supports cultural heritage professionals in countries suffering, or at risk of suffering, cultural crisis and appeals to every decison-maker, organization and individual to be generous, innovative and dynamic in their support”
	When we embraced the UNESCO hashtag #unite4heritage for the events which we organized at Yale University this last spring under the attendance of UNESCO DG Irina Bokova and UNSG Ban Ki-moon, we had exactly this in mind. We all have good reason to be supportive of the colleagues who defend their (and our) cultural heritage in the first line on the ground. In troubled times even much more than in peaceful times. I am mentioning here with respect and great admiration the DGAM and its DG, Maamoun Abdulkarim, who did and continue to do a remarkable, courageous job on the technical level during these past years of conflict, work which has been acknowledged widely and internationally. 
	The Anqa project with ICOMOS and CyArk, which I was presenting in my lecture, seems to me, with all its limitations in scope and capacity, a modest but good example for this approach, as are many other projects in all parts of this war-torn country, carried out by so many groups from almost all sides. Together with Samir, we had after the conference fruitful meetings with the young Anqa 3 D team, the archivists and could get some further first-hand impressions, on which we shall report to ICOMOS and be pleased to share with everybody interested. 
	Of course in Syria the authorities control the message to a degree, but that message can be “spun” only so far, and only so much that is evident to one’s eyes can be hidden. Let us not forget this. Most importantly, let us aim at a less divisive tone in our conversations, even and especially on questions in which we may tend to disagree.
...