State succession in cultural property

First Edition Jakubowski

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/state-succession-in-cultural-property-first-edition-jaku
bowski/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Property, Family and the Irish Welfare State 1st

Edition Michelle Norris (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/property-family-and-the-irish-
welfare-state-1st-edition-michelle-norris-auth/

Media Piracy in the Cultural Economy Intellectual

Property and Labor Under Neoliberal Restructuring Gavin
Mueller

https://textbookfull.com/product/media-piracy-in-the-cultural-
economy-intellectual-property-and-labor-under-neoliberal-
restructuring-gavin-mueller/

Succession Planning in Canadian Academic Libraries 1st

Edition Guise

https://textbookfull.com/product/succession-planning-in-canadian-
academic-libraries-1st-edition-guise/

Property Aspects Of Intellectual Property Ole-Andreas

Rognstad

https://textbookfull.com/product/property-aspects-of-
intellectual-property-ole-andreas-rognstad/
Property rights in Post Soviet Russia violence
corruption and the demand for law First Paperback
Edition Gans-Morse

https://textbookfull.com/product/property-rights-in-post-soviet-
russia-violence-corruption-and-the-demand-for-law-first-
paperback-edition-gans-morse/

The Mammoth Book of Erotic Romance and Domination

Mammoth Books Maxim Jakubowski

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-mammoth-book-of-erotic-
romance-and-domination-mammoth-books-maxim-jakubowski/

Estate and Business Succession Planning Bernie

O'Sullivan

https://textbookfull.com/product/estate-and-business-succession-
planning-bernie-osullivan/

The shape of the state in medieval Scotland, 1124-1290

First Edition Taylor

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-shape-of-the-state-in-
medieval-scotland-1124-1290-first-edition-taylor/

Family Businesses in Transition Economies Management

Succession and Internationalization 1st Edition Léo-
Paul Dana

https://textbookfull.com/product/family-businesses-in-transition-
economies-management-succession-and-internationalization-1st-
edition-leo-paul-dana/
C U LT U R A L H E R I TAG E L AW A N D P OL IC Y
Series Editors
PROFESSOR FR A NCESCO FR A NCIONI
Professor of International Law and Human Rights and Co-Director of the Academy
of European Law at the European University Institute in Florence
PROFESSOR A NA V R DOLJA K
Associate Dean (Research) and Professor of Law, University of Technology, Sydney

State Succession in Cultural Property

 C U LT U R A L H E R I TAG E L AW A N D P OL IC Y
The aim of this series is to publish significant and original research on and
scholarly analysis of all aspects of cultural heritage law through the lens of
international law, private international law, and comparative law. The series
is wide in scope, traversing disciplines, regions, and viewpoints. Topics given
particular prominence are those which, while of interest to academic lawyers,
have significant bearing on policy making and current public discourse on
the interaction between art, heritage, and the law.
Advisory Board
James Nafziger
Kurt Siehr
Ben Boer
Roger O’Keefe
Marc-Andre Renold
Federico Lenzerini
Keun-Gwan Lee
Foralin Shyllon
 State Succession
in Cultural Property
A N DR Z EJ J A K U B OW S K I

1
 1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Andrzej Jakubowski 2015
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2015
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence
Number C01P0000148 with the permission of OPSI
and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015941227
ISBN 978–0–19–873806–0
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
 Series Editors’ Preface
At a time when the understandings of states and their role in international law is
being fundamentally challenged, Andrzej Jakubowski’s book on state succession
in cultural property squarely addresses these transformations and provides them
with a much needed historical context. In so doing, it embodies an important aim
of this book series, to place issues concerning the protection of cultural heritage
squarely within the field of international law, broadly understood.
The break-up of federations after the Cold War and emergence of new states in
recent years has reignited interest among international lawyers in state succession
once again. While it is a recurring theme in the development of international law
in the modern era, its application to cultural property has not been examined in
a coherent and dedicated fashion. This book fills this gap by critically examining
the principles and practices relating to state succession with respect to tangible
cultural property, including succession in related rights and obligations under
treaty and customary international law. This alone is an important contribution.
However, as the author himself flags, this work is not confined to a positivist read-
ing of the current law.
International law and related state practice is often in a state of flux and inde-
terminacy. Accordingly, the longer term contribution of this book is the author’s
recognition of the precariousness of the state in present day international law and
international relations – despite (or perhaps because) of its centrality to his topic.
He does this by engaging fully with developments in international human rights
law, humanitarian law and cultural heritage law, and explaining their pertinence
to a fuller, more cogent understanding of state succession in cultural property and
as complementary considerations to the traditional criterion of territoriality in
the event of a redrawing of national boundaries. This approach provides a sound
rationale and a valuable source of innovative criteria for the future evolution of
the law.
Francesco Francioni and Ana Filipa Vrdoljak
 Preface
The allocation of cultural treasures in cases of state succession has always stimu-
lated heated disputes and attracted public attention. Conflicts have been exac-
erbated and legal solutions hindered because of the strong emotions attached to
cultural heritage and the rancour that sometimes flows from bitter memories.
Having been born and raised in Poland, the country which in the past 100 years
drastically changed its territorial boundaries and ethnic composition, I am accus-
tomed to the overwhelming nature of the discourse on identity, lost heritage, and
restitution. Assessments of past attitudes to history and contradictions between
present uniform national identity and past multicultural traditions have always
been an important element of public life in Poland, especially since 1989. In fact,
following the political breakthrough almost every country of the former Eastern
bloc initiated the long-awaited discussion regarding rights to cultural heritage
hindered by the post-Second World War Potsdam agreements and Cold War
ideological considerations. Observation of this explosion of previously suppressed
national sentiments led me to focus my legal studies on international heritage law
in search of universal answers to local problems.
The topic of state succession in cultural property is not new to international
practice and scholarship. Indeed, attempts to provide a legal framework for the
cultural aspects of state succession have been undertaken in international prac-
tice and legal scholarship since at least the mid-nineteenth century. These were
strictly bound to the origin of the European nation-state, determining its territo-
rial boundaries according to ethnic and cultural divisions. However, the set of
principles applied to the allocation and distribution of cultural material did not
take a form of any legally binding international instrument. In fact, the issue was
neglected by international lawyers and scholars for several years following the
era of decolonization, marked by the failure of colonized peoples and indigenous
communities to recover their cultural patrimony from former colonial powers.
The major doctrinal efforts were focused on the topic of self-determination of peo-
ples and economic aspects of state succession—core questions for international
legal order and political stability during the Cold War and decolonization. In
this context, the cultural heritage dimension of state succession was perceived as
a secondary issue.
The fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent dissolution of the Cold War
political and territorial system, followed by the Balkan and now the Ukrainian
crises, have once again put the issue on the table. Yet the doctrinal response to the
current international practice seems unsatisfactory. As exemplified in the 2001
Resolution of the Institute of International Law (IIL), entitled State Succession
in Matters of Property and Debts, the majority of legal scholarship focuses on the
allocation of tangible cultural heritage based on two paramount criteria: territo-
rial provenance and major cultural significance for a given state. Such an approach
viii Preface
also provides for the solutions largely based on the mechanical application of the
territoriality principle, uti possidetis, and exclusive territorial competence with
regard to cultural property.
This book arises from the criticism of the existing traditional legal construc-
tions, as they arguably do not recognize the important evolution from the nar-
rowly defined ‘cultural property’ towards a broader, more human-oriented idea
of ‘cultural heritage’. Such a conceptual shift has occurred in the last 50 years,
marked by the gradual recognition of the fundamental role performed by cultural
manifestations in the preservation of human dignity and the continuous develop-
ment of all mankind. I endeavour to analyse to what extent the practice and the
theory of state succession reflect this evolution, by reconstructing the principles
regulating interstate arrangements with regard to such matters in a broad histori-
cal and geographical framework. I attempt to identify the peculiarity of cultural
heritage in its relation with the human communities, groups, and individuals who
have created, maintained and enjoyed such a heritage. These, therefore, have a def-
inite interest in staking their claim to the inherent link with their natural cultural
heritage and not seeing it disappear by virtue of territorial vicissitudes and political
changes involved in state succession. This observation leads the analysis towards
the topic of international cultural heritage obligations and their content, sources,
and status in state succession. Indeed, the very essence of the international herit-
age law is grounded in the conviction that cultural heritage concerns go beyond
state sovereignty and thus touch upon the area of human rights. Moreover, these
interests and values are also perceived as being vested in the international com-
munity as a whole. In fact, the recent international practice of state succession in
cultural property seems to be moving towards international cultural cooperation,
and beyond mere restitution and distribution considerations.
Thus, the core objective of this book is to offer a new doctrinal approach, based
both on the principles of international cultural heritage law and human rights law.
This implies the limitation of the contractual freedom of states in the matter of
cultural agreements, in favour of the continuity of international cultural heritage
obligations in cases of state succession. According to such a lens, the book also
proposes a list of guiding principles relating to the succession of states in respect
of tangible cultural heritage, which may contribute to the further development of
both academic debate and international practice.
Andrzej Jakubowski
 Acknowledgements
Like most scholarly efforts, this one is heavily indebted to many institutions and
individuals. It is a pleasure to thank them now in print. Research for this book
has been possible by a Polish national doctoral grant at the Law Department
of the European University Institute, which provided me with excellent institu-
tional support. I would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the Max-Planck
Institute for Comparative and Private International Law in Hamburg, and the
Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in
Heidelberg.
I am very fortunate to have been able to receive guidance from my supervisor,
Francesco Francioni, who constantly encouraged me in my research and showed
me the true meaning of academic excellence and professionalism. I thank him
for his patience, support, and enthusiasm wholeheartedly. I have also greatly
benefited from the constant exchange of ideas and information with Ana Filipa
Vrdoljak, whose work, International Law, Museums and the Return of Cultural
Objects (2006), has always provided inspiration for my research.
The actual choice of the topic of this book owes a lot to Kurt Siehr, to whom
I am extremely grateful. For suggestions, advice, and useful clarifications at
different moments of my research, I should thank Lyndell V. Prott, Nawojka
Cieślińska-Lobkowicz, Kerstin Odendahl, Wojciech Kowalski, Cynthia Scott,
and Władysław Czapliński. This study also benefited from the comments of par-
ticipants in the three consecutive sessions of the international annual seminar
‘Kunst und Recht’ (Art and Law), organized in 2008–2010 in Berlin, Vienna,
and Munich, where I presented parts of my work in draft form. Special thanks for
stimulating discussions and feedback go to the members of the Working Group
on Cultural Heritage at the European University Institute: Adriana Bessa Da
Costa Antunes Rodrigues, Alessandro Chechi, Lucas Lixinski, Jeanne-Marie
Panayotopoulos, Robert Peters, Valentina Vadi, and Amy Strecker to whom I am
also very grateful for her much appreciated linguistic revision of vast sections of
this book.
An important part of my research is based on fact-finding and case-study
analysis which would never have been possible without the generosity and pro-
fessional assistance of many people. In particular, I would like to acknowledge
Mečislav Borák, Silesian Land’s Museum, Opava, Czech Republic; Esko Häkli,
Helsinki University Library, University of Helsinki, Finland; Miha Pogačnik,
Faculty of Law, University of Nova Gorica, Slovenia; Piotr Kosiewski, the Batory
Foundation, Warsaw; Serhij Kot, Institute of History of Ukraine in Kyiv, National
Academy of Science of Ukraine; Michał Michalski, Ministry of Culture and
National Heritage, Poland; Solvita Zvidriņa, Ministry of Culture, Latvia; Majda
Širca and Silvester Gaberšček, Ministry of Culture, Slovenia; Ljubica Stefanovska,
Ministry of Culture, Republic of Macedonia; Dino Zulumović, Commission to
x Acknowledgements
Preserve National Monuments, Bosnia–Herzegovina; and Jovita Mikalkėnaitė,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Lithuania.
I would like also to thank Emma Endean, and the staff at Oxford University
Press for making the production of this book a pleasant process.
Last but not least, I wish to thank my family for their unfailing encourage-
ment, patience, and optimism which gave me the strength in the last miles of this
journey.
 Contents
Table of Cases  xv
Table of Instruments  xvii
List of Abbreviations  xxv

Introduction  1
1 The Meaning and Relevance of Cultural Heritage  2
2 Legal Effects of State Succession on Tangible
Cultural Heritage  10
3 Methodology and Structure  23

I . E M E RG E N C E A N D E L A B OR AT IO N
OF PR I N C I PL E S (1815 –1939)
1. Territoriality, Nation-State, and the Integrity of National
Patrimony in the Nineteenth Century  29
1.1 Concept of territoriality  30
1.2 State and national patrimony  43
1.3 The principle of territoriality and the integrity of national
patrimony in the practice of state succession  47
1.4 Conclusion  52

2. State Succession in Cultural Property: Peace Treaty Practice

(1918–1939)  53
2.1 Self-determination and cultural patrimony  55
2.2 Allocation of cultural property—the complexity of the
post-First World War regulations  62
2.3 Restoration of national patrimonies displaced or lost in
relation to the First World War  63
2.4 Territorial cession and the allocation of cultural property  65
2.5 Dissolution of a multinational state and reintegration
of national patrimonies  67
2.6 Succession to colonial territories and the status of
cultural patrimony  83
2.7 Conclusion—a legal appraisal  85
xii Contents
I I . C O N S OL I DAT IO N A N D C ODI F IC AT IO N
OF T H E L AW (19 4 0 –1989)
3. The Second World War, Decolonization, and State Succession
in Cultural Property  91
3.1 Cultural property in the post-Second World War
legal landscape  94
3.2 Post-Second World War Europe and state succession in
cultural property  100
3.3 Decolonization in matters of cultural property  117
3.4 Conclusion  134

4. In Search of a New Global Order: The Codification of

State Succession and the Development of International Cultural
Heritage Law  136
4.1 Cultural genocide, war plunder, and restitution  139
4.2 Normative framework for the protection of the cultural heritage
of mankind—the World Heritage Convention  144
4.3 Self-determination and tangible cultural heritage  146
4.4 The protection of movable cultural property and the restitution
debate: action by UNESCO  152
4.5 The International Law Commission and state succession to
cultural property  159
4.6 The 1983 Vienna Convention  167
4.7 Conclusion  172

I I I . BU I L DI N G A N E W C O N S E N S U S O N C U LT U R A L
H E R I TAG E : S TAT E S U C C E S S IO N A F T E R 1989
5. State Succession in State Property and Tangible Cultural Heritage
in the Post-Cold War Context  177
5.1 State succession revisited  180
5.2 The post-Cold War state succession and cultural
heritage: doctrinal approaches  191
5.3 Cultural property and historic archives in the post-Cold War
practice of state succession: select case-studies  198
5.4 Conclusion  235

6. New Horizons of State Succession: Reconciliation

and Cultural Cooperation  238
6.1 Cultural heritage obligations in state succession  242
6.2 The human and cultural heritage framework for
Bosnia–Herzegovina and Kosovo  270
 Contents xiii

6.3 Past territorial and population transfers—solutions based on

the procedural principle of international cultural cooperation  275
6.4 Post-colonial reconciliation and international
cultural cooperation  290
6.5 State succession and world heritage  302
6.6 State succession to underwater cultural heritage  308
6.7 Conclusion  318

7. Conclusion  321
7.1 Passing of state cultural property  322
7.2 Succession to international cultural heritage obligations  326
7.3 State succession and international responsibility  330
7.4 Procedural principles of dispute settlements  331
7.5 Best practices and guiding principles  332

Annex: Draft Proposal of Guiding Principles Relating to the Succession

of States in respect of Tangible Cultural Heritage 335
Select Bibliography  341
Index  363
 Table of Cases
C OU NC I L OF T H E L E AGU E N AT IONS
Åland Islands, Decision of 24 June 1921 (including Sweden’s Protest),
LNOJ September 1921, 697 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

EU ROPE A N C OU RT OF H U M A N R IGH TS
Kalogeropoulou and Others v. Greece and Germany, Application No. 59021/00, Decision
of 12 December 2002, 2002-X ECHR Reports 417. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

GR E EC E
Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany (Distomo case), Judgment of the
Hellenic Supreme Court (Areios Pagos) of 4 May 2000, 129 ILR 514 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

I N T E R-A L L I E D R E PA R AT IONS C OM M IS SION (1919 –1921)

Report of the Committee of Three Jurists. Belgian Claims to the Triptych of Saint
Ildephonse and Treasure of the Order of the Golden Fleece (1921). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72–74

I N T E R N AT ION A L C OU RT OF J US T IC E
Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in
Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, ICJ Reports 2010, 403. . . . . . . . . . . 221
Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), Judgment
of 5 February 1970, ICJ Reports 1970, 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264, 327
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro),
Judgment of 11 July 1996 (preliminary objections), ICJ Reports 1996, 645. . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro),
Judgment of 26 February 2007, ICJ Reports 2007, 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257–258, 263
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment of 18 November 2008
(preliminary objections), ICJ Reports 2008, 412.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257–258
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment of 3 February 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257–258
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v. Republic of Mali), Judgment of 22 December 1986,
ICJ Reports 1986, 554. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Gabčikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment of 25 September 1997,
ICJ Reports 1997, 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189–190
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment
of 3 February 2012, ICJ Reports 2012, 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment of 15 June 1962,
ICJ Reports 1962, 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120, 307
xvi Table of Cases
Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the
Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment of 11 November 2013,
ICJ Reports 2013, 281. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, Advisory Opinion of 28 May 1951, ICJ Reports 1951, 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

I N T E R N AT ION A L C R I M I N A L C OU RT
FOR T H E FOR M E R Y UG OSL AV I A
Prosecutor v. Kordić and Čerkez, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T, Judgment of
26 February 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Prosecutor v. Krstić, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgment of 2 August 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . 256–257, 329
Prosecutor v. Strugar, Case No. IT-01-42-T, Judgment of 31 January 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . 253, 302

I TA LY
Associazione Nazionale Italia Nostra Onlus v. Ministero per i Beni le Attività
Culturali et al., Consiglio di Stato, No. 3154, 23 June 2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298–300
Associazione Nazionale Italia Nostra Onlus v. Ministero per i Beni le Attività Culturali et al.,
Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale del Lazio (Sez. II-quarter), No. 3518,
28 February 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295–298
Ferrini v. Federal Republic of Germany, Corte di Cassazione (Sez. Unite), No. 5044,
11 March 2004, 128 ILR 658. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

PE R M A N E N T C OU RT OF I N T E R N AT ION A L J US T IC E
Minority Schools in Albania, Advisory Opinion of 6 April 1935,
PCIJ ser.A/B, No. 64. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60–61

U N I T E D S TAT E S
Dole v. Carter, 444 F.Supp. 1065 (D.C.Kan.1977), aff’ d, 569 F.2d 1109
(10th Cir. 1977). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Federal Republic of Germany v. Elicofon, 358 F.Supp. 747 (E.D.N.Y.1972);
536 F. Supp. 813 (E.D.N.Y 1978). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon, 478 F.2d 231 (1973); 536 F.Supp. 829
(E.D.N.Y.1981), aff’ d, 678 F.2d 1150 (2d Cir.1982). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc. v. Kingdom of Spain et al., Sup. Ct. Decision No.
11A745, 9 February 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc. v. the Unidentified, Shipwrecked Vessel,
675 F. Supp. 2d 1126 (M.D. Fla. 2009); 657 F.3d 1159 (11th Cir. 2011);
132 S. Ct. 2379 (US, 14 May 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313–316
 Table of Instruments
I N T E R N AT ION A L
Agreement between Austria and Hungary Concerning Certain Objects from
Museum and Library Collections (1932). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76–78, 88, 235, 326
Agreement between Austria and Poland Regarding Questions of Archives (1932). . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Agreement between Cambodia and the French School of the Far East Orient
Concerning the Regime of Archaeological Excavations (1956). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Agreement between Cambodia and the French School of the Far East Orient on the
Renewal of the 1956 Bilateral Agreements on the Conservation of Angkor and
the Regime of Archaeological Excavations (1967). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Agreement between Czech Republic and Slovakia on Good-Neighbourliness, Friendly
Relations and Cooperation (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Agreement between Czech Republic and Slovakia on the Exchange of Certain Objects
of Cultural Heritage (1994). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201–202
Agreement between Eritrea and Ethiopia (2000) (Algiers Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Agreement between France and Algeria Relating to Works of Art from the Museum of
Fine Arts of Algiers (1968). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Agreement between Germany and Poland Concerning Cultural Cooperation (1997). . . . . . . . 279
Agreement between Germany and Poland Concerning Family Estates (1925). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Agreement between Italy and Ethiopia Concerning the Settlement of Economic and
Financial Matters Issuing from the Treaty of Peace and Economic
Collaboration (1956). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104–105
Agreement between Italy and Libya on Economic Cooperation and Settlement of Issues
Arising from Resolution 388(V) of 15 December 1950 of the General Assembly
of the United Nations (1956). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
Agreement between Italy and Yugoslavia on the Restitution of Cultural Property
(1961). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103–104, 285
Agreement between Korea and Japan Concerning Cultural Property and Exchange
(1965). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .292–293, 295
Agreement regarding the Mutual Return of Property between Poland and
Czechoslovakia (1947). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Agreement between the Netherlands and Indonesia on Cultural Co-operation
(1968) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 300
Agreement between Poland and the German Democratic Republic Concerning the
Demarcation of the Established and the Existing Polish-German State
Frontier (1950). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111, 276
Agreement between the Polish Committee of National Liberation and the
Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic Regarding the
Evacuation of the Polish Population from the Territory of the BSSR and of the
Byelorussian Population from the Territory of Poland (1944). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Agreement between Ukraine and Poland on Co-operation in Protection and
Restitution of Objects of Cultural Interest Lost and Illegally Removed during
World War II (1996). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
Agreement on Succession Issues of the Former Socialist Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (2001). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223–229, 236
Agreement on Succession with respect to State Archives of the Former Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Agreement between Ukraine and Poland on Co-operation in the Realm of Culture,
Science and Education (1997). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
xviii Table of Instruments
Agreement between United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, France,
United States of America, Italy and Federal Republic of Germany Relating to
Certain Libraries and Properties in Italy (1953) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Alma Ata Declaration (1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183, 203, 205

Charter of the United Nations (1945). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 161, 290

Commonwealth of Independent States Agreement on the Co-Operation in the
Field of Culture (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Commonwealth of Independent States Agreement on the Return of Cultural and
Historic Treasures to their Country of Origin (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . 206–210, 215, 235–236
Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement (2007). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178, 274
Convention (II) with respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land (1899). . . . . . . . . . 62, 296
Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907). . . . . . . . 62, 278, 296
Convention Additional between France, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam
Relating to the French School of the Far East (1950) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123–124
Convention between Austria and Czechoslovakia Concerning the Implementation of
Certain Provisions of the Treaty of St Germain-en-Laye (1920). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in Relation to State Succession (2009). . . . . . . . 187
Convention of Florence between Austria-Hungary and Italy (1871). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 51–52
Convention between Italy and Austria Concerning the Historic and Artistic
Patrimony of the former Austria-Hungary (1920). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75–76
Convention Concerning the Protection of World Natural and Cultural Heritage
(1972) (World Heritage Convention) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, 20, 129–130, 144–146, 207, 252,
264, 302–308, 319, 327, 332, 335–336
Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import,
Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970)
(1970 UNESCO Convention). . . . . . . . . . 4, 145, 153–156, 158, 166, 173, 206–207, 235, 237,
240, 247, 250–251, 293–294, 319, 323, 332, 335–336
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948)
(Genocide Convention). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140–142, 257–258, 263, 329
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict (1954) (1954 Hague Convention). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3–4, 128, 138, 142–144, 158,
165–166, 173, 231, 243–244, 246,
264, 293–294, 296–298, 323, 327, 335
Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural
Expressions (2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, 260
Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (2001). . . . . . . . . . 4, 253–255,
308–309, 312, 317
Convention for the Restitution of Documents and Works of Art between
Austria-Hungary and Italy (1868). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50–51, 70–71
Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Council Directive 93/7/EEC on the Return of Cultural Objects Unlawfully
Removed from the Territory of a Member State (1993). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities (1995). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for
Society (2005) (Faro Convention). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Covenant of the League of Nations (1919) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57–58, 84
Cultural Agreement between Cambodia and France (1950). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the

Return of Cultural Objects Unlawfully Removed from the Territory of a
Member State and Amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (2014). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
 Table of Instruments xix
Draft Agreement between the Provisional Government of the National Unity of the
Polish Republic and the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist
Republic on the Repatriation of Polish Cultural Goods from the Territory of the
Ukrainian SSR and of the Ukrainian Goods from the Territory of Poland (1945). . . . . . . 113
Draft Agreement between the United Nations and Israel (1949) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Draft Cultural Agreement between the Netherlands and Indonesia (1949) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

European Convention on the Protection of Archaeological Heritage (1969). . . . . . . . . . . . 144–145

European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised)
(1992) (Malta Convention). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
European Cultural Convention (1955). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Évian Accords between France and the Provisional Government of the Algerian
Republic (1962). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Final Act and Annex of the Paris Peace Conference on Reparation (1945). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Final Act of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in
Bretton Woods (1944). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

General Armistice between Israel and Jordan (1949) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

General Convention between France and Laos (1949) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1995)
(Dayton Peace Agreement) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219–220, 271–273, 303
Geneva Convention on the High Seas (1958). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in
Time of War (1949) (Geneva IV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151, 243
Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone (1958). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309–310
German Surrender Documents (1945) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Inter-Allied Declaration against Acts of Dispossession Committed in

Territories under Enemy Occupation or Control (1943) (1943
Declaration of London). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95, 100, 242
Interim Agreement for Peace and Self-Government in Kosovo (1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
International Convention on Salvage (1989). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Concerning the
Immunity of State-Owned Vessels (1926). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) (ICCPR) . . . . . . . . 148, 150–151, 328
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (1966) (ICESCR). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148, 150, 260
International Labour Organization Convention (No 169) concerning Indigenous
and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (1989) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258–259
International Labour Organization Convention (No 107) concerning the
Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal
Populations in Independent Countries (1957). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Minsk (Belovezh Forest) Agreement on Creation of the Commonwealth (1991) . . . . . . . . 183, 203

Peace of Münster Concerning the Holy Roman Emperor and France and
Their Respective Allies (1648). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32–33
Peace of Nijmegen between the Holy Roman Empire and France (1679). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Peace of Oliwa between Poland, Sweden and Brandenburg (1660). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Peace of Osnabrück Concerning the Holy Roman Empire, France, Sweden and
Their Respective Allies (1648). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32–33
Peace of Ouchy-Lausanne with Turkey (1912) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239, 297
xx Table of Instruments
Peace of Paris between France and the Allied Powers (1814). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Peace of the Pyrenees between France and Spain (1659). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Peace of Tollentino between France and the Holy See (1797). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Peace of Whitehall between England and the Netherlands (1662). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Polish-German Financial Agreements (1920). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67–68
Potsdam Agreement (1945). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 110–112, 200, 275–278
Preliminary Agreement between Ukraine and Poland for Cultural and Scientific
Cooperation (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
Procès-verbal of the Transfer of Powers between France and Laos (1950) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122–123
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to
the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (1977) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Protocol on Restitution of Cultural Assets from Serbia to Croatia (2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Pyongyang Declaration – Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea (2002). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293–294

Round Table Conference Agreement between the Netherlands and Indonesia (1949). . . . . . . . 125

Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1999). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244, 264, 327
State Treaty for the Re-Establishment of an Independent and Democratic Austria (1955). . . . . 100
Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998) (Statute of Rome), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the
Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 (1993). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

Treaty between Federal Republic of Germany and Poland on Good Neighbourly

Relations and Friendly Cooperation (1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175, 277–278
Treaty between Federal Republic of Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics on Good-Neighborliness, Partnership and Cooperation (1990). . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Treaty between Italy and France on the Cession of Savoy and Nice (1860). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Treaty between Japan and Republic of Korea on Basic Relations (1965). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Treaty between Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany Concerning the
Basis for Normalization of Their Mutual Relations (1970). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111, 276
Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Poland (1919)
(Polish Minority Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Treaty between Ukraine and Poland on Good Neighbourliness, Friendly
Relations and Cooperation (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281–282
Treaty of Annexation between Korea and Japan (1910). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292, 295
Treaty of Berlin between Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Great Britain,
Italy, Russia and Turkey (1878). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59, 328
Treaty of Frankfurt between France and Prussia (1871). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48–49
Treaty of Lyon between France and Savoy (1601). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Treaty of Nonaggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics (1939) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Treaty of Osimo between Italy and Yugoslavia on the Delimitation of the Frontier
for the Part not Indicated as such in the Peace Treaty of 10 February
1947 (1975). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104, 285–287, 289
Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Austria (1919)
(Treaty of Saint Germain). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64–65, 69–72, 75, 78, 103, 284
Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Austria (1920)
(Treaty of Trianon). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64–65, 69, 71, 76–77, 103
Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Bulgaria (1919). . . . . . . . . . . 63, 65
 Table of Instruments xxi
Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Germany (1919)
(Treaty of Versailles). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57, 63–65, 67, 84, 279
Treaty of Peace between Austria and Italy (1866). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49–51, 69, 71
Treaty of Peace between Austria, France and Sardinia (1859). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48, 71
Treaty of Peace between Austria, Prussia and Denmark (1864) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Treaty of Peace between Hesse-Darmstadt and Prussia (1866). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48, 52, 331
Treaty of Peace of Brest-Litovsk between Germany, Austria–Hungary, Bulgaria,
Finland, Turkey, and Russia (1918). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Treaty of Peace of Lausanne with Turkey (1923). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 84, 130, 239, 296–297
Treaty of Peace of Moscow between Lithuania and Russia (1920) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 80
Treaty of Peace of Riga between Latvia and Russia (1920). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 80
Treaty of Peace of Riga between Poland, Russia and the Ukraine (1921). . . . . . . . . . 54, 61, 66–67,
80–82, 87, 218, 322, 326
Treaty of Peace of Sèvres with Turkey (1920) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65–66, 84–85
Treaty of Peace of Tartu between Estonia and Russia (1920) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 80, 215
Treaty of Peace of Tartu between Finland and Russia (1920). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, 79, 115
Treaty on Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation between Italy and
Libya (2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241, 296
Treaty on the Implementation of the Peace of Nijmegen between the Holy
Roman Empire and France (1679). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Treaty of Peace with Finland (1947). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Treaty of Peace with Hungary (1947). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 105–107, 117
Treaty of Peace with Italy (1947). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 101–105, 117, 323

Understanding on the Administration of Zones A and B of the Free Territory of

Trieste (1954). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
UNESCO Constitution (1945). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 153
UNESCO Declaration of Principles of International Cultural
Co-operation (1966). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 153, 290, 335
UNESCO Draft Declaration of Principles Relating to Cultural Objects
Displaced in Relation to the Second World War (2007). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197–198
UNESCO Preliminary Draft Convention Concerning the Protection of
Monuments and Sites of Universal Value (1971). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
UNESCO Recommendation Concerning the International Exchange of
Cultural Property (1976). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155, 290
UNESCO Recommendation on International Principles Applicable to
Archaeological Excavations (1956) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
UNESCO Recommendation on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit
Export, Import and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1964). . . . . . . . . . . 152–153
UNESCO Recommendation on Participation by the People at Large in Cultural
Life and Their Contribution to It (1976). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
UNGA Declaration for the Establishment of a New International
Economic Order (1974). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
UNGA Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations (1970). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
UNGA Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic,
Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
Unidroit Convention on Stolen and Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (1995)
(Unidroit Convention) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251–252
United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their
Property (2004). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
xxii Table of Instruments
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982)
(UNCLOS). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253–254, 309–310, 312–317
United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial
Countries and Peoples (1960) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119, 147, 149
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
United Nations Draft Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (1993). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 6/11 (2007). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167, 260
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220, 273
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 (2003). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
United Nations Security Council Resolution 476 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
United Nations Security Council Resolution 686 (1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) (UDHR). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 260

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

Vienna Convention of Law of Treaties (1969) (VCLT). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154, 156
Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives
and Debts (1983) (1983 Vienna Convention) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 10, 12, 15, 18, 32, 162–163,
165–172, 174, 187–188, 192, 199, 208, 217, 224,
235–236, 266, 296, 298, 314–315, 324, 333
Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties (1978) (1978 Vienna
Convention). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 12, 19, 162–163, 187–188, 261–262

N AT ION A L
Confederation Agreement between the Bosnian Government and Bosnian Croats
(1994) (1994 Washington Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Constitutional Act No. 541/1992 on the Partition of Property and Its
Transfer to the Czech and Slovak Republics (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Constitutional Act No. 542/1992 on the Extinction of the Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Constitutional Charter of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government of Kosovo (2001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
Constitutional (Fundamental) Law of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1977). . . . . . . . 204

Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the Most Valuable Objects of
Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of Russia (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Decree of the President of Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic on the Most
Valuable Objects of National Heritage of Russia (1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

Enactment of the Supreme Soviet of Russia on the Agreement on the Return of

Cultural and Historical Objects to the States of Their Origin (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

Federal Law on Cultural Valuables Displaced to the USSR as a Result of

World War II and Located on the Territory of the Russian
Federation (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196, 212–214

Indian Independence Act (1947). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Israeli Basic Law—Jerusalem—Capital of Israel (1980). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Kosovo Cultural Heritage Law (2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274

 Table of Instruments xxiii
Law on the Implementation of Decisions of the Commission to Preserve National
Monuments Established Pursuant to Annex 8 of the General Framework
Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (2002). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

Order of the Governor General of Indochina on the Conservation of Monuments and

Objects of Historic and Artistic Interest (1900) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Polish Decree on Deserted and Abandoned Estate (1946). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Polish Decree on Deserted and Abandoned German Estate (1946) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic Constitution (1918). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

United States Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (1976). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

M ISC E L L A N EOUS
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Opinion No. 193 on Russia’s
Request for Membership of the Council of Europe (1996). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211–212
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Resolution 1205 on Looted
Jewish Cultural Property (1999). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

European Economic Community Declaration on Guidelines on the Recognition of

New States in Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union (1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256

Final Declaration of the Vilnius International Forum on Holocaust-Era

Looted Cultural Assets (2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

International Council of Museums (ICOM)Recommendations Concerning the

Return of Works of Art Belonging to Jewish Owners (1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Protocol of the Proceedings of the Crimea Conference at Yalta (1945). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 113
Protocol on the Transport of Objects of Art, Cultural Assets and Other Exhibits
from the Museum of Vojvodina and the Novi Sad City Museum (in Yugoslavia)
to the Vukovar City Museum (2001). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231–232

Statutes of the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of

Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in
Case of Illicit Appropriation (1978). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art (1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

 List of Abbreviations
AAL Art Antiquity and Law
AAS Acta Apostolicae Sedis
AFDI Annuaire Français de Droit International
AJIL American Journal of International Law
AVR Archiv des Völkerrechts
BYIL British Yearbook of International Law
CanYIL Canadian Yearbook of International Law
Cd, Cmd, Cmnd UK Command Papers
CETS Council of Europe Treaty Series
CITRA International Conference of the Round Table on Archives
CoE Council of Europe
Corps universel Jean Dumont (Baron de Carlscroon), Jean Rousset de Missy, Jean
diplomatique Barbeyrac, Corps universel diplomatique du droit des gens: contenant
un recueil des traites d’alliance, de paix, de trêve, de neutralité, de com-
merce, d’ échange de neutralité, de commerce, d’ échange, de protection &
de garantie, de toutes les conventions, transactions, pactes, concordats, &
autres contrats, qui ont été faits en Europe, depuis le règne de l’Empereur
Charlemagne jusques à présent (P. Brunel, R., and G. Wetstein, les
Janssons Waesberge, et L'Honoré et Chatelain, 1726–1731)
CSCE Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe
CUP Cambridge University Press
D&H Duncker & Humblot
EEC European Economic Community
EJIL European Journal of International Law
EPC European Political Cooperation
ETS European Treaty Series
EU European Union
GU Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana (Official Gazette of the
Italian Republic)
GYIL German Yearbook of International Law
HILJ Harvard International Law Journal
ICA International Council on Archives
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
ICOM International Council of Museums
ICJ International Court of Justice
ICJ Reports International Court of Justice Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions
and Orders
ICLQ International and Comparative Law Quarterly
ICTY International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
IDI/IIL Institut de Droit International/Institute of International Law
IJCP International Journal of Cultural Property
IJHR International Journal of Human Rights
xxvi List of Abbreviations
ILA International Law Association
ILC International Law Commission
ILM International Legal Materials
ILO International Labour Organization
IYIL Italian Yearbook of International Law
KFOR Kosovo Force
LN League of Nations
LNOJ League of Nations Official Journal
LNTS League of Nations Treaty Series
Martens NRGT Nouveau recueil général de traités et autres actes relatifs aux rapports de
droit international: continuation du grand recueil de G. Fr. de Martens
(2e série, 1876–1908, 3e série, 1909–1944/69)
Martens RMPT Recueil manuel et pratique de traités, conventions et autres actes diplo-
matiques sur lesquels sont établis les relations et les rapports existants
aujourd’ hui entre les divers états souverains du globe, depuis l’année
1760 j’usqu’ à l’ époque actuelle (2e série, 1857–88)
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Nijhoff Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
NILR Netherlands International Law Review
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
OUP Oxford University Press
Parry’s CTS Parry’s Consolidated Treaty Series
PCA Permanent Court of Arbitration
PCIJ Permanent Court of International Justice
PCIJ ser.A/B Permanent Court of International Justice, Collection of Judgments,
Orders and Advisory Opinions (1931–40)
PYIL Polish Yearbook of International Law
RBDI Revue Belge de Droit International
RCADI Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de la Haye (Collected Courses of the
Hague Academy of International Law)
RGDIP Revue Générale de Droit International Public
SRSG Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations
UK United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
UKTS United Kingdom Treaty Series
UN United Nations
UNESCO The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNGA United Nations General Assembly
UNGA Res. United Nations General Assembly Resolution
UNHRC United Nations Human Rights Council
Unidroit International Institute for the Unification of Private Law
UNMIK United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo
UNTS United Nations Treaty Series
WH World Heritage
WHC World Heritage Committee
WHL World Heritage List
YBUN Yearbook of United Nations
YILC Yearbook of International Law Commission
 Introduction

The point about the relationship between ‘identity’ and ‘heritage’ is that they
are contingent upon one another: no identity without an act of remembrance
of some origin(s) and that, which is remembered as origin(s), is constructed
into the identity’s heritage. This makes ‘history’ not into an objective, inde-
pendent force, but identifies ‘history’ as a narrative. And as all narratives,
it is a created and therefore chosen one, chosen, that is, by and for particu-
lar criteria tied to fundamental decisions about human life (the existential
dimension); decisions which are themselves, in turn reflections of their place
and time (the social dimension) … As a modern endeavour, the question of
identity found its answer in the idea of the nation and in the national state as
its political, social, economic, and cultural expression.1

‘State succession’ and ‘cultural heritage’ are profoundly interconnected and reflec-
tive of each other. In fact, they both derive from the universal idea of ‘inheritance’
and express the continuity between the past and the present. Cultural heritage is
a powerful repository resource of wisdom intended to be preserved, enjoyed, and
enriched by the creations of present generations and handed down to future ones.2
It is a vehicle and key provider of collective memory and identity—the factors
conditioning processes of creation, dismemberment, and extinction of states, to
which legal and doctrinal frameworks are provided by the theory of state succes-
sion. The latter employs the conception of succession of legal persons and applies
it to different scenarios of replacement of states with regard to international obli-
gations of territory. These also involve the legal situation of individuals and groups
and their rights to cultural heritage.
Paradoxically, the historic and semantic affinities between the concepts of
cultural heritage and state succession do not alleviate their reciprocal relations.
Indeed, the role of cultural heritage as an assertion of one’s rights and legitimacy to
control a determined area may foster hostile attitudes and cause violent solutions

1 Peter Wagner, ‘From Monuments to Human Rights: Redefining “Heritage” in the Work of
the Council of Europe’, in Forward Planning: The Function of Cultural Heritage in Changing Europe
(Council of Europe, 2001), 9–28, at 17, available at <http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage/
resources/Publications/ECC-PAT%282001%29161_EN.pdf>, accessed on 15 January 2015.
2 Lyndell V. Prott and Patrick O’Keefe, ‘Cultural Heritage or Cultural Property?’, IJCP 1(1992)2,
307–20, at 311.
2 Introduction
to territorial disputes. Therefore, cultural heritage has often been exposed to
intentional destruction, suppression, and plunder—weapons which affect human
communities dramatically.3 The history of humankind is marked by an infinite
number of examples of systematic cultural cleansing performed in the name of
ethnic, national, and, more precisely, cultural ‘purity’, driven by ideological foun-
dations of power and statehood. In parallel, the symbolic meanings of cultural
heritage often lead to opposite tendencies aimed at restoring and/or (re)constructing
national identities and collective memories through physical ‘repatriation’ of cul-
tural treasures, despoiled or disparaged in the past.
The control, preservation, and enjoyment of cultural heritage do not however
constitute the sole concern of state sovereignty. Indeed, the protection of cultural
heritage has been subject to an extensive process of legislative internationaliza-
tion, motivated by the recognition of the fundamental role performed by cultural
manifestations in the preservation of human dignity and the continuous develop-
ment of all mankind. This book focuses on the legal effects of state succession on
tangible cultural heritage and explores the principles regulating interstate arrange-
ments with regard to such material. It does not consider the mechanisms for the
creation of states as regulated under international law nor the cultural reasons for
their dissolution or extinction. Neither is it about the removal and restitution of
cultural assets. The central problem that the book attempts to tackle is to what
extent the principles and practice of state succession reflect the evolution of the
concept of cultural heritage in international law. With this aim, the book recon-
structs iterations of international practice and legal doctrine of state succession
to tangible cultural heritage since the formation of European nation-states in the
nineteenth century, through the experience of decolonization, to the post-Cold
War dissolution of multinational states. It intends to identify shortcomings, prob-
lems, contradictions, possible common trends and standards, and discusses what
principles may be brought to bear on international practice in terms of normative
developments.

1. The Meaning and Relevance of Cultural Heritage

Intuitively, the general meaning of the concept ‘cultural heritage’ does not pose
any particular difficulties. For the purposes of the analysis conducted by this book,
however, its legal meaning requires some clarification.4 The term ‘cultural heritage’

3 Janet Blake, ‘On Defining the Cultural Heritage’, ICLQ 49(2000)1, 61–85, at 84.
4 For a doctrinal reconstruction of the evolution of the concept of cultural heritage in international
law, see Francesco Francioni, ‘A Dynamic Evolution of Concept and Scope: From Cultural Property
to Cultural Heritage’, in Abdulqawi A. Yusuf (ed), Standard-Setting in UNESCO. Normative Action
in Education, Science and Culture: Essays in Commemoration of the Sixtieth Anniversary of UNESCO,
Vol. 1 (UNESCO, 2007), 221–36; for the analysis of the importance of cultural roles and narra-
tives in shaping heritage, see Derek Gillman, The Idea of Cultural Heritage (2nd edn, CUP, 2010).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Milligrams of Chemical per
Liter of Air,
Chemical Intensity of Odor
Quite Very
Detectable Faint Strong
Noticeable Strong
Amyl acetate 0.039 0.053 0.067 0.478 1.326
Ethyl acetate 0.686 1.224 2.219 4.457 6.733
Amyl alcohol 0.225 0.300 0.442 1.581 2.167
Butyric acid 0.009 0.021 0.066 0.329 0.580
Valeric acid 0.029 0.119 0.523 1.394 4.036
Ethyl ether 5.833 10.167 14.944 17.6667 60.600
Butyl 0.018 0.037 0.055 0.120 0.177
mercaptan
Isobutyl 0.008 0.018 0.025 0.041 0.060
mercaptan
Ethyl 0.046 0.088 0.186 0.357 0.501
mercaptan
Propyl 0.006 0.020 0.028 0.043 0.054
mercaptan
Amyl thioether 0.001 0.007 0.0115 0.012 0.015
Ethyl thioether 0.012 0.042 0.107 0.223 0.271
Allyl 0.008 0.012 0.024 0.030 0.201
isothiocyanate
Methyl 0.015 0.039 0.067 0.108 0.144
isothiocyanate
Amyl 0.012 0.018 0.039 0.072 0.082
isovalerate
Carbon 4.533 9.222 10.024 31.333 38.444
tetrachloride
Chloroform 3.300 6.800 12.733 28.833 46.666
[40]
Iodoform 0.018
Artificial musk 0.00004[41]
Nitrobenzene 0.146 0.178 0.222 0.563 1.493
Phenyl 0.002 0.005 0.013 0.042 0.105
isocyanide
 Milligrams of Chemical per
Liter of Air,
Chemical Intensity of Odor
Quite Very
Detectable Faint Strong
Noticeable Strong
Pyridine 0.032 0.146 0.301 2.265 5.710
Methyl 0.100 0.145 0.179
1.526[42]
salicylate
Oil of 0.024 0.032 0.109 0.332 0.348
peppermint

Touch Method. This method consists of dipping a small glass rod drawn to a needle-
like end to the depth of 1 mm. in the compound and then quickly touching the skin. The
method is qualitative only.

Fig. 119.—Skin Irritant Vapor Apparatus.

Use of Solutions. Alcohol, kerosene, olive oil, carbon tetrachloride and other solvents
may be used for the purpose of determining the lowest effective concentration of a
substance, and for the determination of the relative skin irritant efficiencies of various
compounds. Since the skin irritants were scarcely ever used in this form in the field, that
is, in solution, the method is not as satisfactory as the vapor method.
 CHAPTER XXII
CHEMICAL WARFARE IN RELATION TO
STRATEGY AND TACTICS[43]

Fundamentals of War. The underlying fundamental principles of

Chemical Warfare are the same as for all other arms. Because of
this, it is worth while, and even necessary, to understand the
applications of Chemical Warfare, for us to go back and study the
work of the masters in war from the dawn of history down to the
present. When we do that we find that the underlying fundamental
principles of war remain unchanged. They are the same today as
they were in the time of Demosthenes, and as they will be 10,000
years from now. It is an axiom that the basis of success in war is the
ability to have at the decisive point at the decisive moment a more
effective force than that of the enemy. This involves men and
materials. It involves courage, fighting ability, and the discrimination
and energy of the opposing commanders.
Another fundamental is that no success is achieved without
positive action; passive resistance never wins. These are really
unchanging fundamentals. We may also say that the vigor of attack,
the speed of movement of men and supplies, and the thorough
training of men in the use of the weapons of war are unchanging
requirements, but outside of these everything is subject to the
universal law of change.
Grecian Phalanx and Roman Legion. The last word in the
development of human strength as a battle weapon was illustrated
by the Grecian phalanx with its sixteen rows of men, the spears of
each row being so adjusted that all reached to the front line. That
phalanx could not be stopped by any other human formation that met
it face to face. To overcome it required a Roman legion that could
open up and take the phalanx in the flank and rear. In the same way,
the elephants of the Africans and the chariots of the Romans with
their great swords swept all in front of them, until the Roman Legion,
opening up into smaller groups allowed the elephants and chariots to
pass through only to close in on them from the rear. Then and then
only did those engines of war disappear forever.
Frederick the Great. Frederick the Great, realizing that rapidity
of fire would win on the fields of battle where he fought, trained his
men to a precision of movement in close order probably never
achieved by any other troops in the world and then added to their
efficiency by teaching them to load and fire muskets at double the
rate of that of his adversaries. He was thus enabled to concentrate at
the decisive points a preponderance of power, which swept all his
enemies before him.
Napoleon. Napoleon achieved the same decisive power in a
different way. Realizing that his French troops could not stand the
rigorous training that the Prussians underwent, he trained them to
fight with great enthusiasm, to travel long distances with unheard of
swiftness, and to strike the enemy where least expected. He added
to that a concentration of artillery until then not thought of as possible
on the field of battle. He, of course, had also a genius for organizing
and keeping up his supply.
Grant and Jackson. Grant at Vicksburg and Stonewall Jackson
in the Shenandoah Valley and at Chancellorsville, achieved the
same results in different ways. In every case the fundamental
principle of concentrating the greatest force at the decisive point at
the vital moment in the battle remained the same. The methods for
achieving that end change with every age, and every commander of
world-wide renown developed something new or used an old method
in a new way. And that is the fundamental requirement for a
successful general. Hannibal, Hasdrubal, Cæsar, Napoleon,
Frederick the Great, Scott, Grant, and Jackson were all independent
thinkers. Each and every one dared to do something that every other
general and statesman of his time told him could not be done or that
would bring about disaster. They had the courage of their
convictions. They had the courage to think out new ideas and to
develop them, and then they had the courage to carry through those
convictions, not alone against the opposition of the enemy, but
against the opposition of their own people, both in the field and at
home. And we may be perfectly sure that in each case had these
men not done the things they did, they would have gone down to
oblivion just as has been the case with millions of others who tried
the usual methods in the usual way.
Chemical Warfare Latest Development. Chemical Warfare is
the latest development of war. So far as the United States is
concerned, it is considerably less than four years old. It is the most
scientific of all methods of fighting and also the most universally
applicable to all other methods of making war. The use of poisonous
and irritating gases in war is just as fundamental as the introduction
of gunpowder. In fact, they have an even wider application to war
than powder itself.
Necessity for New Methods. The idea that has been expressed
above is that the General Staff and the Army commander who sticks
to old and tried methods and who is unwilling to try with all his might
new developments, will never achieve any first class success. The
General Staffs and the generals of the future that win wars will be
the ones who make the most vigorous and efficient use of Chemical
Warfare materials. They cannot confine this use to the artillery, to
Aviation, to Special Gas Troops, or to any other single branch of the
war machine. They must make use of it in every way.
What Is Meant by Gas. It must be understood that by gases we
refer to materials that injure by being carried to the victim in the air.
The word “gas” has nothing whatever to do with the condition of the
material when in the shell, or the bombs, or the cylinders before
released. In every case, the gases are liquids or solids. When the
containers are broken open the liquids are volatilized either by the
gas pressure or by the force of the explosion of the bomb.
Groups of Gases. Chemical Warfare gases are divided into
three great groups. So far as their actual tactical use on the field of
battle is concerned, there are only two groups—persistent and non-
persistent. The third is the irritant group. This group affects the eyes
and the lungs so as to make the victim very uncomfortable if not
completely incapable of action in quantities so small as to cause no
injury that lasts more than a few hours. The quantities of such gases
needed to force the wearing of the mask is ¹/₁₀₀₀ that needed to
cause the same discomfort by the really poisonous gases, such as
phosgene. They, therefore, have a very great economic value in
harassing the enemy by forcing him to wear masks and to take other
precautions against gas. And no matter how perfect gas masks and
gas-proof clothing become, their long-continued use will cut down
physical vigor in an ever increasing ratio until in two or three days an
army may be totally incapacitated.
Smoke. In Chemical Warfare materials we have another great
group which will probably be equal in the future to the three groups
just mentioned. That is common smoke. Smoke has a variety of
uses. By the simple term “smoke” is meant smokes that are not
poisonous or irritating. Such smokes offer a perfect screen against
enemy vision, whether it is the man who sights the machine gun, the
observer in the lookout station, the cannoneer or even the aeroplane
observer. Every shot through impenetrable smoke is a shot in the
dark and has a tenth or even less chance of hitting its mark. Smoke
affords a means of decreasing the accuracy of firing, much the same
as night decreases it, without the inherent difficulties of night action.
Peace Strategy. The strategy of successful war involves the
strategy of peace. This has been true from the days when David with
his sling-shot slew Goliath, down to the present moment. We don’t
always think of it in connection with war, but back of every successful
war has been preparation during peace. It may have been incidental
preparation such as the training of men in fighting Indians, and in
creating public sentiment favorable to an independent nation that
preceded the Revolutionary War. It may, on the other hand, have
been a deeply studied policy such as that of the Germans prior to the
World War. They tried and generally quite successfully, to coördinate
all peace activities toward the day when a war should come that
would decide the future destiny of the German Empire, and it was
only because of that study in peace that Germany almost single-
handed was able to stand out for more than four years against the
world. The Allies came near losing that war because they did not
appreciate that the strategy of efficient war had to be preceded by
the strategy of peace.
Chemical Warfare an Example. Chemical warfare is a
particularly good example of this fact. Prior to the World War we had
acknowledged, and without any misgivings, that Germany led the
world in chemistry, that it produced most of the dyes in the world,
and to a large extent the medicines of the world. We felt that when
American needs showed it to be advisable we could take up
chemistry and chemical production and soon excel the Germans. We
had not reckoned on the suddenness of war.
We were just getting ready with chemicals, and that included
powders and high explosives, when the war closed. And yet we had
had not only eighteen months’ intensive preparation after our own
entry into the World War, but also the preparation of great steel
institutions and powder factories for nearly three years in
manufacturing supplies for the Allies who preceded us in the war.
Coal Tar. The World War opened the eyes of England, France
and Japan as well as the United States. Each of them today is
struggling to build up a great chemical industry as the very
foundation of successful war. Few of us realized prior to the World
War that in the black, sticky mess called coal tar from the coking of
coal or the manufacture of gas from coal and oil, was stored up most
of the high explosives used in war, the majority of the poison gases,
a great deal of the medicines of the world, and nearly all the dyes of
the world. The Germans realized it and in their control over methods
of using this material, together with the great commercial plants
developed to manufacture it, as well as with the trained personnel
that must go with such plants, were enabled, when blockaded on
land and sea, to furnish the munitions, the clothing and the food
needed for four and one-half years of war.
Great Chemical Industries. Thus it is that our Government
today is giving most serious heed to the need of building up a great
chemical industry in the United States. We have the raw materials.
We need only the factories and the trained men that go with them.
We need, of course, in addition to the development of the coal tar
industry, a production of heavy chemicals such as chlorine, sulfuric
acid and the like, all of which, however, are bound together by
community interest in peace as well as in war.
Reserves of Chemists. A part of the strategy of peace is the
card-indexing of the manpower of a nation divided into special
groups. In one great group must come those who have a knowledge
of chemistry and the chemical industries. That must be so worked
out that if war should come on a moment’s notice, within twenty-four
hours thereafter every chemist could be given his job, jobs extending
from the firing line to the research laboratory. And that is the task of
the Chemical Warfare Service. And right here it is well to know that
Congress, among the other features of its Army Reorganization Act
of June 4, 1920, provided for a separate Chemical Warfare Service
with these powers:

Chemical Warfare Powers

The Chief of the Chemical Warfare Service
under the authority of the Secretary of War shall be
charged with the investigation, development,
manufacture, or procurement and supply to the
Army of all smoke and incendiary materials, all toxic
gases, and all gas defense appliances; the
research, design, and experimentation connected
with chemical warfare and its material; and chemical
projectile filling plants and proving grounds; the
supervision of the training of the Army in chemical
warfare, both offensive and defensive, including the
necessary schools of instruction; the organization,
equipment, training, and operation of special gas
troops, and such other duties as the President may
from time to time prescribe.
Why Power Is Needed. These rather broad powers indicate that
Congress realized the unity of effort that must be made from the
research laboratory to the firing line if America was to keep pace with
Germany or any other nation in chemical warfare. Some have raised
the question as to whether a service should be both supply and
combat. Perhaps the best answer to that question is that so
organized Chemical Warfare was a success in the World War. It was
a success notwithstanding it had to be developed in the field six
months after our entry into the war and with no precedents, no
materials, no literature and no personnel. Through its officers on the
staffs of commanding generals of armies, corps and divisions, and
through its fighting gas troops in the front line, it was enabled to
direct its research, development and manufacture more quickly
along lines shown to be necessary by every change in battle
conditions, than any other service.
Chemical Warfare Troops. And why should there not be fighting
Chemical Warfare troops? They fight under exactly the same orders
as all other troops. They conform to the same general plan of battle.
They bring, however, to that battle experts in a line that it takes a
long time to master. And where has there been any live commander
in the world’s history who refused aid from any class of troops that
might help him win?
Specialists in War. The wars of the future will become more and
more wars of the specialists. Your Infantry may remain the backbone
of the fighting force, but if it has not the Artillery, the Aviation, the
Chemical Warfare, the Engineers, the tanks and other specialists to
back it up, it will be overcome by the army which has such
specialists. Indeed the specialist goes into the very organization of
the Infantry itself with its machine gun battalions, its tank battalions,
and as now proposed, the Infantry light howitzer companies.
Duties of Chemical Warfare Staff Officers. The Chemical
Warfare officers on the staff of armies, corps and divisions are there
for the purpose of giving expert advice as to the quantities of
chemical materials available, the best conditions for using them, and
the best way of avoiding the effects of enemy gas upon our own
troops. The conditions that must be kept in mind are so many that no
other officer can be expected to master and keep them if he does his
own work well. The general staff officers and commanding generals
will not have the time to even try to remember the actual effects of
clouds, wind, rain, trees, valleys, villages and plains upon each and
every gas. They must depend upon the Chemical Warfare officer for
accurate information along those lines, and if he cannot furnish it
they will have to secure some one who can. The history of war is
filled with the names of generals who failed because they could not
forget how to command a company. These Chemical Warfare
officers will also furnish all data as to supply of chemical warfare
materials, and will furnish the best information along lines of training,
whether for defensive or offensive use of gas.
Gas Used by all Arms. As before stated, we cannot confine the
use of gas to any one arm. We may then ask why, if it is applicable to
all arms, it should need special gas troops. Special gas troops are
for the purpose of putting off great quantities of chemical warfare
materials by special methods that are not applicable to any other
branch now organized or that any other branch has the time to
master. Long-range firing of gas by the artillery can be done just as
well by the artillery as by gas troops. Why? Because in the
mechanics of firing chemical ammunition there is no difference
whatever from the mechanics of firing high explosives or shrapnel.
The same will be true of gas rifle grenades and smoke candles in
use by the Infantry. The same will be true of the dropping of gas
bombs and the sprinkling of gas by the aeroplanes. In this
connection just remember that all of the army is trained in first aid,
but in addition we have our ambulance companies, our hospitals,
and our trained medical personnel.
Arguments Against Use of Gas. It has been many times
suggested since the Armistice that the use of poisonous gas in war
may be done away with by agreement among nations. The
arguments against the use of gas are that it is inhumane and that it
might be used against non-combatants, especially women and
children. The inhumanity of it is absolutely disproven by the results of
its use in the World War. The death rate from gas alone was less
than one-twelfth that from bullets, high explosives and other methods
of warfare. The disability rate for gas patients discharged was only
about one-fourth that for the wounded discharged for other causes.
The permanently injured is likewise apparently very much less than
from other causes.
 Humanity. No reliable statistics that we can get show that gas in
any way causes tuberculosis any more than a severe attack of
bronchitis or pneumonia causes tuberculosis. Since its principal
effects are upon the lungs and, therefore, hidden from sight, every
impostor is beginning to claim gassing as the reason for his wanting
War Risk benefits from the Government. We do not claim there may
not be some who are suffering permanent injuries from gas, and we
are trying very hard to find out from the manufacturers of poisonous
gases and allied chemicals if they have any authentic records of
such cases. So far the results indicate that permanent after-effects
are very rare.
As to non-combatants, certainly we do not contemplate using
poisonous gas against them, no more at least than we propose to
use high explosives in long-range guns or aeroplanes against them.
The use of the one against non-combatants is just as damnable as
the other and it is just as easy to refrain from using one as the other.
Gas Cannot be Abolished. As to the abandonment of poison
gas, it must be remembered that no powerful weapon of war has
ever been abandoned once it proved its power unless a more
powerful weapon was discovered. Poisonous gas in the World War
proved to be one of the most powerful of all weapons of war. For that
reason alone it will never be abandoned. It cannot be stopped by
agreement, because if you can stop the use of any one powerful
weapon of war by agreement you can stop all war by agreement. To
prepare to use it only in case it is used against you is on the same
plane as an order that was once upon a time issued to troops in the
Philippine Islands. That order stated in substance that no officer or
soldier should shoot a savage Moro, even were he approaching the
said officer or soldier with drawn kriss (sword), unless actually first
struck by such savage. Every officer preferred, if necessary, to face a
court-martial for disobedience of such an order rather than allow a
savage Moro with a drawn kriss to get anywhere near, let alone wait
until actually struck.
Let the world know that we propose to use gas against all troops
that may be engaged against us, and that we propose to use it to the
fullest extent of our ability. We believe that such a proposition will do
more to head off war than all the peace propaganda since time
began. It has been said that we should not use gas against those not
equipped with gas. Then why did we use repeating rifles and
machine guns against Negritos and Moros armed only with bows
and arrows or poor muskets and knives. Let us apply the same
common sense to the use of gas that we apply to all other weapons
of war.
Effect on World War Tactics. A very brief study of the effects of
chemical warfare materials on the strategy of the World War will
indicate its future. It began with clouds of chlorine let loose from
heavy cylinders buried under the firing trench. These took a long
time to install and then a wait, sometimes long, sometimes brief, for
a favorable wind, but even at that these cloud gas attacks created a
new method of fighting and forced new methods of protection. Gas
at once added a tremendous burden to supply in the field, to
manufacture, and to transportation, and in a short time even made
some decided changes in the tactics of the battle field itself.
Cloud Gas. The fact that the gas cloud looked like smoke is
responsible for the name “cloud gas.” Really all gases are nearly or
wholly invisible, but those which volatilize suddenly from the liquid
state so cool the air as to cause clouds of condensed water vapor.
The cloud obscured everything behind and in front of it. It led the
German to put off fake smoke clouds and attack through them, thus
taking the British at a tremendous disadvantage. Then and there
began a realization of the value of smoke. Cloud gas was also the
real cause of the highly organized raid that became common in
every army during the World War. The real purpose in the first raids,
carried out by means of the box barrage, was to find out whether or
not gas cylinders were being installed in trenches.
These raids finally became responsible, in a large measure, for
driving the old cloud gas off the field of battle. It did not, however,
stop the British from putting off cloud gas attacks in 1918 by
installing their gas cylinders on their light railway cars and then
letting the gas loose from the cylinders while still on the cars. This
enabled them to move their materials to the front and put off gas
attacks on a few hours’ notice when the wind was right.
 Toxic Smoke Candles. To-day we have poisonous smokes that
exist in solid form and that are perfectly safe to handle until a fuse is
lighted. The so-called candles will be light enough so that one man
can carry them. With these, cloud gas can be put off on an hour’s
notice when wind and weather conditions are right, no matter how
fast the army may be moving and whether on the advance or in
retreat. Cloud gas will usually be put off at night because the cloud
cannot be seen, because then men are tired and sleepy, and all but
the most highly trained become panicky. Under those conditions the
greatest casualties result. The steadiness of wind currents also aids
cloud gas attacks at night.
Value of Training in Peace. And this brings up the value of
training in peace. We are frequently asked, “Why do you need
training with masks in peace; why do you need training with actual
gas in peace; cannot these things be taught on short notice in war?”
The answer is, “No!” Nothing will take the place of training in peace.
All of us recall that early in the war the Germans spread
broadcast charges that the Allies were using unfair and inhumane
methods of fighting because they brought the Ghurka with his terrible
knife from Asia and the Moroccan from Africa. And we all know that
after a time the Germans ceased saying anything about these
troops. What was the cause? They were not efficient. Just as the
Negro will follow a white officer over the top in daylight and fight with
as much energy and courage and many times as much efficiency as
the white man, he cannot stand the terrors of the night, and the
same was true of the Ghurka and the Moroccan.
All the Allies soon recognized that fact as shown by their drawing
those troops almost entirely away from the fighting lines. In some
cases dark-skinned troops were kept only as shock troops to be
replaced by the more highly developed Caucasian when the line had
to be held for days under the deadly fire of the counter attack. The
German idea, and our own idea prior to the World War, was that
semi-savages could stand the rigors and terrors of war better than
the highly sensitive white man. War proved that to be utterly false.
 Familiarity with Gas Necessary. The same training that makes
for advancement in science, and success in manufacture in peace,
gives the control of the body that holds the white man to the firing
line no matter what its terrors. A great deal of this comes because
the white man has had trained out of him nearly all superstition. He
has had drilled into him for hundreds of years that powder and high
explosive can do certain things and no more. If the soldier is not to
be afraid of gas we must give him an equal knowledge of it, its
dangers, and its limitations. The old adage says, “Familiarity breeds
contempt.” Perhaps that is not quite true, but we all know that it
breeds callousness and forgetfulness; that the man manufacturing
dynamite or other more dangerous explosives takes chances that we
who do not engage in such manufacture shudder at.
Edgewood Chemists Not Afraid. All of this has direct
application to training with chemical warfare materials in peace. We
believe that all opposition to chemical warfare today can be divided
into two classes—those who do not understand it and those who are
afraid of it—ignorance and cowardice. Our chemists at Edgewood
Arsenal are every day toying with the most powerful chemical
compounds; toying with mixtures they know nothing of, not knowing
what instant they may induce an explosion of some fearful poisonous
gas. But they have learned how to protect themselves. They have
learned that if they stop breathing and get out of that place and on
the windward side they are safe. They have been at that work long
enough to do that automatically.
Staff Officers Must Think of Gas in Every Problem. The staff
officer must train the army man in peace with all chemical warfare
materials or he will lose his head in war and become a casualty. The
general staff officers and commanding generals must so familiarize
themselves with these gases and their general use that they will
think them in all their problems just exactly as they think of the
Infantry, or of the Cavalry, or of the tanks or of the Artillery in every
problem. On them rests the responsibility that these gases are used
properly in battle. If plans before the battle do not include these
materials for every arm and in the proper quantities of the proper
kinds they will not be used properly on the field of battle and on them
will rest the responsibility.
They are not expected to know all the details of gases and their
uses, but they will be expected to consider the use of gas in every
phase of preparing plans and orders and then to appeal to the
chemical warfare officers for the details that will enable them to use
the proper gases and the proper quantities. They cannot go into
those details any more than they can go into the details of each
company of infantry. If they try to do that they are a failure as staff
officers.
Effect of Masks on Troops. The very best of masks cause a
little decrease in vision, a little increase in breathing resistance, and
a little added discomfort in warm weather, and hence the soldier
must learn to use them under all conditions. But above all in the
future he must be so accustomed to the use of the mask that he will
put it on automatically—almost in his sleep as it were. We have tear
gases, today, so powerful and so sudden in their action that it is
doubtful if one man out of five who has had only a little training can
get his mask on if subject to the tear gas alone—that is, with tear gas
striking him with full force before he is aware of it.
Effectiveness of Gas in World War. In the past war more than
27 out of every 100 Americans killed and wounded suffered from gas
alone. You may say that many of the wounds were light. That is true;
but those men were put out of the battle line for from one to four
months—divisions, corps and armies almost broken up—and yet the
use of gas in that war was a child’s game compared to what it will be
in the future.
It is even said that many of them were malingerers. Perhaps they
were, but do you not suppose that there were at least as many
malingerers among the enemy as there were in our own ranks?
Furthermore, if you can induce malingering it is a proper method of
waging war, and unless our boasted ability is all a myth we should
have fewer malingerers under conditions of battle than any other
nation.
 Strategy of Gas at Picardy Plains. Let us go back now to the
strategy of gas in war. Following the cloud gas came tear gases and
poisonous gases in shells and bombs. A little advance in tactics here
and a little there, the idea, though, in the early days being only to
produce casualties. As usual the Germans awoke first to the fact that
gas might be used strategically and on a large scale. And thus we
find that ten days before he began the battle of Picardy Plains he
deluged many sections of the front with mustard gas. He secured
casualties by the thousands, but he secured something of greater
importance. He wore out the physical vigor and lowered the morale
of division after division, thus paving the way for the break in the
British Army which almost let him through to the sea.
He used non-persistent gases up to the very moment when his
own men reached the British lines, thereby reducing the efficiency of
British rifle and artillery fire and saving his own men. And this is just
a guide to the future. A recent writer in the Field Artillery Journal
states that gas will probably not be used in the barrage because of
its probable interference with the movement of our own troops. In
making that statement he forgot the enemy and you cannot do that if
you expect to win a war.
Gas in Barrages. In the future we must expect the enemy to be
in a measure as well prepared in chemical warfare as we are. Let us
consider the special case of our own men advancing to the attack
behind a rolling barrage. We will consider also that the wind is
blowing toward our own troops. Obviously under those conditions the
wind will blow our own gas back onto our troops. Will we use gas in
that barrage? We certainly will! Because with the wind blowing
toward our own troops we have the exact ideal condition that the
enemy wants for his use of gas. He will then be deluging our
advancing troops with all the gas he can fire, in addition to high
explosives and shrapnel. Our men must wear masks and take every
precaution against enemy gas. How foolish it would be not to fire gas
at the enemy under those conditions. If we did not fire gas we would
leave him entirely free from wearing masks, and entirely free from
taking every other precaution against gas while our own troops were
subject to all the difficulties of gas. No, we will fire gas at him in just
as great quantities as we consider efficient. And that is just a sample
of what is coming on every field of battle—gas used on both sides by
every method of putting it over that can be devised.
World War Lessons Only Guide Posts. Example of Book
Worms. Every lesson taught by the World War must be taken as a
guide-post on the road to future success in war. No use of gas or
other materials in the past war must be taken as an exact pattern for
use in any battle of the future. Too much study, too much attention to
the past, may cause that very thing to happen. A certain general
commanding a brigade in the Argonne told me just recently that
while the battle was going on a general staff officer called him on the
telephone and asked him what the situation was. He gave it to him.
The staff officer then asked, “What are you doing?” and he told him.
The staff officer replied, “Why, the book doesn’t say to do it that way
under such conditions.” There you have the absurd side of too much
study and too close reliance on details of the past.
The battle field is a perfect kaleidoscope. The best we can hope
to get out of books is a guide—something that we will keep in our
minds to help us decide the best way to meet certain situations. He
who tries to remember a particular position taught in his school with
the idea of applying that to actual use in battle is laying the
foundation for absolute failure. Your expert rifleman never thinks
back when he goes to fire a shot as to just what his instructor told
him or what the book said. He just concentrates his mind on the
object to be attained, using so far as comes to him facts he has
learned from books or teachers. Your general and your staff must do
the same.
Infantry Use of Gas. A few words about how we will use gas in
the future. We will start with the Infantry. The Infantry as such will
use gas in only two or three ways. They will use some gas in rifle
grenades, and a great deal more smoke. We speak of the rifle
grenade because in our opinion the hand grenade is a thing of the
past. We do not believe there will ever be used in the future any
grenade that is not applicable to the rifle. The Infantry will probably
often carry large quantities of gas in the shape of the toxic smoke
candle. These materials being solids may be shot up by rifles or
artillery fire, run over by trucks or tractors, or trampled and still be
harmless. It is only when the fuses are lighted and the material
driven off by heat that they are dangerous. In using these candles
under these conditions you must have sufficient chemical warfare
officers and soldiers to get the necessary control indicated by the
sun, wind, woods, fogs, ravines and the like.
Cavalry Use of Gas. Next consider the Cavalry. The Cavalry will
use gas practically the same as the Infantry. The chemical warfare
troops will accompany the Cavalry with Stokes’ mortars or other
materials to fire gases into small enemy strongholds that may be
encountered whether machine gun nests, mountain tops, woods or
villages. They will do this either against savages or civilized people.
Methods of making these materials mobile for that purpose are
already well under way. If against savages and one does not want to
kill them, use tear gases—no better method of searching out hidden
snipers in mountain tops, among rocks, or villages, in ravines, or in
forests was ever invented.
Use of Gas by Tanks. The tanks will employ gas in the same
way as the Infantry with the possibility, however, that they may be
used to carry large quantities of gas on caterpillar tractors where
otherwise it would be difficult to move the gas. This is not a certainty,
but is a situation promising enough to warrant further study.
Artillery Use of Gas. Your Artillery will fire gas and smoke in
every caliber of gun. There is a tendency now to limit gas to certain
guns and howitzers and to limit smoke to even a smaller number of
guns. This is a mistake that we are going to recognize. A very careful
study of the records of the war show that more casualties were
produced several times over by a thousand gas shells than by a
thousand high explosive or shrapnel. And that is because gas has an
inherent permanence that no other weapon of war has.
Permanency of Gas. The bullet whistles through the air and
does its work or misses. The high explosive shell bursts, hurling its
fragments that in a few seconds settle to earth, and its work is done.
The shrapnel acts in the same way, but when one turns loose a shell
of gas it will kill and injure the same as the high explosive shell and
in the same length of time and in addition for some minutes
thereafter. Even with the non-persistent gases, it will continue on its
way, causing death or injury to every unprotected animal, man or
beast in its path. With the persistent gases, the materials from each
shell may persist for days.
Variety of Uses of Gas. This brings up the point of the great
variety of uses to which gas can be put. The non-persistent gas may
be used at all times where one wants to get rid of it in a few
moments—the persistent gas wherever one wants to keep the
enemy under gas for days at a time. We will use mustard gas on
strong points in the advance, on flanks, on distant areas one will not
expect to be reached, and as our own protection of masks and
clothing increases toward perfection we will use it on the very fields
you expect to cross. Why? Because we will be firing it at the enemy
for days before hand and we will cause him trouble all those days
while we ourselves will encounter it for a few hours at the most. So
do not think that mustard gas is only going to be used in defense in
the future.
Solid Mustard Gas and Long-Range Guns. We will come to
use chemical warfare materials just as high explosives and bullets
are used today, even though at times we do suffer an occasional
loss from our own weapons. Our Artillery in long-range guns where
we want destruction will fill each shell with say 15 per cent gas and
85 per cent high explosive. We have a solid mustard gas that may
be so used. We have tremendously powerful tear gases and irritating
gases that may be so used. Being solids they do not affect the
ballistic qualities of the shell. And what an added danger will mustard
gas from every shell bring against railroad centers, rest villages,
cantonments, cross-roads and the like. The results will be too great
for any force to overlook such use.
Tear Gases in Shrapnel. We will probably use tear gas in most,
if not all, of our shrapnel. The general idea now is that we should not
put tear gas in all shrapnel because under certain conditions it will be
blown back and harass our own troops. But as was said before, we
must remember that the enemy will be using gas at all times as well
as ourselves, and hence if we limit ourselves in any line we give the
enemy an advantage. This use of gas by the Artillery will extend to
all classes of guns—seacoast, field, turret and what not.
Use of Gas by Air Service. Bombs. Let us next consider the Air
Service. We naturally think of dropping gas in bombs when we speak
of the use of gas by the Air Service. Gas will so be used and it will be
used in bombs of perhaps a thousand pounds or even a ton in
weight, at least 50 per cent of which will be gas. Such gases,
however, will be of the non-persistent type—phosgene or similar
ones. They will be used against concentration camps and cross-
roads, on troops on the road in columns; against railroad centers and
rest areas; in other words, against groups of men or animals.
Sprinkling. But that is not even the beginning of the use of gas by
aeroplanes. Mustard gas, which is one-third again as heavy as
water, and which volatilizes far slower than water, may be sprinkled
through a small opening such as a bung hole in a tank that simply
lets liquid float out. The speed of the aeroplane will atomize it. In this
way, gas can be sprinkled over whole areas that must be crossed in
battle. The Lewisite, of which we have heard considerable, will be
used. It is less persistent than the mustard gas, but like mustard gas
it produces casualties by burning. Unlike mustard gas, however, the
burns from a quantity equal to three drops will usually cause death.
The material can be made up by hundreds, even thousands, of tons
per month.
We are working on clothing that will keep it out just as we have
been and are working on clothing that will protect against mustard
gas. But these gases are so powerful that if any opening be left in
the clothing the gas will get through, so that even if we get clothing
that will protect, it must cover every inch of the skin from head to
foot. Besides the mask must be worn at all times.
Consider the burden put on any army in the field that would have
to continually wear such complete protection. What a strain on the
mentality of the men! As before said, to endure it at all we must train
our men to think of such conditions, to face them in peace, and in
order to do so we must actually use gas. Just as in the World War
the highly trained Caucasian outdistanced the savage in endurance,