Just a few decades in, the 21st century has witnessed acts of breathtaking cultural destruction across West Asia, from Afghanistan’s Bamiyan Buddhas to ancient sites in Iraq and Syria. Now, Iran, another country rich in historical and archaeological sites, is under attack, with U.S. and Israeli bombs obliterating military targets and infrastructure and killing the country’s leaders, along with nearby civilians. But because the Iranian government has largely blocked the internet, reports of damage to cultural heritage sites are scarce.
“Even if I were to call up the Tehran museum director I know, he probably couldn’t say anything,” says Michael Danti, a near eastern archaeologist and director of the Iraq Heritage Stabilization Program at the University of Pennsylvania. But according to the country’s Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts, at least 56 cultural sites, monuments, and museums have been damaged since U.S. and Israeli attacks began on 28 February.
Central Tehran’s Golestan Palace—an ornate, 18th century fusion of Persian and European design—suffered broken windows, mirrors, and doors from air blasts and debris from Israeli and U.S. missiles. Social media posts also show fallen ceilings and shattered glass within the Sa’dabad Complex in northern Tehran, a cluster of palaces and museums established by the Qajar shahs in the early 19th century.
Southwest of Tehran, a nearby missile blast damaged the third century Shapur Khast Castle in Khorramabad and injured five museum employees, according to Iranian reports. And in the city of Isfahan—whose underground nuclear laboratories reportedly house some 60% of the country’s enriched uranium—provincial authorities say 21 cultural sites have taken damage, including the 17th century Chehel Sotoun Palace, famed for its frescoes, and the Masjed-e Jāmé, Iran’s oldest Friday mosque.
Then there’s the damage to countless urban sites. “Most of these towns that we’re bombing are filled with historic houses and a lot of other cultural heritage that flies under the radar,” Danti says.
So far all of the damage appears to be collateral—in part because heritage organizations have learned the importance of preparedness from other recent conflicts. As war broke out in the Persian Gulf, UNESCO sent all warring parties the geographic coordinates of Iranian heritage sites designated for protection, including Golestan Palace. Iran is also taking measures to protect its moveable heritage, including boxing up museum items for safekeeping and installing the Blue Shield logo–designed to indicate protected heritage–on more than 100 cultural monuments. “[T]here is a proactive attitude from the local experts and the local heritage workers, to protect the movable [artifacts],” says Alessandra Peruzzetto, the World Monument Fund’s senior regional director for the Middle East and North Africa.
But limited access to on-the-ground reporting and satellite imagery has hamstrung independent verification of damage, says Patty Gerstenblith, a professor of law at DePaul University and chair of the Blue Shield International Working Group on Countering Trafficking of Cultural Objects. Peruzzetto is keeping tabs as best she can, scouring official Iranian websites and social media accounts for photos and videos of damage.
Making matters worse, decades of sanctions have left Iran academically isolated, with fewer trusted connections existing between Iranian scholars and the global research community. “Even though there were sanctions on Iraq, still, you’d go to a conference, particularly in Europe, and there’d be Iraqi archaeologists and scholars there,” says Gerstenblith, who also serves as president of the Board of Directors of the U.S. Committee of the Blue Shield. That’s not the case in Iran.
It is unclear whether Israel and the United States are trying to avoid directly damaging Iranian heritage sites, but U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened to bomb them before. Following the U.S. assassination of the Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in January 2020, Trump wrote in a social media post that “if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have … targeted 52 Iranian sites … some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD.” U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently said the traditional rules of engagement in war—which include the protection of heritage sites—were “stupid.”
For Gerstenblith, the implication that such rules might now be ignored is “deeply troubling.” She notes that in previous conflicts, such as the 2003 Iraq War, there was at least some recognition of the importance of protecting cultural heritage. Although mistakes were made, there was no outright dismissal of the laws of armed conflict. The U.S., Israel, and Iran are all parties to the 1954 Hague convention, which requires that cultural sites be protected during conflict.
Iran’s best known UNESCO World Heritage Sites, the ancient Persian capitals of Persepolis and Pasargadae, are at low risk of collateral damage, as both sites are far away from military installations. But others are in the thick of the conflict. Elements of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard are known to locate themselves near heritage sites, under the belief that the U.S. and Israel will deliberately avoid attacking these monuments—a restraint that Ali Mousavi, a Pourdavoud research scholar and adjunct assistant professor of Iranian archaeology in the University of California, Los Angeles’s Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, urges the countries to maintain.
“There is no excuse for bombing a monument, a mosque, or a caravanserai under the pretext that there is a sort of military camp there,” he says. “There’s no excuse.”
And as bombs continue to fall on Iran, experts are also resigned to an uptick in looting of archaeological sites across the country. “Whenever there’s a spate of insecurity [or] instability in Iran, there’s a big increase in archaeological looting,” Danti says. There’s plenty of it already going on … but it’s going to get a lot worse.”
Heritage experts are also mourning the impact of war on their Iranian colleagues. “My position in this war is that damages to cultural heritage sites are limited compared to human casualties and destruction of Iran's infrastructures,” Mousavi says.
Peruzzetto thinks the country’s heritage will help sustain it through the turmoil. The country recently celebrated the ancient new year holiday of Nowruz, a pre-Islamic tradition that has survived the mullahs. Iranians “are really strong on their cultural heritage,” she says. “I hope it will also bring peace.”
Facts Only
U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iran began on 28 February, targeting military sites and infrastructure.
At least 56 cultural heritage sites, monuments, and museums in Iran have been damaged, per Iran’s Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts.
Golestan Palace in central Tehran, an 18th-century site, suffered broken windows, mirrors, and doors from missile blasts.
The Sa’dabad Complex in northern Tehran, a 19th-century cluster of palaces and museums, sustained fallen ceilings and shattered glass.
Shapur Khast Castle, a third-century site in Khorramabad, was damaged by a nearby missile blast, injuring five museum employees.
In Isfahan, 21 cultural sites were damaged, including the 17th-century Chehel Sotoun Palace and Masjed-e Jāmé, Iran’s oldest Friday mosque.
UNESCO provided geographic coordinates of protected Iranian heritage sites to warring parties before the conflict escalated.
Iran has marked over 100 cultural monuments with the Blue Shield logo and secured movable artifacts in museums.
U.S. President Donald Trump threatened in January 2020 to target 52 Iranian sites, including cultural heritage locations, in retaliation for potential Iranian strikes.
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth criticized traditional rules of engagement, including heritage site protections, as “stupid.”
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has positioned elements near heritage sites, possibly to deter attacks.
Experts anticipate increased looting of archaeological sites due to instability caused by the conflict.
Iran celebrated the ancient Nowruz holiday amid the conflict, highlighting cultural resilience.
Executive Summary
Since late February, U.S. and Israeli airstrikes targeting military and infrastructure sites in Iran have resulted in collateral damage to at least 56 cultural heritage sites, according to Iran’s Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts. Notable sites affected include Tehran’s Golestan Palace and Sa’dabad Complex, both historic royal compounds, as well as the 17th-century Chehel Sotoun Palace and Masjed-e Jāmé mosque in Isfahan. The Shapur Khast Castle in Khorramabad also sustained damage, with reports of injuries to museum staff. While Iran has taken measures to protect movable artifacts and mark heritage sites with the Blue Shield emblem, independent verification of damage remains limited due to internet restrictions and academic isolation caused by decades of sanctions. Experts warn of increased looting of archaeological sites amid the instability, echoing patterns seen in previous conflicts in the region. The U.S. and Israel, along with Iran, are signatories to the 1954 Hague Convention, which mandates the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflict. However, recent statements by U.S. officials, including threats to target Iranian cultural sites, have raised concerns about adherence to these norms. The conflict’s broader human toll—including civilian casualties and infrastructure destruction—overshadows the cultural losses, though heritage experts emphasize the role of cultural identity in Iran’s resilience.
The situation reflects tensions between military objectives and the protection of cultural heritage, with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard reportedly positioning near heritage sites, possibly assuming they would deter attacks. While some sites like Persepolis and Pasargadae remain at low risk due to their remote locations, urban areas with dense historical fabric face greater vulnerability. The academic and diplomatic isolation of Iran complicates efforts to assess and mitigate damage, leaving global heritage organizations reliant on fragmented reports from official and social media sources.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative highlights a critical tension between modern warfare and the protection of cultural heritage, framing the damage in Iran as both a collateral consequence of military strikes and a potential harbinger of eroding norms. The article credibly documents specific instances of damage, leverages expert testimony to underscore the risks of looting and academic isolation, and contextualizes the conflict within international legal frameworks like the Hague Convention. It also gives voice to Iranian scholars and heritage workers, humanizing the stakes beyond mere structural losses. The inclusion of U.S. officials’ dismissive remarks about heritage protections adds urgency to the argument, suggesting a paradigm shift in how cultural sites are valued—or devalued—in contemporary geopolitics.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity (limited independent verification due to internet restrictions), ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (U.S. officials oscillating between dismissing heritage protections as "stupid" while technically adhering to Hague Convention obligations).
The root cause of this narrative lies in the clash between state sovereignty and global heritage stewardship, exacerbated by decades of sanctions that have severed Iran from international academic networks. The assumption that cultural sites should be sacrosanct in war is being tested by a geopolitical environment where military necessity and symbolic retaliation increasingly override legal and moral constraints. This echoes historical patterns of cultural destruction in conflicts, from the Balkans to Syria, where heritage becomes both a casualty and a weapon.
The implications for human agency are profound: Iranian civilians bear the dual burden of physical destruction and the erosion of their cultural identity, while global heritage organizations grapple with enforcement gaps in international law. The second-order consequences include the normalization of cultural heritage as a bargaining chip in warfare, the acceleration of illicit antiquities trafficking, and the further marginalization of Iranian scholars from global discourse.
Bridge questions: How might the international community enforce heritage protections when key actors openly dismiss them? What role do sanctions play in isolating cultural institutions from global support networks? Would the presence of independent observers on the ground change the strategic calculus of targeting near heritage sites?
Counterstrike scan: A coordinated influence campaign would likely amplify emotional appeals (e.g., framing cultural destruction as an existential threat to Iranian identity) while omitting nuanced legal debates or the Revolutionary Guard’s use of heritage sites as shields. The actual content avoids overt manipulation, presenting a measured account of damage and expert concerns. However, the selective inclusion of U.S. officials’ provocative statements—without equivalent Iranian military justifications—could subtly skew perceptions of culpability. This does not rise to the level of a structured attack but warrants awareness of framing biases.
Sentinel — Human
The article exhibits strong human authorship signals, including natural stylistic variation, emotional emphasis, and specific expert attributions, with no detectable synthetic patterns.