Introduction
Following the attacks carried out by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran, which began on the morning of 28 February 2026, a number of Iran’s cultural and historical sites sustained damage as a result of either direct strikes or blast waves generated by explosions in their vicinity. In several instances, the affected sites were places whose historical and cultural significance extended far beyond that of mere physical structures and constituted part of the symbolic foundations of Iran’s identity and civilization.
Within the framework of Iran’s millennia-old history—from ancient periods such as the Achaemenid and Sasanian eras to the Islamic period—these sites have served as carriers of civilizational continuity and reflections of the cultural identity of the Iranian people. Beyond their historical functions, they also maintain an active presence in the cultural life of contemporary Iranian society. Many of these sites are closely connected to collective rituals, religious and national occasions, and patterns of urban life, functioning as spaces for the production of meaning and the strengthening of social bonds.
The continued presence of these monuments within the lived experiences of citizens—from the holding of religious ceremonies in historic spaces to their role in the visual and symbolic memory of cities—has meant that damage inflicted upon them is perceived not merely as a physical loss but also as a disruption in the continuity of Iran’s cultural experience. Among the reported incidents are damages sustained by several historical structures in Isfahan and Tehran resulting from blast waves and military attacks occurring in their vicinity.
Culture and Cultural Identity
Culture may be understood as the collective body of values, beliefs, traditions, language, narratives, rituals, and shared ways of life that are transmitted from one generation to another through education, social experience, collective memory, and everyday interactions. In this sense, culture is not merely a collection of customs or symbols; rather, it constitutes the framework through which individuals and societies understand themselves, interpret their past, and define their relationship with others and the surrounding world.
Accordingly, cultural identity in this report is employed not as an independent theoretical framework but as a conceptual lens through which the relationship between cultural heritage, historical memory, and collective belonging may be understood.
Cultural identity is composed of several principal elements:
- First, historical memory: the collection of narratives, experiences, and symbols that keep the past of a society alive in the consciousness of successive generations;
- Second, symbolic capital: those monuments, personalities, structures, rituals, and symbols that carry meanings for a nation extending beyond their mere material or historical value;
- Third, collective belonging: the sense that connects individuals to a shared history, territory, language, and common experience;
- Fourth, national narrative: the image a society constructs of its historical trajectory, sufferings, achievements, civilizational continuity, and place in the world;
- Fifth, tangible and intangible heritage: including monuments, historical sites, architectural works, rituals, literature, language, traditions, and culturally embedded ways of life;
- Finally, international representation: culture itself forms part of cultural identity because cultural heritage shapes the image of a nation on the global stage and enables that society to be recognized through its history, art, architecture, and civilization.
In the case of Iran, these elements have emerged through a profound interconnection between the country’s pre-Islamic ancient history, Islamic traditions, the Persian language, literary heritage, collective rituals, and historical monuments. Sites such as Persepolis, Naqsh-e Jahan Square, the Golestan Palace, the historic bazaars of Tehran, Isfahan, and Tabriz, ancient mosques, and the historic urban fabrics of cities including Isfahan, Yazd, Kerman, Shiraz, Hamadan, Tabriz, and Tehran, together with traditions such as Nowruz, the Muharram and Safar commemorations, poetry recitations, Hafez-reading gatherings, and narratives derived from the Shahnameh, are not merely separate cultural elements. Rather, they constitute interwoven components of the historical memory and collective self-awareness of Iranians.
These elements enable society to remember its past, preserve connections between generations, and construct a sense of historical and civilizational continuity.
From this perspective, cultural heritage cannot be understood merely as “historical property” or “architectural works.” A historical monument, when it maintains an active presence within collective memory, social rituals, urban life, and a society’s national narrative, becomes part of that society’s cultural and social identity.
For example, Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Isfahan is not simply an architectural complex registered on Iran’s national heritage list and the UNESCO World Heritage List, nor is it merely a tourist destination. Rather, its significance derives from its connection to Safavid history, Iranian-Islamic art, urban life, marketplaces, mosques, collective rituals, and the global image of Isfahan. Likewise, historic bazaars in different cities embody not only economic functions but also social memory, interpersonal relationships, everyday interactions, and the continuity of urban traditions.
Consequently, damage to such spaces cannot be reduced to the destruction of stonework, mirrorwork, or stucco decorations. Rather, it may result in the weakening of a society’s historical memory and symbolic capital.
Within such a framework, historical sites and cultural heritage perform multiple and interrelated functions. These sites can strengthen collective dignity and self-esteem, as society perceives itself through them as the heir to an ancient history, artistic tradition, and civilization. Furthermore, by creating connections between the past and everyday life, they provide society with stability, meaning, and a sense of continuity.
At the same time, cultural heritage shapes both the internal and external image of a society. Internally, it helps members of society answer the question, “Who are we?” Externally, it introduces and represents that society before others. Moreover, historical sites can assist a society in explaining its place in relation to other communities and in demonstrating, through its history, art, architecture, and civilizational narratives, its contribution to the shared heritage of humanity.
Finally, cultural heritage may also play a role in either preserving or challenging structures of power. The control, destruction, reinterpretation, or appropriation of cultural symbols has always been linked to questions of power, domination, and social representation.
The significance of this issue becomes even more apparent in the context of the recent military attacks on Iran. When cultural and historical sites are damaged as a result of direct attacks or blast waves, the consequences do not remain confined to the level of physical destruction. Such damage can affect cultural security, historical myths and epics, society’s emotional connection to its past, a nation’s historical image of itself, and even the international representation of Iranian culture.
This is particularly true in a society such as Iran, whose cultural identity is deeply rooted in historical continuity, civilizational heritage, language, literature, architecture, and collective rituals. In such a context, the destruction or damage of cultural heritage may disrupt the mechanisms through which meaning, identity, and belonging are reproduced and transmitted.
Therefore, in this report, cultural heritage is understood as one of the principal foundations of cultural identity—a foundation through which society remembers its past, gives meaning to its present, and imagines its future as a continuation of a shared historical narrative.
Accordingly, any damage inflicted upon cultural heritage, particularly in situations of armed conflict, must be examined not only from material and legal perspectives but also through the lens of its identity-related, social, and symbolic consequences. This consideration provides the basis for the next discussion: namely, that the destruction of cultural heritage may simultaneously constitute the destruction or weakening of a society’s cultural identity.
Destruction of Heritage; Destruction of Identity
As discussed above, the destruction of cultural heritage cannot be understood solely as the loss or damage of a monument, archaeological site, or historical artifact. Heritage is not merely a material reality; rather, it derives its significance through a profound relationship with people, memory, belonging, and identity.
Whenever a historical site maintains an active presence within the social life, collective memory, and national narrative of a society, its value transcends architecture, antiquity, or artistic features and becomes part of that society’s universe of meaning. From this perspective, damage to cultural heritage is, in essence, damage to one of the principal foundations through which cultural identity is reproduced.
This issue assumes particular importance in the Iranian context, as a significant portion of Iranian society’s historical self-awareness is formed through its civilizational, architectural, literary, religious, and ritual heritage. Consequently, damage to such sites during military attacks cannot be understood merely as damage to historical monuments; rather, it may weaken one of the key points through which society remains connected to its historical memory, symbolic capital, and cultural narrative.
Accordingly, if a site such as Naqsh-e Jahan Square suffers damage as a result of a direct attack, blast waves, or other military-related impacts, the consequences extend far beyond the physical realm. Such damage may affect one of the most important symbols of Iran’s historical memory and symbolic capital—a symbol that occupies a prominent place both in the historical self-understanding of Iranians and in the global representation of Iranian culture.
As a result, damage to such a site may weaken, at the domestic level, society’s sense of historical continuity and cultural self-image, while at the international level it may undermine part of Iran’s symbolic standing within the cultural memory of humanity. Naqsh-e Jahan Square contributes to the historical and cultural self-image of Iranians domestically and simultaneously serves as one of the most widely recognized symbols of Iranian culture and civilization internationally.
From this perspective, the destruction of cultural heritage may generate several significant consequences.
First, it may contribute to the erosion of historical memory, since historical monuments serve as focal points of collective remembrance and tangible markers of the past.
Second, it may weaken a society’s symbolic capital, as prominent monuments and heritage sites possess meanings that extend far beyond their material value.
Third, it may disrupt collective belonging, as individuals connect themselves to a shared history, territory, and narrative through these very places.
Fourth, it may render a nation’s historical self-image more vulnerable, since societies reconstruct part of their historical self-understanding through cultural heritage.
Fifth, it may affect the international representation of Iranian culture, as major historical monuments constitute one of the most important means through which Iran’s civilization becomes visible and recognized on the global stage.
Accordingly, the destruction of cultural heritage during wartime must always be analyzed as something that extends beyond material loss. Contemporary history offers numerous examples—including the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan and the devastation of archaeological sites in Syria and Iraq—demonstrating that cultural heritage can become a symbolic target during periods of violence and conflict.
Such destruction, even when apparently directed at stone, brick, domes, inscriptions, or archaeological sites, may at a deeper level convey messages of erasure, humiliation, or the weakening of a community’s cultural identity. For this reason, contemporary legal and human rights discourse increasingly understands cultural heritage not merely as property or objects, but as an integral part of people’s relationship with their past, memory, and identity.
Within the context of the recent attacks on Iran, damage to cultural and historical sites must be analyzed through the same lens. If a historical monument in Isfahan, Tehran, or any other Iranian city is damaged as a result of military attacks or blast waves, such damage may weaken, at the domestic level, society’s sense of cultural security and its connection to its own past. At the international level, it may contribute to the erosion of part of Iran’s civilizational image.
This is particularly significant in relation to sites that occupy a place not only within national memory but also within global memory. In the case of monuments such as Naqsh-e Jahan Square, the consequences of destruction or damage extend beyond national borders and become an issue concerning the shared cultural heritage of humanity.
Moreover, it should be recognized that the destruction of cultural heritage may also complicate post-war social reconstruction. Societies emerging from crises require common points of reference in order to rebuild social bonds and restore a sense of stability. Cultural heritage constitutes one of the most important of these reference points because it enables communities to remember their past, narrate the harms they have suffered, and redefine their future within a framework of historical continuity.
When such heritage is damaged, part of society’s capacity for psychological, cultural, and social recovery is also weakened.
Therefore, the destruction of cultural heritage should simultaneously be understood as the destruction of a part of cultural identity. Behind the destruction of every historical monument lies the potential erosion of a society’s memory, meaning, sense of belonging, and historical self-awareness.
In the case of Iran, this issue carries particular significance because of the central role that cultural heritage plays in shaping the country’s historical and civilizational narrative. Consequently, protecting Iran’s cultural heritage against the consequences of war is not merely a matter of safeguarding monuments and historical artifacts; it is also a matter of defending the historical memory, symbolic capital, cultural image, and identity continuity of Iranian society.
Violation of Cultural Rights and the Responsibility of Aggressor States
Damage inflicted upon cultural heritage during armed conflicts possesses not only identity-related and social dimensions but also legal and human rights implications. Nevertheless, the purpose of this report is not to provide a detailed legal analysis of the laws of war, state responsibility, or compensation mechanisms. Rather, its aim is to demonstrate that, in light of contemporary approaches to cultural rights, the destruction or damage of cultural heritage is not merely an issue concerning historical property or physical structures; it is also connected to the cultural rights of people, including the right of access to heritage, the right to participate in cultural life, and the right to enjoy cultural memory and identity.
Contemporary understandings of cultural rights increasingly regard cultural heritage not merely as the property of states but as an integral component of the cultural life of societies and human communities. Numerous scholars of cultural rights and experts in heritage studies have emphasized that historical monuments, landmark buildings, cultural sites, and the rituals associated with them form part of the cultural life of people. Protecting such heritage therefore means protecting the relationship between human beings and their past, collective memory, and the transmission of culture across generations.
From this perspective, when a historical monument is damaged as a result of military operations, the issue is not limited to the destruction of an object or structure. The community that regards that monument as part of its memory, narrative, and identity is also affected.
Within this framework, a number of prominent scholars and jurists in the field of international law have examined the destruction of cultural heritage during armed conflicts from the perspective of state responsibility and the obligation to observe fundamental standards for the protection of cultural property. According to this approach, parties to a conflict are required to distinguish between military objectives and cultural property, to refrain from directly attacking cultural assets, and to exercise all feasible precautions during the planning and execution of military operations in order to prevent or minimize damage to such sites.
These considerations become even more important in relation to monuments and sites possessing historical, religious, artistic, or civilizational significance and carrying meanings that extend far beyond material value for local communities, nations, or even humanity as a whole.
International instruments have likewise recognized the principle of protecting cultural heritage during wartime. The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict constitutes one of the most important legal instruments in this regard and emphasizes the obligation to respect and protect cultural property.
Similarly, within the framework of international humanitarian law, attacks directed against cultural property and sites of historical or religious significance may, under certain circumstances, constitute violations of the rules governing armed conflict.
Furthermore, from a human rights perspective, the right to participate in cultural life and the right to access cultural heritage are recognized as components of the cultural rights of individuals and communities. Consequently, damage to cultural heritage may simultaneously raise concerns under international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and the law of state responsibility.
However, the significance of these principles extends beyond the legal sphere alone. Heritage experts frequently emphasize that historical monuments—particularly those included on national or international heritage lists—embody values that transcend political boundaries.
For example, Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Isfahan is not only significant within the history and cultural identity of Iran but is also recognized as part of humanity’s cultural heritage at the global level. Therefore, damage inflicted upon such a site—even if caused indirectly through blast waves or military operations conducted in its vicinity—cannot be regarded solely as a domestic or local matter. It may also be understood as damage to the shared cultural heritage of humankind.
In the case of Iran, this issue is significant for several reasons.
First, many of Iran’s historical and cultural sites derive their meaning from their connection to the country’s civilizational memory, historical narrative, and global image. They are not merely physical structures; rather, they constitute visible manifestations of Iran’s historical continuity and cultural identity.
Second, a number of these sites—including Naqsh-e Jahan Square and the Golestan Palace—enjoy international recognition and contribute substantially to the global representation of Iranian culture and civilization. Their significance extends beyond national borders and forms part of the broader cultural heritage recognized by the international community.
Third, damage inflicted upon such sites in the context of military attacks may weaken society’s sense of cultural security and create the perception that not only material infrastructure but also the historical and cultural symbols of the community are under threat.
From this perspective, the responsibility of aggressor states extends beyond merely refraining from causing physical destruction. It also encompasses an obligation to recognize, respect, and preserve the special status of cultural property.
States that plan or conduct military operations are required to take into account both the direct and indirect consequences of their actions for cultural heritage, collective memory, and the cultural rights of affected populations. Failure to do so—particularly in areas characterized by a high concentration of historical and cultural sites and recognized as historic urban districts—may give rise to questions regarding the international responsibility of aggressor states for damage caused to cultural heritage.
Accordingly, damage to Iran’s cultural heritage during the recent attacks must be understood through an interdisciplinary framework.
On the one hand, such damage possesses a material and historical dimension, involving physical harm to monuments, historic sites, and cultural landscapes.
On the other hand, it directly affects cultural memory, symbolic capital, and the collective identity of Iranian society.
Finally, it may also be examined from the perspective of cultural rights and the international responsibility of states whose actions have contributed to such damage.
Therefore, while a comprehensive examination of international legal rules, state responsibility, and mechanisms for reparation requires a separate and dedicated report, it may nevertheless be stated at this level that the destruction of or damage to cultural heritage cannot be regarded merely as a collateral consequence of war. Rather, it constitutes an issue intimately connected to the cultural rights of peoples, the obligations of states to respect cultural heritage, and the broader imperative of safeguarding the historical memory of nations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the damage inflicted upon Iran’s cultural and historical sites as a result of the recent attacks cannot be interpreted merely as harm to a number of monuments or archaeological locations. Rather, it should be understood at a deeper level as an injury to one of the principal foundations through which the cultural identity of Iranian society is reproduced and sustained.
As demonstrated throughout this report, cultural heritage is not simply a material remnant of a nation’s historical past. It embodies collective memory, historical narrative, a sense of belonging, and the continuity of civilization. From the perspective of cultural identity theory, societies recognize themselves and preserve their connection with the past through precisely such symbols, places, and tangible markers.
Accordingly, any assault on cultural heritage—particularly in the context of armed conflict—may lead not only to physical destruction but also to symbolic and identity-related erosion.
This issue assumes particular significance in the Iranian context, where the history, civilization, and cultural heritage of the country constitute an inseparable component of the historical self-awareness of the Iranian people.
For this reason, the destruction of or damage to these sites should be understood not merely as an attack against historical monuments but as an attack against the historical memory and symbolic capital of Iranian society.
Such damage may weaken intergenerational connections, erode cultural cohesion, and complicate processes of post-crisis social reconstruction.
Consequently, the protection of cultural heritage should not be viewed solely as an effort to preserve the past. Rather, it is an endeavor aimed at safeguarding the identity, meaning, and historical continuity of a nation in both the present and the future.
