Some of the contents of this article were originally delivered as part of a talk held during Classic Art London, entitled ‘Protecting Art in Times of War (opens a new window)’, and featured speakers from Blue Shield International, the Commission for Looted Art (CLAE), and the Art Loss Register. The talk was moderated by James Ferrer, Head of Fine Art at Lockton.
In 2022, the Russian invasion of Ukraine marked the beginning of the largest art theft since World War II. At the outbreak of the conflict, more than 1.7 million museum objects were located within now-occupied territories, where they have effectively been removed from the Ukrainian museum system. Nearly half a million objects are reported to have been looted, worth $44 billion according to some estimates. The true figure is likely to be significantly higher.
These thefts are not isolated incidents; they are part of a coordinated effort by Russian forces to seize and destroy Ukrainian cultural heritage. But they also represent a distinct frontier, in which warfare is perpetrated through the erosion of cultural history and identity. In this increasingly volatile political climate, the risks for the art sector and its institutions are multiplying, while preparedness – from documentation, to evacuation, and insurance – is more crucial than ever before.
The risk to cultural institutions
Unlike military targets, energy, or critical infrastructure, art objects have not historically been regarded as key targets for warfare. Yet, recent conflicts demonstrate that artworks, archives, monuments and archaeological sites are not merely collateral casualties of war; they are increasingly becoming strategic targets in their own right, because of their role in preserving cultural memory, identity and national heritage.
Recent years have several incidents in which art and cultural objects have been targeted as an act of war or political violence. Since 2014, Islamic State forces engaged in widespread destruction of cultural heritage throughout Iraq and Syria, including museums, libraries, and religious sites. Among these targets was Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in the central Syrian desert, which was captured in 2015. The group subsequently demolished numerous temples, arches and tombs, and inflicted significant damage on Palmyra castle, in an effort to destroy pre-Islamic cultural heritage.
Not every attack on cultural property is driven by a desire to erase identity. In some cases, museums and archaeological sites are targeted for financial gain, with looted objects sold through illicit markets to fund armed groups and criminal networks. The occupation and looting of the Sudan National Museum in Khartoum in 2023, which reportedly resulted in losses exceeding $110 million, illustrates how cultural assets can become a source of revenue for parties to a conflict. However, whether motivated by ideology or profit, the outcome is often the same: the loss of cultural heritage.
Aside from damage and destruction, these acts can also create downstream consequences for the art market. Once looted, objects may be trafficked for sale to criminal networks and private collections. Provenance details may be changed or forged to disguise the objects’ origins – for instance, describing Ukrainian objects as originating from ‘eastern Europe’, or acquired via family inheritance. This can significantly complicate recovery efforts, increasing reliance on provenance research and databases maintained by organisations such as the Art Loss Register (opens a new window) to identify and trace potentially stolen works.
As more artworks enter illegal circulation, it becomes increasingly difficult to determine whether any purchase is legitimate. Museums, galleries and collectors may therefore face greater due diligence requirements, together with the risk of unknowingly acquiring looted property. Where an object’s true origins later emerge, institutions can be forced to return the work, absorb associated financial losses, and contend with reputational damage. In 2017, the New York Met made a £4m purchase of a 2,100-year-old gilded Egyptian coffin, which later became the centrepiece of a dedicated exhibition. It was later discovered to have been looted from Egypt in October 2011, forcing the Met to shutter the then-ongoing exhibition, and repatriate the coffin.
The growing focus on restitution claims, including work supported by organisations such as the Commission for Looted Art in Europe (opens a new window), has further increased scrutiny of provenance records, particularly for objects removed during periods of conflict, occupation or political instability.
Why proactive management is crucial
Many institutions lack a coherent plan to protect art and cultural heritage during war or conflict. Typical arrangements to transfer inventories to another nearby institution (for example, a reciprocal agreement to move works from a National Museum to a National Library, or vice versa) may be effective if dealing with threats such as fire, flood, or building collapse. But they are not sufficient when dealing with larger-scale threats, such as war, where those ‘safe’ locations are equally at risk. And once stolen, the longer objects remain outside of the control of their country of origin, the more unlikely restitution becomes.
Instead, museums and galleries must take a proactive approach to risk management, including:
Digitisation and documentation – Digital backups of museum inventories, including comprehensive scans and photographs, can help to track items if later stolen. If possible, collection logs should be stored across multiple, separate locations to guarantee data resilience.
Evacuation planning – Prioritise the most valuable pieces for relocation to secure locations, ideally outside of the likely conflict zones, and ensure they are clearly indicated to emergency evacuation teams. Source adequate packing material to protect objects during transportation.
In-situ protection – For objects that cannot be evacuated, on-site physical measures can help to protect objects from damage, including securing or blocking windows, or constructing false walls around valuable items.
Legal co-ordination and registration – Register culturally significant property under the UNESCO International Register of Cultural Property under Special Protection (opens a new window) to grant sites immunity from attack under international law. Coordinate with military forces to share geospatial data, mapping heritage sites onto ‘no-strike’ lists, and physically mark buildings with the distinctive Blue Shield emblem to deter military targeting. Promoted by Blue Shield International (opens a new window) to protect cultural heritage in emergency situations, the emblem helps identify protected cultural property and support efforts to reduce accidental or deliberate targeting during conflict.
Further advice around the preservation of art and cultural heritage is available in the International Council of Museums (ICOM) (opens a new window)guidelines for conflict and disasters.
Recent efforts in Ukraine provide a practical example of these principles in action. Organisations such as the Heritage Emergency Response Initiative (HERI) (opens a new window), coordinated by Ihor Poshyvailo of Kyiv’s Maidan Museum (opens a new window), have supported the documentation, protection and salvage of cultural heritage threatened by the conflict, highlighting the value of preparedness and coordinated response measures.
The role of insurance in conflict preparedness
Even with robust documentation, evacuation, and protection measures in place, the risk of loss cannot be eliminated entirely. Specialised insurance can therefore form an important part of a broader resilience strategy – helping institutions to manage the financial consequences of damage and theft due to conflict-related events.
Depending on the circumstances, cover may be available under Terrorism, Civil Unrest, Political Violence policies:
Cover | What it responds to | Typical examples |
Terrorism | Deliberate acts intended to further political, religious or ideological objectives | Bomb attack, vehicle attack, coordinated terrorist assault |
Civil Unrest | A substantial violent uprising by a large number of persons assembled together and acting with common purpose or intent | Violent disturbances, demonstrations and protests of public peace causing damage to property |
Political Violence | Acts of open, armed hostile conflict between states of nations as well as opposing citizens and parties of the same country | Invasion, military occupation, interstate war, tank or missile attacks, military action on land |
As geopolitical tensions continue to rise, institutions should review their insurance arrangements carefully to ensure they align with their specific risk profile, collection exposures and business continuity requirements.
Talk to us
Our Fine Art & Specie specialists work closely with clients to identify and manage conflict-related risks, helping to build resilience before losses occur and providing support when incidents arise. By combining sector expertise with tailored insurance solutions, we help collectors and institutions protect both the financial and cultural value of their collections in an increasingly uncertain world.
For more information, reach out to a member of our Fine Art & Specie (opens a new window) team.
