34 YEARBOOK 2025 INTRODUCTION : REVIEW AND ANALYSIS communication about the project’s aims, methodology and sequencing has likely fuelled some of the criticism. Future efforts must involve communities from the outset to build trust, gather feedback and align expectations. Nonetheless, the project holds symbolic value as a milestone in Aleppo’s post-conflict recovery. RETHINKING HERITAGE PROTECTION Syria’s conflict has exposed the limitations of international frameworks intended to protect cultural heritage. Despite being signatories to key instruments, such as the 1954 Hague convention, the 1970 and 1972 Unesco conventions, and the Fourth Geneva Convention, the parties involved in the conflict failed to uphold these agreements. The Hague convention’s obligations, including the prohibition of military use of heritage sites, were disregarded and the illicit trade in looted antiquities continued in violation of the 1970 convention. Although UN Security Council resolutions and various international appeals condemned the destruction, no effective response mechanisms were implemented. Sanctions on Syria further hindered the delivery of aid. While the EU funded a heritage support project via Unesco and ICCROM, it was short-lived and operated primarily outside Syrian territory. In response, Souk al-Saqatiyya following repair and reconstruction: the shop (right) was previously located in the Ropes Market, Souk al-Hibal. (Both photos: Mariam Hammouda, 2020 and 2022) Unesco has since advocated for reform, calling for the integration of cultural heritage protection into humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. The case of Souk al-Saqatiyya underscores both the possibilities and limitations of post-conflict heritage reconstruction. While technically and symbolically successful, the project has not yet revitalised the social and economic life of the souk. This gap highlights the need for heritage initiatives to go beyond physical restoration and engage meaningfully with affected communities. More inclusive and transparent processes are needed, alongside policies that centre local agency and align with community needs. Ultimately, Souk al-Saqatiyya prompts us to reconsider how recovery frameworks might more effectively integrate heritage into broader processes of urban and social regeneration. It also raises a critical question: have international policy tools, such as the ICOMOS Guidance on PostTrauma Recovery and Reconstruction for World Heritage Cultural Properties 2017 or the Warsaw Recommendation on Recovery and Reconstruction of Cultural Heritage 2018, meaningfully shaped recovery on the ground? In the case of Souk al-Saqatiyya, their influence appears limited. While the principles they promote are valuable, their implementation in Aleppo remains largely aspirational, exposing the gap between policy ambition and practical impact, particularly between frameworks developed in the West and realities faced in crisis-affected settings in the Middle East. To move beyond symbolic gestures, future recovery efforts must not only acknowledge the cultural significance of sites like Souk al-Saqatiyya but also empower local actors, integrate heritage meaningfully into reconstruction and bridge the persistent divide between global policy frameworks and on-the-ground realities. Further reading Aga Khan Historic Cities Programme, “Souk al-Saqatiyya rehabilitation”, Archnet, 2019, www.archnet.org/sites/20464 Directorate General for Antiquities and Museums (DGAM), “State party report: on the state of conservation of the Syrian cultural heritage sites”, 2018, whc.unesco.org/document/165430 Unesco World Heritage Centre, “Ancient City of Aleppo”, whc.unesco.org/en/list/21/ ATAA ALSALLOUM PhD is a senior lecturer at the University of Liverpool’s School of Architecture. The article is enriched by the work of Mariam Hammouda, who generously shared photographs from her visits in 2020 and 2022.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzI0Mzk=