A/HRC/31/59 67. Unfortunately, there is a long human history of such acts as iconoclasm and biblioclasm in all regions of the world, whether in wars, revolutions or waves of repression. However, in the early twenty-first century, a new wave of deliberate destruction is being recorded and displayed for the world to see, the impact magnified by widespread distribution of the images. Such acts are often openly proclaimed and justified by their perpetrators. This represents a form of cultural warfare being used against populations, and humanity as a whole, and one which the Special Rapporteur condemns in the strongest possible terms. The Special Rapporteur shares the view of UNESCO that these acts of intentional destruction sometimes constitute “cultural cleansing”. They take the terrorization of a population to a new level by attacking even its history and represent an urgent challenge to cultural rights, one which requires rapid and thoughtful international response. 68. The preamble of the 2003 UNESCO Declaration stresses that “cultural heritage is an important component of cultural identity and of social cohesion, so that its intentional destruction may have adverse consequences on human dignity and human rights”. In recent cases, as in their historical antecedents, the objects in question have clearly been targeted not in spite of the prohibitions on attacking cultural heritage and notwithstanding the value of the objects in question, but precisely because of that value and those norms. D. Towards a human rights approach to the intentional destruction of cultural heritage 69. In responding to intentional destruction of cultural heritage, it is critical to employ a human rights approach: there are many human rights implications. As rightly noted by one cultural rights expert, “despite the rich international normative framework created under the aegis of UNESCO over the decades, the question is largely not being addressed by the international community as a question of human rights generally, or of cultural rights in particular”.27 This must change. As her first priority area of thematic work, the Special Rapporteur aims to develop such an approach. 70. The Special Rapporteur’s predecessor noted the added value of a human rights approach: beyond preserving and safeguarding an object or a manifestation in itself, the human rights approach to cultural heritage obliges one to take into account the rights of individuals and communities in relation to such object or manifestation and, in particular, to connect cultural heritage with its source of production (see A/HRC/17/38 and Corr.1, para. 2). 71. The importance of having access to one’s own cultural heritage and to that of others has been emphasized by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its general comment No. 21. As stressed by the Committee therein, the obligations to respect and to protect freedoms, cultural heritage and cultural diversity are interconnected. It is impossible to separate a people’s cultural heritage from the people itself and their rights. 72. Just as the intentional destruction of cultural heritage has a devastating impact on cultural rights, so too protecting cultural heritage can have a positive impact on morale and rights in situations of conflict or repression. “A nation stays alive when its culture stays alive” is the motto of the National Museum of Afghanistan, where some 2,750 pieces were destroyed by the Taliban in 2001. 27 16 Elsa Stamatopoulou, Memorandum submitted to the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, 12 December 2015.