Multiple terrorist attacks on cultural heritage since 2001 have drawn heritage into international security politics, reframing it from a Law of Armed Conflict issue to one of hybrid warfare. This exploratory study uses semi-structured interviews with 51 practitioners from two community groups to examine perspectives on terrorism and heritage, testing assumptions in the literature against protection practices. Findings reveal that credible, dynamic threat data is scarce, leading to reliance on historic event data to extrapolate future risks. The article proposes a new multi-layered cultural intelligence framework for more critical threat assessments and argues that concerns over religiously motivated terrorist attacks may be overstated, suggesting a shift toward considering political and ideological drivers within unconventional warfare.

This article examines endangered language protection through domestic legislation, questioning reliance on international linguistic human rights frameworks. While international courts frequently decline to enforce language rights independently, national legislation proves more effective in safeguarding linguistic diversity.

Through a comparative case study of Qatar, Lebanon, and Morocco, this research identifies effective domestic approaches to protecting linguistic diversity. Qatar’s Law No. 7 of 2019 balances Arabic promotion with minority protections. Lebanon’s multilingual educational framework and Morocco’s constitutional recognition of Tamazight demonstrate how domestic mechanisms provide substantive linguistic safeguards. These cases reveal that successful preservation requires enforceable domestic legislation rather than theoretical international frameworks lacking implementation mechanisms.

The article exposes critical gaps between idealistic international instruments and enforceable protections, advocating state-centered approaches that treat language as both cultural heritage and living practice. Effective preservation emerges from coordinated national legislation combined with community initiatives within existing human rights frameworks. This shift from international idealism to domestic pragmatism offers viable pathways for protecting global linguistic diversity – particularly urgent given that approximately 3,000 languages face extinction within the coming decades. The study presents implementable alternatives to failed international strategies, demonstrating how context-specific domestic policies achieve meaningful preservation outcomes.

This article maps how cultural heritage has been securitized in international discourse by analyzing seven key United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and UN Security Council (UNSC) documents (2003–2017). Drawing on the Copenhagen School’s framework and its distinction between identification and mobilization, the study reveals a two-stage process. Initially, heritage destruction was framed as a human rights violation, later escalating into a global security threat linked to terrorism and conflict financing. Through a sectoral and scalar typology of referent objects, the analysis highlights divergent framings by UNESCO (societal, normative) and the UNSC (military, strategic). Despite strong discursive alignment—culminating in UNSC Resolution 2347—the mobilization of extraordinary measures remained limited. The article concludes that heritage securitization is discursively robust but operationally incomplete, shaped by institutional capacities, leadership shifts, and evolving geopolitical contexts. These findings contribute to the broader literature on security politics, norm diffusion, and the symbolic power of heritage in global governance.

On 24 May 2024, member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) adopted the Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. Mandating that contracting parties require that patent applicants disclose any genetic resources or associated traditional knowledge that their invention is based on, the treaty has been hailed as historic triumph. In this article, we analyze whether the treaty is so remarkable in relation to Aotearoa New Zealand’s existing law and practice. Finding that it is not, and that the treaty could place limits on the law, we argue that Aotearoa New Zealand should not sign the Treaty but could learn from it. We conclude that, while Aotearoa New Zealand must continue to partake in any ongoing international negotiations, it should continue to find ways to address the domestic situation.

Earlier this year a Swedish archaeologist based at Gothenburg University’s Centre for Critical Heritage Studies published an unfounded ad hominem attack on me in the pages of the International Journal of Cultural Property. I am grateful to the editors for this right to reply to Staffan Lundén’s wholly spurious claims, and order to correct the record. Despite its provocative, “clickbait” title, not one substantive mistake or incorrect fact was identified in Lundén’s article in my book “The Brutish Museums”. The motivation for Lundén’s serial accusations against colleagues with whose scholarship on the history of the Benin Expedition he disagrees - from curators at the British Museum to members of the Royal Court of Benin - is discussed. In conclusion, the allegation that my book The Brutish Museums is “part of a trend away from pro-British perspectives” is contextualised and refuted. On the contrary, this reply argues, openness and transparency about the colonial past and present is a key element of the reclamation and reimagining of Britishness that is unfolding in the 2020s – this unfinished period that the book calls “the decade of returns”.