Sadly the World Archaeological Congress has no real power. It was set up in the 1980s because the big meeting, the International Union of Pre- and Proto-Historic Sciences, was inviting South African and Namibian archaeologists. Southhampton City Council refused funding for the event if those invitations stood. The invitations were withdrawn so the IUPPS withdrew from the conference as did a lot of archaeologists. The rump conference became WAC. The co-existence of IUPPS and WAC suggests there’s no common agreement on ethics in archaeology. It’s not that WAC = left-wing idealists and IUPPS = right-wing pragmatists, but there’s quite a political spectrum in archaeology.
My guess is no archaeologist would take part in a project to draw up a list of civilian targets. On the other hand I’m cynical enough to think many would jump at the chance to be funded to draw up a synthesis of settlement and economic activity in the ancient Persian empire. If that information is then used by the military then that would be unfortunate. What WAC does do it give notice that people won’t be turning a blind eye to that behaviour.
]]>