Abstract
Cultural heritage as one of the pillars of national identity and collective memory of nations, has constantly been subject to great threat in times of humanitarian and natural crisis. Civil war, military occupation, political revolution, terrorism, and natural disasters are the main factors that can lead to the destruction, plundering, or annihilation of cultural monuments. In this context, formulation of protective multi-layered strategies and utilizing international capacities is an undeniable imperative for safeguarding cultural heritage. The international committee of Blue Shield has been operating based on the contents of the 1954 Hague convention and additional protocols with the goal of protecting cultural heritage in times of crisis. The goal of this research is to comparatively study the actions of Blue Shield in the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine and analyzing its effect on cultural resilience. The main question of the study is “How these measures have been able to safeguard cultural heritage against serious threats and what factors have influenced their effectiveness.” The main hypothesis of the study is that the combination of domestic capacities with international cooperation, especially via Blue Shield, has improved cultural resilience in times of crisis. The research method has been qualitative and comparative, and the data have been gathered through analyzing the official documents of Blue Shield, institutional preparedness level, Reports from UNESCO and ICOMOS, national law, and case studies. The findings show that the effectiveness of the measures of Blue Shield depends on factors such as type of threat, institutional preparedness level, the extent of technology use, and inter-institutional cooperation. Ukraine’s experience in applying new technologies, Egypt’s engagement with judicial institutions, and Syria and Iraq in training local forces and documentation, have provided various examples of emergency safeguarding. The conclusion of the study is that designing a local safeguarding framework in Iran should be based on combining domestic capacities with international cooperation, in order for the country’s cultural resilience to improve against crises.
Keywords: War, Protection, Blue Shield, Cultural Heritage, Resilience.

Introduction
Cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible, is an inseparable part of nations’ historical and social identity and plays an important role in the preservation of collective memory. The importance of this heritage doubles in times of crisis, since on one hand as a symbol of national identity, and on the other hand as a cultural and spiritual asset, enhances societies’ cultural resilience. However, wars and armed conflicts are the greatest threats that put cultural heritage in danger of destruction, plundering, and annihilation. The recent experiences in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Ukraine demonstrate that historical monuments, museums, and archeological sites are among the first victims of political and military crises and the consequences go beyond material losses, leading to undermining social identity and cohesion.
To take action against these threats, the international committee of Blue Shield was formed based on the 1954 Hague convention and its additional protocols and was tasked with protecting cultural heritage in wartime through drafting protective strategies, training military and local forces, emergency documenting, and inter-institutional cooperation. 
The goal of this study is to analyze the protective measures taken by Blue Shield in the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine in order to identify the factors that influence the effectiveness of safeguarding interventions and create the ability to design a local framework for countries like Iran. 
The necessity of this study stems from the fact that Iran, a country with a rich cultural heritage, is facing multiple natural and anthropogenic threats, but so far, has not attained official and practical membership in the committee of Blue Shield. Analyzing international experiences can make ground for drafting local strategies, increasing cultural resilience, and strengthening heritage diplomacy.
The main question of the study is: How the actions of the international committee of Blue Shield during times of war have affected the cultural heritage resilience of the aforementioned countries.
The main hypothesis is: Combining local capacities with international cooperation, especially via Blue Shield, has led to the enhancement of cultural resilience in times of crisis.
And additional hypotheses include: 1) Utilization of new technologies in emergency safeguarding increases the effectiveness of the interventions. 2) Training local forces and accurate documentation plays a key role in decreasing cultural damages. 3. In situations of political instability, assessment and documentation missions are more effective than on-site actions.

Manuscript
The theoretical foundations of the study are based on the legal and executive frameworks of the 1954 Hague convention and its additional protocols and introduce principles such as prevention, documentation of damages, and respecting heritage during military operation as the core pillars of the activities of Blue Shield. These principles are reinforced by UNESCO’s complementary instruments, the Venice Charter, and the Statute of the International Criminal Court and provide the basis for a comparative analysis of Blue Shield’s actions in different countries.
In this text, the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine have been chosen as case studies. These choices have been made based on geographical diversity, differences in the type of confrontation, the level of technological infrastructure, and the amount of intervention by the International Committee of Blue Shield. Iraq and Syria demonstrate security and institutional challenges in the Middle East, while Egypt presents a distinct experience when it comes to confronting internal unrest and preventative safeguarding. Ukraine is also surveyed as an example of the utilization of new technologies in cultural safeguarding in the context of total war. The comparative study shows that the measures taken by Blue Shield in every country have been different based on the type of threat and institutional capacities. In Iraq, military occupation and the terrorism of the ISIS led to the widespread destruction of monuments; Blue Shield was able to restore parts of monuments through documentation, training military personnel, and international cooperation. In Egypt, the crisis of the 2011 revolution led to the plundering of museums and warehouses; assessment missions and reinforcing cultural heritage police were the key measures. In Syria, protracted civil war and targeted destruction of monuments restricted the effectiveness of the measures; documentation and local training only reduced the damages. In Ukraine, total war with Russia was a great threat to heritage; utilization of new technologies such as GIS and 3D Scanning, and extensive institutional cooperation led to relative success.
Comparative analysis shows that the difference in the success level of the actions of Blue Shield is not only a result of the technical quality of the interventions, but also depends on the political, institutional, and social context.
In Iraq, institutional inability and the high level of political corruption caused many of the safeguarding measures to face obstacles. Meanwhile, low social capital and public distrust of official institutions restricted the effectiveness of the interventions.
In Egypt, the presence of long-standing cultural institutions and a long history of safeguarding heritage provided the ability for faster restoration. However, political constraints and intense government control over international activities restricted cooperation opportunities.
In Syria, civil war conditions and the extensive unsafety posed serious danger to Blue Shield agents. Additionally, the accusation of foreign intervention and government constraints hindered the full execution of the programs.
In Ukraine, a rather more transparent political structure and higher social capital, coupled with the feasibility of active cooperation with NGOs and volunteers, caused the actions of Blue Shield to be more effective. The rate and quality of restoration in this country were notable compared to others.
Overall, the role of NGOs, museum owners, and volunteers in countries like Ukraine and Egypt was able to compensate for the institutional void; however, in Iraq and Syria, this capacity was less utilized.

Conclusion
The findings in this research demonstrate that the actions of the International Committee of Blue Shield in wartime have been effective when coupled with local capacities of the countries and local institutions have participated in the process of safeguarding. Analysis of the four countries of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Ukraine showed that the type of threat, level of local preparedness, type of intervention, and utilization of technology have been considered the determining elements in the level of cultural heritage resilience.
Establishing National Committees of Blue Shield provides the possibility of active participation in international programs, upgrading institutional preparedness, and decreasing escalatory actions. These committees, with a governmental and participatory approach, integrate the operational capacities of the state, civil institutions, and military forces and focus on protecting cultural heritage in times of crisis. The secondary effects of this approach, like strengthening the process of democratization in the armed forces and preventing politicization of cultural safeguarding, play an important role in improving cultural governance and national cohesion.
To answer the main question of the research, stating how the actions of Blue Shield have affected cultural resilience in wartime, it can be said that these actions, if executed in a targeted way and suitable to local conditions, play an effective role in decreasing cultural damages and protecting collective memory. The main hypothesis of the study, stating that integrating local capacities with international cooperation leads to the enhancement of cultural resilience, was confirmed. Moreover, additional hypotheses were studied during the comparative analysis: utilization of new technologies in Ukraine has enhanced the effectiveness of emergency safeguarding; training local forces and accurate documentation in Syria and Iraq have played big roles in safeguarding cultural monuments; and assessment missions in Egypt at a time of political instability proved more effective than on-site interventions.
Given the richness of Iranian culture and the presence of multiple natural and humanitarian threats, officially and practically joining the International Committee of Blue Shield can be a strategic step toward enhancing the country’s safeguarding capacities. This membership, in addition to benefiting from global experiences and international standards, will pave the way for the reinforcement of cultural diplomacy, increase in international credibility, and regional exemplification for Iran. 
Practical suggestions are:
• Establishing the Iranian National Committee of Blue Shield with the collaboration of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, universities, military institutions, and NGOs.
• Holding collaborative workshops with the International Committee of Blue Shield in order to train local forces and managers in the heritage sector. 
• Formulation of localized safeguarding manuals based on global standards and the specific conditions of Iran.
• Establishing a national digital database to record and legally track endangered monuments.
• Strengthening Iran’s cultural diplomacy through membership in international institutions and utilizing the supportive capacities of UNESCO, ICOM, ICOMOS, and IFLA.