With the proposed loss of yet another 2,000yr old archaeological site in Afghanistan due to mining interests, I was wondering what you would choose if it came down to a choice between saving the irreplacable inheritance left by our ancestors or the possibility of putting a meal on the table?

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/21/afghanistans_vanishing_buddhas#0

You might be interested in listening to today's "The Forum" on Radio 4 in which Bridget Kendall and guests discussed this very issue in relation to the broader one of rebuilding societies after traumatic times such as Afghanistan has been through in recent years. They touch on the Afghanistan dilemma too.

The Forum

Thanks Nordmann, an interesting programme.

Excellent, I'd have missed that, I'll catch it later. Thanks once again.

The book I mentioned in another post is, I've discovered, on line in full. You might find some of it interesting.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/65991443/Layton-Et-Al-Eds-Destruction-and-Conservation-of-Cultural-Property

Not to do with mining (at least not in Afghanistan), but I was interested recently hearing a couple of times about the protection of archaelogical sites and important ancient buildings etc during wartime in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. It sounded as if people were taking this seriously and really trying to protect them.

It was, at least in one case, compared with NZ's treatment of its own older heritage buildings, which are being pulled down for motorways or gentrification, and of its proposed treatment of conservation areas for mining. Same arguments, but at least in Afghanistan they may well be having trouble putting food on the table, whereas here a lack of money is comparative.