PROFESSOR Peter Stone from Newcastle University has a remarkable photograph taken in 2011.

It shows a burnt-out military vehicle close to the walls of a ruined Roman fort in Libya.

The precision air attack which reduced one of Colonel Gaddafi’s mobile radar units to a twisted mass of metal destroyed the target but left the historically important Roman site virtually unscathed – apart from a few scratches from shrapnel.

If the Allied military commanders had not been warned - by the equivalent of a red light flashing on their computer - it is likely that the Roman fort would have been reduced to rubble along with the entire area.

Prof Stone, who heads Newcastle University’s School of Arts and Cultures, says the photograph illustrates what can be achieved when academics work with the military to avoid culturally significant buildings or sites being targeted by high explosive during conflicts.

The Allied forces were pre-warned by Blue Shield, a voluntary international network of experts which compile “no strike lists”.

The Newcastle archaeologist chairs the UK committee of Blue Shield and he is also the secretary general of the Association of National Committees of Blue Shield. His name recently appeared among 98 signatories to a letter published by the Daily Telegraph calling for the UK to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.

Signed by peers, academics, archaeologists and other luminaries ranging from Michael Palin to Sir Tony Robinson, it states: “In 1954, the international community agreed the Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, following the devastating impact of the Second World War on some of Europe’s most valued heritage,

“After the looting in 2003 of museums and archaeological sites in Iraq, Britain announced its intention to ratify the convention. A decade later, we have yet to honour this commitment.

“Britain is the most significant worldwide military power not to have ratified the convention, the United States having done so in 2009. “

The letter goes on to say that continuing failure to ratify” is mystifying” as it has all-party support and argues there is “ample parliamentary time” to pass the legislation.

Prof Stone’s involvement in advising the military began in rather bizarre circumstances in 2003, shortly before the Allied invasion of Iraq. Because he happened to live in the same Northumberland village as a senior military planner he was approached and asked whether he could provide a list of culturally sensitive sites in Iraq.

“It was done far too late and I was the wrong person but I was the only person approached and it was made clear that if I didn’t do it, nobody else would be asked,” he recalls.

Using his personal network of contacts Prof Stone was able to provide a list and in the years since that first contact was made he has continued to assist the UK military and NATO in avoiding strikes against historically significant buildings and sites as far apart as Libya, Mali and Syria.

He points out that avoiding the destruction of culturally important sites or buildings can also avoid stirring up opposition from local people and prolonging the military campaign.

Recently the professor has had to come up with a refreshed list of sites in northern Iraq, which is currently under attack by forces of the Islamic Caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS.

Prof Stone is happy to provide such information but he believes that it would be far better if the UK ratified the 1954 Hague Convention.

“Ratification is the key thing. For this to have teeth each national signatory needs to have in place national legislation which will make it a criminal offence to breach the convention. Without ratification it is totally toothless,” he adds.

While he does not advocate that lives should be lost to defend culturally important sites he acknowledges that “incredibly brave” site guards, policemen and archeologists have already given their lives to try to protect them.

“Protecting cultural property is not just about preventing the looting of artefacts and destruction of sites,” he adds. “ It is also about protecting what these physical things represent – the intangible heritage and heart of long-standing communities.”