In their recently published volume War Diaries: Design after the Destruction of Art and Architecture, editors Elisa Dainese and Aleksandar Staničić curate a compelling collection of essays, case studies, and dialogues that critically examine the complex role of design in the aftermath of urban warfare. The book brings together a diverse range of perspectives from practitioners, artists, scholars, and educators working on the frontlines of post-conflict reconstruction across Europe, the Middle East, and East Africa. Through these situated accounts, War Diaries makes a significant contribution to the emerging interdisciplinary field of post-war recovery, offering both theoretical frameworks and practical strategies for harnessing design as a tool of spatial and social repair.

A key strength of the book resides in its examination of the ethical dilemmas confronting designers operating in war-torn contexts. It explores how design approaches and policies can be leveraged to address the political and social repercussions of urban devastation responsibly. The book also examines how combating the aestheticization of violence and fostering culturally sensitive design can pave the way through the urgency of recovery, and how designers can collaborate with diverse stakeholders throughout these processes.

The chapters do not shy away from critiquing the ways in which even well-intentioned interventions can perpetuate divisions and inequalities if carried out without careful consideration of local power dynamics, cultural specificities, and community agency. The authors offer an analysis of how the built environment can become a tool of control and exclusion in the hands of state and private interests, as evident in the case studies ranging from Lebanon’s Solidere development project to the design of refugee camps and emergency settlements. At the same time, they highlight the importance of critical self-reflexivity and the need for designers to interrogate their own positionality and biases when working in complex post-conflict settings.

Yet, for all its candid analysis, War Diaries is ultimately a hopeful book that affirms the transformative potential of design as a means of healing, reconciliation, and empowerment, noting that “while architects can serve as mediators working across the aisle, by insisting upon participatory design and planning, they can give voice to local and even marginalized communities.” ¹ Across the diverse case studies, we encounter architects, planners, and artists who are striving to develop more participatory, culturally responsive, and ethically grounded approaches to post-war reconstruction.

In Chapter 1, “On Urban Postconflict Development: Toward a Practice-Oriented Research Agenda,” Kai Vöckler draws on his extensive experience as cofounder and director of the NGO, Archis Interventions, leading reconstruction projects in Kosovo, Cyprus, and Bosnia-Herzegovina to examine the spatial implications of violent conflict in cities and the strategies designers can employ to overcome urban divisions. Vöckler emphasizes the role of architects and planners as agents of change in post-war contexts but cautions that they must navigate a complex web of local and international stakeholders with sensitivity and care. He stresses the importance of partnering with local civil society organizations, fostering participatory planning processes, and adapting design solutions to the specific cultural, political, and social realities of each place. 

Chapter 2, “War Diary and Design Intentions of an Architect in Postwar Sarajevo,” offers a fascinating comparative analysis of the wartime destruction and post-war reconstruction of Sarajevo through the lens of two prominent architects: Bosnian architect Ivan Štraus and American architect Lebbeus Woods. Armina Pilav carefully traces how Štraus’s intimate experience of the siege of Sarajevo informed his understanding of the city’s architectural heritage and his vision for its rebuilding, especially in the case of reconstruction of Elektroprivreda Building, which emphasized the importance of cultural continuity and collective memory. In contrast, Woods’ more conceptual and provocative proposals for post-war spaces in Sarajevo, raise challenging questions about the role of the architect as an outsider and the ethics of aesthetic responses to trauma. Through this juxtaposition, Pilav underscores the complex symbolic and affective dimensions of post-war reconstruction and the need for designers to approach these contexts with deep understanding of local histories as well as new construction principles and environmental issues.

In Chapter 3, “Normalizing War: The Aesthetics of National Resilience,” Gabriel Schwake offers a compelling analysis of the shifting landscape of civil defense infrastructure in Israel. Schwake skillfully navigates the complex interplay between the privatization of the Israeli economy and the increasing threats of violence against civilians, shedding light on the state’s evolving approach to ensuring the safety of its citizens. The author’s choice to focus on the design competition for the National Center of Israeli Resilience as a case study proves to be a powerful tool for illustrating the normalization of war through the aestheticization of infrastructure. Schwake’s arguments are well-crafted and persuasive, as he demonstrates how the commodification and aestheticization of civil defense measures serve to blur the lines between the harsh realities of war and the everyday lives of civilians. 

Deen Sharp’s Chapter 4, “Scars of War and Reconstruction in Lebanon,” investigates the politics of post-war reconstruction in Lebanon through the lens of Beirut’s controversial Solidere development project. Drawing on archival research and interviews with key stakeholders, Sharp traces how the privatized rebuilding of the city center in the aftermath of the Lebanese Civil War served to consolidate the interests of political and economic elites while displacing and marginalizing low-income residents and communities. He argues that the Solidere project, rather than promoting reconciliation and inclusive development, in fact, perpetuated many of the same socio-spatial inequalities and sectarian divisions that fueled the conflict. The chapter offers a cautionary tale about the ways in which post-war reconstruction can become a vehicle for elite capture and the further entrenchment of social injustice.

In Chapter 5, “‘Simple Plans’ and Complex Lives: A Dialogue about Planning and Designing Emergency Settlements,” Charlie Hailey presents a conversation with Per Iwansson and Hans Skotte, two experienced architects and planners who have worked on refugee camps and post-war reconstruction projects with a focus on Iwansson’s work in the Kakuma and Dadaab camps in Kenya in the early 1990s. The conversation grapples with the complex challenges of balancing the urgent need for shelter with longer-term considerations of community-building, cultural appropriateness, and refugee agency in the context of displacement. Iwansson reflects critically on the limitations of top-down, technocratic approaches to camp planning that fail to take into account the diverse needs, capacities, and aspirations of refugees themselves. Instead, he advocates for a more flexible and adaptable “simple planning” approach that provides a basic spatial framework for incremental growth and customization by residents over time. The dialogue highlights the importance of learning from the everyday spatial practices and improvisations of refugees and of designing settlement spaces that enable rather than constrain their ability to rebuild a sense of home and community.

In Chapter 6, “Designing Emergency Architecture,” Raul Pantaleo and his colleagues at the Italian architecture firm TAMassociati discuss their approach to designing health facilities for the Italian NGO Emergency in Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Drawing on projects such as the Pediatric Clinic in Nyala, Sudan, and the Maternity Center in Anabah, Afghanistan, Pantaleo highlights the importance of combining ethics, aesthetics, and economy within the constraints of time when working in conflict-affected areas. The author emphasizes the need for architects to provide practical and rapid responses to emergency situations while also envisioning a better future. Pantaleo introduces the concept of “bellitudine,” a term that encompasses the firm’s commitment to creating beautiful, functional, and sustainable spaces that prioritize the well-being of the communities they serve.

In the next Chapter, “Teaching Culturally Sensitive Design,” Aleksandar Staničić presents an interview with Azra Akšamija, Associate Professor at the MIT Department of Architecture, about her innovative course focused on the Al Azraq Refugee Camp in Jordan. The course explores the role of art and design in fostering intercultural collaboration and enhancing the quality of life for refugees displaced by the Syrian Civil War. Through the lens of “performative preservation,” Akšamija and her students critically examine the meaning of cultural heritage in conflict and crisis, emphasizing the importance of community engagement, co-creation, and the development of transcultural perspectives. The chapter highlights the ethical considerations inherent in designing for and with refugee communities, stressing the need for empathy, self-reflection, and the unlearning of assumptions. Akšamija’s pedagogical approach, which is part of a larger research initiative at the Future Heritage Lab, offers a compelling model for addressing the emotional and cultural needs of displaced populations through art and design.

A recurring theme throughout the book is the role of design in mediating between top-down and bottom-up forces in post-conflict reconstruction. Several authors critique the tendency of international aid agencies and government actors to impose universal solutions without adequate consideration of local needs, knowledge, and capacities. Instead, they advocate for more inclusive and responsive forms of practice that center the voices and agency of affected communities. The chapters by Iwansson and Skotte, Pantaleo and TAMassociati, and Akšamija all emphasize the importance of participatory design processes, cultural sensitivity, and a willingness to learn from the everyday spatial practices and aspirations of displaced and war-affected populations. They highlight the need for designers to approach post-conflict contexts with humility, flexibility, and a commitment to building genuine partnerships and solidarity with local stakeholders.

While War Diaries addresses the immense challenges and traumas of post-war rebuilding, it is animated by a sense of grounded hope in the resilience and creativity of communities in the face of adversity. The book reminds us that even in the most devastated environments, people continue to shape space in ways that affirm cultural identities, social bonds, and visions of a better future. By documenting and analyzing these practices of everyday placemaking, the authors suggest, designers can learn to work in greater solidarity with communities and amplify their capacities for recovery and self-determination.

Ultimately, War Diaries makes a compelling case for the role of design in enacting more just and sustainable forms of post-conflict reconstruction – not as a panacea but as part of a broader ecology of social, political, and environmental repair. Its provocations and examples point towards an emerging paradigm of reconstructive practice that is grounded in critical reflection, historical understanding, and an ethics of care. For scholars and practitioners grappling with the spatial dimensions of conflict and recovery, the book is an invaluable resource and a catalyst for further research and action.

In a world where the ravages of war continue to shape the lives of millions, War Diaries is a timely and necessary intervention. By bringing together myriads of voices and visions, it expands our understanding of what it means to design in the aftermath of violence and what is at stake in the process. More than just a collection of case studies, it is a manifesto for a more engaged, equitable, and hopeful approach to rebuilding – one that recognizes the power of design to heal and transform while remaining vigilant to its potential for harm.