In 2005, Sotheby's, with some some assistance from Christie's, helped lead the opposition to a MOU with the PRC. This time around, however, both auction houses have remained silent. Why the change? Recently, the PRC agreed to allow them to do business in China. Presumably, both companies have concluded selling modern art to Chinese citizens is more lucrative and far less of a hassle these days than selling Chinese antiquities to Americans.
Christie�s new business in China also presumably helps explain the Pinault family�s decision to repatriate two of the bronze fountain heads that were allegedly looted from the Summer Palace in the 19th century by an Anglo-French punitive expedition. The Pinaults -- who own Christie�s-- are not the first astute business interests to offer such sculptures as gifts. Stanley Ho, a Macao based gambling tycoon, also gained favor with the PRC when he donated a horse�s head from the group to a Chinese museum.
Repatriation of the bronze fountain heads has been a cause c�l�bre for the PRC Government, Chinese Nationalists and their allies in American archaeological advocacy groups like SAFE.
On the other hand, Chinese dissident artist Ai Weiwei has produced his own ironic take on the sculptures. His gigantic versions of the diminutive heads say something about the over sized Chinese nationalism these sculptures have come to embody.
Showing posts with label Lobbying. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lobbying. Show all posts
Soft Sell on Cambodian Repatriation
It's interesting to contrast the hardball tactics of elements within the US Government and the US archaeological lobby with the softer line on Cambodian antiquities taken by Prince Ravivaddhana Sisowath of Cambodia. Is this a case of Good Cop/Bad Cop or is the archaeological lobby cart pushing the repatriation horse once again?
SAFE No More?
A reliable source indicates that Saving Antiquities for Everyone (SAFE) is effectively dead. While SAFE's website remains online, it has not really been updated for some time.
Certainly, SAFE has not been very active in the past year or so. And despite rumors that SAFE was planning a major conference on Turkish antiquities that was to be funded by Turkey�s U.S. lawyers, nothing ever came of it.
It does appear that a related group called "Antiquity Now" is forming on Facebook. It will be interesting to see if it becomes more active as time goes by.
I for one will not mourn the demise of SAFE. From the start, it was highly confrontational, and brought far more heat than light to cultural property issues.
Certainly, SAFE has not been very active in the past year or so. And despite rumors that SAFE was planning a major conference on Turkish antiquities that was to be funded by Turkey�s U.S. lawyers, nothing ever came of it.
It does appear that a related group called "Antiquity Now" is forming on Facebook. It will be interesting to see if it becomes more active as time goes by.
I for one will not mourn the demise of SAFE. From the start, it was highly confrontational, and brought far more heat than light to cultural property issues.
Corruption and the Archaeological Lobby's Models
It's interesting to see where the archaeological lobby's models stack up on Transparency International's 2012 Corruption Perception Index: Bulgaria-75; China-80; Cyprus-29; Egypt-118, Greece-94; Italy-72 and Turkey-54.
The higher the number, the higher the perception of corruption. Denmark is No. 1 as the least corrupt country while No.174, Somalia, is perceived as most corrupt.
While Cyprus' rank of 29 would seem at first blush to be fairly good, at least some commentators suggest that Cypriots themselves think their government is more corrupt than Transparency International's experts believe.
It's interesting that these countries also have very restrictive export controls for cultural property. One might suspect that such controls merely provide an opportunity for corrupt officials to profit from the system.
Why does the archaeological lobby continue to see such corrupt systems as models for cultural heritage protection? Or are they somehow suggesting the cultural bureaucracies in these countries are far cleaner than government in general? And, if so, what is their basis for any such claim?
The higher the number, the higher the perception of corruption. Denmark is No. 1 as the least corrupt country while No.174, Somalia, is perceived as most corrupt.
While Cyprus' rank of 29 would seem at first blush to be fairly good, at least some commentators suggest that Cypriots themselves think their government is more corrupt than Transparency International's experts believe.
It's interesting that these countries also have very restrictive export controls for cultural property. One might suspect that such controls merely provide an opportunity for corrupt officials to profit from the system.
Why does the archaeological lobby continue to see such corrupt systems as models for cultural heritage protection? Or are they somehow suggesting the cultural bureaucracies in these countries are far cleaner than government in general? And, if so, what is their basis for any such claim?
More Success from Treasure Act and PAS
The Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme have reported another good year, which again begs the question why the US archaeological lobby is so hostile to any suggestion that a similar program should be tried elsewhere and barely tolerant of the program even for England and Wales.
Indeed, it's a bit of a puzzle why the archaeological lobby (and by default their allies in the State Department Cultural Heritage Center) seem more influenced by the views of the corrupt and/or bankrupt and/or authoritarian governments of places like Bulgaria, China, Cyprus, Egypt, Greece and Italy than by the fair play of our longstanding ally, the United Kingdom.
Perhaps, some of the millions of dollars of US taxpayer money committed to archaeological projects in places like Iraq and Egypt should instead be invested in a pilot Portable Antiquities Scheme program in a place like Bulgaria. That would help Bulgaria record many of the coins that now are not recorded, and show our support not only for Bulgaria, but for our ally, the United Kingdom.
Indeed, it's a bit of a puzzle why the archaeological lobby (and by default their allies in the State Department Cultural Heritage Center) seem more influenced by the views of the corrupt and/or bankrupt and/or authoritarian governments of places like Bulgaria, China, Cyprus, Egypt, Greece and Italy than by the fair play of our longstanding ally, the United Kingdom.
Perhaps, some of the millions of dollars of US taxpayer money committed to archaeological projects in places like Iraq and Egypt should instead be invested in a pilot Portable Antiquities Scheme program in a place like Bulgaria. That would help Bulgaria record many of the coins that now are not recorded, and show our support not only for Bulgaria, but for our ally, the United Kingdom.
Labels:
Archaeologists,
Cultural Heritage Center,
Lobbying,
pas,
Treasure Trove
Reader Beware: Peter Weiss' Mea Culpa and Ancient Coin Collecting
The archaeological blogosphere is seeking to make the most of Peter Weiss' article in the ANS Magazine. While I don't have much to quibble with concerning Peter's recommendations-- at least as they relate to purchasing very expensive ancient coins-- one must also acknowledge that the article was written under duress as part of a plea deal, and one wonders if getting the article vetted by members of the archaeological lobby was some sort of requirement. It is of particular note that John Russell, a former (or current?) State Department employee also associated with the archaeological lobby (but not known as an expert in coins) is specifically mentioned in the introduction as one of Weiss' editors. Did prosecutor Bogdanos want to help his friends in the State Department justify their much criticized decision making concerning import restrictions on coins by "suggesting" that Russell and other members of the archaeological lobby be given editorial rights? The article certainly fails to mention some of the problems with the archaeological orthodoxy, including poor stewardship of coin finds by archaeologists and countries like Greece, Cyprus and Italy. And let us not forget that unprovenanced coins are widely collected in each of the countries for which the US has granted import restrictions. Yet, I hear no US archaeologist or State Department official criticizing such practices.
For more about Russell's apparent transformation from sanctions breaker to rule maker, see an earlier blog.
Update: As some in the archaeological blogosphere purport to want me to respond to the topics raised in Peter Weiss' article, here again is a link to the article I wrote for the ANS Magazine. I can also assure CPO readers that my own article was not written under duress. Nor was it vetted by members of the archaeological lobby before publication.
For more about Russell's apparent transformation from sanctions breaker to rule maker, see an earlier blog.
Update: As some in the archaeological blogosphere purport to want me to respond to the topics raised in Peter Weiss' article, here again is a link to the article I wrote for the ANS Magazine. I can also assure CPO readers that my own article was not written under duress. Nor was it vetted by members of the archaeological lobby before publication.
Labels:
ancient coins,
ANS,
Archaeologists,
hypocrisy,
Import Restrictions,
Lobbying
Research or Advocacy on "Organized Crime" and the Antiquities Trade?
Chasing Aphrodite has interviewed Simon Mackenzie, an academic associated with the archaeological lobby, about his EU funded �research� into �organized crime� and the antiquities trade. See http://chasingaphrodite.com/2012/06/04/the-antiquities-trade-as-organized-crime-glasgow-team-digs-deep-into-the-market-for-ancient-art/
I�ve been dubious that academics with an axe to grind against collectors could really be expected to produce anything other than advocacy dressed up as "research" to help justify more clamp downs on collectors, museums and dealers, and greater funding for cultural bureaucracies and law enforcement. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2012/02/your-european-tax-euros-at-work.html If anything, this Chasing Aphrodite interview only seems to confirm those concerns.
In that regard, I would note that Mackenzie rejects the notion that overregulation creates a black market and defines �organized crime� quite broadly to include any three or more persons acting in concert to violate some some source country regulation, no matter how draconian. For instance, I presume under this definition an Italian farmer and his two sons who fail to turn over ancient coins they find on their own land to the State which will not compensate them are involved in �organized crime.� And what of a tourist who buys inexpensive antiquities for his children sold quite openly in a shop in Rome, but the shop owner refuses to go through the bother of securing export licenses for such insignificant artifacts? Would Mackenzie and friends treat such tansgressions as "serious" enough to constitute "organized crime" too? I bet they would.
I�ve been dubious that academics with an axe to grind against collectors could really be expected to produce anything other than advocacy dressed up as "research" to help justify more clamp downs on collectors, museums and dealers, and greater funding for cultural bureaucracies and law enforcement. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2012/02/your-european-tax-euros-at-work.html If anything, this Chasing Aphrodite interview only seems to confirm those concerns.
In that regard, I would note that Mackenzie rejects the notion that overregulation creates a black market and defines �organized crime� quite broadly to include any three or more persons acting in concert to violate some some source country regulation, no matter how draconian. For instance, I presume under this definition an Italian farmer and his two sons who fail to turn over ancient coins they find on their own land to the State which will not compensate them are involved in �organized crime.� And what of a tourist who buys inexpensive antiquities for his children sold quite openly in a shop in Rome, but the shop owner refuses to go through the bother of securing export licenses for such insignificant artifacts? Would Mackenzie and friends treat such tansgressions as "serious" enough to constitute "organized crime" too? I bet they would.
Latest Pompeii Collapse: Will State Control Model Collapse Next?
There has been another collapse at Pompeii despite recent EU funding efforts. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/9219470/Pompeii-wall-collapses-despite-new-conservation-initiative.html
Yet, the US State Department, the Italian cultural bureaucracy, and the archaeological lobby still maintain that the Italian State should control anything old as it is the best steward to conserve, study and protect it.
No state has enough resources to protect everything, particularly one teetering on the edge of bankruptcy like Italy. The sooner this basic fact is recognized, the sooner more rational approaches to cultural heritage preservation-- including ones that embrace the value of private collecting-- will be tried, rather than the current approach that assumes a nation state should control everything and anything old.
Yet, the US State Department, the Italian cultural bureaucracy, and the archaeological lobby still maintain that the Italian State should control anything old as it is the best steward to conserve, study and protect it.
No state has enough resources to protect everything, particularly one teetering on the edge of bankruptcy like Italy. The sooner this basic fact is recognized, the sooner more rational approaches to cultural heritage preservation-- including ones that embrace the value of private collecting-- will be tried, rather than the current approach that assumes a nation state should control everything and anything old.
Labels:
AIA,
Italian MOU,
Italy,
Lobbying,
poor stewardship,
State Department
AIA Doubles Down Against Open Access
AIA President Elisabeth Bartman has responded to criticism about the AIA's opposition to legislation meant to guarantee open access to federally funded research. See http://www.archaeological.org/news/8905
This criticism extends to AIA ranks. Recently, Sebastian Heath, the AIA's Past Vice President for Professional Responsibilities, took the AIA to task here: http://ancientworldbloggers.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-and-open-access-response.html
The AIA claims it represents the public interest before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee and in lobbying before Congress.
If so, its publications-- particularly those funded through federal dollars-- should not be used as profit centers. Instead, this research should made freely available to the public, and other fundraising efforts be used to ensure that the organization's publications program continues.
This criticism extends to AIA ranks. Recently, Sebastian Heath, the AIA's Past Vice President for Professional Responsibilities, took the AIA to task here: http://ancientworldbloggers.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-and-open-access-response.html
The AIA claims it represents the public interest before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee and in lobbying before Congress.
If so, its publications-- particularly those funded through federal dollars-- should not be used as profit centers. Instead, this research should made freely available to the public, and other fundraising efforts be used to ensure that the organization's publications program continues.
AIA Seeks to Maintain Monopoly on Research About the Past
The AIA is under attack from groups supporting open access to government funded research for its efforts to oppose the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012.
The legislation is meant to ensure that government funded research is made available to the public on the Internet.
A group called, "Open Access Archaeology" takes the AIA to task, noting,
�The AIA does not understand that the legislation does not force them to make their materials Open Access. It only requires that research paid for by the US federal government be made Open Access after a period of closed access.
�We believe the AIA does not actually know what Open Access is or even what the term means. While public lectures are great it is not Open Access PUBLICATIONS.
�It is not the AIA that adds value to publications but the researchers who write the articles and peer reviewers who make improvements. Both actions are not paid for or undertaken by the AIA but by volunteers for FREE.
�We interpret the AIA mission statement, �Believing that greater understanding of the past enhances our shared sense of humanity and enriches our existence, the AIA seeks to educate people of all ages about the significance of archaeological discovery., to be in full support of Open Access and NOT in support of closed access.
For more, see http://www.openaccessarchaeology.org/response-to-aia.html
The AIA's stance in this matter certainly belies any claims made before Congress and the State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee that import restrictions are necessary to further research that is then made available to the public.
Interestingly, the AIA's efforts against open access appear nowhere on the AIA's advocacy page. See http://www.archaeological.org/sitepreservation/advocacy
Is the AIA interested in the dissemination of knowledge as widely as possible or information control?
The legislation is meant to ensure that government funded research is made available to the public on the Internet.
A group called, "Open Access Archaeology" takes the AIA to task, noting,
�The AIA does not understand that the legislation does not force them to make their materials Open Access. It only requires that research paid for by the US federal government be made Open Access after a period of closed access.
�We believe the AIA does not actually know what Open Access is or even what the term means. While public lectures are great it is not Open Access PUBLICATIONS.
�It is not the AIA that adds value to publications but the researchers who write the articles and peer reviewers who make improvements. Both actions are not paid for or undertaken by the AIA but by volunteers for FREE.
�We interpret the AIA mission statement, �Believing that greater understanding of the past enhances our shared sense of humanity and enriches our existence, the AIA seeks to educate people of all ages about the significance of archaeological discovery., to be in full support of Open Access and NOT in support of closed access.
For more, see http://www.openaccessarchaeology.org/response-to-aia.html
The AIA's stance in this matter certainly belies any claims made before Congress and the State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee that import restrictions are necessary to further research that is then made available to the public.
Interestingly, the AIA's efforts against open access appear nowhere on the AIA's advocacy page. See http://www.archaeological.org/sitepreservation/advocacy
Is the AIA interested in the dissemination of knowledge as widely as possible or information control?
Government, Supported By Archaeological Lobby, Moves Against Sotheby's on Behalf of Cambodia
The Government of Cambodia has been criticized for its undemocratic ways and its border disputes with Thailand. Yet, the US State Department, its Cultural Heritage Center, and its allies in the archaeological community-- including the Department of State funded �Heritage Watch� --have been instrumental in imposing broad restrictions on cultural goods from Cambodia. This, despite the wide availability of this material in markets abroad and the forthright admission by Cambodia�s representative at the most recent CPAC hearing that the Cambodian Army is deeply involved in the supply of ancient Cambodian artifacts to world markets. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html
Now, the Government, again supported by the archaeological lobby, is seeking to seize a Cambodian artifact from Sotheby�s based on allegations that the statute was stolen from an archaeological site, presumably during the dislocation associated with fall of the US-Supported Cambodian government during the aftermath of the Vietnam war. See : http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/arts/design/ancient-cambodian-statue-is-seized-from-sothebys.html?_r=1
My advice to Sotheby�s would be to fight. Experience teaches that press reports sourced to the archaeological lobby may not provide either a complete or accurate depiction of the actual strength of the Government�s case. If SLAM can prevail, perhaps Sotheby�s can as well.
The seizure does, however, suggests that Sotheby�s hiring of a former prosecutor, Jane Levine, has not protected Sotheby�s and its consigners from the aggressive repatriation efforts of the US Government.
Moreover, the seizure raises further questions about whether Jane Levine can serve as an effective member of CPAC or whether her defense of Sotheby�s import of the statue for auction raises conflict of interest issues that cannot be adequately addressed.
Now, the Government, again supported by the archaeological lobby, is seeking to seize a Cambodian artifact from Sotheby�s based on allegations that the statute was stolen from an archaeological site, presumably during the dislocation associated with fall of the US-Supported Cambodian government during the aftermath of the Vietnam war. See : http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/arts/design/ancient-cambodian-statue-is-seized-from-sothebys.html?_r=1
My advice to Sotheby�s would be to fight. Experience teaches that press reports sourced to the archaeological lobby may not provide either a complete or accurate depiction of the actual strength of the Government�s case. If SLAM can prevail, perhaps Sotheby�s can as well.
The seizure does, however, suggests that Sotheby�s hiring of a former prosecutor, Jane Levine, has not protected Sotheby�s and its consigners from the aggressive repatriation efforts of the US Government.
Moreover, the seizure raises further questions about whether Jane Levine can serve as an effective member of CPAC or whether her defense of Sotheby�s import of the statue for auction raises conflict of interest issues that cannot be adequately addressed.
Labels:
Archaeologists,
Cambodia,
Cambodian MOU,
CPAC,
Heritage Watch,
ICE,
Lobbying,
Sotheby's,
stolen antiquities
"Coiney 2012"
This is from the Philadelphia Enquirer April 1, 2012:
COINEY 2012: A Video Hit that Misses?
By April Fells
The archaeological advocacy group Saving Antiquities from Everyone (�SAFRE�) has joined with the archaeological advocacy website �Chasing Afrodite� to promote a video to publicize the evils of ancient coin collecting to a wider audience of young adults.
But a cyclone of controversy is swirling around Coiney 2012, a video by SAFRE members Dr. Nathan Snikel and Gill Barmore. The video that targets ancient coin collectors or �Coineys� has gotten more than 76 million views on YouTube since it was posted March 5.
Some say that Snikel and Barmore are a bunch of self-promoting, overprivileged young adults, others that they are brilliant filmmaker/advocates who know how to use new-media tools to grab the attention of high school and college students.
Actually, they are both, and Coiney 2012 embodies all the potential - and pitfalls - of high-tech advocacy.
Ancient coin collecting used to be known as a somewhat nerdy pastime for middle age and older men interested in ancient history. Then, SAFRE began arguing that ancient coin collecting encouraged the looting of archaeological sites by metal detectorists with ties to the mafia or terrorist groups. First, no one took such claims seriously, but then in 2007 SAFRE�s efforts gained a boost when Cypriot advocacy groups, which had hoped to get the US to agree to side with Greeks over the Turkish enemy on questions related to the division of Cyprus, instead got as a booby prize the commitment of then Undersecretary of State Nicholas Beans to order import restrictions on ancient coins, despite the views of State�s own advisory committee. No one could actually figure how this then became a cornerstone of US foreign policy, but since that time, SAFRE has allegedly worked hand in hand with SAFRE members embedded in the State Department Cultural Hermitage Center to extend import restrictions first imposed on coins from Cyprus, to ancient coins from Italy, Greece and China. Coins from Albania, Bulgaria and the rest of the alphabet are now set for new restrictions every other month.
Both the video and the Coiney 2012 campaign seek to raise awareness and to press the U.S. government to keep up the import restrictions on coin collectors or �Coineys� as the campaign wants them officially designated. Visitors to the Coiney 2012 website (www.coiney2012.com) can sign a �call to de-coin the Coineys,� donate US coins, get an advocacy kit, or, by clicking share, post a link to their Facebook page.
The edgy, half-hour video appeals to those called millennials, or Generation Y, those born approximately between 1980 and 2000. Filmmaker and narrator Snikel begins Coiney 2012 by asserting a new world order created by Facebook, YouTube, and other social network sites: "There are more people on Facebook than there were on the planet 200 years ago. Humanity's greatest desire is to belong and connect. . . . And this connection is changing the way the world works."
It's about being cool. If a friend doesn't know about Coineys at this point, Snikel says, "you automatically think they're an idiot."
Criticism - and there has been a lot - has targeted the video's approach and accuracy, and SAFRE�s finances. The group raises millions yearly and spends much of it on filmmaking, travel and some great beer and �Legalize pot� parties.
The effort has also received criticism abroad, from �Coineys� in other countries. Italian coin collectors are the fiercest critics of all, claiming the group profits from Italy�s troubles, displays a colonialist attitude in its work, and fails to mention the Italian cultural bureaucracy cannot even take care of cultural treasures like Pompeii - charges SAFRE has hotly disputed.
There's another problem: If all these young people do is watch and share the video, then Coiney 2012 is not much more than "slacktivism," Net-based pseudo-activism that's little more than clicking computer keys. SAFRE and Chasing Afrodite have planned activities beyond the video, but the video's getting all the attention.
Moreover, there have been some whispers by worried SAFRE members that the campaign may have backfired, encouraging a new group of youths to take up ancient coin collecting because it is now �gangsta cool� in some hipster circles.
If Coiney 2012 in fact ends up bringing new, younger collectors to ancient coin collecting it will indeed be the hit that missed in a big way.
COINEY 2012: A Video Hit that Misses?
By April Fells
The archaeological advocacy group Saving Antiquities from Everyone (�SAFRE�) has joined with the archaeological advocacy website �Chasing Afrodite� to promote a video to publicize the evils of ancient coin collecting to a wider audience of young adults.
But a cyclone of controversy is swirling around Coiney 2012, a video by SAFRE members Dr. Nathan Snikel and Gill Barmore. The video that targets ancient coin collectors or �Coineys� has gotten more than 76 million views on YouTube since it was posted March 5.
Some say that Snikel and Barmore are a bunch of self-promoting, overprivileged young adults, others that they are brilliant filmmaker/advocates who know how to use new-media tools to grab the attention of high school and college students.
Actually, they are both, and Coiney 2012 embodies all the potential - and pitfalls - of high-tech advocacy.
Ancient coin collecting used to be known as a somewhat nerdy pastime for middle age and older men interested in ancient history. Then, SAFRE began arguing that ancient coin collecting encouraged the looting of archaeological sites by metal detectorists with ties to the mafia or terrorist groups. First, no one took such claims seriously, but then in 2007 SAFRE�s efforts gained a boost when Cypriot advocacy groups, which had hoped to get the US to agree to side with Greeks over the Turkish enemy on questions related to the division of Cyprus, instead got as a booby prize the commitment of then Undersecretary of State Nicholas Beans to order import restrictions on ancient coins, despite the views of State�s own advisory committee. No one could actually figure how this then became a cornerstone of US foreign policy, but since that time, SAFRE has allegedly worked hand in hand with SAFRE members embedded in the State Department Cultural Hermitage Center to extend import restrictions first imposed on coins from Cyprus, to ancient coins from Italy, Greece and China. Coins from Albania, Bulgaria and the rest of the alphabet are now set for new restrictions every other month.
Both the video and the Coiney 2012 campaign seek to raise awareness and to press the U.S. government to keep up the import restrictions on coin collectors or �Coineys� as the campaign wants them officially designated. Visitors to the Coiney 2012 website (www.coiney2012.com) can sign a �call to de-coin the Coineys,� donate US coins, get an advocacy kit, or, by clicking share, post a link to their Facebook page.
The edgy, half-hour video appeals to those called millennials, or Generation Y, those born approximately between 1980 and 2000. Filmmaker and narrator Snikel begins Coiney 2012 by asserting a new world order created by Facebook, YouTube, and other social network sites: "There are more people on Facebook than there were on the planet 200 years ago. Humanity's greatest desire is to belong and connect. . . . And this connection is changing the way the world works."
It's about being cool. If a friend doesn't know about Coineys at this point, Snikel says, "you automatically think they're an idiot."
Criticism - and there has been a lot - has targeted the video's approach and accuracy, and SAFRE�s finances. The group raises millions yearly and spends much of it on filmmaking, travel and some great beer and �Legalize pot� parties.
The effort has also received criticism abroad, from �Coineys� in other countries. Italian coin collectors are the fiercest critics of all, claiming the group profits from Italy�s troubles, displays a colonialist attitude in its work, and fails to mention the Italian cultural bureaucracy cannot even take care of cultural treasures like Pompeii - charges SAFRE has hotly disputed.
There's another problem: If all these young people do is watch and share the video, then Coiney 2012 is not much more than "slacktivism," Net-based pseudo-activism that's little more than clicking computer keys. SAFRE and Chasing Afrodite have planned activities beyond the video, but the video's getting all the attention.
Moreover, there have been some whispers by worried SAFRE members that the campaign may have backfired, encouraging a new group of youths to take up ancient coin collecting because it is now �gangsta cool� in some hipster circles.
If Coiney 2012 in fact ends up bringing new, younger collectors to ancient coin collecting it will indeed be the hit that missed in a big way.
Egyptian Antiquities Minister: We've Got Things Under Control
Egypt's current antiquities minister is quoted as stating,
"All the warehouses of antiquities are fully secured, noting that only 2 percent of the artifacts were stolen during the state of lawlessness which prevailed in the country, he added."
http://allafrica.com/stories/201202211274.html
If so, where is the "emergency" that has prompted all the lobbying from the archaeological community and the sole source contract to ICOM to prepare a "Red List" of Egyptian antiquities that are supposedly at risk?
"All the warehouses of antiquities are fully secured, noting that only 2 percent of the artifacts were stolen during the state of lawlessness which prevailed in the country, he added."
http://allafrica.com/stories/201202211274.html
If so, where is the "emergency" that has prompted all the lobbying from the archaeological community and the sole source contract to ICOM to prepare a "Red List" of Egyptian antiquities that are supposedly at risk?
Labels:
Egyptian MOU,
Emergency Import Restrictions,
ICOM,
Lobbying,
Red Lists
Extralegal Import Restrictions Discussed
A discussion about extralegal import restrictions on coins took place at the recent ACCG gathering conducted during the New York International Coin show. See http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=24783
Import restrictions under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act were meant to be narrowly tailored to protect archaeological sites in specific countries. Unfortunately, due to the extralegal activities of State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological lobby, these restrictions have instead morphed into grossly over broad import bans on whole categories of ancient coins regardless of their find spots.
As such, these extralegal restrictions appear designed to suppress the trade as a whole so that cultural bureaucrats in source countries and their allies in the archaeological lobby can monopolize the study and preservation of even the most common artifacts from the past. That was not the intent of the CPIA. It was instead meant to balance all interests, including those of the trade and collectors.
Import restrictions under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act were meant to be narrowly tailored to protect archaeological sites in specific countries. Unfortunately, due to the extralegal activities of State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological lobby, these restrictions have instead morphed into grossly over broad import bans on whole categories of ancient coins regardless of their find spots.
As such, these extralegal restrictions appear designed to suppress the trade as a whole so that cultural bureaucrats in source countries and their allies in the archaeological lobby can monopolize the study and preservation of even the most common artifacts from the past. That was not the intent of the CPIA. It was instead meant to balance all interests, including those of the trade and collectors.
AIA Lobby Shop Springs into Action
The AIA styles itself as not for profit educational organization, but is acting more and more like a lobby shop in support of foreign cultural bureaucracies all the time. Indeed, the AIA's website now has an "advocacy page" (See http://www.archaeological.org/sitepreservation/advocacy) that links to an effort to gin up comments for the upcoming CPAC meetings on Cyprus and Peru. See http://www.archaeological.org/CPAC
And here is the AIA's party line:
"The looting of sites damages archaeological contexts, hampering archaeologists' study of ancient remains and distorting our reconstruction of the past. Because our understanding of the past is dependent on our ability to recover, study, and interpret ancient sites and artifacts in their original context, the preservation of sites is critical to the creation of archaeological knowledge, as well as to the maintenance of cultural heritage. A commitment to stopping the import of looted cultural material will help to prevent the destruction of the archaeological record."
While its hard to disagree with most of this statement, the last sentence is misleading in the extreme. If the advocates at the AIA were being honest, they would acknowledge that import restrictions as formulated and applied are grossly overbroad. Instead of focusing on artifacts reasonably suspected to be looted, they in fact embargo the import of all undocumented material on a "designated list"-- including many artifacts openly and legally available abroad-- on the assumption it "must be stolen." Of course, the "undocumented" equals "looted" equation only makes some sense for narrow ranges of "culturally significant" material that has not regularly appeared on international markets for generations. Yet, the ideologues at the AIA and the obdurate bureaucrats at State and US Customs have stretched the reach of import restrictions to even the most common artifacts, like ancient coins, that have been widely collected without provenance information for hundreds of years.
And here is the AIA's party line:
"The looting of sites damages archaeological contexts, hampering archaeologists' study of ancient remains and distorting our reconstruction of the past. Because our understanding of the past is dependent on our ability to recover, study, and interpret ancient sites and artifacts in their original context, the preservation of sites is critical to the creation of archaeological knowledge, as well as to the maintenance of cultural heritage. A commitment to stopping the import of looted cultural material will help to prevent the destruction of the archaeological record."
While its hard to disagree with most of this statement, the last sentence is misleading in the extreme. If the advocates at the AIA were being honest, they would acknowledge that import restrictions as formulated and applied are grossly overbroad. Instead of focusing on artifacts reasonably suspected to be looted, they in fact embargo the import of all undocumented material on a "designated list"-- including many artifacts openly and legally available abroad-- on the assumption it "must be stolen." Of course, the "undocumented" equals "looted" equation only makes some sense for narrow ranges of "culturally significant" material that has not regularly appeared on international markets for generations. Yet, the ideologues at the AIA and the obdurate bureaucrats at State and US Customs have stretched the reach of import restrictions to even the most common artifacts, like ancient coins, that have been widely collected without provenance information for hundreds of years.
Labels:
AIA,
bureacracy,
Cyprus,
Import Restrictions,
Lobbying,
Peru,
State Department,
US Customs
Archaeological Lobby Sinks Sackler Exhibit
The archaeological lobby has succeeded in sinking an exhibit at the Sackler Gallery that would have given the American public an opportunity to learn something about early international trade routes in the Orient. See
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sackler-gallery-cancels-controversial-exhibit-of-tang-dynasty-treasures-from-shipwreck/2011/12/15/gIQAnlyjwO_story.html?wprss=rss_style
The exhibit was supposedly sunk because the excavation work was not up to professional standards-- though one suspects that the real reason was to appease archaeologists who have little use for commercial salvers, whether contracted by a foreign government or not.
I've previously covered this dispute here:
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/smithsonian-caves-on-shiprwreck-exhibit.html and http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/none-of-their-business-ii.html
For a thoughtful critique of the archaeological establishment's views on this topic, See http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
Supposedly, the plan now is to "re-excavate the wreck" using AIA approved archaeologists no doubt. But money has to be raised first. Hopefully, taxpayer dollars won't be tapped for such project, but it will not surprise me if the US Government is ultimately expected to foot the bill for what probably is little more at this point than a vanity project.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sackler-gallery-cancels-controversial-exhibit-of-tang-dynasty-treasures-from-shipwreck/2011/12/15/gIQAnlyjwO_story.html?wprss=rss_style
The exhibit was supposedly sunk because the excavation work was not up to professional standards-- though one suspects that the real reason was to appease archaeologists who have little use for commercial salvers, whether contracted by a foreign government or not.
I've previously covered this dispute here:
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/smithsonian-caves-on-shiprwreck-exhibit.html and http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/none-of-their-business-ii.html
For a thoughtful critique of the archaeological establishment's views on this topic, See http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
Supposedly, the plan now is to "re-excavate the wreck" using AIA approved archaeologists no doubt. But money has to be raised first. Hopefully, taxpayer dollars won't be tapped for such project, but it will not surprise me if the US Government is ultimately expected to foot the bill for what probably is little more at this point than a vanity project.
Will the Obama State Department Uphold Import Restrictions Allegedly Founded on Cronyism?
How did the controverisal decision to impose import restriction on Cypriot coins come about? This is a significant issue because this "precedent" has formed the basis for far more extensive restrictions on Chinese, Italian and now Greek coins.
Well, here are some unrebutted allegations from ACCG's Amended Complaint in the Baltimore Test Case. They are largely based on information from FOIA releases:
48. In or about November 2005, Dr. Pavlos Florentzos, Director of the Cyprus Department of Antiquities, visited the United States at the invitation of CAARI and with the support of the U.S. Embassy in Cyprus. During this time, CAARI facilitated a meeting between Florentzos and employees of ECA�s Cultural Heritage Center, including its Executive Director, Maria Kourpoupas, and a staff archaeologist. See J. Green, Cyprus Director of Antiquities, Dr. Pavolos Flourtzos, Visits the U.S., 31 CAARI News 3 (Winter 2006).
49. Upon information and belief, CAARI has benefited from direct and/or indirect financial and/or material support from State, the Government of Cyprus and Cypriot entities, including the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation.
50. Upon information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation was established to rescue the Island�s cultural heritage, which the Foundation maintains was pillaged and destroyed by Turkish forces when they occupied the Northern part of the Island. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation maintains one of the largest collections of ancient coins of Cypriot type within Cyprus. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation purchases unprovenanced coins on the open market for its collection of the sort now subject to U.S. import restrictions on coins of Cypriot type.
51. On January 19, 2006, State announced a five (5) year renewal of its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Italy relating to cultural artifacts. Once again, Defendants exempted ancient coins struck in Italy from import restrictions.
52. On December 7, 2006, the Federal Register carried a notice indicating that CPAC would conduct a review of the MOU with Cyprus. That notice invited public comment to be submitted no later than January 11, 2007. The Federal Register notice contained no mention of an effort to extend new restrictions to coins. See 71 Fed. Reg. 71015-71016 (Dec. 7, 2006).
53. On December 8, 2006, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch indicated in a response to an e-mail inquiry that he �d[id] not anticipate� that new restrictions on coins would be addressed at CPAC�s hearing to consider the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus.
54. On December 14, 2006, two numismatic trade associations filed a request with State to recuse CPAC member Joan Connelly from voting on any last minute effort to impose import restrictions on ancient Cypriot coins. That recusal request noted that Dr. Connelly excavated in Cyprus and had publicly thanked �the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, its Director, Dr. Demos Christou and the Ministry of Communication and Works, Republic of Cyprus, for granting us the license to excavate on Yeronisos Island.�
55. On January 12, 2007, State summarily denied the recusal request.
56. On January 17, 2007, according to a heavily redacted document released in response to a FOIA request, a State ECA Cultural Heritage Center staff archaeologist conferred with the late Dr. Danielle Parks, an archaeologist associated with the CAARI, about the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request.
57. On January 19, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Cyprus requested State to amend the designated list of artifacts subject to import restriction to include coins of Cypriot type.
58. On January 25, 2007, CPAC conducted a public hearing on the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus. At that hearing, CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak announced that he had learned that Cyprus had requested that State amend the designated list of Cypriot artifacts subject to import restrictions to include coins of Cypriot type.
59. Upon information and belief, at that same hearing, neither Cypriot authorities nor members of the archaeological community could point to any material change of fact justifying a change in the exemption from import restrictions on Cypriot coins.
60. On January 26, 2007, in response to complaints about the lack of public notice for the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request, State announced an additional ten (10) day comment period. State made this announcement on the Cultural Heritage Center website and not in the Federal Register. Nevertheless, during this extremely short time frame, numismatic groups generated over 1100 letters opposing the extension of import restrictions to coins.
61. Upon information and belief, comments provided by ACCG and others established: (a) that Cypriot coins were common, with many known examples of coin types struck on the Island; (b) that Cypriot coins travelled widely so that one could not assume that a coin struck in Cyprus was �first discovered� there; (c) that less drastic remedies like the imposition of a treasure trove law and/or the regulation of metal detectors should be tried before import restrictions were considered; (d) and that the CPIA�s �concerted international response� requirement could not be met.
62. Upon information and belief CAARI, the AIA, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, and the late Dr. Danielle Parks submitted comments supporting import restrictions at the behest of Cyprus.
63. In a letter dated February 5, 2007, the AIA�s president claimed that it was proper to assume that coins of Cypriot type can be assumed to have Cypriot find spots, because �Coins minted on Cyprus were very rarely taken from the island in antiquity.�
64. On May 2, 2007, Assistant Secretary of State, ECA Dina Powell, the decision maker for the extension of the MOU with Cyprus announced her departure to become the Director for Global Corporate Engagement at Goldman Sachs. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dina_Powell (last checked, 7/2/10).
65. Upon information and belief, Goldman Sachs is a bank holding company with worldwide business interests, likely including relationships with Cyprus or Cypriot entities like the Bank of Cyprus.
66. On or about May 7, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, CPAC issued its report making its recommendations concerning the extension of the MOU with Cyprus.
67. On or about May 14, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Pavolos Flouretzos, Director, Cypriot Department of Antiquities, admitted in a private communication to State, �It is true that Cypriot coins shared the same destiny as all other coins of the ancient world. As a standard media of exchange they circulated all over the ancient world due to their small size, which facilitated their easy transport� The continuous circulation of coins for many centuries amongst collectors and between collectors and museums make any attempt to locate their exact find spot extremely difficult.�
68. On or about May 16, 2007, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, upon information and belief the third ranking official at State, accepted an award from Greek and Greek Cypriot advocacy groups as these groups lobbied the State policy makers. According to a press release, "Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns was the first Philhellene to receive the Livanos Award. This award is given each year to, as its states on the award, 'that individual who, like George P. Livanos, has utilized ancient Hellenic values to realize extraordinary achievement in modern society while contributing to the improvement of our civilization.'" See http://news.pseka.net/uploads/img/documents/PSEKA-SAE_2007_Conference_EN_01_CEH_01.pdf (last checked, 7/2/10).
69. On or about May 16, 2007, State�s news service quoted Burns as stating on receipt of the Livanos award, "I wear this title of Philhellene rather proudly. You don�t spend four years in Greece, as my wife and three daughters and I did, and not come back feeling committed to Greek thought, to the Greek way of life, to Greece itself in my case....We�re personally committed to the country, to the relationship."
70. On May 17, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Kurt Volker, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, wrote the Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell, stating �[G]iven our general support for protection of antiquities and the importance of this MOU to our bilateral relations with Cyprus, EUR strongly recommends that ECA approve the renewal of the MOU and include the protection of coins.�
71. On May 29, 2007, according to a document released in redacted form in response to a FOIA request, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch wrote an �Action Memo� to the decision maker Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell regarding the extension of the MOU with Cyprus. That Action Memo only provides the decision maker with the false choice of approving the import restrictions including coins in their entirety or disapproving them in their entirety. The Action Memo does not provide the decision maker the option of continuing the then current import restrictions without extending them to coins.
72. On May 30, 2007, according to that same document, Assistant Secretary of State Dina Powell signed off on that action memo that authorized import restrictions on ancient coins of Cypriot type.
73. On July 13, 2007, Defendants formally extended import restrictions to coins of Cypriot Types. See Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Pre-Classical and Classical Archaeological Objects and Byzantine Period Ecclesiastical and Ritual Ethnological Material from Cyprus, 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 72 Fed. Reg. 38470-74 (July 13, 2007).
74. On July 16, 2007, the MOU renewal with Cyprus was signed. That MOU fails to suggest that restrictions under the agreement satisfy the CPIA�s requirements, including the requirement �concerted international response� requirement or the requirement that less drastic remedies than import restrictions on coins are not available.
75. On July 19, 2007, Undersecretary Nicholas Burns conducted a signing ceremony for the MOU to coincide with Greek and Greek Cypriot lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill and at the State Department itself. Upon information and belief, representatives of CAARI were invited to this signing ceremony.
76. The official transcript of the Cyprus MOU signing ceremony omits several significant words. In the transcript, Ambassador Kakouris of Cyprus is reported as saying, "In fact, I was reminded just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and responding to someone very much on the side of the coin collectors who -- talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: �It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.�"
77. In fact, what Kakouris actually said can be heard (at 10:09 of the audio). There, he states, "In fact, I was reminded by [Cultural Heritage Center ED] Maria Kouroupas just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and dealing with the coin collectors and somebody who was very much on their side, when he talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: �It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.�" (Emphasis added.)
78. On July 20, 2007, State issued a press release about the MOU. That press release stated, �With the extension of this MOU, DHS amended the designated list of restricted categories to include ancient coins of Cypriot types produced from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 235 A.D. Coins, a significant and inseparable part of the archaeological record of the island, are especially valuable to understanding the history of Cyprus. This extension of the MOU is consistent with the recommendation of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee, which is administered by the Bureau for Educational and Cultural Affairs.� (Emphasis added.)
79. On August 29, 2007, State sent a report mandated under the CPIA to Congress. Under 19 U.S.C. � 2602 (g)(2), that report is required to: (a) describe the actions taken; (b) whether there were any differences between those actions and CPAC�s recommendations; and, (c) if so, the reasons for those differences. That report, however, contains no indication whether State rejected CPAC recommendation against import restrictions on coins, and, if so, why?
80. In addition, that report also indicates that Customs acted as the lead agency for imposing import restrictions on coins. In pertinent part, the report states, �The Federal Register notice for Cyprus was amended by the Department for Homeland Security, in consultation with the Department of State, to include coins of Cypriot types which are also vulnerable to archaeological looting.�
81. In or about July 17, 2007, ECA publicized the new restrictions on coins of Cypriot types on its website as follows: �The Government of the Republic of Cyprus requested and amendment to the designated list to include coins�. Q. What was the response? A. The Cultural Property Implementation Act places the authority for the Designated List with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in consultation with the Department of State. On July 13, 2007, DHS published a Federal Register notice concerning the extension of the agreement and amending the Designated List to include certain coins from Cyprus, effective July 16, 2007.�
82. In or about May-June 2008, the Cyprus News Service quoted CAARI�s president as stating, �CAARI has been in the forefront of the successful effort to renew the Memorandum of Understanding between Cyprus and the USA restricting the import of Cypriot antiquities into the United States�..� See http://www.caari.org/CAARIat30.htm (last checked, 7/2/10).
83. On January 16, 2009, the Federal Register announced import restrictions on Chinese cultural artifacts, including those on early media of exchange to Tang era cash coins. See 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 74 Fed. Reg. 2838-2844 (Jan. 16, 2009).
84. On April 20, 2009, past CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak signed a declaration in FOIA litigation that stated in pertinent part:
o I am told that Section 303 (g) of the CPIA requires the State Department to report to Congress any differences between CPAC�s recommendations and the State Department�s ultimate decision to impose import restrictions. In this regard, the release of the most recent CPAC report related to Cyprus and its discussion about coins could clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.
o I specifically recall the Cypriot request that then current import restrictions on other cultural artifacts be extended to coins was a matter of great public controversy. CPAC considered the question specifically and I recall a special vote being taken on this particular issue.
o With that in mind, I have reviewed both an official State Department Press Release and a State Department report made pursuant to CPIA Section 303 (g) about the MOU with Cyprus�I believe it is absolutely false to suggest in those materials that the State Department�s decision to extend import restrictions to ancient coins was consistent with CPAC�s recommendations. The full release of CPAC�s recommendations with regard to coins could be in the public interest because it should clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.
Will the Obama Administration and CPAC investigate these allegations before deciding to renew the Cypriot MOU? If true, don't they suggest that the MOU be terminated instead because it is founded on cronyism? If not, why not?
Well, here are some unrebutted allegations from ACCG's Amended Complaint in the Baltimore Test Case. They are largely based on information from FOIA releases:
48. In or about November 2005, Dr. Pavlos Florentzos, Director of the Cyprus Department of Antiquities, visited the United States at the invitation of CAARI and with the support of the U.S. Embassy in Cyprus. During this time, CAARI facilitated a meeting between Florentzos and employees of ECA�s Cultural Heritage Center, including its Executive Director, Maria Kourpoupas, and a staff archaeologist. See J. Green, Cyprus Director of Antiquities, Dr. Pavolos Flourtzos, Visits the U.S., 31 CAARI News 3 (Winter 2006).
49. Upon information and belief, CAARI has benefited from direct and/or indirect financial and/or material support from State, the Government of Cyprus and Cypriot entities, including the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation.
50. Upon information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation was established to rescue the Island�s cultural heritage, which the Foundation maintains was pillaged and destroyed by Turkish forces when they occupied the Northern part of the Island. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation maintains one of the largest collections of ancient coins of Cypriot type within Cyprus. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation purchases unprovenanced coins on the open market for its collection of the sort now subject to U.S. import restrictions on coins of Cypriot type.
51. On January 19, 2006, State announced a five (5) year renewal of its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Italy relating to cultural artifacts. Once again, Defendants exempted ancient coins struck in Italy from import restrictions.
52. On December 7, 2006, the Federal Register carried a notice indicating that CPAC would conduct a review of the MOU with Cyprus. That notice invited public comment to be submitted no later than January 11, 2007. The Federal Register notice contained no mention of an effort to extend new restrictions to coins. See 71 Fed. Reg. 71015-71016 (Dec. 7, 2006).
53. On December 8, 2006, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch indicated in a response to an e-mail inquiry that he �d[id] not anticipate� that new restrictions on coins would be addressed at CPAC�s hearing to consider the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus.
54. On December 14, 2006, two numismatic trade associations filed a request with State to recuse CPAC member Joan Connelly from voting on any last minute effort to impose import restrictions on ancient Cypriot coins. That recusal request noted that Dr. Connelly excavated in Cyprus and had publicly thanked �the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, its Director, Dr. Demos Christou and the Ministry of Communication and Works, Republic of Cyprus, for granting us the license to excavate on Yeronisos Island.�
55. On January 12, 2007, State summarily denied the recusal request.
56. On January 17, 2007, according to a heavily redacted document released in response to a FOIA request, a State ECA Cultural Heritage Center staff archaeologist conferred with the late Dr. Danielle Parks, an archaeologist associated with the CAARI, about the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request.
57. On January 19, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Cyprus requested State to amend the designated list of artifacts subject to import restriction to include coins of Cypriot type.
58. On January 25, 2007, CPAC conducted a public hearing on the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus. At that hearing, CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak announced that he had learned that Cyprus had requested that State amend the designated list of Cypriot artifacts subject to import restrictions to include coins of Cypriot type.
59. Upon information and belief, at that same hearing, neither Cypriot authorities nor members of the archaeological community could point to any material change of fact justifying a change in the exemption from import restrictions on Cypriot coins.
60. On January 26, 2007, in response to complaints about the lack of public notice for the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request, State announced an additional ten (10) day comment period. State made this announcement on the Cultural Heritage Center website and not in the Federal Register. Nevertheless, during this extremely short time frame, numismatic groups generated over 1100 letters opposing the extension of import restrictions to coins.
61. Upon information and belief, comments provided by ACCG and others established: (a) that Cypriot coins were common, with many known examples of coin types struck on the Island; (b) that Cypriot coins travelled widely so that one could not assume that a coin struck in Cyprus was �first discovered� there; (c) that less drastic remedies like the imposition of a treasure trove law and/or the regulation of metal detectors should be tried before import restrictions were considered; (d) and that the CPIA�s �concerted international response� requirement could not be met.
62. Upon information and belief CAARI, the AIA, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, and the late Dr. Danielle Parks submitted comments supporting import restrictions at the behest of Cyprus.
63. In a letter dated February 5, 2007, the AIA�s president claimed that it was proper to assume that coins of Cypriot type can be assumed to have Cypriot find spots, because �Coins minted on Cyprus were very rarely taken from the island in antiquity.�
64. On May 2, 2007, Assistant Secretary of State, ECA Dina Powell, the decision maker for the extension of the MOU with Cyprus announced her departure to become the Director for Global Corporate Engagement at Goldman Sachs. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dina_Powell (last checked, 7/2/10).
65. Upon information and belief, Goldman Sachs is a bank holding company with worldwide business interests, likely including relationships with Cyprus or Cypriot entities like the Bank of Cyprus.
66. On or about May 7, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, CPAC issued its report making its recommendations concerning the extension of the MOU with Cyprus.
67. On or about May 14, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Pavolos Flouretzos, Director, Cypriot Department of Antiquities, admitted in a private communication to State, �It is true that Cypriot coins shared the same destiny as all other coins of the ancient world. As a standard media of exchange they circulated all over the ancient world due to their small size, which facilitated their easy transport� The continuous circulation of coins for many centuries amongst collectors and between collectors and museums make any attempt to locate their exact find spot extremely difficult.�
68. On or about May 16, 2007, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, upon information and belief the third ranking official at State, accepted an award from Greek and Greek Cypriot advocacy groups as these groups lobbied the State policy makers. According to a press release, "Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns was the first Philhellene to receive the Livanos Award. This award is given each year to, as its states on the award, 'that individual who, like George P. Livanos, has utilized ancient Hellenic values to realize extraordinary achievement in modern society while contributing to the improvement of our civilization.'" See http://news.pseka.net/uploads/img/documents/PSEKA-SAE_2007_Conference_EN_01_CEH_01.pdf (last checked, 7/2/10).
69. On or about May 16, 2007, State�s news service quoted Burns as stating on receipt of the Livanos award, "I wear this title of Philhellene rather proudly. You don�t spend four years in Greece, as my wife and three daughters and I did, and not come back feeling committed to Greek thought, to the Greek way of life, to Greece itself in my case....We�re personally committed to the country, to the relationship."
70. On May 17, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Kurt Volker, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, wrote the Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell, stating �[G]iven our general support for protection of antiquities and the importance of this MOU to our bilateral relations with Cyprus, EUR strongly recommends that ECA approve the renewal of the MOU and include the protection of coins.�
71. On May 29, 2007, according to a document released in redacted form in response to a FOIA request, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch wrote an �Action Memo� to the decision maker Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell regarding the extension of the MOU with Cyprus. That Action Memo only provides the decision maker with the false choice of approving the import restrictions including coins in their entirety or disapproving them in their entirety. The Action Memo does not provide the decision maker the option of continuing the then current import restrictions without extending them to coins.
72. On May 30, 2007, according to that same document, Assistant Secretary of State Dina Powell signed off on that action memo that authorized import restrictions on ancient coins of Cypriot type.
73. On July 13, 2007, Defendants formally extended import restrictions to coins of Cypriot Types. See Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Pre-Classical and Classical Archaeological Objects and Byzantine Period Ecclesiastical and Ritual Ethnological Material from Cyprus, 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 72 Fed. Reg. 38470-74 (July 13, 2007).
74. On July 16, 2007, the MOU renewal with Cyprus was signed. That MOU fails to suggest that restrictions under the agreement satisfy the CPIA�s requirements, including the requirement �concerted international response� requirement or the requirement that less drastic remedies than import restrictions on coins are not available.
75. On July 19, 2007, Undersecretary Nicholas Burns conducted a signing ceremony for the MOU to coincide with Greek and Greek Cypriot lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill and at the State Department itself. Upon information and belief, representatives of CAARI were invited to this signing ceremony.
76. The official transcript of the Cyprus MOU signing ceremony omits several significant words. In the transcript, Ambassador Kakouris of Cyprus is reported as saying, "In fact, I was reminded just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and responding to someone very much on the side of the coin collectors who -- talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: �It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.�"
77. In fact, what Kakouris actually said can be heard (at 10:09 of the audio). There, he states, "In fact, I was reminded by [Cultural Heritage Center ED] Maria Kouroupas just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and dealing with the coin collectors and somebody who was very much on their side, when he talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: �It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.�" (Emphasis added.)
78. On July 20, 2007, State issued a press release about the MOU. That press release stated, �With the extension of this MOU, DHS amended the designated list of restricted categories to include ancient coins of Cypriot types produced from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 235 A.D. Coins, a significant and inseparable part of the archaeological record of the island, are especially valuable to understanding the history of Cyprus. This extension of the MOU is consistent with the recommendation of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee, which is administered by the Bureau for Educational and Cultural Affairs.� (Emphasis added.)
79. On August 29, 2007, State sent a report mandated under the CPIA to Congress. Under 19 U.S.C. � 2602 (g)(2), that report is required to: (a) describe the actions taken; (b) whether there were any differences between those actions and CPAC�s recommendations; and, (c) if so, the reasons for those differences. That report, however, contains no indication whether State rejected CPAC recommendation against import restrictions on coins, and, if so, why?
80. In addition, that report also indicates that Customs acted as the lead agency for imposing import restrictions on coins. In pertinent part, the report states, �The Federal Register notice for Cyprus was amended by the Department for Homeland Security, in consultation with the Department of State, to include coins of Cypriot types which are also vulnerable to archaeological looting.�
81. In or about July 17, 2007, ECA publicized the new restrictions on coins of Cypriot types on its website as follows: �The Government of the Republic of Cyprus requested and amendment to the designated list to include coins�. Q. What was the response? A. The Cultural Property Implementation Act places the authority for the Designated List with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in consultation with the Department of State. On July 13, 2007, DHS published a Federal Register notice concerning the extension of the agreement and amending the Designated List to include certain coins from Cyprus, effective July 16, 2007.�
82. In or about May-June 2008, the Cyprus News Service quoted CAARI�s president as stating, �CAARI has been in the forefront of the successful effort to renew the Memorandum of Understanding between Cyprus and the USA restricting the import of Cypriot antiquities into the United States�..� See http://www.caari.org/CAARIat30.htm (last checked, 7/2/10).
83. On January 16, 2009, the Federal Register announced import restrictions on Chinese cultural artifacts, including those on early media of exchange to Tang era cash coins. See 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 74 Fed. Reg. 2838-2844 (Jan. 16, 2009).
84. On April 20, 2009, past CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak signed a declaration in FOIA litigation that stated in pertinent part:
o I am told that Section 303 (g) of the CPIA requires the State Department to report to Congress any differences between CPAC�s recommendations and the State Department�s ultimate decision to impose import restrictions. In this regard, the release of the most recent CPAC report related to Cyprus and its discussion about coins could clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.
o I specifically recall the Cypriot request that then current import restrictions on other cultural artifacts be extended to coins was a matter of great public controversy. CPAC considered the question specifically and I recall a special vote being taken on this particular issue.
o With that in mind, I have reviewed both an official State Department Press Release and a State Department report made pursuant to CPIA Section 303 (g) about the MOU with Cyprus�I believe it is absolutely false to suggest in those materials that the State Department�s decision to extend import restrictions to ancient coins was consistent with CPAC�s recommendations. The full release of CPAC�s recommendations with regard to coins could be in the public interest because it should clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.
Will the Obama Administration and CPAC investigate these allegations before deciding to renew the Cypriot MOU? If true, don't they suggest that the MOU be terminated instead because it is founded on cronyism? If not, why not?
CPAC Hearing on Bolivian MOU: State Department Responds to Narrow Special Interests
The AIA has posted a summary of CPAC's hearing on a proposed renewal of an MOU with Bolivia on its website. See
http://www.archaeological.org/news/advocacy/6098
US relations with the anti-American leftist government of Evo Morales are so poor that each country has recalled its ambassador. See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35751.htm.
However, does anyone believe this will impact yet another renewal of import restrictions on Bolivian artifacts? See http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/blfact.html
What is stiking though is really how small is the group that benefits most from such restrictions. Indeed, according to one speaker, no more than 40-50 archaeologists are currently at work in the entire country!
And, of course, the tangible public support for such restrictions is even more limited. Only 25 members of the public commented at all on the restrictions. And while most of these comments were in support, many of these appear to be from members of the AIA's leadership. See http://www.regulations.gov/#docketDetail;dct=FR+PR+N+O+SR+PS;rpp=10;po=0;D=DOS-2011-0092 (Docket No. DOS-2011-0092) Hardly a ringing endorsement by the American public in favor of giving away something for nothing once again to an unfriendly nation in the name of archaeology!
Also of interest is the fact that the Bolivian government apparently at least tolerates indigenous collectors (wonder how connected they are to the local power elite?). According to another speaker, a local collector was convinced to put his collection into a museum rather than put it up for international sale. This is all fine and good, but if so, why should Americans be put in legal jeopardy for buying such material when Bolivians are allowed to collect it?
The Bolivian Government is no friend to our Government. Our Government is awash in red ink. President Obama has claimed he is against over regulation. Yet, if history is any guide, the State Department will renew this MOU yet again to assuage the demands of archaeologists, and likely do so without any conditions whatsoever that require Bolivia to do something in return for our trouble.
Why? Are such agreements worth the costs involved to the US taxpayer, to museums and to those interested in collecting such material, particularly given the very narrow special interests such agreements actually serve?
http://www.archaeological.org/news/advocacy/6098
US relations with the anti-American leftist government of Evo Morales are so poor that each country has recalled its ambassador. See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35751.htm.
However, does anyone believe this will impact yet another renewal of import restrictions on Bolivian artifacts? See http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/blfact.html
What is stiking though is really how small is the group that benefits most from such restrictions. Indeed, according to one speaker, no more than 40-50 archaeologists are currently at work in the entire country!
And, of course, the tangible public support for such restrictions is even more limited. Only 25 members of the public commented at all on the restrictions. And while most of these comments were in support, many of these appear to be from members of the AIA's leadership. See http://www.regulations.gov/#docketDetail;dct=FR+PR+N+O+SR+PS;rpp=10;po=0;D=DOS-2011-0092 (Docket No. DOS-2011-0092) Hardly a ringing endorsement by the American public in favor of giving away something for nothing once again to an unfriendly nation in the name of archaeology!
Also of interest is the fact that the Bolivian government apparently at least tolerates indigenous collectors (wonder how connected they are to the local power elite?). According to another speaker, a local collector was convinced to put his collection into a museum rather than put it up for international sale. This is all fine and good, but if so, why should Americans be put in legal jeopardy for buying such material when Bolivians are allowed to collect it?
The Bolivian Government is no friend to our Government. Our Government is awash in red ink. President Obama has claimed he is against over regulation. Yet, if history is any guide, the State Department will renew this MOU yet again to assuage the demands of archaeologists, and likely do so without any conditions whatsoever that require Bolivia to do something in return for our trouble.
Why? Are such agreements worth the costs involved to the US taxpayer, to museums and to those interested in collecting such material, particularly given the very narrow special interests such agreements actually serve?
Obama Appoints Prof. Patty Gerstenblith to Chair CPAC
The Obama Administration has shown its support for the archaeological community by appointing Prof. Patty Gerstenblith Chair of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee. Professor Nancy Wilkie was also reappointed to represent the interests of the archaeological community on CPAC. See
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/06/24/president-obama-announces-more-key-administration-posts
The announcement does not state which interest group Prof. Gerstenblith will represent on CPAC. Presumably, Prof. Gerstenblith should represent the interests of the archaeological community, but it is also possible that the Obama Administration will designate her as a member representing the interests of the public.
In any event, it appears that the Obama State Department has decided to "solve" its "CPAC problem" by tilting CPAC to the extreme archaeological view adopted by the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center.
Opensecrets.org reports that Prof. Gerstenblith has donated $14,950 to Democratic candidates since 2008, including $2,300 to President Obama's election campaign and $1500 to his Senatorial campaigns.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/06/24/president-obama-announces-more-key-administration-posts
The announcement does not state which interest group Prof. Gerstenblith will represent on CPAC. Presumably, Prof. Gerstenblith should represent the interests of the archaeological community, but it is also possible that the Obama Administration will designate her as a member representing the interests of the public.
In any event, it appears that the Obama State Department has decided to "solve" its "CPAC problem" by tilting CPAC to the extreme archaeological view adopted by the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center.
Opensecrets.org reports that Prof. Gerstenblith has donated $14,950 to Democratic candidates since 2008, including $2,300 to President Obama's election campaign and $1500 to his Senatorial campaigns.
Egypt: No "Emergency" After All, Just More Exaggeration
Less than a month after Egyptian Antiquities Pharaoh Zahi Hawass suggested on his blog that archaeo-lobbyists of the "Capitol Archaeological Institute" had been given agreement authority by the US State Department to draft a MOU imposing "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural goods, see
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html, Hawass has blogged that there really is no "emergency" in Egypt after all. See http://www.drhawass.com/blog/can-egypt-protect-its-ancient-monuments
Hawass now states, " I have been distressed by recent reports that exaggerate the damage done to our antiquities...."
And so am I, but for different reasons.
This again just goes to show that archaeologists are simply not credible sources when it comes to reports of looting in countries where the facts are difficult to verify. Archaeologists have previously exaggerated looting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq to justify emergency import restrictions. Here, they have apparently done so again-- this despite Minister Hawass' own view that the situation is under control.
Emergency import restrictions are unnecessary here. Egyptian and US authorities are well able to interdict looted artifacts.
But archaeological fanatics want more: they see import restrictions as a way to drive unprovenanced artifacts off the market in the United States, at least.
And ginning up an "emergency" is their best way to assist their cronies in the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center to get the job done. Based on their exaggerations, yet another collecting area will likely become off limits to all those but the wealthy who can afford to purchase the limited number of artifacts with detailed collecting histories.
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html, Hawass has blogged that there really is no "emergency" in Egypt after all. See http://www.drhawass.com/blog/can-egypt-protect-its-ancient-monuments
Hawass now states, " I have been distressed by recent reports that exaggerate the damage done to our antiquities...."
And so am I, but for different reasons.
This again just goes to show that archaeologists are simply not credible sources when it comes to reports of looting in countries where the facts are difficult to verify. Archaeologists have previously exaggerated looting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq to justify emergency import restrictions. Here, they have apparently done so again-- this despite Minister Hawass' own view that the situation is under control.
Emergency import restrictions are unnecessary here. Egyptian and US authorities are well able to interdict looted artifacts.
But archaeological fanatics want more: they see import restrictions as a way to drive unprovenanced artifacts off the market in the United States, at least.
And ginning up an "emergency" is their best way to assist their cronies in the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center to get the job done. Based on their exaggerations, yet another collecting area will likely become off limits to all those but the wealthy who can afford to purchase the limited number of artifacts with detailed collecting histories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)