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?
Showing posts with label Bolivia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bolivia. Show all posts
AIA's Lobby Shop Gins Up Letters for Bolivia MOU
The Bolivian Government, which has fallen under the orbit of Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's Dictator, is no friend of the United States. See http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=51849
Yet, the AIA is ginning up a lobbying campaign to ensure that the State Department renews its MOU with Bolivia for a fourth time.
See http://www.archaeological.org/cpac
Despite poor bilateral relations, I suspect this effort will be successful, particularly given the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center's predilections to renew MOU's as a standard operating procedure.
Yet, the AIA is ginning up a lobbying campaign to ensure that the State Department renews its MOU with Bolivia for a fourth time.
See http://www.archaeological.org/cpac
Despite poor bilateral relations, I suspect this effort will be successful, particularly given the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center's predilections to renew MOU's as a standard operating procedure.
Freudian Slip?
This entry from the "What's New" section of the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs website was recently brought to my attention.
It states,
Advisory Committee to Convene to Consider the MOU with Bolivia
The Cultural Property Advisory Committee will convene on June 27-28, 2011, to consider the proposal of Assistant Secretary Ann Stock to extend the existing Memorandum of Understanding with Bolivia, which entered into force in December 2001. The Federal Register Notice about the meeting contains details on how to submit written comments for the Committee, and how to reserve a seat at the open session of the meeting on June 27, 2011. Please read the information carefully, as the procedures have changed. (emphasis added)
http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/whatsnew.html
Silly me. I thought Bolivia was asking for an extension of the current agreement, and Ann Stock, the decision maker, was not supposed to prejudge the issue.
One would hope that this was just a poorly drafted news item, but since agreements are typically renewed without much thought, perhaps the item may be more accurately characterized as a bureaucratic Freudian slip.
It states,
Advisory Committee to Convene to Consider the MOU with Bolivia
The Cultural Property Advisory Committee will convene on June 27-28, 2011, to consider the proposal of Assistant Secretary Ann Stock to extend the existing Memorandum of Understanding with Bolivia, which entered into force in December 2001. The Federal Register Notice about the meeting contains details on how to submit written comments for the Committee, and how to reserve a seat at the open session of the meeting on June 27, 2011. Please read the information carefully, as the procedures have changed. (emphasis added)
http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/whatsnew.html
Silly me. I thought Bolivia was asking for an extension of the current agreement, and Ann Stock, the decision maker, was not supposed to prejudge the issue.
One would hope that this was just a poorly drafted news item, but since agreements are typically renewed without much thought, perhaps the item may be more accurately characterized as a bureaucratic Freudian slip.
CPAC Meetings on Bolivia, Guatemala and Mali
The State Department has announced CPAC review of the MOU's with Bolivia, Guatemala and Mali. See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-06-02/html/2011-13693.htm
According to the notice,
During its meeting on Monday, June 27, the Committee will begin its review of a proposal to extend the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bolivia Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from the Pre-Columbian Cultures and Certain Ethnological Material from the Colonial and Republican
Periods of Bolivia [Docket No. DOS-2011-0092]. An open session to receive oral public comment on this proposal to extend will be held from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.
On Tuesday, June 28, the Committee will conduct interim reviews of the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Guatemala Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Objects and Materials from the Pre-Columbian Cultures of Guatemala, and of the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Mali Concerning the Imposition of import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from Mali from the Paleolithic Era (Stone Age) to approximately the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Public comment, oral and written, will be invited at a time in the future should these MOUs be proposed for extension.
This continues the anti-transparency trend at the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. The public is no longer welcome to provide testimony on whether a source country is living up to its side of an MOU during an interim review hearing. Instead, comments are only welcome at the very end of the process-- when the train has almost arrived at the station.....
Not that anyone really believes that the State Department holds source countries to their promises to secure such MOU's. If they did, its doubtful many of the MOU's would continue to be extended and even expanded time and time again.
According to the notice,
During its meeting on Monday, June 27, the Committee will begin its review of a proposal to extend the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bolivia Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from the Pre-Columbian Cultures and Certain Ethnological Material from the Colonial and Republican
Periods of Bolivia [Docket No. DOS-2011-0092]. An open session to receive oral public comment on this proposal to extend will be held from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.
On Tuesday, June 28, the Committee will conduct interim reviews of the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Guatemala Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Objects and Materials from the Pre-Columbian Cultures of Guatemala, and of the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Mali Concerning the Imposition of import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from Mali from the Paleolithic Era (Stone Age) to approximately the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Public comment, oral and written, will be invited at a time in the future should these MOUs be proposed for extension.
This continues the anti-transparency trend at the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. The public is no longer welcome to provide testimony on whether a source country is living up to its side of an MOU during an interim review hearing. Instead, comments are only welcome at the very end of the process-- when the train has almost arrived at the station.....
Not that anyone really believes that the State Department holds source countries to their promises to secure such MOU's. If they did, its doubtful many of the MOU's would continue to be extended and even expanded time and time again.
Labels:
Bolivia,
bureacracy,
CPAC,
Guatamala,
Import Restrictions,
Mali,
transparency
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)