Despite some real questions (even raised within the archaeological blogosphere) about the true extent of antiquities smuggling from Syria, a UN Panel, which presumably only heard from anti-trade proponents of a ban, has advocated just that as an anti-terrorism measure.
The panel's recommendations will now be considered by the Security Council, but CPO doubts there will be any effort to conduct a real assessment of the situation or to assess the negative impact of such a ban on the lawful trade in undocumented Syrian antiquities long out of that country, on refugees fleeing with family heirlooms or on the fate of Christian and Jewish religious artifacts.
And let's get real. Where do the proponents of such a ban think any antiquities that are seized should be returned to? Of course, the only possible choices are Assad, ISIS or the Free Syrian Army, all of whom have been implicated to one extent or the other in the destruction and looting that have prompted the calls for a ban in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
" Where do the proponents of such a ban think any antiquities that are seized should be returned to? "
The genuinely ardent proponents of such sentiments are one thing, but within their ranks and hi-jacking the debate are cranks bent on using them for their own ends; high-end single-issue nutters of whom we are all familiar.
Mercifully, while the familiar psycho's are sticking pins in voodoo dolls of collectors, then at least flies are not having their wings plucked out.
Luckily for us the nutters are easily spotted. On that, I'm convinced, we need to expose and capitalize.
Warm regards
John Howland
England
Post a Comment