China’s leader, Xi
Jinping, has popularized the slogan, the Chinese Dream, as a call for China to
reclaim its ancient glory.
Part of all
this, of course, is to highlight
the importance of ancient Chinese artifacts not just through diplomatic
efforts like this MOU,
but through the creation of a vibrant internal collector’s market, including world class bourses
like the Beijing International Coin Exposition and auction houses like China
Guardian and Poly Auctions.
IAPN and PNG
are all for the
Chinese government encouraging China’s own people to collect, preserve, study and display ancient
artifacts, particularly as common as ancient Chinese coins, which must exist in
the billions. That certainly is
much preferable to the ideologically
motivated destruction of Chinese cultural heritage during the Cultural
Revolution or, for that matter, the far more recent demolition of Christian
Churches by China’s atheist government.
But given the reality
of a huge, largely open internal
Chinese market in common antiquities like pottery and coins, it’s a fair question to ask what is
the real purpose of the import restrictions our State Department, presumably
with the consent of CPAC, have imposed on American collectors, the small
businesses of the antiquities and coin trade and museums?
Certainly, archaeologists
have argued that import restrictions help drive potentially looted artifacts
off the market, but such a claim makes little sense whatsoever given this huge internal Chinese
market. Indeed, all that is really being
accomplished is to give Chinese dealers, auction houses and collectors a leg up on their foreign,
particularly American competition.
Does the Trump Administration really
support such a state of affairs, particularly where the most successful Chinese
antiquities sales outlets are controlled by insiders associated with the
Chinese Government, like Poly Group controlled by the family of former leader
Deng Xiaoping who also run a major weapons producer, and China Guardian
Auctions, run by Chen Dongsheng, the grandson-in-law of the PRC’s founder, Mao
Zedong? Let’s hope not.
There is also
the issue of Chinese obligations under the current MOU.
Several issues come to mind. First, China was supposed to make it easier to legally export
artifacts, but that provision was drastically limited in the 2014 renewal to
Chinese objects imported into China for re-export and there is no indication
China has even complied with this weaker provision. Of course, few rules apply to the free ports
of Hong Kong and Macao. China was
also initially supposed to clamp down on them, but it has not. Instead, artifacts leaving these ports can still
be re-imported into the PRC no questions asked.
Even more
importantly for US coin collectors is the issue of Chinese fakes of historic US coins. As the letter submitted by our sister
organization, ICTA, states, Chinese
businesses licensed by the Chinese Government are counterfeiting untold
thousands of fake historic US mint coins which are then being introduced into
the US numismatic market. How can the US State Department countenance
the renewal of a MOU when the PRC encourages the production of counterfeits that
have damaged the American coin trade and which also represent a serious
violation of US counterfeiting and hobby protection laws?
Finally, let’s
talk more about Chinese coins currently on the designated list. The State Department and U.S. Customs have misapplied the CPIA’s requirement
limiting any restrictions to
artifacts “first discovered within” and “subject to the export control” of
China. They have instead barred the
import of any Tang Dynasty and earlier coins based on their place of production,
which is entirely different.
One cannot safely assume any
Chinese cash coins are only found where they were made. Scholarly evidence demonstrates that early
cash coins like those on the designated list were exported in quantity with later issues all around
the Far East and even as
far West as Africa and the Arabian coast.
Moreover, it is difficult for all but experts to tell restricted Tang
and earlier Chinese cash coins from later unrestricted ones that were produced
as late as 1911 or similar ones made in places like Japan, Korea and Vietnam.
The MOU with China should be
suspended because it is doing nothing to actually protect Chinese
archaeological sites, but at
a minimum, Chinese cash coins, which exist in the billions and which are widely
collected in China itself should be delisted.
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Henceforth, comments will only be posted from those who provide a full name, country of residence and basis for interest, i.e., collector, archaeologist, academic, etc. or their Blogger profile provides such information.