Renewals for Afghanistan and Turkey Raise Unreconcilable Contradictions

This is what I said at today's CPAC hearing:  

Thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the International Association of Professional Numismatists.  IAPN opposes renewals for Afghanistan and  for Turkey.  IAPN takes no position on a new MOU for Cameroon or a renewal for Colombia, but opposes any import restrictions on coins.  The coins that circulated in these two countries simply don’t meet the criteria for either archaeological or ethnological objects.  Historical coinage that circulated in Colombia was also US legal tender before 1857 and the first official issues of Cameroon were late 19^th century coinage of the German Empire.

I would like to focus my comments today on Afghanistan and Turkey.  Both renewals raise fundamental contradictions that cannot possibly be reconciled.

Proponents argue that import restrictions promote cultural heritage preservation and are only directed against keeping recently looted material off the market.  However, such claims are misleading at best given the reality on the ground in both countries and the way US Customs enforces  import restrictions as embargoes on material imported from legal markets abroad, chiefly in Europe.  

Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers blew up the  Bamiyan Buddhas and smashed statuary at the Kabul Museum.  More recent efforts at bribing them into caring with money for “conservation projects” can’t compete with Chinese business interests which are in the process of destroying a major Buddhist site at Mes Aynak to mine copper.   Moreover, any looting has been going on for decades, all under the watchful eyes of local warlords.  The only difference now is that they pledge allegiance to the Taliban.  Such long term looting with the full knowledge of government authorities simply does not qualify as an  “emergency.”   Finally, despite the AIA’s claims to the contrary, Section 1216 of the National Defense Authorization Act is no safe harbor provision because it only covers institutional loans.  In fact, US law requires repatriation to the Taliban once diplomatic relations are restored, and  any decision will be made on a basis other than the safety of the objects.

Meanwhile, Erdogan’s aggressive repatriation efforts abroad must be contrasted with his government’s active promotion of  “treasure hunting” at former Jewish and Christian sites at home.  This is just another provocation directed at minority religious groups like the conversion of Hagia Sophia and the Cathedral at Ani into mosques. 

For coins, extensive “designated lists” which cover coins that circulated regionally or internationally only hurt legitimate trade.  Efforts to limit such lists to coins “sourced” to Afghanistan or which “circulated primarily” in Turkey are meaningless since US Customs seizes coins based on their  “type” alone.  That means pretty much all ancient and early modern coins are now at risk unless the importer can prove the “negative” that they were out of a given country before the effective date of the governing regulations or for at least 10 years    While  enforcement has been spotty, it does occur with the results being that collectors have their property taken with little, if any, “due process.” 

Going forward, the best solution would be for the Trump Administration to make  preparing designated lists  subject to the Administrative Procedure Act and for any detentions, seizures and forfeitures of cultural property to be subject to the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.  The former would require the government to justify the inclusion of specific coin types in the designated lists and the latter would help  ensure that import restrictions only apply in situations where there was some evidence that the coin in question was illicitly exported from a country with a MOU or emergency restrictions after the date of the governing regulations.

Thank you for your consideration of the views of the micro businesses of the numismatic trade.