Not MAGA: Trump Administration Implements Biden Embargo on "Indian" Cultural Goods

The Federal Register has announced long anticipated import restrictions on Indian cultural goods.  This is yet another wide-reaching Biden Administration  MOU implemented by the Trump Administration.

Following a trend that picked up steam under the Obama Administration and accelerated under Trump I and Biden, the announced restrictions are extremely broad, covering archaeological material dating as recently as 1770 and ethnological material dating as recently as the end of the Raj in 1947.

 Here is a link to the restrictions: 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/07/28/2025-14114/imposition-of-import-restrictions-on-archaeological-and-ethnological-material-of-india

For coin collectors, the restrictions generally include all coins found in India, including Persian, Greek, Roman, and later issues with types struck in India specifically named as part of the designated list: 

 (5) Coins—Ancient coins include gold, silver, copper, lead, and copper alloy coins in a variety of sizes and denominations. Includes gold and silver ingots and commemorative coins. Coins may be circular, oval, square, or polygonal in shape, may be punch-marked, hammered, cast, molded, and/or gilded. Coins may include designs on one or both sides, including edges. Designs may include portraits, crests, deities, and animal, floral, architectural, geometric, and/or vegetal motifs, and/or may be inscribed in various languages and scripts. Includes depictions of symbols and figures from Buddhist, Jain, Hindu, Christian, Sikh, and Zoroastrian religious traditions, among others. Includes Roman, Persian, Greek or Hellenistic, Gandharan, Central Asian, and other coins found in India. Includes coins that were reused or converted into decorative objects or objects of personal adornment. Approximate Date: 600 B.C.E.-1770 C.E.

a. Early Historic Period includes punch-marked coins, discs, tokens, among others in gold and silver. May include depictions of animals, geometric, floral, and/or vegetal motifs.

b. Historic Period includes, but is not limited to, Mauryan punch marked coins ( karshapana) with various symbols such as suns, crescents, six-arm designs, hills, peacocks, human figures, animals, and others, and inscriptions in Brahmi script; Roman silver and bronze coins; Hellenistic and Gandharan drachms, tetradrachms, and gold staters featuring iconography of Hellenistic deities and human portraiture and inscriptions in Greek and Kharoshti; Kushan dinars, tetradrachms, and copper alloy denominations with iconography from Persian, Zoroastrian, Buddhist, and Hindu traditions; Western Satraps coins with bull-and-hill or elephant-and-hill images; Indo-Scythian coins; Satavahana coins with Prakrit inscriptions and animal, floral, geometric, star, Buddhist shrines or stupas, human, wheel, and/or maritime motifs; Ashokan stambha coins featuring a central pillar; Gupta dinaras and drachms and others with images of animals, human figures, mythological birds, archery, javelins, battle-axes, wheels and scepters, deities, and portraiture along with floral, geometric, and/or vegetal motifs, including inscriptions in Brahmi script.

c. Medieval Period includes, but is not limited to: Gurjara-Pratihara, Pallava, and other dynastic coins or tokens with portraiture and geometric, animal, and religious motifs; Chola coins with crests of animals and weapons, mythological icons, and inscriptions in the Nagari script; Vijayanagara pagoda coins featuring Hindu deities and related symbols; Delhi Sultanate tankas and jitals with animal, religious, floral, geometric, and/or vegetal motifs and calligraphic inscriptions in various languages and scripts such as Arabic.

d. Mughal Empire or Early Modern Period includes, but is not limited to, rupiya, dam, and mohur coins primarily featuring calligraphy and literary or religious verses, but also figures and portraits of rulers, zodiac signs, birds, animals, and other icons.

 What are not included are the machine struck coins of the British Raj.

For further background on  the arguments for and against these restrictions, see this blog post about the Jan. 30, 2024, CPAC hearing related to this MOU: https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2024/02/public-meeting-of-us-cultural-property.html

Some of the issues raised by collectors and the trade (but completely ignored) are the fact that there is a huge internal market for items like coins within India itself, but with no working system for legal exports as contemplated under both the UNESCO Convention and the Cultural Property Implementation Act. 

There is also the important issue of the impact of these restrictions on the ability of Indian-Americans to own their own cultural heritage, including heirlooms brought from India. 

Given the breadth of these restrictions and their enforcement as embargoes, there needs to be Congressional intervention to rein in the State Department and US Customs.  For a modest proposal which would accomplish just that, see here:  https://culturalpropertynews.org/time-to-make-collecting-great-again/

 For coin collectors, it’s also important to support HR 595, legislation which would facilitate the lawful exchange of collector's coins already subject to cultural property MOUs.  For more, see here:  https://accguild.org/HR-7865

Public Meeting of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee to Consider Renewal with Algeria and Proposed MOU with India

 On January 30, 2024, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to hear testimony regarding a proposed renewal of MOUs with Algeria and a new proposed MOU with the Republic of India.  An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the scope of the requests.  See Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, January 30 – February 1, 2024, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Media Center (November 29, 2023) (but subsequently updated), available at https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-january-30-february-1-2024 (last visited February 3, 2024).   Although that update was subsequently deleted, it stated that Algeria sought no change to the current exceptionally broad designated list for import restrictions, and that India sought a breathtakingly broad list of items to be covered which included cultural goods made as recently as the end of the British Raj in 1950:

 India

 The Government of India seeks import restrictions on archaeological and ethnological materials dating from 1.7 million years ago to 100 years ago, including objects dating from the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, Ancient Periods (including, but not limited to, the Indus Valley Civilization, Maurayan Empire, Shunga Empire, Gandharan Kingdom, Gupta Period, and the Gurjara-Pratihara, Rastrakuta, and Pala Dynasties), and Historic Periods (including, but not limited to, the Chola Dynasty, Delhi Sultanate, Mughal Empire, and the British Raj).  Categories of objects include stone tools and artifacts, terracotta figurines, toys, coins and medals, seals and sealing, molds, dies, sculpture, utensils, architectural materials, arms and ammunition, scientific instruments, and jewelry and toiletries.  Protection is also sought for miniature paintings, art pieces in cloth and paper, and manuscripts dating from the 7th century CE to 75 years ago. 

 Id. (but subsequently deleted from the website). 

 The CPAC members did not introduce themselves before the public session, but CPAC currently includes the following members: (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Mirriam Stark, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, Professor of Anthropology, University of Hawaii); (4) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); ( (5) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (6) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (7) Amy Cappellazzo, Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Principal, Art Intelligence Global; (8) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); (9) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois);  (10) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); and, (11) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)).

 The Chair, Alexandra Jones, welcomed the speakers and assured them that their written comments had been read.  She indicated that speakers would be given 5 minutes each. 

 Dr. Mark Lycett was the first speaker.  He is the director at the South Asia Resources Center at the University of Pennsylvania.  He supported the MOU and thought that import restriction will help encourage continued collaboration between the Indian government and American archaeologists.  His talk focused on looting of temple complexes for idols.

 Prof. Miriam Stark (represents archaeology) asked Lycett if he had observed looting.  He says yes, particularly of temple complexes.  He had not seen metal detectors in use but understood they are used.

 His written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0032 (last visited February 3, 2024).

 Kate FitzGibbon (Executive Director, Committee for Cultural Policy) spoke about India.  India has a terrible record of neglect of its archaeological heritage and its government, run by Hindu religious supremacists, has engaged in a policy of destroying the cultural heritage of its Muslim population.  The Indian legal system is ineffective at dealing with looting.   What has been returned already has neglected.   Many of the bronze idols that have been returned suffer from bronze disease because they have not been conserved.  During the British Raj both Indian and British enthusiasts built up great collections, many of which were removed from India right after Independence due to fear that the post-independence Socialist leaning government would confiscate them. 

 Despite Ms. FitzGibbon’s obvious knowledge of the subject, there were no questions. 

 The Committee for Cultural Policy and the Global Heritage Alliance’s written comments on the proposed MOU with India can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0042 (last visited February 3, 2024)

 Sanja Kampoor briefly spoke.  He indicated that he agreed with the points made in Kate FitzGibbon’s testimony. 

 Nicholas Fritz spoke next.  Fritz is a young professional numismatist with Stack’s Bowers auction house.  He indicated that the Indian MOU request as to coins was over broad, including many types well-known to scholarship, which should not be restricted.  He further indicated that an MOU would only encourage smuggling.  

 Alexandra Jones (Chair, representing archaeology) and Miriam Stark (representing archaeology) asked Fritz a series of hostile questions.  Jones wanted to know why modern-day India should not be able to control the heritage of all of historic India (which included Pakistan and Bangladesh), and Stark debated with Fritz about the importance of coins as archaeological artifacts.  (Comment:  The belligerent tone both Ms. Jones and Ms. Stark used with Mr. Fritz did not reflect well either on CPAC or the Biden Administration that appointed them.  If the State Department really wants public comment, it should advise CPAC members of their responsibility to treat members of the public, particularly those who have never appeared before the Committee, with respect.)

 Peter Tompa (Executive Director, International Association of Professional Numismatists) was called to speak next.   He made the point that the designated list for Algeria and the proposed one for India were greatly overbroad, including coin types that circulated far outside these countries.  He also indicated that later coins, particularly of the Raj, do not fit the definitions of either archaeological or ethnological objects necessary for them to be restricted.  All coins of the British Raj are less than 250 years old and hence cannot be treated as archaeological objects under the governing statute. Additionally, they are the products of what at the time were sophisticated industrial practices, so they cannot be treated as ethnological objects.  He also discussed the large internal market in India and how given such a market, import restrictions that only impact American collectors made no sense.  He also noted that collecting is necessary because governments and museums cannot preserve all the coins out there. Finally, he discussed the importance of regulating metal detectors as a self-help measure and a less drastic remedy.  In so doing, Tompa made clear that the British Portable Antiquities scheme and Treasure Act were the preferred method of regulation. Tompa closed by recalling that he had met an Indian collector some years ago who had built up his collection by buying coins from jewelers in India, who would have otherwise melted the coins for bullion.  Tompa provided members of CPAC with a real-world example to show that collectors are essential for the preservation of coins. 

 Miriam Stark (representing archaeology) stated her belief that coins must be restricted because they are important for archaeology.  She demanded to know if Tompa had ever worked at an archaeological site.  He indicated he had not, but he had discussed the issue with others who had.  Tompa indicated that archaeologists mainly see coins as dating tools, but they are generally poor tools for dating archaeological strata because historical coins circulated for long periods of time and only coins from secured contexts were really useful for that purpose.  Stark also asserted that CPAC had no right to suggest that the Indian government regulate metal detectors.  Tompa indicated the governing statute requires as much and before the State Department started issuing generic MOUs, an agreement with Cyprus required as much.  He suggested that Stark should consult with State Department lawyers about the statutory requirements for MOUs. 

 The International Association of Professional Numismatists’ comments for the proposed renewal of the MOU with Algeria can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0029 (last visited February 3, 2024).

 The International Association of Professional Numismatists’ comments for the proposed MOU with India can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0028  (last visited February 3, 2024).

 Tompa’s personal comments can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0036 (last visited February 3, 2024). 

 Randy Myers spoke next on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild.   He raised concerns about insufficient public notice for CPAC meetings, including the details of any requests.  He noted that the State Department website that announced the upcoming CPAC meeting, though dated November 29, 2023, was updated just recently to include more details about the request, but misleadingly without indicating the date the text was modified.  (Perhaps in response, the State Department recently deleted this additional information from the post.)  Myers also reiterated the argument that one cannot assume many of the coins on the Algerian designated list or conceivably might be on the one for India were actually found there.  He also discussed the importance of considering a portable antiquities scheme as a less drastic measure before imposing import restrictions.  Finally, he also indicated that neither Algeria or India should be awarded rights to coin issues of displaced or discriminated minorities.  This would include Christian Spanish and Byzantine coins and many Muslim coins from India.

 Alexandra Jones (chair, representing archaeology) debated with Myers about the notice requirements, maintaining that the State Department only needed to give the public 15 days’ notice.   Myers explained based on his long experience as an attorney for a large federal agency, he believed that the law requires 60 days’ notice.  He also indicated that if Jones wants to encourage informed public comment, 60 days’ notice is essential. 

 The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild’s and the American Numismatic Association’s joint written comments can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0012 (last visited February 3, 2024).

Elias Gerasoulis (Executive Director, Global Heritage Alliance) next spoke on behalf of both the Global Heritage Alliance and the Committee for Cultural Policy with regard to the proposed renewal of the MOU with Algeria.  Gerasoulis indicated that Algeria had failed to meet any of the statutory for renewal.   He further indicated that CPAC should not recommend a renewal of a MOU that recognizes the rights of Algeria’s authoritarian government to the cultural heritage of its displaced Jewish population.

 The Global Heritage Alliance’s and the Committee for Cultural Policy’s comments for the proposed renewal of the MOU with Algeria can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0017 (last visited February 3, 2024).

 Ömür Harmanşah (Vice President for Cultural Heritage, Archaeological Institute of America) spoke briefly in support of both MOUs.  He indicated that both countries had met their statutory burdens and MOUs should be completed with each.  

 The Archaeological Institute of America’s comments with regard to India can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0052 (last visited February 3, 2024).

 Those related to Algeria can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0048 (last visited February 3, 2024).

 Peter Herdrich (Executive Project Director, Algerian Cooperative Plan for the Digitization of HeritageCEO, Cultural Capital Group) discussed a digitization project for Algerian museum and private collections paid for by the US government which also involved the Antiquities Coalition.  Herdrich maintained that this US government funded program showed that Algeria was engaged in protecting its own cultural heritage. (Comment:  There is a real question whether money paid to US contractors who also lobby for MOUs should be considered “self-help.”  See

https://culturalpropertynews.org/careful-collector-no-22-your-tax-dollars-at-work/  (last visited February 5, 2024).)

Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (representing museums) asked Herdrich if any of these efforts were directed at preserving Jewish and Berber culture.  Hedrich responded by indicating that such materials were included in the inventories of institutions that were partner organizations. 

 Herdrich’s written comments can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0037 (last visited February 3, 2024).

Amended and Expanded Import Restrictions on Cambodian cultural goods.

 The State Department and US Customs have unveiled amended and expanded import restrictions on behalf of Cambodia's authoritarian government.  These include additional restrictions on a limited number of coin types.  

5. Coins

Rare coinage from the Funan area of Southern Cambodia is included. Coinage dates from the 1st through 6th centuries A.D. In gold, silver, gilded silver, or tin. Designs vary, but coins often bear the image of a rising sun, a deer, a rooster, a Garuda, a team of oxen, and other designs. Inscriptions may be present and in Kharosthi script or Sanskrit.

Source:  88 Fed. Reg. 64372-64379  (September 19, 2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/09/19/2023-20335/extension-and-amendment-of-import-restrictions-imposed-on-archaeological-and-ethnological-material

Cultural Property MOU entered into with Yemen without vetting by CPAC or public comment

 Lee Satterfield, the Assistant Secretary, ECA, has apparently unilaterally transformed current “emergency import restrictions” for Yemen into a cultural property MOU with that country, all without input from Cultural Property Advisory Committee or the public.   Unfortunately, Yemen these days is run by factions aligned with Iran, Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China. 

The Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 USC Section 2605 contemplates that such agreements will only be entered into after the proposal is vetted by CPAC, which then is expected to recommend which kinds of objects are considered for import restrictions under the agreement (19 USC Section 2605 (f)).   By converting the current “emergency import restrictions” into ones under a MOU, the State Department has prevented CPAC and the public (including concerned Jewish exile and collector groups)  from commenting on whether import restrictions should continue for the country, which does not respect the rule of law. 

When Yemeni import restrictions were last before CPAC in 2019, despite a short 2-week comment period, any such agreement faced substantial opposition from Jewish exile and coin collector groups.  The State Department presumably engineered this MOU without vetting it through the Cultural Property Advisory Committee and allowing public comment as required under CPIA, 19 USC Section 2605 because they knew it would be controversial and subject to the same opposition today. 

It is unclear whether this will result in a change in the current designated list, which implicitly includes the cultural heritage of Yemen’s displaced Jewish minority as well as a wide variety of coin types.

Addendum (September 3, 2023):  A State Department  press release suggests that the MOU does not only convert current "emergency import restrictions" into "regular ones" under a MOU, but also extends them past their current sunset date, again all without the required input from CPAC and the public.

Note that the first sentence of the press release states, 

 "On Wednesday, Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs Lee Satterfield and Ambassador of Yemen to the United States Mohammed Al-Hadhrami, accompanied by the Department’s Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking, signed a bilateral cultural property agreement that renews and extends protections for Yemeni cultural property which were put in place in 2020 on an emergency basis."

Public Session of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee to Review Proposed Renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and China, June 5, 2023

                 On June 5, 2023, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to hear testimony regarding the proposed renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).  An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the requests.  See https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-april-26-27-2023 (last visited June 7, 2023).  According to that website, Bulgaria has asked for import restrictions on additional categories of archaeological material dating from the Paleolithic Period to the Neolithic (c. 1.6 million years ago – 7500 B.C.) and on additional ethnological material of an ecclesiastical nature dating from 1750 through the 20^th century.  Id.  In contrast, the PRC does not seek any additional restrictions.  Id. 

                The public session was postponed from April 26-27, 2023, presumably to allow all the remaining Trump appointees to be replaced by Biden appointees to CPAC.  Those replaced included Anthony Wisniewski, the sole coin collector representative on the Committee.  One of the replacements, Susan Schoenfeld Harrington, has discernable links to the PRC, as a past Board Member of the China Art Foundation.  See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/04/new-cpac-members.html (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Despite the postponement, the public was only allowed an exceptionally short time to comment on these MOUs on the regulations.gov website.  See https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0016-0001  (last visited June 7, 2023).  Although the Federal Register notice was posted on Friday, May 19, 2023, due to a snafu, the regulations.gov website did not accept comments until midday Monday, May 22, 2023.  The comment period closed only 4 days later, on Friday, May 26, 2023.  An analysis of the comments that were submitted can be found here.  See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/05/low-public-support-for-mous-with.html  (last visited June 7, 2023). 

                Oral comments during the public session were also circumscribed.  Rather than the usual 5 minutes, each speaker was only allotted 4 minutes to speak.   

                At least the following CPAC members were present for the meeting:  (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); (4) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)); (4) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (5) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (6) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public?, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); (7) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); and (8) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public?, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois).

                Additionally, at least the following State Department employees were present for the meeting:  Allison Davis (Executive Director, CPAC) and Andrew Zander. 

                These individuals spoke at the public session about one or both MOUs: (1) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy/PRC); (2) Elias Gerasoulis (Global Heritage Alliance/PRC); (3) Peter Tompa (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Bulgaria and PRC); (4) Doug Davis (Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation/PRC); (5) Ömür Harmanşah (Archaeological Institute of America/Bulgaria and PRC); (6) Douglas Mudd (American Numismatic Association, Ancient Coin Collectors Guild/Bulgaria); (7) Louisa Greve (Uyghur Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Peter Irwin (Uyghur Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Josh Knerly (Hahn, Loeser & Parks, LLP for Association of Art Museum Directors/PRC); (9) Dr. Rowan Flad (Harvard Department of Anthropology/Society for American Archaeology/PRC); (10) Dr. Anne Underhill (Yale/Society for American Archaeology/PRC); and (11) Dr. Rian Thum (University of Manchester/PRC). 

                Alexandra Jones (AJ), CPAC’s chairperson, indicated that the Committee had reviewed all the testimony, and asked the speakers to limit their remarks to 4 minutes each.  AJ indicated that she would allow CPAC members to ask questions after each speaker finished their prepared remarks.  Very few questions were actually posed. 

                Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) spoke first.  She indicated that none of the criteria for renewal of the MOU found in the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) could be met.  The second determination, related to the PRC taking measures consistent with the UNESCO Convention concerning the protection of its cultural patrimony, has not been met because of the PRC’s intentional destruction of the cultural heritage of its Uyghur population.  KFG pointed to the creation of concentration camps as well as the destruction of over 500 Uyghur sites in her testimony.  Moreover, the first and third determinations, related to the PRC’s cultural patrimony being in jeopardy, and the effectiveness of the response, could not be met given the booming internal Chinese market for cultural goods.  The fourth determination relating to benefits to the international system could not be met given the PRC’s mercantilist approach to repatriating artifacts and failing to follow through on museum loans. 

                The Committee for Cultural Policy’s and the Global Heritage Alliance’s joint written testimony can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0044 ) (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Elias Gerasoulis (EG) echoed many of the concerns that KFG raised about the PRC’s intentional destruction of minority culture.  He also noted that current import restrictions have the perverse effect of promoting the interests of PRC auction houses associated with the government over their American competitors.  It makes no sense for ECA to undertake to renew the MOU given the anti-American actions the PRC has taken, including the recent spy balloon overflight.  EG believes that renewing the MOU would be tantamount to committing diplomatic malpractice.

                Peter Tompa (PT) asked CPAC to oppose any effort to expand current import restrictions on behalf of Bulgaria to Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins.  He explained that one cannot assume that such coins come from Bulgarian archaeological contexts.  Only a very small percentage of such coins circulated there compared to those which circulated elsewhere.  He also indicated that it is important to distinguish Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins from Roman Provincial coins, which are currently restricted.  Roman Provincial coins were struck for local use in contrast to Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins which were meant to circulate through the Empire.   Due to time constraints, PT was only able to express general concerns about the MOU with the PRC.  He mentioned that the PRC should not be rewarded for destroying the cultural property of its minority populations or for its failure to address counterfeiting of US historical coins.

                PT’s planned oral comments can be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/06/cpac-should-be-skeptical-about-new.html (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The International Association of Professional Numismatist’s (IAPN’s) written comments about the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0010 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                IAPN’s written comments about the MOU with the PRC can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0009 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                PT’s personal written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0056 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Doug Davis (DD) indicated that the PRC is a major source of counterfeits with 100,000s of coins being faked.  These are exported in bulk to the US for resale, often to unsuspecting buyers.   The Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation Task Force has worked with US law enforcement on seizing $46 million worth of counterfeit US coins.  In addition to historical US coins, counterfeiters are also faking modern US Mint products including bullion pieces like silver eagles.  This is a global problem because Chinese counterfeiters are faking coins of all nations. 

                CPAC member Alex Barker asks DD about what kinds of bullion are being faked. DD indicates the fakes include silver bars. 

                The Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation’s written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0067 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Ömür Harmanşah (OH) indicates that the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) supports the renewals of both MOUs.  The AIA maintains that each of the four criteria for renewal found in the CPIA are met for both MOUs.  OH mentions that the PRC recovered 66,000 stolen archaeological artifacts in the year 2021 showing that the PRC’s cultural patrimony is in jeopardy.  OH states that it is important to ensure restrictions are imposed on mass produced items like coins to promote their study.  He further indicates that the PRC has worked to ensure that there is extensive collaboration with US archaeologists and museums.  For example, an exhibition featuring the famous “Terracotta warriors” has been exhibited in a number of venues around the United States. 

                The AIA’s written testimony regarding the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0068 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The AIA’s written testimony regarding the PRC renewal can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0066 (last visited June 7, 2023). 

                Douglas Mudd (DM) speaks on behalf of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) and the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), a member organization.  DM indicates that import restrictions have negatively impacted the study of coins.  Because coins are so durable many have come down to us from ancient times. There are far too few trained archaeologists to study the numbers of coins that have been found and there is no reason to sequester them all in museums.  The most important thing that can be accomplished is to ensure they are properly recorded, something that can be achieved through programs like the UK’s Portable Antiquity Scheme.  DM also asks that import restrictions not be imposed on widely circulating Roman Imperial coins.  He further believes that the current designated list should be subject to expert review because many of the coin types currently on that list circulated in quantity outside of the confines of Bulgaria. 

                The ANA’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0006  (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The ACCG’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0031 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Louisa Greve (LG) opposes the MOU with the PRC.  The PRC is committing genocide against the Uyghurs.  CPAC should not brush aside this genocide and cultural cleansing in order to approve the renewal.  The current MOU authorizes import restrictions through the Tang period.  The PRC has sought to rewrite history through cultural cleansing to create a false narrative that Han was the dominant culture throughout what is today the PRC.  If CPAC and ECA approves this MOU, the Uyghur Human Rights Project (UYRP) will protest the decision. 

                The UYRP’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0069 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Peter Irwin (PI) is LG’s colleague at the UYRP.  The PRC has not worked to protect cultural heritage, but to purposefully destroy that of the Uyghurs.  Some 10,000 to 50,000 sites have been destroyed to date.  These includes mosques and up to 85% of the historic city of Kashgar. The MOU should not be extended in these circumstances. 

                Josh Knerly (JK) stated the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) supports the extension of the MOU with the PRC contingent on Article II being modified to provide for multi-year museum loans with more significant objects and the PRC granting immunity from seizure for art sent there for display from the US.  The 2019 MOU dropped any meaningful requirements regarding loans.  Multi-year loans are necessary to make it cost effective to bring exhibits to the US.  Only multi-year loans allow museums to share the substantial costs involved. Another issue is US tariffs of 7.5% on Chinese art, which make it impossible for US museums to purchase Chinese art internationally.  Such tariffs give Chinese museums, dealers and collectors a competitive advantage compared to their American counterparts. 

                CPAC member Susan Schoenfeld Harrington asks JK if the MOU provides an opportunity for cultural exchange with the PRC.  JK indicates for this to happen, the PRC needs to change its policies on long term loans and immunity from seizure.

                The AAMD’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0061 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Rowan Flad (RF) indicates that the PRC has undertaken significant self-help measures to protect its own cultural patrimony.  A database of cultural heritage has been established.  There is active collaboration with American archaeologists. 

                RF’s written testimony may be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0055 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Anne Underhill (AU) states that the PRC has met its obligations under the MOU.  It has protected archaeological sites from looting.  One innovative program has used drones to monitor a site for looting.  Another development is an increase in “indoor excavations,” for which entire depositional matrices are transported to covered labs for careful excavation in safe conditions.  In 2020, 4,200 crimes were investigated, involving 9,700 individuals. Some 93,000 artifacts were recovered.  Access to museums has improved.

                AU’s written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0057  (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Rian Thum (RT) indicates that he could not make policy determinations, but he could state facts.  It is an unassailable fact that the PRC has failed to take measures consistent with the UNESCO Convention to protect its cultural patrimony.   It has demolished large parts of the Silk Road city of Kashgar.  It has recently bulldozed two very important Uyghur shrines, and any archaeological artifacts beneath them.  Another target is books.  Initially PRC authorities enforced a “blacklist” of forbidden books.  Now, however, that has been replaced with a “whitelist” which deems any book not explicitly permitted to be forbidden.  This has led to the confiscation and destruction of countless books, some of which are otherwise unknown to scholarship.  It has also prompted some Uyghurs to burn their own books in an effort to avoid being sent to concentration camps.  As was discussed regarding Bulgaria, modern boundaries don’t always correspond with ancient ones.  The same is also true with the status of the Uyghur region in the PRC.  RT observes all of the PRC’s achievements prior speakers associated with archaeological advocacy groups praised relate solely to the study of the PRC’s Han culture. These studies feed the PRC’s narrative.  The PRC seeks to rewrite history to make it appear that Han culture was always the dominant culture in the Uyghur areas.  RT expresses disappointment that his colleagues are unwilling to acknowledge the PRC’s intentional destruction of Uyghur cultural heritage for political purposes.

                No CPAC members asked any additional questions, and AJ concluded the public session approximately 10 minutes early. 

State Department Announces Proposed Renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and China

 The State Department’s Cultural Heritage Center has provided advance notice of an upcoming CPAC meeting on April 26-27, 2023, to consider renewals of current MOUs with Bulgaria and China  For more, see https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-april-26-27-2023

The State Department will accept comments on these MOUs from the public at a future date when official notice of the meeting is provided in the Federal Register. 

Both MOUs already impact the ability of American collectors to import historical coins of the sort widely and legally collected elsewhere.   Once a coin type is placed on a “designated list,” U.S. Customs can detain, seize and repatriate it unless the importer produces provenance information that is usually unavailable for most coins, particularly the inexpensive types most people can afford to collect.  These rules apply to all coin imports, not just to imports directly from countries for which import restrictions have been granted.  Ever broader (and sometimes overlapping) lists have made it increasingly difficult to import coins for the US Collector market even if enforcement remains spotty.

The designated list for Bulgaria covers a wide variety of Greek, Roman Provincial, Byzantine, Bulgarian Empire and Ottoman coins that were either made or circulated there.  For more, see 79 Fed. Reg. 2781-2785 (January 16, 2014), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/01/16/2014-00615/import-restrictions-imposed-on-certain-archaeological-and-ecclesiastical-ethnological-material-from

The designated list for China covers all Chinese coins from the earliest times to the end of the Tang Dynasty.  For more, see 74 Fed. Reg. 2838-2844 (January 16, 2009), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2009/01/16/E9-848/import-restrictions-imposed-on-certain-archaeological-material-from-china

Right now, there are no all-encompassing import restrictions on Roman Imperial coins, but this is subject to change.  Hobby leaders are particularly worried about a staff driven effort to use the Bulgarian renewal to expand current import restrictions to include widely collected Roman Imperial coins of the sort that circulated throughout the Roman Empire and beyond.  See https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2023/2/18/23604528/ancient-coin-collecting-us-import-restrictions  Roman Imperial coins are by far the most available and widely collected type of ancient coins.  New restrictions on Americans importing such coins from legitimate markets in Europe could greatly damage the US ancient coin market and collecting as a whole. 

Of course, there are other concerns with both MOUs.  One can ask about the efficacy of any MOU with Bulgaria when it is estimated that up to 4% of the population is engaged in treasure hunting for fun or profit.  As for the China MOU, one wonders why the US denies its own citizens the right to import ancient Chinese coins when the Chinese government itself encourages its own citizens to buy, sell and collect the exact same coin types.   Also, does the authoritarian Chinese high-tech surveillance state really need US help to police its own archaeological sites?

Watch here for updates for when the State Department accepts comments for these upcoming renewals on the regulations.gov website.   

Update:: 4/12/23- The Cultural Heritage Center website now indicates that the CPAC hearing has been postponed until a future date.  Watch this website for additional updates. 

Update:  5/1/23-  The Cultural Heritage Center website now indicates that the CPAC hearing will now take place on 6/5/23 and that any comments will be due on or before 5/26/23.  See  https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-april-26-27-2023  It also suggests that there will be no changes in any renewal with China.  While it states that no additional categories of archaeological materials will be considered for times when coins circulated, it is not entirely clear whether this really forecloses consideration of new import restrictions on Roman coins.  The regulations.gov website is yet to go live which gives the ability to comment.  Watch here for an update when it does. 

Update: 5/24/23- The State Department finally published the noticed of meeting on 5/19 and enabled comments on 5/22/23, giving 4 days for the public to comment before the 5/26/23 close on these important renewals.  Cynics will conclude that the exceptionally short time frame allowed for public comment was designed to limit it as much as possible so that the State Department bureaucracy could claim these renewals "were not controversial."  The Federal Register notice and comment button can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0016-0001

Summary of July 26, 2022, Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to Discuss Proposed MOU Renewals with Belize and Libya

         On July 26, 2022, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met to consider proposed renewals of MOUs with Belize and Libya.  CPAC is comprised of the following members: (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology); Rachael Fulton Brown (Archaeology); (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property); (8) Mark Hendricks (Sale of International Cultural Property); and (9) David Tamasi (International Sale of Cultural Property).  Because CPAC was meeting in person after a long hiatus due to the pandemic, it was unfortunately impossible to determine if all members were present. 

            Michelle Prior, a program officer for the Cultural Heritage Center, was also present to run the Zoom presentation.   Again, other Cultural Heritage Center staff may have been in the room, but it was impossible to tell given the Zoom image quality. 

                Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He acknowledged “familiar faces” and commented there were new speakers for this session.  He indicated that each speaker would be given 5 minutes for their presentation.  He asked Committee members to hold questions to the end.  He further indicated that speakers would be grouped, with those discussing Belize alone or Belize and Libya speaking first.

                Dr. Eleanor King (Howard University) spoke on her own behalf as well as for the Society for American Archaeology.  Belize meets all the criteria for a renewal.  Its cultural heritage is still in danger due to looting which is exacerbated by its rugged terrain and porous borders.  Belize does take self-help measures in the form of awareness campaigns against looting, posters warning about purchasing looted objects, and workshops devoted to the subject.  Import restrictions are not only the best available method to prevent importation of stolen objects, but they are also the only real ones available. Given the porous nature of Belize’s borders and the country’s restricted resources, it would be impossible to seal all exit points from the country.  Finally, there are extensive collaborative efforts between US and Belizean archaeologists.

                Dr. King’s written comments can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0037

                Dr. Brian Daniels (Smithsonian and University of Pennsylvania) spoke on behalf of the Archaeological Institute of America (“AIA”).  Dr. Daniels indicated that the AIA’s membership comprised of approximately 200,000 professional archaeologists, corresponding members, students, and enthusiasts.  Both Belize and Libya have met all the necessary criteria for renewal.  Both Libya and Belize still suffer from looting.  Both have dedicated archaeological departments. Although the archaeological departments in Libya must answer to different governments, they operate with the same common purpose.  Dr. Daniels indicates ASOR will provide further information on Libya.  There are a host of collaborative projects with Belize.  Before the 2011 Revolution, the AIA ran tours to Libya. The AIA also ran tours to Belize before Covid.

                The AIA’s written comments on Belize can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0049

                The AIA’s written comments on Libya can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0050

                Stephen Knerly (Hahn Loeser) spoke on behalf of the Association of Art Museum Directors (“AAMD”).  He first addressed Libya.  He first questioned if Jewish artifacts can be considered Libyan state property now because antiques held prior to 1968 were not state property under Libyan law.   He noted there are a host of issues related to the scope of the designated list if CPAC decides to recommend a renewal of the MOU with Libya.  With regard to the MOU with Belize, he criticized the open-ended nature of the designated list of archaeological material, effectively being extended an extra five years with every renewal.  He also criticized the Form Article II that has been put in place in more recent agreements.  These should be tailored to the individual countries. 

                The AAMD’s written comments on Libya and Belize may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0054   

                Peter Tompa (Peter Tompa Law) spoke on behalf of the International Association of Professional Numismatists (“IAPN”).  His comments focused on Libya.  ASOR received $800,000 in State Department grants that paid for work that was then used to justify renewing this MOU.  However, on a closer look, the report ASOR submitted actually demonstrates that Libya has not taken adequate self-help measures to justify a renewal.  He also noted that one cannot assume most coins on the designated list are only found in Libya, or even that they “circulated primarily” there, which is the State Department’s own standard.  The State Department should at least be held to its own standard and the coin types that do not meet it should be delisted.  Tompa  finally indicated we should all look forward to the day Libya is at peace and the $800,000 given to ASOR to help justify a renewed MOU with Libya can instead be used to fund a Portable Antiquities Scheme in Libya. 

                Peter Tompa’s complete oral comments can be found here:

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2022/07/cpac-should-focus-on-facts-not-false.html

                His personal written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0012

                IAPN’s written comments on Libya may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0018

                IAPN’s written comments on Belize may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0015

                Randolph Myers spoke on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (“ACCG”).  He first noted that the 28-day notice provided for public comment, while far better than the 5 days allowed for comment on proposed emergency import restrictions for Afghanistan, still falls far short of the 60 days public notice period under the Administrative Procedure Act.  He also noted the injustice of import restrictions on Jewish cultural artifacts. He indicated that hoard evidence proved that most types of coins on the current designated list are found in far greater frequency outside of Libya than they are found inside Libya.  This is particularly true for the famous type with the Silphium plant on the reverse which was made to pay mercenaries from Crete.  He further indicated that the MOU has not been effective with only one Immigration and Customs Enforcement seizure of an artifact that left Libya at least 10 years prior to the MOU. 

                The ACCG’s written comments may be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0002

                Kate FitzGibbon spoke on behalf of the Committee for Cultural Policy (“CCP”) and the Global Heritage Alliance (“GHA”).  She focused on Libya.  One cannot conflate Libya and Belize.  There is no functioning government in Libya.  Reports from British archaeologists do not paint the same picture as in the ASOR report.  There is poor stewardship of Libya’s cultural heritage.  The overbroad designated list encompasses 13,000 years of Libyan history.  Ambiguities in that list recognize Libya as the de-facto custodian of the cultural heritage of its displaced Jewish population.  The MOU should be terminated.  Alternatively, CPAC should only recommend new emergency restrictions on limited numbers of cultural goods consistent with the statute. 

                The CCP’s and GHA’s written comments about Libya can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0041

                The CCP’s and GHA’s written comments about Belize can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0003

                Gina Waldman spoke on her own behalf as well as Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa (“JIMENA”).  She was born in Tripoli, from which she and her family were brutally expelled.  The driver of the bus meant to take her out of the country instead set it afire with her and her family in it.  She was saved by British Christians and eventually settled in California.  MOUs are supposed to stop looted property, but here the Libyan government was the looter.  Libya took all the Jewish community’s religious artifacts, and all its private and communal property.  Unless the current MOU is re-written to explicitly exclude Jewish and Christian property, the MOU will legitimize Libya’s confiscations of minority cultural heritage and property.  There was a carve out done in the MOU with Morocco and the same should be done here.  Libya has desecrated the synagogue where Ms. Waldman worshiped by turning it into an Islamic Center.  She has presented CPAC with a video showing this desecration.  The person who took the video was arrested and was sentenced to 8 months in a Libyan prison.  Libyan authorities have robbed the Jewish community, desecrated its synagogues, and even erected skyscrapers over its cemeteries.  Libya cannot be considered a custodian of Jewish cultural heritage.

                JIMENA’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0048

                Raphael Luzon was born in Benghazi.  This MOU will just justify the Libyan Government’s taking of Jewish property.  CPAC should follow the Moroccan example and recommend an exemption for Jewish cultural heritage.  There needs to be a carve-out for Jewish religious articles. Libya has robbed its Jewish citizens.  He understands Libyan Jewish cultural heritage was carted up and put in a storeroom.  He does not know what happened to it.  A Synagogue he attended has now been converted into a Coptic Church. 

                David Gerbi is a doctor in psychology and the President of “ASTREL,” an organization which represents the Jews of Libya in exile.  He now lives in Israel and appeared on zoom from a museum in Israel devoted to commemorating Libya’s Jewish diaspora.  In 1967, when he was 12 years of age, he spent days hiding with his family from a rampaging mob that was looting and destroying Jewish homes and businesses.  In 2002, Ghaddafi invited him to Libya to visit his aunt, the last Libyan Jew.  Ghaddafi wanted his help in normalizing relations with the United States.  He was fearful he would suffer the same fate as Saddam Hussein.  Mr. Gerbi worked with Congressman Tom Lantos on this issue and after relations with the U.S. were normalized Qaddafi invited him to Libya in 2007 to see Jewish sites and restore DAR BISHI Synagogue.  However, during his trip he was arrested and the money he raised to restore the Synagogue was stolen.  He was deported to Malta without any money.   After he got back to Rome, there was an assassination attempt and he moved to Israel.  In 2009, Qaddafi reconciled with him and again invited him home to restore the Synagogue, but this never happened.  After the 2011 Revolution, he was invited back to serve in the government, but on his arrival, he was threatened with death and fled again with the help of the Italian Government.  He recently was invited back to Tripoli to restore Synagogues but was again threatened with death and was forced to leave again. 

                Rabbi Eric Fusfield spoke on behalf of B’nai B’rith International.  B’nai B’rith is our nation’s oldest and best-known Jewish advocacy and social service organization, promoting the rights and concerns of the Jewish community on a wide range of issues.  No issue is of greater importance to the Jewish community than the rights of the nearly one million Jewish refugees from the Middle East and North Africa.  Nowhere did this Jewish presence end more tragically than in Libya, where Jews had lived since the 4th Century B.C.E. and numbered as many as 40,000 in the early 1900s but lost their entire population as a result of anti-Semitic pogroms and immigration to Israel.  The cultural patrimony of the Libyan Jewish diaspora is gravely threatened by the absence of guarantees to custody of materials that are rightfully theirs. The Jewish community wrote a letter in December 2018 requesting the exclusion of Jewish ritual items from the current Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Libya. However, the previous administration’s refusal to acknowledge the letter amounted to a de facto U.S. recognition of Libya’s confiscation of Jewish properties in 1958 and 1969 and to the persecution Libyan Jewry suffered at the hands of the regime.  This MOU legitimizes the confiscation of Jewish property seized by Libya’s government when Jews were forced from the country.  B’nai B’rith strongly urges the Committee to include a derogation, or carve-out, for Jewish personal and communal property should this MOU be renewed. We have seen a precedent for this in the Morocco MOU, which clearly and explicitly excluded Jewish property from its scope. To do less would be nothing short of a betrayal of American values.

                B’nai B’rith’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0030

                 Panina Meghnagi is from the Libyan diaspora.  She had to flee her home in Tripoli with one suitcase.  Her family had to leave everything behind.  They were stripped searched on leaving the country.  Jews lived in Libya for 2,000 years before being driven out.  Their cultural heritage has been destroyed, buried under Autostradas and Skyscrapers.   There were 40,000 Jews living in Libya in the 1940’s.  Pogroms took place in the 1950s.  During the 1960’s most Jews and Christians fled the country.  She implored the Committee to “love us” and do not renew this MOU.  Morocco is a good example of a country that preserves its Jewish heritage. 

                Dr. Andrew Vaughn is the Executive Director of the American Society of Overseas Research (“ASOR”) and as Co-Director of ASOR Cultural Heritage Initiatives (“ASOR CHI”).  Dr. Vaughn participated in meetings with Libyan cultural heritage officials in Tunisia.  He was impressed with their motivation to work cooperatively to protect Libya’s cultural assets.  Government actors and supporting militias are not involved in the antiquities trade which helps with enforcement.  There have been instances where the public has returned chance finds to members of the Department of Antiquities.  He has been working with Libya’s Department of Antiquities (“DOA”) towards creating temporary exhibitions in the US of material seized under the MOU. The DOA looks on ASOR as partners.  Preservation efforts include that of materials of minority populations as a counter to extremism.  Dr. Vaughn polled Libyan cultural heritage officials who indicated that ancient coins are the most looted item.  (Note- they are also one of the most common ancient artifacts, see Tompa individual comments).

                Dr. Vaughn’s written comments on behalf of ASOR can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0051

                Will Raynolds is the co-director of ASOR-Cultural Heritage Initiative. Despite the division of the DOA under two separate governments, the separate entities work well together.  ASOR has intensive collaborations with both DOAs and smaller, local groups.  Since the signing of the MOU, there have been sincere efforts to protect Libya’s cultural heritage.  Raynolds was particularly heartened by voluntary returns of objects by Libyan citizens. 

                Raynold’s written comments on behalf of ASOR can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0015-0038

                As more than an hour had already been devoted to public comment, Chairman Passantino asked questions from members of the Committee to be kept short. 

                An unidentified CPAC member indicated that he believed speakers from the Jewish Diaspora had made a compelling case for exempting Jewish artifacts from any new import restrictions.  He asked Dr. Vaughn about his views on the subject.  Dr. Vaughn does not answer the question, and instead indicates he is not familiar with the legal aspects of such a decision. 

                Anthony Wisniewski asked Stephen Knerly if there were credible enforcement efforts taking place in Libya.  He indicated that there are no such efforts and that is but one piece of Libya’s failure to undertake self-help measures. 

                Anthony Wisniewski pointed Kate FitzGibbon to page 18 of her submission where she discussed the State Department’s application of a “circulated primarily” standard as a trigger for import restrictions on coins.  Ms. FitzGibbon confirmed that the standard contradicts the governing statute’s limitation of import restrictions to coins “first discovered within, and subject to export control” by Libya.

                She also noted that with two DOAs in Libya there is no effective enforcement of cultural heritage laws.

                Anthony Wisniewski pointed Peter Tompa to page 7 of IAPN’s submission which discussed the current designated list for Libya.  He asked if there were any Roman Imperial coins struck in Libya.  Mr. Tompa indicated that such coins were not struck in Libya and as stated in a footnote only 0.18 % of all Roman Imperial coin hoards with Italian mint coins are found in Libya.  Anthony Wisniewski also asked about Greek Coins.  Mr. Tompa agreed with Mr. Wisniewski that the Greek designated list excludes large denomination stater and tetradrachm coins.  Mr. Tompa stated that hoard evidence indicates that Greek silver and gold coins from Libyan mints did not “circulate primarily” there because the vast majority are found outside Libya.  This includes high denomination tetradrachm coins from Cyrene and Barce as well as the stater size coins with the silphium plant on the reverse mostly found in Crete as described in Randolph Myer’s testimony.