Desperately Seeking Continued Funding?

On June 8, 2017, CPO attended a panel discussion entitled, "Preserving Northern Iraq's Cultural Heritage."   The major theme of the event was to document the good work the Smithsonian is doing stabilizing what is left of Nimrud after ISIS dynamited and bulldozed much of the site.

However, the continued hype about the supposed value of ISIS looted material ($80 million!) as well as surprising claims that cultural heritage preservation fights terrorism and fosters minority rights seem calculated to sway Trump Administration and Congressional budget officials as much as anything else.  Indeed, it probably was no coincidence that representatives of the House Foreign Relations Committee were in the audience.

If anything, the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR) should be subject to serious scrutiny from appropriators given the $900,000 taxpayer costs of ASOR's cooperative agreement with the State Department, ASOR's efforts to lobby on issues related to that same contract, and the continuing efforts of ASOR members to hype the value of looting by ISIS long after other, more disinterested sources have questioned such hype.

Goldman Sachs Power and Influence Benefit Archaeology Lobby?

A front page article in Sunday's New York Times raises some important questions about how cultural heritage policy is made in the United States that deserve further investigation.   The article explores close ties between Hillary Clinton and Goldman Sachs including during the period Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State.  That discussion highlights the Clinton State Department's partnership with Goldman Sachs' 10,000 women initiative.

While it is no doubt a good program, what is relevant for our purposes here is that this initiative is run by former Bush Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Dina Powell.  Powell and her State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs are not popular with coin collectors for good reason.

In May 2007, Powell rejected the U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee's  recommendations against import restrictions on Cypriot coins.  Then, according to a declaration signed by Former CPAC Chair Jay Kislak, State Department officials went on to mislead Congress and the public about CPAC's true recommendations in official reports. That decision changed long-standing U.S. Government policy against import restrictions on coins, and provided the "precedent" for further restrictions on certain coin types from Iraq (2008), China (2009), Italy (2011), Greece (2011), Bulgaria (2014), and Syria (2016).

In CPO's view, Powell's 2007 decision at a minimum raises an appearance of conflict of interest. Critically, Powell made the decision after accepting her high level job with Goldman Sachs but before leaving the State Department.  At the time, Goldman was apparently heavily involved in arranging controversial credit swaps with Greece and likely had at least some business dealings with Cyprus too.  Of even more concern, it has since come to light that Powell was recruited by John F.W. Rogers, Goldman's powerful chief of staff, where she serves as part of his "lobbying team."   This is relevant to cultural heritage issues because Mr. Rogers is married to Deborah Lehr, an AIA Trustee and international business consultant, who also serves as President of the Antiquities Coalition, a well-funded archaeological lobbying group.

So, perhaps it's no surprise that the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs has actively participated in Antiquities Coalition events, such as its recent "Culture Under Threat" conference in New York City.

Of course, the point of these conferences is to drum up support in Congress for measures sought by the archaeological lobby.  So, it also should be no surprise that the Antiquities Coalition has successfully lobbied Congress to clamp down on illicit antiquities (efforts which the trade and collectors see as grossly over-broad and hence damaging to the legitimate trade and collecting).

What's also interesting is that the Antiquities Coalition lobbying efforts are part of a partnership with the Middle East Institute and this work has been done to support repatriation efforts sought by authoritarian Middle Eastern governments like that of Egypt.

What's less clear is whether all this effort also directly or indirectly benefits the financial interests of those involved, i.e., is lobbying on cultural heritage issues of interest to countries like Greece, Cyprus and Egypt being "leveraged" to promote other business interests?

CPO commends all interested in expressing their views on cultural heritage issues, but given the amounts of money that the Antiquities Coalition must be spending on its efforts and all the contacts that are being worked,there should be far more transparency about the Antiquities Coalition's funding, its aims and details about its public-private partnerships with countries like Egypt.

2015's Questionable Claims on ISIS and Syrian Antiquities: To Hopes for More Accuracy and Less Hype in 2016

Knowledgeable cultural property observers have been frustrated that questionable claims about Syria, ISIS and antiquities trade continue to be actively promoted as part of the archaeological lobby's campaign in support of H.R. 1493/S. 1887,  problematic legislation that purports to address protecting cultural property in times of war and civil strife.

In honor of the New Year, CPO counts down the top five (5) dubious claims made in 2015 in support of this legislation that would create a new State Department coordination and enforcement bureaucracy and place what amounts to permanent import restrictions on Syrian cultural goods.

Hopefully, questions about the accuracy of these claims will also lead to questions about the wisdom of  the Senate passing H.R. 1493/S. 1887 in its current form.  While this legislation was no doubt introduced with the best of intentions, it suffers because its sponsors failed to consult with all stakeholders before its introduction and have relied on incomplete, misleading or false information to justify its approach to the issue of cultural heritage preservation.

5. The Claim:  Trade data helps prove there has been an upsurge in stolen Syrian antiquities on the market.

The Source:  "Cultural Heritage Lawyer" Rick St. Hilaire and "Red Arch" Cultural Heritage Law Policy Research" have heavily promoted this idea on St. Hilaire's blog.  See most recently, Rick St. Hilaire, "Antiques from Syria: U.S. Cultural Property Import Stats Raise Suspicion," Cultural Heritage Lawyer Blog (December 29, 2015), available at http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com/2015/12/antiques-from-syria-us-cultural.html

 (last visited January 6, 2016).

The Reality:  Mr. St. Hilaire and his blog are associated with the archaeological lobby and its anti-trade and anti-collecting views.  As such, his interpretation of trade data should be viewed as that of an advocate for a position and not that of an unbiased researcher. With regard to his work, at the outset, there appears to be a serious misconception about the nature of the figures themselves.  St. Hilaire at least implies the figures reflect the values for artifacts exported from Syria in 2014 rather than a “country of origin” or “country of manufacture” of Syria and exported from elsewhere to the United States.  In fact, due to massive confusion in the trade and a lack of guidance from U.S. and foreign Customs, it is likely that the figures include values for both artifacts manufactured in Syria (perhaps thousands of years ago) and exported to the U.S. from elsewhere along with artifacts directly exported from Syria itself.  Thus, artifacts that were manufactured in Syria but have been out of Syria for decades are likely included (and indeed may represent the bulk of the material that has been imported.)  In any event, the values cited are modest (particularly compared to wild claims for the values of looted Syrian antiquities (see Claim No. 2 below)), and it would be interesting to compare them with figures for antiquities imports with a country of origin of Syria over time. 

4.  The Claim:  There must be storehouses full of valuable stolen Syrian antiquities.

The Source:  In 2002 and 2005, Swiss police raided warehouses that were used to house antiquities illicitly excavated in Italy and Greece over the past decades.   See David Gill, "Warehouses, Antiquities and Basel," Looting Matters Blog (November 7, 2008), available at http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/11/warehouses-antiquities-and-basel.html  (last visited January 6, 2016).   Of course, Switzerland is an exceptionally stable country that at the time was also known for its strong privacy laws.  What better a place to store valuable antiquities?

The Reality:  Though warehouses full of illicitly excavated antiquities were found in Switzerland, is it also likely that similar storehouses also exist in unstable Middle Eastern countries?  One would not necessarily think so, but the archaeological lobby has nonetheless promoted the idea. Why?  After the Second Gulf War, there were also claims that material looted from archaeological sites in Iraq would be reaching the market in quantity.  When this never materialized, the archaeological lobby then explained away the issue by claiming that the material was being stockpiled.  See Guy Gugliata, "Looted Iraqi Relics Slow to Surface," The Washington Post (November 8, 2005) available at https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35577.html (last visited January 6, 2016).  Now, given the dearth of fresh Syrian material on the market, the same claim is again being used to explain away suspicions that efforts to loot archaeological sites (as evidenced by what appear to be holes in the ground in satellite photography) may not be anywhere near as successful as has been maintained.  (Apparently, no one has seriously (or at least publicly) considered the possibility that many of these holes were "dry" or at least some of these "looter's holes" were actually "fox holes" dug for military purposes.)

But what of the recent seizure from an ISIS financier? On May 15, 2015, U.S. Special Operations personnel removed a cache of hundreds of artifacts from the home of ISIS Financier Abu Sayyaf.  According to the State Department, "The cache represents significant primary evidence of looting at archaeological sites in Syria and Iraq, theft from regional museums, and the stockpiling of these spoils for likely sale on the international market." See  "ISIL Leaders Loot," U.S. State Department Cultural Heritage Center Website (undated), available at http://eca.state.gov/cultural-heritage-center/iraq-cultural-heritage-initiative/isil-leaders-loot (last visited January 5, 2016).  So far, this is the only storehouse full of "valuable" ISIS loot that has come to light.  However, an experienced dealer who looked at images of the coins found in the group valued them at perhaps $40,000 retail and $8,000 wholesale.  Indeed, the cache looked more like the modest stock of a small dealer in Middle Eastern antiquities than a storehouse for a fabulous cache of valuable Syrian antiquities.

3.  The Claim:  Only ISIS is benefiting from sales of illicit antiquities.  

The Sources:  Back in 2014, Secretary of State Kerry highlighted the looting and destruction of cultural  sites in Syria  at an event at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.  See Secretary of State John Kerry, Remarks at Threats to Cultural Heritage in Iraq and Syria Event (September 22, 2014), available at  http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/09/231992.htm (last visited January 5, 2016).  Kerry evidently illustrated his talk with satellite imagery showing severe damage to Apamea, an important classical site in Syria.  CBS News and other news outlets then ascribed the damage at Apamea to ISIS even though Apamea appears to have been in government hands since the beginning of the Civil War.  It is unclear whether the archaeological lobby purposefully perpetuated this deception, but it is clear that CBS and other news sources have relied exclusively on State Department and archaeological lobby sources for their reporting.  See "The Perils of Limited Sourcing," Cultural Property Observer Blog (September 9, 2015), available at

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-perils-of-limited-sourcing.html (last visited January 5, 2016).

The Reality:  A Dartmouth College study has confirmed that all participants in the Syrian civil war have taken part in looting Syrian archaeological sites. See "Dartmouth Led Study Shows ISIS Not Only Culprit in War Related Looting in Syria," Dartmouth Press Release (October 21, 2015), available at http://www.dartmouth.edu/press-releases/war-related-looting102115.html (last visited January 6, 2016).  As the press release states, "One of the most well-known incidents of looting occurred at Apamea, a massive Roman city in western Syria. The satellite images indicate that looting began in the start of 2012, after Syrian forces invaded the area, and continued during the Syrian occupation of the site through at least the fall of 2013. However, the most extreme phase of looting was conducted in the government-administered portion of the site with privately held fields remaining untouched until several months later when looting holes made by heavy machinery encroached into nearby areas on a systematic block by block basis with Syrian soldiers only 200 meters away."  Id.

2.  The Claim:  ISIS has made $10 s of millions or $100 s of millions from stolen antiquities.

The Sources:  The “tens of millions” figure ultimately derives from an erroneous claim that ISIS had stolen $36 million in antiquities from one on area in Syria alone.   See Heather Pringle, “ISIS Cashing in on Looted Antiquities to Fuel Iraq Insurgency,” National Geographic, June 27, 2014, available at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140626-isis-insurgents-syria-iraq-looting-antiquities-archaeology/ (last visited January 6, 2016).  The report was later found to refer to money made from all types of looting in the al-Nabuk region of Syria, not only the looting of archaeological material.  (See “New Documents Prove ISIS Heavily Involved in Antiquities Trafficking,’ Gates of Nineveh Blog (September 30, 2015), available at https://gatesofnineveh.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/new-documents-prove-isis-heavily-involved-in-antiquities-trafficking/) (last visited January 6, 2016). 

The $100 million figure has been cited in a "Fact Sheet" to justify support for H.R. 1493/S.1887, but it appears even less grounded in fact.  See "Fact Sheet: Deny ISIS Funding & Save Syria's Antiquities,"  United States House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Elliot L. Engel, Democrats (October 28, 2015) available at https://democrats-foreignaffairs.house.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-deny-isis-funding-save-syrias-antiquities-hr1493s1887 (last visited January 6, 2016).  Instead, it traces back to an unsupported claim made by Iraq’s UN Ambassador at a time the U.N. was considering a resolution condemning the terrorist group’s destruction and looting of cultural sites in Iraq.  See Rick Gladstone, “U.N. Resolves to Combat Plundering of Antiquities by ISIS,” The New York Times, May 28, 2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/world/middleeast/un-resolves-to-combat-plundering-of-antiquities-by-isis.html?_r=0  (last visited January  6, 2016).   

The Reality:  Provable amounts that ISIS has made from antiquities sales are far smaller, ranging from several hundreds of thousands of dollars to several millions.  See Derek Fincham, "Leaked Records Hint at How Much ISIS Makes on Antiquities," Illicit Cultural Property Blog, http://illicitculturalproperty.com/leaked-records-hint-at-how-much-isis-makes-on-antiquities/#more-10623    (last visited January 4, 2016).  See also Kate Fitz Gibbon, "Debunking the ISIS Antiquities Funding Myth,' Committee for Cultural Policy Blog (December 6, 2015), available at http://committeeforculturalpolicy.org/debunking-the-isis-antiquities-funding-myth/ (last vistited January 6, 2016).  These figures are a drop in the bucket compared to ISIS estimated take of at least $1 billion.

1. The Claim:  Import restrictions will "save" Syrian cultural property.

The Sources:  The archaeological lobby claims that embargoes on cultural goods will "save" Syrian cultural property, act as to disincentive looting, and damage terrorist financing.  See Erin Thompson, "Restrict Imports of Antiquities from Syria to Cut Down on Looting," The New York Times (January 21, 2015), available at http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/10/08/protecting-syrias-heritage/restrict-imports-of-antiquities-from-syria-to-cut-down-on-looting (last visited January 6, 2016) and Heather Lee, "Heritage Crisis in Syria; a Call for a Moratorium on the Antiquities Trade, Saving Antiquities for Everyone Blog (September 3, 2014) available at http://savingantiquities.org/heritage-crisis-syria-call-temporary-moratorium-trade/ (last visited January 6, 2016).

The Reality:  As applied by U.S. Customs, import restrictions are grossly over broad because they relate to where artifacts are made instead of where and when they were found.  Under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act ("CPIA"), the law governing import restrictions on cultural goods, the Government bears the initial burden to establish: (1) the item is of a type that appears on the designated list; (2) the item was first discovered within and subject to the export control of the country for which restrictions were granted; and (3) that it was illegally removed from the country for which import restrictions were granted after the applicable date.  (Under the CPIA, this is the date restrictions were imposed; here the date proposed under H.R. 1403/S.1887 is March 15, 2011.)  Thus, under H.R. 1493/S.1887, the Government should be required to establish that (1) the item is of a type that appears on the designated list of Syrian artifacts that will be created; (2) the item was “first discovered within” Syria and was subject to Syrian export control; and (3) the item was illegally removed from Syria after March 15, 2011.

Unfortunately, history shows that the State Department and U.S. Customs put expedience first.  Despite the CPIA’s plain meaning, the applicable regulation, 12 C.F.R. § 12.104 (a), ignores these requirements.  See Ancient Coin Collectors Guild v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 801 F. Supp. 2d 383, 407 n. 25 (D. Md. 2011) (“Congress only authorized the imposition of import restrictions on objects that were ‘first discovered within, and [are] subject to the export control by the State Party.’ Under the regulations, that requirement seems to apply only to the importation of a ‘fragment or part’ of an object of archaeological or ethnological interest.  This appears to have been an oversight in the drafting, or codification, of the original regulations in 1985, and has persisted in the C.F.R. ever since.”), aff’d,  698 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2012).  Accordingly, collectors are rightly concerned that following standard operating procedure,  the Government will argue that it need only establish the first element of its burden, i.e. that the object is “of archaeological interest” with a “country of origin” or manufacture of “Syria.”  For coins (one of the most common ancient artifacts), the practical result will thus be to give CBP license to “scoop up” all historical coins minted in Syria over the centuries even though such coins circulated far from Syria in ancient times as items of commerce and in more modern times as collectibles.  This, of course, will do little or nothing to "save" Syrian cultural property, disincentivize looting, and damage terrorist financing, but will do much to harm the legitimate trade in ancient art and the cultural understanding it brings.  

And what will happen to any antiquities and coins that are swept up in the dragnet?  The CPIA assumes that they will be repatriated to Syria, something not changed in H.R. 1493/S. 1887.  This, of course, raises pertinent questions.  Can artifacts be saved if they are returned to a war zone?  And is it morally justifiable to give them to the Assad regime, which has done its own share of looting and which has also intentionally destroyed cultural sites with its barrel bombs and artillery?

State Department Funding Backdoor Lobbying Campaign in Favor of HR 1493?

This week's front page Washington Post article that again features the discredited claim that looted antiquities are the "second most important commercial activity [for ISIS] after oil sales" [along with a misstatement of the impact of the "1970 Rule"] raises important questions:

(1) Is the article meant to prompt action on the improved, but still flawed HR 1493 in the Senate?

and, if so,

(2) Is ASOR's $600,000 State Department funded  "monitoring and global awareness campaign"  really a backdoor means to lobby on that bill, which uses the ongoing tragedy in Iraq and Syria as a justification for a new State Department bureaucracy aimed at fostering further "coordination" with the same insiders associated with the archaeological lobby who already dominate things?

Archaeological Lobby Goes for the Gold?

It may or may not be a coincidence, but just as the archaeological lobby has geared up to press for legislation that would give the State Department unlimited authority to fund archaeological groups, a number of consultancies and/or research entities have apparently sprung up that have principals associated with that lobby.

These include: Red Arch with principals with current and/or past associations with the AIA, Lawyer's Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation and Saving Antiquities for Everyone; Heritas with principals with current and/or past associations with the AIA, Lawyer's Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation and Antiquities Coalition; and the Past for Sale Project with a researcher associated with Saving Antiquities for Everyone.

The bill in question (HR 5703) died at the end of the last legislative session, but presumably will be reintroduced in some form.  Of course, there is nothing wrong with lobbying for this or other cultural heritage legislation.  And there is also nothing wrong with making money from one's passion through "consulting" or "research." However, there needs to be far more transparency about the intersection between lobbying and consulting or researching here, particularly given the archaeological lobby's full throttled attacks on any "lobbying" by "commercial interests" concerned about the State Department's imposition of import restrictions on cultural goods.  After all, some big money-- like the $600,000 contract the State Department awarded to ASOR to assess Syrian cultural sites--is already out there for the taking by the State Department's allies against antiquities collecting.

Chutzpah

The Egyptian Military Dictatorship, fresh from demanding the US Government stop the legal trade in undocumented Egyptian artifacts, has now demanded that the Borough of Northampton stop the sale of an Egyptian artifact long in its possession.  Will British local government stand up to these imperialists against such meddling?  Surely so.  Will our US State Department also show some spine and stand up for US small businesses, collectors and Museums?  Sadly, probably not given indications that the MOU with Egypt  has already been pre-judged after some behind the scenes lobbying by politically connected archaeological organizations with a vested interest in the corrupt status quo in that troubled country.

Better Burned then Smuggled?

UNESCO and the Iraqi cultural bureaucracy are up in arms because some valuable Islamic manuscripts were removed from ISIS controlled Mosul and taken to Turkey. One wonders if UNESCO and the Iraqi cultural bureaucracy would rather have seen them burned by Islamic fanatics instead.

If anything, the rise of ISIS and the the devolution of the rest of Iraq into a Shia-dominated sectarian rump state also confirms the wisdom of keeping the Iraqi Jewish archive in the United States.

CPO was dubious about the archive's repatriation even before the wheels came off in Iraq.  Yet, CPO suspects there are still some in the archaeological lobby still pressing for the return of the archive to an uncertain fate.

A very small special interest II

More evidence, if any is needed, that the actual number of supporters the archaeological lobby can muster is quite small in the scheme of things:

Petition in favor of the Egyptian Military Dictatorship's claims to Egyptian artifacts:

http://www.change.org/petitions/cpac-stop-the-import-of-egyptian-heritage-objects

1,300 signatories.  (And, of these, it's unclear how many may be Egyptian state employees)

Petition against the Egyptian Military Dictatorship's mass death sentence of regime opponents:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/stop_mass_execution_loc/

1.5 million signatories.

A very small special interest

It's estimated that there are only approximately 11,000 archaeologists in the United States.  Most appear to either be employed by the federal government or not for profit educational institutions.  Of this small number, only an infinitesimal few seem to be active in lobbying against private and museum collecting, perhaps 50-100 or so.

No doubt all, or most of these individuals,  really believe in what they are advocating.  But even so, given the small numbers why all the influence?   Could it be because this small group works hand in hand with foreign governments (including most recently the Egyptian military dictatorship) that offer excavation permits?  Or that they are joined at the hip with cronies in both the State Department and in US law enforcement?  Or that their time and efforts are effectively funded by tax or tuition dollars?  Or that not much thought is put into the actual basis for source country claims?  Or that lazy media outlets are all too often ready to take what they say at face value rather than actually check sources?  Or, all of the above?  

Investigations Needed of Close, Secretive Ties to Middle Eastern Dictators and Terror States?

According to the archaeological blogosphere there are links between terrorists and collectors that must be investigated.  If so, CPO hopes any such investigation also explores the established but opaque links between the archaeological lobby and Middle Eastern military dictatorships like Egypt and even terror states like Saddam's Iraq, the Assads' Syria and the Mullah's Iran.   Any such links are potentially far more dangerous to our own national security than a few cylinder seals in the hands of terrorists.  And this is no job for Homeland Security or even the FBI.  No, this is one for the CIA or perhaps even the NSA.  They'll get to the bottom of all this-- though, of course, we may never learn what they find.

Debunking Wild Claims About Collectors Supporting Terrorism

Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's former chief of staff and current mayor of Chicago, famously said, " You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."  So, its not surprising the archaeological lobby is cynically exploiting the rise of the ISIS terrorist group in Iraq to try to justify a further clamp down on collectors

Thankfully, others with no such axe to grind have exposed the dubious nature of such claims.  First, former senior Homeland Security official Jim McAndrew debunked such claims at a recent public forum.   And now Derek Fincham, who not generally known as a friend of the antiquities trade, raises his own questions about the motivations behind the recent spate of stories on the subject.

US Taxpayer to Pay SLAM's Attorney's Fees?

The US taxpayer has already paid dearly to pursue a stale claim to the Ka Nefer Nefer Mummy Mask at the behest of now disgraced (but perhaps to be rehabilitated) Zahi Hawass and the Egyptian Military Dictatorship.  Now, pursuant to a statute meant to reimburse claimants who successfully defend their interests in seized property, the US taxpayer is likely to also be stuck for a bill for the Saint Louis Art Museum's attorney's fees.  This is as it should be, but hopefully the government will be more discriminating in what cases it pursues in the future.  Too often, the decision seems to be made on little more than pressure from the archaeological lobby and the State Department, whose primary interest seems to be to bend over backwards for nationalistic foreign potentates.

The Real Face of Egypt

Try as archaeological lobby might to put a smiley face on the Egyptian military dictatorship in order to justify a MOU with the US, the real Egypt keeps on coming through.  Indeed, it's not even safe to be a comic in the country any longer.  Yet, protesting against shadowy foreign "cultural racketeers" is apparently still just fine.

Tunnel Vision: MOU Supporters Oblivious to Facts on the Ground

Supporters of the Egyptian Military Dictatorship's request for a MOU should take note.  The Egyptian public is refusing to buy into the Generals' efforts to seek "legitimacy" through phony elections.  Indeed, so much so that the Generals have extended voting for another day.

Yet, the archaeological lobby still seeks to portray Egypt's request, which dubiously coincides with the country's fraudulent elections, as necessary to protect Egypt's cultural patrimony.  But from whom?  "Cultural racketeers" or poor stewardship, corruption and an absolutely Pharaonic view of state ownership that devalues artifacts so thoroughly within Egypt itself that they are either destroyed or smuggled from the country, presumably more often than not with "inside help?"

Hopefully, at least some on CPAC will see through this fraud during next week's public session.  The public certainly has, with 91% of public comments solidly against the MOU or the extension of restrictions to ancient coins.  That's an "election result" that should have resonance.

“Done Deal” or Not— Say NO to the Dictators and Oppose the Egyptian MOU

Press reports suggest that the State Department has already promised Egypt’s military government that it will impose import restrictions on its behalf.  Still, if one feels strongly about their continued ability to collect Egyptian artifacts and/or historical coins, CPO believes they should comment on the regulations.gov website.  Why? Because silence will only be spun as acquiesce by US and Egyptian cultural bureaucracies as well as the archaeological lobby with an ax to grind against collectors.

A.    The Law

The Cultural Property Implementation Act (“CPIA”) contains significant procedural and substantive constraints on the executive authority to impose import restrictions on cultural goods.  “Regular” restrictions may only be applied to archaeological artifacts of “cultural significance” “first discovered within” and “subject to the export control” of a specific UNESCO State Party.  They must be part of a “concerted international response” of other market nations, and can only be applied after less onerous “self-help” measures are tried.  They must also be consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes.

“Emergency restrictions” are narrower.  They focus on material of particular importance, but no “concerted international response” is necessary.  The material must be a “newly discovered type” or from a site of “high cultural significance” that is in danger of “crisis proportions.” Alternatively, the object must be of a civilization, the record of which is in jeopardy of “crisis proportions,” and restrictions will reduce the danger of pillage.

The Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) is to provide the executive with useful advice about this process. The CPIA contemplates that CPAC is to recommend whether import restrictions are appropriate as a general matter and also specifically whether they should be placed on particular types of cultural goods.  

In the past, CPAC has recommended against import restrictions on coins.  Initially those recommendations were followed, but beginning with the renewal of Cypriot import restrictions in 2007, this has changed.  Now, there are restrictions on coins made in Cyprus, China, Italy, Greece and Bulgaria.
  

Import restrictions make it impossible for Americans to legally import collectors’ coins widely and legally available worldwide.   Foreign sellers are typically unwilling or unable to certify the coin in question (which can retail as little as $1) left a specific UNESCO State Party before restrictions were imposed as required by the CPIA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection rules.   Restrictions have drastically limited Americans’ abilities to purchase historical coins from abroad and have negatively impacted the cultural understanding and people to people contacts collecting fosters. 

B.     The Request

Egyptian artifacts have been actively and legally collected here and abroad since the early 19th c.  Egyptians also actively and legally collected objects from their past until a series of military governments cracked down on the practice.  Finally, in 1983, the Egyptian Government of Hosni Mubarak declared all such objects state property.  Most common and less valuable Egyptian artifacts, like coins and amulets have lost their provenance over time.  Even many more valuable pieces have lost any provenance information as well.  There simply was no reason to keep such information in most cases.  

There certainly has been looting in Egypt, as has been the case since ancient times.  However, there is a real question whether there is an “emergency” of “crisis proportions” and, if so, if any “emergency” is of Egypt’s own making.   During a recent public forum meant to publicize the need for import restrictions, Egyptologist Monica Hanna conceded that government officials were intimately involved in illicit antiquities trafficking, that much damage is due to urban encroachment onto archaeological sites, and that common people don’t respect their past because they believe it belongs to Egypt’s abusive military government and not them.  This, of course, is the real root of Egypt’s problems.  Since prior military governments made the trade in all antiquities illegal, artifacts have been either illegally traded or devalued so much that they are either destroyed or dumped in landfills.

Archaeological groups have been seriously lobbying for import restrictions on Egyptian cultural artifacts since at least 2011.   The Arab Spring Revolution, the fall Egyptian antiquities Pharaoh Zahi Hawass, an ongoing bribery investigation involving Hawass and National Geographic (which had joined the lobbying effort), and the rise and fall of Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi derailed things for a time, but Egypt’s new military government has now pressed the issue, probably because it believes that a MOU with the United States that recognizes its control over Egypt’s past will give it much needed legitimacy.   Indeed, from the Generals’ perspective, what better timing than to link a MOU to orchestrated elections in late May that are expected to anoint Egyptian Army Chief Abdel Fattah el-Sissi,  President.  

The State Department certainly seems to have been treating the Egyptian Government’s request as requiring an immediate, positive response. Egypt apparently made its formal request in mid-March.  A New York Times Editorial, dated March 20, 2014, states that the US Government immediately agreed to this demand.   See “Egypt's Heritage Plundered Anew” (March 20, 2014) ("The United States — a leading buyers’ market for Egyptian antiquities — was quick to respond, with the State Department promising cooperation by relaxing standards that currently require customs officials to have precise information in hand about a stolen item before they can act.").   Egyptian press reports then placed Assistant Secretary of State Evan Ryan, the decision maker on any import restrictions, in Egypt to discuss the details in early April.   Dr. Hanna was then given a platform to make her case at the Wilson Center, a prestigious think tank associated with the U.S. Government’s Smithsonian Institution.  Two days later, on April 16, 2014, a CPAC hearing was announced for June 2, 2014, presumably to provide legal “cover” for this farce. 

Certainly, the public notice itself tells nothing of the basis for the request and even whether Egypt seeks “regular” or “emergency” restrictions.   All we know is the June 2, 2014 date for CPAC’s open session, that Egypt seeks an import ban on artifacts that date from pre-historic to Ottoman times, and that public comments are due no later than 11:59 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on May 14, 2014.  For more background, see http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/search/label/Egyptian%20MOU

C.     What You Can Do

Admittedly, all the evidence points to the matter being already decided—no matter what the CPIA says, what the facts really are, and what American citizens or others interested in collecting Egyptian artifacts may think.  Still, to remain silent is to give the Egyptian generals, the cultural bureaucrats and archaeologists with an ax to grind against collectors exactly what they want-- the claim that any MOU is not controversial. So, to submit comments concerning the proposed MOU, go to the Federal rulemaking Portal and enter Docket No. DOS-2014-0008 and by all means speak your mind. 

What should you say?  Provide a brief, polite explanation about why the request should be denied or limited.  Indicate to CPAC how restrictions will negatively impact your business and/or the cultural understanding and people to people contacts collecting provides.   Coin collectors should add that it’s typically impossible to assume a particular coin was “first discovered within” and “subject to the export control” of Egypt and that Egyptian historical coins are very common and widely and freely available for sale elsewhere, particularly in Europe.  And, of course, feel free to mention any concerns you might have about government transparency, whether this is a real “emergency” of “crisis proportions,” and how the State Department has generally handled this request.   Finally, you don’t have to be an American citizen to comment—you just need to be concerned enough to spend twenty or so minutes to express your views on-line. 

"I destroyed them because they belong to the Government and I'm mad at the Government."

So a young man reportedly said to SAFE award winner Monica Hanna to explain his participation in the looting and destruction of the Minya Museum with other locals angry that the military had  deposed their Muslim Brotherhood president.

CPO will report more on other revealing admissions Ms. Hanna made at an event organized by the so-called Antiquities Coalition soon, but this statement in particular gets to the heart of what's wrong with Egypt's cultural establishment and why US Collectors should not be made to pay the price for a mess entirely of Egypt's own making.

The Military Government that has run Egypt for decades,  like its much more bloodthirsty cousins in Syria and the former Baathist state of Iraq, has declared ownership of all antiquities as part of nationalist campaign to associate the regime with the glories of the ancient past.  This may sit well with collector-hating foreign and domestic archaeologists, but it also means that common people associate antiquities with their government oppressors.  The results have been sadly predictable in all three countries, what with wanton destruction of archaeological artifacts during times of strife.

And yet, rather than facing this basic truth, the media and government decision-makers uncritically accept the received wisdom from archaeologists with an axe to grind against collectors and self-interested foreign cultural bureaucrats that the real culprits are foreign collectors and shadowy antiquities dealers.  No, the real problem is the state ownership model they support, particularly when this approach awards absolute control to violent and venal governments at war with their own people.

More Evidence of a Pre-Judged Done Deal Banning Import of Egyptian Antiquities?

An Egyptian news source is reporting that that,

Assistant US Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs Evan Ryan will arrive on Monday 7/4/2014 to discuss a proposal submitted by Egypt to illegalize trading of Egyptian monuments in America.

Just more evidence of a pre-judged done deal with Egypt's military government cooked up with the help of politically connected academic insiders?

New York Times Editorial Board Stops Thinking

The New York Times generally analyzes issues pretty well.  Not, however, the recent call by a politically connected group associated with the Archaeological Institute of America and George Washington University seeking to effectively ban the sale of Egyptian antiquities.  Before endorsing such a ban, one would have hoped that the New York Times editorial board would have at least considered the following:

1. The accuracy of reports of looting, particularly given the prior pronouncements of Egyptian Government officials on the subject.  The Times editorial assumes thefts from the Malawi National Museum in Minya justify a clamp down on American collectors, but more accurate reports place the blame on discontented locals not "cultural racketeers" and "global connoisseurs" as Egyptian authorities claim.  Moreover, it appears what was not destroyed by locals angry at their own government has been largely returned. Under the circumstances, the sophisticated editors of the New York Times should have asked if the MOU is based on a legitimate need or whether it is actually a ploy by Egypt's military government to help gain some much needed legitimacy.

2.  The importance of rule of law.  Rule of law is not a priority for Egypt's military rulers, but it should be for our own State Department.  Thus, it should be troubling that according to the New York Times editorial, the State Department has already agreed to "relaxing  standards that currently require customs officials to have precise information in hand about a stolen item before they can act."   What then about the legal requirements Congress imposed under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act-- including CPAC review and the opportunity for public comment?  Instead, we have what sounds to be a prejudged decision, made behind closed doors, based solely on the input of politically connected academic insiders and the representatives of Egypt's generals.  Shouldn't that be a concern for the New York Times, and indeed something for its staff of world-class reporters to investigate?

3.  The impact of any restrictions on the ability of Americans to continue to enjoy Egyptian artifacts of the sort widely and legally collected both here and abroad since the 19th c.  It's bad enough that import restrictions effectively ban the entry of many artifacts of too modest value or importance to have been properly documented.  But what are we to make of calls "to halt the sale of any antiquity lacking a stamp of approval from the government in Cairo?"  One might wonder how such a proposal would be administered, but for the well-founded suspicion that Egypt's nationalistic cultural bureaucrats think that virtually everything of Egyptian origin rightly belongs to the Egyptian State.  So perhaps such calls are indeed tantamount to an antique ivory style ban, another Obama Administration initiative which has come under fire for straying much too far from a targeted response to the present-day killing of elephants for profit.  Antiquities are not endangered species and its wrong to assume collectors who have preserved, studied and displayed them for centuries should pay the price for today's problems created in Egypt by the Egyptians themselves.

Money and Politics of a Cultural Property Kind

Money and politics is an unfortunate reality here in Washington, D.C.    So, it should be no surprise that Opensecrets.org reports that  Deborah Lehr of the Archaeological Institute of America, Capitol Archaeological Institute and Antiquities Coalition has given at least $124,800 to mostly Republican candidates over the years.  Or that Clay Constantinou, a board member of the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute, helped Democrats raise so much money that President Clinton appointed him as Ambassador to Luxembourg.  But perhaps it helps explain why despite the CPIA's legislative history, CPAC's prior recommendations on Cypriot and Italian coins, bipartisan support in Congress for coin collectors, and lopsided numbers of public comments against import restrictions on coins, there are now import restrictions on coins from Cyprus, China, Italy, Greece and  Bulgaria, and if the AIA and related groups has their way apparently there will soon be restrictions on coins from Egypt as well.

There needs to be far more scrutiny about behind the scenes lobbying of the executive branch by principles of public charities which were supposedly created to further purely academic pursuits like archaeology.

Lobbying Group Supporting Egypt's Military Government Scrubbed Before Push for Emergency Restrictions?

Based on recent reports, politically connected members of the Antiquities Coalition  and Capitol Archaeological Institute are lobbying the US State Department in support of Egypt's request for so-called "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural artifacts.

But conspicuously absent from these efforts are two of their key allies, Zahi Hawass and National Geographic presumably because both are still under federal investigation related to a bribery scheme.

One hand washes the other is unfortunately a fact of life in places like Egypt.  Under the circumstances, there needs to be far more transparency about the Antiquities Coalition and the Capitol Archaeological Institute including their funding, political contacts, aims and exact relationship with Egypt's military government.