I am here to ask that you look hard before you leap to approve
yet another round of MOUs with authoritarian MENA governments. Yemen
is a particularly troubling case with an ongoing civil war. The Hadi government has been propped up by Saudi
Arabia. It is undisputed that Saudi
Arabia and its coalition partners are complicit in intentionally destroying
cultural sites, including bombing the Dhamar museum. The other major party, the Houthis, are Iranian
proxies. The Hadi Government has accused
the Houthi of doing most of the looting in the country, but if that is true
wouldn’t that also mean any looted material is going to Iran, not here? In any case, the net result of any MOU with
Yemen will be repatriating artifacts (that may or not have been in Yemen for
decades) back to a war zone. A MOU with Morocco
raises a different issue—is the patrimony of Morocco really in jeopardy or is
this just a case where another MENA government has been promised the same
treatment as its neighbor, Algeria. The
information that has been provided about a shadowy seizure in France, a few
images of what purport to be Moroccan cultural items on Facebook, and even an
article that links treasure hunting to sorcery fall well below the quantum of
evidence required.
As to coins,
let me make the following points.
·
There
are large numbers of coin collectors and numismatic firms in the US. Very few collectors do so to “invest.” Most collect out of love of history, as an expression
of their own cultural identity, or out of interest in other cultures. All firms that specialize in ancient coins in
the US are small businesses.
·
Private
collectors and dealers support much academic research into coins. For example, a German collector and a curator
at the American Numismatic Society collaborated to produce, “Coinage of the
Caravan Kingdoms,” an extensive study which includes research into the coinage
of ancient Yemen. A clamp down on
collecting will inevitably lead to less scholarship.
·
While
what became the CPIA was being negotiated, one of the State Department’s top
lawyers assured Congress that “it would be hard to imagine a case” where coins
would be restricted. In 2007, however, the State Department imposed
import restrictions on Cypriot coins, against CPAC’s recommendations, and then
misled the public and Congress about it in official government reports. What also should be troubling is that the
decision maker, Assistant Secretary Dina Powell, did so AFTER she had accepted
a job with Goldman Sachs where she was recruited by and worked for the spouse
of the Antiquities Coalition’s founder.
Since that time, additional import restrictions have been imposed on
coins from Algeria, Bulgaria, China, Egypt, Greece, Iraq, Italy, Libya and
Syria.
·
The
cumulative impact of import restrictions has been very problematical for
collectors since outside of some valuable Greek coins, most coins simply lack the
document trail necessary for legal import under the “safe harbor” provisions of
19 U.S.C. § 2606.
·
It
is probably too late to change history, but even at this late date, the
problems facing coin collectors could be ameliorated if CPAC works with Customs
to ensure the CPIA is applied as written.
o
The
CPIA only authorizes the government to impose import restrictions on coins and
other artifacts first discovered within and subject to the export control of either
Morocco or Yemen. (19 U.S.C. § 2601). Furthermore, seizure is only appropriate
for items on the designated list exported
from the State Party after the effective date of regulations. (19 U.S.C. § 2606). Unfortunately, the State Department and
Customs view this authority far more broadly.
In particular, designated lists have been prepared based on where coins
are made and sometimes found, not where they are actually found and hence are
subject to export control. Furthermore,
restrictions are not applied prospectively solely to illegal exports made after
the effective date of regulations, but rather are enforced against any import into
the U.S. made after the effective date of regulations, i.e., an embargo, not
targeted, prospective import restrictions.
o The State Department will no doubt
point to a 4th Circuit case as support for its procedures, but it is
important to recognize this decision was ultimately predicated on the view that
the Court should not interfere with what it considered to be a “foreign policy
matter.” That of course has no
bearing on CPAC recommending that State and Customs do the right thing and
ensure any restrictions that may be advocated are properly phrased to only
apply to coins illicitly removed after the effective date of regulations. As referenced in our papers, Congress
mandated a similar formulation under Syrian import restrictions. Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment