State Department reopens record for renewal and possible amendment of the current MOU with Cyprus; Renewals of MOUs with Guatemala and Mali also to be discussed.

The State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center have provided public notice of a Cultural Property Advisory Committee meeting on January 25 and 26 to discuss a renewal of a MOU with Guatemala, and renewals and possible amendments of current MOUs with Cyprus and Mali.  The public notice can be found here. A direct link to comment can be found here.  It is important that any comments be received before the January 18, 2021 11:59 PM deadline. That is also the deadline to inform the Cultural Heritage Center if you want to speak at the hearing. 

The renewal and possible amendment of the MOU with Cyprus was to be discussed last October, but consideration of the request was bumped to CPAC's January meeting given a last minute addition of proposed "emergency import restrictions" on behalf of Afghanistan being placed on the docket.  CPO has covered the CPAC public meeting that discussed that absurd request that will only benefit the Taliban regime here.  At this juncture, we have not heard one way or the other whether the State Department will actually go through with authorizing such import restrictions that would claw back Afghan heritage imported from legitimate markets in Europe just so it can be handed over to the iconoclasts who blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas and smashed many of the statues in the Kabul Museum. 

In any case, that report also includes links to papers submitted by the ACCG, IAPN, and Alan Berman about the proposal to extend and amend the Cypriot MOU.  Collectors of Byzantine, Crusader and Turkish coins should beware; it is likely that this renewal will be used as a vehicle to amend current restrictions on Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman Provincial coins minted in Cyprus to include such later issues.   

Please consider commenting if you failed to do so back in September because silence will be spun as acquiescence.  A guide on the request and what to say can be found here.  Those of you who also collect Latin American coinage should also consider commenting on the Guatemalan request.  The issues there are similar to those raised with regard to MOUs with other Latin American countries.  As described in  IAPN's paper about last year's Peruvian request, Spanish Colonial and Republican era coinage of Latin American countries simply fail to meet the threshold criteria for archaeological or ethnological objects.  Spanish Colonial and Republican era coins cannot be considered archaeological objects because they are not normally discovered in the ground.  Nor can they be properly viewed as ethnological objects.  They are the products of what at the time were sophisticated industrial practices, not crafts of tribal societies.  Moreover, such coins circulated widely, including within the United States, where they were legal tender until 1857. 

On Mali, there are no numismatic issues as far as CPO can tell. Evidently, the people of Mali preferred to use salt as currency rather than coins.  The first Malian coins were not local, but French Colonial issues from the late 19th c, making Mali one of the few countries coin collectors at least have little to worry about. Or, maybe we all should be worried if the State Department embargoes Malian salt as cultural heritage and US Customs bans all salt imports because even trained customs inspectors cannot tell Malian from other types of salt.  Don't laugh!  Recently, "rope" became targets of such embargoes, although to be fair any rope shortage appears to be the result of pandemic related supply chain issues and not cultural property embargoes. 

Satterfield Disappoints Representatives of Displaced Minority Populations

Lee Satterfield's confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee suggests that the Cultural Heritage Center is a minor part of the Assistant Secretary ECA’s portfolio.  It also confirms that the incoming Assistant Secretary likely will not change the "archaeology over all" status quo found at the Bureau.  CPO found her answer to Senator Markey’s question touching on minority rights to be nonresponsive, and understands that representatives of displaced minorities from the MENA region feel the same way. 

Senator Markey  1:11:12

Thank you, Mr Chairman Ms. Satterfield, your position at the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs will allow you to establish import restrictions on cultural goods from foreign countries through the authorization of memorandums of understanding. Cultural property MOUs [use] have the power to impact the cultural heritage of ethnic and religious minority populations which the United States should aim to protect. If confirmed, will you urge the administration to appoint an advocate for religious and ethnic minorities as a public representative to the cultural property advisory committee to ensure that minority populations are properly represented?

 Lee Satterfield  1:11:57

Thank you Senator. ECA is very proud of the work of the Cultural Heritage Center to protect and preserve global heritage. It is critically important work, as you said. ECA can and should play a strong role particularly in cooperating with law enforcement to prevent the financing of transnational terrorism through looting and trafficking of antiquities. If I'm confirmed I look forward to working with Congress, other parts of the department, and private entities, particularly through the advisory committee to ensure a diversity of perspective when continuing the important work, as it was laid out originally by Congress.

 It’s particularly concerning that Satterfield evidently thinks throwing around the archaeological lobby's “terrorist financing” narrative (which RAND and others have largely debunked) can shut off any serious consideration of  the concerns of Greek and Jewish groups about how recent MOU’s recognize the rights of authoritarian MENA governments to the cultural heritage of displaced minorities. CPO thanks American Hellenic Institute for transcribing the event.  You can listen to the whole  confirmation hearing here. 

Report on January 21, 2020, CPAC hearing to discuss proposed MOU's with Turkey and Tunisia

               On January 21, 2020, the U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) met to consider proposed MOU’s with Turkey and Tunisia.   CPAC is currently constituted as follows.  (1) Stefan Passantino (Public); (2) Adele Chatfield-Taylor (Public); (3) James Reap (Public); (4) Karol Wight (Museums); (5) Nancy C. Wilkie (Archaeology); (6) Ricardo A. St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (7) Lothar Von Falkenhausen (Archaeology); and  (8) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property).

                Due to the large number of speakers, the Chair indicated each speaker would only be allowed two (2) minutes rather than the usual five (5) minutes.  Those speakers in favor of MOU’s with Turkey and/or Tunisia were as follows: (1) Dr. Lynn Dodd; (2) Dr. Jane Evans; (3) Sam Hardy; (4); Dr. Christina Luke; (5) Dr. Brian Rose; (6) Tess Davis; (7) Dr. Nathan Elkins; (8) Dr. Elizabeth Greene; and (9) Katie Paul.  Those opposed to one or both MOU’s or their application to certain types of artifacts were as follows:  (1) Stephen Knerly; (2) Elias Gerasoulis; (3) Carol Basri; (4) Kate FitzGibbon; (5) Douglas Mudd; (6) Peter Tompa; and (7) Randolph Myers.

                Chairman Passatino welcomed the speakers.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments, particularly those of the speakers.  Given the large number of speakers, Mr. Passatino indicated that speakers would be limited to 2 minutes.  After all the speakers were finished, he would open up the floor to questions.

                Dr. Lynn Dodd is an archaeologist.  She supports Turkey’s MOU.  She indicates Turkey has met all the criteria to be granted a MOU.

                Dr. Jane Evans indicates coins are at risk from metal detectors.  She indicates excavation coins typically are local issues that do not circulate far from where they are made so they should be restricted.

                Sam Hardy starts his presentation honoring an archaeologist who took his own life rather than taking the blame for embezzlement.  He indicates trafficking is a real problem in Turkey.  He finds it odd that Turkey would not be granted a MOU because of problems within the country because granting a MOU will encourage positive forces in Turkey to clean up the country’s act.

                Dr. Christina Luke works in Turkey.  She echoes her support of others for a MOU with Turkey.

                Dr. Brian Rose of the University of Pennsylvania has seen looted sites.  Looting is a lucrative business that needs to be addressed. Turkey allows US Archaeologists to work in the country, which promotes educational exchange.

                Tess Davis and her organization, the Antiquities Coalition, supports the MOU with Turkey.  She focuses her comments on the third determination. She indicates there is a concerted international response of market nations now that the EU has promulgated import controls on cultural artifacts.

 

                Stephen Knerly spoke for the Association of Art Museum Directors.  He indicates that a MOU in this case would not be appropriate because the Turkish government is involved in state sanctioned looting and destruction of Turkey’s cultural patrimony.

                Elias Gerasoulis speaking for the American Hellenic Institute opposes any MOU with Turkey.  There is no rule of law in Turkey under Erdogan.  A number of Byzantine era cathedrals have been turned from museums into mosques.  Over 400 churches have been destroyed in Cyprus. Erdogan has shown disdain for religious minorities and the material remains of their culture.

                Dr. Nathan Elkins notes that prior MOUs have focused on coins that have circulated locally, but is time to expand upcoming MOU’s to include Roman Republican, Roman Imperial and Byzantine coins.  There are enough MOUs already where coins have been included that now is the time to treat all coins like other objects that are found on different designated lists.

                Dr. Elizabeth Greene supports the MOU.  MOUs ensure that objects of minority groups are preserved. From her work on shipwrecks, Greene knows that even common artifacts like transport amphorae are important to understanding the past.

                Katie Paul speaks for the Athar Project.  She shows images of artifacts from Tunisia and Turkey on sale on Facebook.  She indicates some buyers are located in the US.  She also indicates that she is Pontic Greek.  She wants Greek artifacts protected as evidence of the Greek Diaspora.

                Carole Basri contrasts her prior work for the State Department to more recent State Department efforts to recognize the rights of authoritarian MENA governments to the artifacts of displaced minority populations.  At some risk to her personal safety, Ms. Basri collected records of Jews in Iraq on December 11, 2003 for the State Department.  Some of these records were later deposited in the US Holocaust Museum.  Carole Basri believes there needs to be a carve-out in any MOU for religious artifacts of displaced Jews and other minority populations. 

                Kate FitzGibbon speaks for the Committee for Cultural Policy and the Global Heritage Alliance.  It is essential that CPAC adhere to the CPIA’s requirements.  Turkey has engaged in legalized theft of minority religious artifacts.  A book written by a US diplomat discusses the artifacts available in the Grand Bazar for sale to foreigners. 

                Doug Mudd speaks for the American Numismatic Association.  Import restrictions on coins have had a negative impact on the ANA’s educational mission.  An instructor at the Summer Seminar was afraid to bring his coins from abroad because he was concerned they would be seized.  People can learn from ancient coins which are amongst the most common ancient artifacts.

                Peter Tompa speaks for the International Association of Professional Numismatists.  Any MOU would recognize the Erdogan Government’s rights to “claw back” cultural goods of “ethnically cleansed” Greek, Armenian and Assyrian populations.  Since 2007, a series of grossly over broad import restrictions placed on common ancient coins of the sort widely collected worldwide (including within most of the countries for which import restrictions have been granted) have done quite a bit of damage to ancient coin collecting. Their cumulative impact has been problematic because 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.  Another embargo, this time potentially impacting a wide variety of Greek, Carthaginian, Roman Provincial, Roman and Byzantine coins struck or sometimes found in Turkey and Tunisia, will bring even more damage. As set forth in IAPN's submissions, there are many statutory reasons why this should not happen. Moreover, CPAC also needs to consider whether import restrictions on coins are really necessary, particularly because it appears that both Turkey and Tunisia allow for the internal sale of ancient coins.

                Randolph Myers is a coin collector.  Coins struck in large multiples lack cultural significance. CPAC should also consider whether less drastic measures, like the institution of a Treasure Act or Portable Antiquity Scheme, should be tried first.  Finally, there is no evidence presented that either Turkey or Tunisia are undertaking adequate self-help measures.

Questions:

              Karol Wight asks if the AAMD polled its members about loans from Turkey.  Stephen Knerly indicates that because the State Department has started using a standard Article II in their MOU’s there is no reason to seek this information from members.  He does note, however, that Turkey demands high loan fees.  It would be beneficial to all concerned if Art II of MOU’s (which relate to requirements placed on the foreign country) are written individually.

            Anthony Wisniewski asks Kate FitzGibbon if restrictions should be placed on coins.  She indicates it is important to look to the wording of the CPIA to ascertain whether restrictions are appropriate.  She then defers to Peter Tompa.  Peter Tompa indicates restrictions should not be placed on coins, but if they are so placed they must take care that they only apply to coins both first discovered within a country and subject to its export control.  He notes that restrictions would be wholly inappropriate on Roman coins which circulated from England to Sri Lanka and which are found in many more countries than where there are MOUs on coins.  Dr. Nathan Elkins is allowed to comment.  He believes restrictions should come in as long as over 50% of coins are found in a given place, but this should be further expanded to everywhere coins are found.

           Anthony Wisniewski asks Dr. Rose about the provenance of coins found in the University of Pennsylvania Museum.   Dr. Rose said that the Museum secured these coins years ago under a system of partage.

          Chairman Passatino asks Elias Gerasoulis if his group could live with any MOU with conditions to address concerns of the Greek community.  Mr. Gerasoulis indicates that his group is unalterably opposed to a MOU because the Erdogan government cannot be trusted. He believes a MOU would make the situation worse, not better.   Moreover, this MOU raises questions not only about Greek property, but other minority property as well.  For example, how can we trust Turkey to respect Jewish minority property, when Erdogan hosted the leader of Hamas, an anti-Israel U.S. designated terrorist group, at the Presidential palace in Turkey last month?  This issue is not simply one of archeology. The political context needs to be looked at and understood. 

May 2, 2018 Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to Discuss Ecuadorian MOU and Renewal of MOU with PRC

              On May 2, 2018, the U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee held a “virtual” meeting where CPAC members and all speakers were linked via an internet based video platform.  At least the following CPAC members were in attendance:  (1) Karol Wight (Museum); (2) Lothar von Falkenhausen (Archeology); (3) Nancy Wilkie (Archaeology); (4) Rosemary Joyce (Archaeology); (5) James Willis (Trade); and (6) Jeremy Sabloff (Public-Chair).  Cari Enav, the Cultural Heritage Center’s new chief, introduced Dr. Andrew Cohen as CHC’s new executive director and Dr. Sabloff as the Chair of CPAC. Dr. Sabloff ran the meeting.

                There were five (5) speakers:  (1) Peter Tompa (Global Heritage Alliance (GHA)/International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN)/Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG)); (2) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy (CCP)); (3) Josh Knerly (Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD)); (4) Alex Nyerges (Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (VMFA)); and (5) Tess Davis (Antiquities Coalition).

Ecuadorian MOU

                Peter Tompa spoke on behalf of GHA, CCP, IAPN and PNG.  He indicated these groups had serious concerns about the short public comment period and the fact that the Ecuador’s proposal sought import restrictions on “Colonial and republican period coins; medallions more than 50 years old …manuscripts more than 50 years old; and certain works by modern artists.”  None of these materials may be restricted under the terms of the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) because they do not meet the definitions for archaeological or ethnological objects.  Archaeological objects must be at least 250 years old and be normally found in the ground.  Ethnological objects must be the products of tribal or non-industrial societies.  The Legislative History makes clear that Congress understood the term “ethnological” to only encompass what is considered “primitive” or “tribal” art, and not any object which is repetitive in character. 

                These limitations on archaeological and ethnological material should preclude restrictions being placed on coins and medallions.  While the State Department has—over the objections of the numismatic community and prior precedent—placed import restrictions on ancient and other early coins, the Spanish Colonial and Republican era coins at issue here cannot lawfully be restricted because they are neither archaeological nor ethnological in character.  More than that, however, they are as much a part of US culture as they are of Ecuadorian culture.  Large swaths of what is now the US was formally part of Spain’s Empire and even the United States itself—due to the shortages of hard currency at the time—used such coins as legal tender until 1857.  Indeed, such coins were so popular that the term “two bits” entered into our language as meaning 25 cents.  Moreover, references to “pieces of eight” and “gold doubloons” abound in our storytelling, including Melville’s Moby Dick and countless yarns about pirate treasure. 

                Before recommending a MOU, CPAC must also consider what self-help measures Ecuador has undertaken, including the funding Ecuador has devoted to cultural heritage protection.  At least one recent academic work has questioned Ecuador’s commitment in this area.

                Josh Knerly spoke on behalf of AAMD.  AAMD may have been in a position to support the MOU, but the short time span made impossible to poll members.  Knerly echoed Tompa’s concerns about import restrictions being misapplied to objects that are neither archaeological nor ethnological in character. 

                Chairman Sabloff indicates that staff ran into unexpected difficulties in getting out the notice for the CPAC meeting, and that in the future the Committee will try to do better.

                Rosemary Joyce asked about AAMD’s generic recommendations. Knerly indicated that AAMD typically asks for long term loans, low loan fees and immunity from seizure laws.

                In response to a question from Nancy Wilkie, Knerly indicated he did not know if any Ecuadorian artifacts were on display in US museums.  During the review of the China MOU, he later stated that he had learned that at least one AAMD member museum displays Ecuadorian artifacts.

China MOU

                Peter Tompa spoke on behalf of IAPN and PNG.  IAPN and PNG are all for Chinese collecting, but the reality of a huge, largely open internal Chinese market in common antiquities like pottery and coins, raises serious questions about the point of import restrictions imposed on American collectors.  This is especially problematical because the most successful Chinese antiquities sales outlets are controlled by insiders associated with the Chinese Government.  

                There is also the issue of Chinese obligations under the current MOU.     First, China was supposed to make it easier to legally export artifacts, but that provision was drastically limited in the 2014 renewal to Chinese objects imported into China for re-export and there is no indication China has even complied with this weaker provision.  Of course, few rules apply to the free ports of Hong Kong and Macao.  China was also initially supposed to clamp down on them, but it has not.  Instead, artifacts leaving these ports can still be re-imported into the PRC no questions asked.  

                Even more importantly for US coin collectors is the issue of Chinese fakes of historic US coins.    Chinese businesses licensed by the Chinese Government are counterfeiting untold thousands of fake historic US mint coins which are then being introduced into the US numismatic market.    

                Summing up, Tompa stated that the MOU with China should be suspended because it is doing nothing to actually protect Chinese archaeological sites.  At a minimum, Chinese cash coins, which exist in the billions and which are widely collected in China itself, should be delisted. 

                Lothar von Falkenhausen made a statement that what we know about Chinese coins comes from archaeology.  Tompa disputed this claim noting that much information has come from documentation and observation of the types of cash coins found in 1000 coin strings that were used for trade through the early part of the 20^th century.

                Nancy Wilkie states it is not CPAC’s concern that China is counterfeiting US Coins.  Tompa states this is a matter of comity and falls broadly under cultural exchange.  Tompa states this should be addressed in Art. II of the agreement, the part that requires undertakings by the Chinese.

                Kate FitzGibbon spoke for CCP and GHA.  She stated the U.S. Senate recently condemned China’s repression of Tibet, including its cultural heritage.  She then stated there is no justification whatsoever for renewing the China MOU under the CPIA.

• China has a billion-dollar annual internal market in art of all periods that includes the same kinds of antiques barred from US import.
• China has more than adequate internal enforcement resources; its government does not need the US to be a distant, international policeman.
• Past MOUs barring import of Chinese art have had no discernable effect on looting in China.
• The United States is no longer a primary market nation; it has had a net outflow of Chinese art for the last decade. Thousands of US-owned antique objects have left the US – destined for China.

                According to a comprehensive study by Artnet and the China Association of Auctioneers, after the enactment of the original MOU with the United States in 2009, the auction market for art and antiques in mainland China experienced 500% growth between 2009 and 2011. In 2011, the Chinese auction market surpassed all other countries in the world.

                Even in 2014, the year after the MOU’s first renewal, the fastest growing import into China was art, antiques, and collector items, which increased at a staggering 2281% rate.

                Despite its pro-archaeological rhetoric, nothing in Chinese law prohibits the import of all objects predating the end of the Tang Dynasty, as the MOU now does in the US. Nor does Chinese law prohibit the trade or import of monumental sculpture or wall art more than 250 years old ‑ the very objects banned under the China-United States MOU.

                The CCP asked ArtNet, an independent art market research network, to analyze the largest auction sales. In 2016, the total sales of Chinese art at the top ten auction houses worldwide were $103 million dollars. Of this total, $58 million was sold at four auction houses in Hong Kong, and $46 million in six auction houses in Beijing and Hangzhou in mainland China. The only US auction house to make it into the top ten globally that year was Sotheby’s New York, with only 6% of total market share.

                In the United States, the most recent high-value sales are from long-held and foreign collections. A brief 2017 spike in U.S. sales of Chinese art resulted from a single record-breaking sale at Christie’s of a museum collection.  Even there, some of the largest buyers were Chinese

                There is an obvious contradiction between the Department of State’s designation of China’s government as systemically violating international norms of cultural tolerance, and the repeated renewal of US-China agreements on cultural property that grant China’s government absolute control over the same cultural heritage that it has sought to destroy.

                Jim Willis asked if the State Department should renew restrictions that touched on Tibetan art.  Kate FitzGibbon said we should not repatriate Tibetan art to China.

                Josh Knerly stated that AAMD was also hampered by the short time frame allowed in responding to the China MOU.  While AAMD museums have enjoyed good cooperation with Chinese museums, there has been very little progress in the last 5 years on issues related to the length of loans and legislation granting immunity for such loans.

                Karol Wight indicated that her museum, the Corning Glass Museum, was getting good cooperation from China.  She asked Knerly about access for scholars.  He stated such access has had problems at times.  In at least one example, a scholar did not learn whether they could examine objects before they actually arrived at the Chinese institution in question.    

                Alex Nyerges indicated that the VMFA has received good cooperation with Chinese museums with which VMFA has had its own MOUs.  He echoed Knerly’s concern about the length of loans.  Such loans should be for multiple years so that artifacts may travel to other venues so the exhibit is cost effective.  China should also send higher graded antiquities that can be the centerpiece of exhibits. 

                These cultural exchanges have been two way.  Recently, the VMFA sent an exhibit of Fabergé eggs to the Palace Museum in Beijing. 

                In response to a question from Nancy Wilkie, Nyerges has said that seizures of foreign exhibits in China has not been a concern.  He also indicates that the security at the museums VMFA has MOUs with has been excellent.  Other AAMD member museums such as Cleveland, the Met, and Indianapolis also have had very positive experiences with Chinese museums. 

                Tess Davis states China has met all the requirements for a renewal.  The first determination is met.  China has 760,000 archaeological sites that remain in jeopardy of looting. 

                The second determination relating to self-help is met.  China is making its best efforts to protect these sites.  There are export controls on artifacts.  Chinese cultural officials recently met with judicial officials to underscore the need to punish looters.

                The third determination regarding a concerted international response is met.  More countries have joined the UNESCO Convention.  Others now have strong anti-looting legislation favoring repatriation. 

                The MOU has promoted culture exchange.  The Terracotta warrior exhibit is a great example.    Davis believes protecting cultural heritage is a human rights issue. 

                Jim Willis asked how we can enter into an agreement that recognizes the Chinese government’s rights to Tibet’s culture.  Davis stated by restricting imports of Tibetan heritage in the US, we are helping to protect it for a future time when Tibet is hopefully free.

Cultural Heritage Center in Conservative Cross-Hairs

The State Department and its Cultural Heritage Center find themselves in conservative cross-hairs for wasteful spending in their Ambassador's Fund for Cultural Heritage Preservation.   The Weekly Standard paints a picture of a misguided "soft power" effort that has spent millions in anti-American countries.  In so doing, the author, Stephen Schwartz, focuses on the foolishness of giving millions for restoration projects to the same Assad regime which has bombed the Old City of Aleppo into rubble.

The article expresses hope the new Congress will scrutinize the program.  CPO also hopes Congress will also review the Cultural Heritage Center's administration of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act.  Even leaving aside serious concerns about prejudgement of MOUs, it's increasingly clear that MOUs are little more than special interest programs for foreign cultural bureaucracies and the archaeologists that do business with them.  For proof, one need look no further than low public support for MOUs.  For instance, CPAC recently received only four public comments regarding a renewal of the MOU with Nicaragua, including one from the AAMD that suggested it should be turned down.

“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. 

Renewal of China MOU in Diplomatic Trouble?

China's refusal to extradite Edward Snowden, who has been charged with espionage for his leaking of sensitive information gained while working as a contractor for the NSA, raises the question whether the US State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center should renew the current MOU with China.  This particular MOU is probably the most dubious of any of them.   Given China's own huge internal market in Chinese artifacts of the sort restricted under the current agreement, its net effect has only been to give Chinese commercial interests a leg up on their foreign, particularly American competition.  American archaeologists and museums may conduct useful collaborative efforts with their Chinese counterparts, but these will presumably continue without any MOU based on their own merits.   Import restrictions on the ability of Americans to import cultural goods are only supposed to be  imposed with due regard for the significant procedural and substantive constraints found in the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act.  To the extent these statutory constraints have been ignored as a diplomatic gesture to China, China's own actions suggest that the US should reevaluate this MOU and other forms of diplomatic cooperation.  In short, if China won't repatriate Snowden to the US, why should the US repatriate undocumented Chinese artifacts to China?

Cultural Heritage Center Website Updated

The Cultural Heritage Center's website has been spiffed up with pictures, including one of Hillary Clinton gazing at a Greek statute.  Unfortunately, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs' tag line "promoting mutual understanding" rings hollow for ancient coin collectors at least.  Indeed, ECA's controversial import restrictions on millions of ancient Greek, Roman and Chinese coins of the sort avidly collected world-wide has, if anything, greatly harmed people to people contacts between collectors in the US and foreign countries.  Why not promote ancient coin collecting, and the cultural understanding it fosters (at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer), rather than seek to suppress it to the benefit of no one but a small number of academic archaeologists and their patrons in foreign cultural bureaucracies?

End Unilateral Trade Sanctions on Coin Collectors

The Huffington Post has published an editorial by Wayne Sayles attacking import restrictions on ancient coin collecting.

Coin collectors across the U.S. are tired of being singled out with unilateral sanctions. The State Department’s assault on our ability to collect coins is killing another American industry and leaving coin collectors in China and Europe to freely buy and sell. We’ve decided we aren’t going to take it anymore. Join us in ending the State Department’s assault on coin collecting.

Here is the first call to arms for coin collectors across the U.S.: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wayne-sayles/trade-sanction-coin-collectors_b_1400563.html

Seat Brent Benjamin on CPAC

A US District Court's decision to throw out the Government's claim against the Lady Ka-nefer-nefer Mask should also revive Brent Benjamin's appointment to CPAC to represent the interests of the Museum Community.

President Bush appointed Benjamin to the post, but the State Department never seated him, presumably because of Zahi Hawass' campaign to vilify Benjamin, a cause taken up by SAFE and other archaeological groups. See http://www.savingantiquities.org/brent-benjamin-to-join-cpac-an-outrageous-appointment/

Now that the Government's claim has been dismissed and Zahi Hawass has been disgraced, it's time for the State Department to follow the law and seat Mr. Benjamin, who after all was legally appointed by President Bush to the post.

State Indirectly Funding War on Sotheby's?

During the Vietnam war era, the US Government funded a "secret war" in Cambodia. Now, is the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center indirectly funding a not so secret war against Sotheby's Auction House?

Heritage Watch, an archaeological advocacy group with a focus on Cambodia, has been at the forefront of a recent campaign against Sotheby’s. See http://art-crime.blogspot.com/2011/10/what-does-lack-of-provenance-indicate.html
And http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/arts/design/sothebys-caught-in-dispute-over-prized-cambodian-statue.html?pagewanted=1

At the same time, Heritage Watch has received funding from the State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center:
See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/eca-ambassadors-fund-awards-22-million.html and http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html

Is State indirectly funding the archaeological lobby’s war on Sotheby’s? If so, it would be consistent with State's ongoing funding of the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute, which has been at the forefront of lobbying for a clamp down on collectors of ancient coins and other artifacts from Cyprus.

Egypt in Crisis: Clamp Down on Pro-Democracy NGOs Derails Clamp Down on Collectors?

The Egyptian Military Dictatorship's decision to put Americans associated with pro-Democracy NGOs on trial may have derailed efforts to orchestrate emergency import restrictions on Egyptian cultural goods at least temporarily.

The roll-out of the new State Department funded Red List has occurred without the usual hoopla, except for this one post from a lawyer and former prosecutor who formally served as SAFE's Vice President:
http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com/2012/02/egyptian-red-list-now-available.html

And no wonder. While the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs has been funding efforts of the archaeological lobby to justify import restrictions on behalf of the Egyptian Military Dictatorship with a sole source contract to prepare this "Red List," the higher ups at State have threatened to suspend all aid to Egypt over the jailing and threatened trial of Americans associated with pro-Democracy NGOs. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/world/middleeast/trial-of-americans-in-egypt-shakes-nations-ties.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=Egypt&st=cse

Cultural policy is a reflection of other government policies. In Greece, rational management of cultural resources has been hampered by over regulation, corruption and gross underfunding. Egypt's cultural policy suffers from the same ills along with an absolutely Pharaonic view of government control over the past. So why does the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, its Cultural Heritage Center and the archaeological lobby continue to subsidize and cheer for such corrupt and unfair systems?

US State Department Helps Ship Auction House Jobs to China

The time was that Sotheby's and Christies did a lot of auction business involving ancient and modern Chinese art. These started as historic UK companies, but now they have large establishments in NY. Now, however, Chinese auction houses have begun to dominate the trade in part due to the monopoly afforded them in sales of Chinese artifacts by both the Chinese and US Governments. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15933291

Isn't this more evidence that the State Department's MOU with China has done little but helped Chinese auction houses monopolize the trade in ancient art?

CPAC Meeting on Renewal of MOU with Cyprus

The United States Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met on January 18, 2012, to discuss the Cypriot MOU. Once again, CPAC Chair Prof. Patty Gerstenblith (PG, DePaul, Public Representative) began by thanking all speakers or those who had provided comments to CPAC. PG was joined by the following CPAC members Katherine Reid (KR, Cleveland Museum (retired)-Museum); Nina Archabal (NA, Minn. Historical Society-Museum); Marta de la Torre (MT- Florida International University, Public); James Willis (JW, James Willis Tribal Art-Trade); Nancy Wilkie (NW-Carlton College, Archaeology); Barbara Bluhm Kaul (BK,Trustee, Art Institute of Chicago- Public); Jane Levine (JL, Sotheby’s Compliance Department (ex-prosecutor)- Trade); and Rosemary Joyce (RJ,U. Cal., Berkley-Anthropology). Two slots, one in archaeology and the other a trade representative, remain vacant. KR, NW and JW also served under the Bush Administration. The others are Obama Appointees though PG and MT also served the Clinton Administration. There was also staff present including CPAC Executive Director Maria Kouroupas, a Committee lawyer, and Committee archaeologists.

The following individuals spoke at the meeting in support of the MOU: Carmen Biucchi (Harvard); Brian Daniels (U. Pennsylvania Cultural Heritage Center); Nathan Elkins (Baylor); Jane Evans (Temple); Raymond Ewing (CAARI); Ellen Hersher (CAARI); Anne Marie Knobloch (Virginia Tech); Laetitia La Follette (U. Mass./ AIA); Andrew McCarthy (CAARI); Joanna Smith (Princeton); Chris Shaegel (U. Cyprus); Tom Kline (Andrews Kurth); Josh Knerly (AAMD).

The following individuals spoke against the MOU: Peter Tompa (IAPN/PNG); Wayne Sayles (ACCG); and Eloise Ullman (ICTA). In addition, 77% of the comments recorded on the regulations.gov website either opposed the MOU or their extension to coins.

Carmen Biucchi (Harvard) indicated that coins provide important documentation of early Cypriot history because there are few written sources. Even low value bronze coins are important because they frequently appear at archaeological sites. We need to all work together to preserve the past. Cypriot coins are relatively uncommon. In response to a question, Biucchi indicated that it is relatively easy to trace expensive coins due to their appearance at auction, but this is not the case for less expensive coins. She also indicated that metal detectors are the problem.

Brian Daniels (U. Penn. Cultural Center) argued for the extension of restrictions to post-Byzantine period ecclesiastical material. He also suggested that US law enforcement pursue better coordination with Cypriot law enforcement, and other countries with strong Greek cultural influence, including Greece itself and Bulgaria.

Nathan Elkins (Baylor) indicated that Cyprus’ cultural property is in jeopardy as proven by a recent large seizure of artifacts, which included bronze and silver coins. There is a large market in the US as demonstrated by the fact that 200 Cypriot coins are currently listed on the V-coins website. Most Cypriot coins circulated locally. If you add together a list prepared by Wayne Sayles of coins found outside of Cyprus and a list Elkins compiled of coins from Cypriot contexts, that shows that Cypriot coinage is much more prevalent in Cyprus than outside of Cyprus.

Jane Evans (Temple) also indicated that it was important to continue restrictions on coins because it is important that their context not be lost.

Raymond Ewing is a former ambassador to Cyprus. He now serves a CAARI’s President. CAARI receives funding from the US Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Import restrictions should be as closely conformed to Cypriot law, that covers artifacts up to 1850, as possible.

Ellen Hersher is a scholar and archaeologist associated with CAARI. Cyprus has been a specialty for over 40 years. Looting is a historical problem in Cyprus. Looting still goes on until today. Looting only declined during the periods of WWI and WWII and during the 1950’s when British forces were involved in anti-insurgency operations. Wealthy Cypriots have collected Cypriot antiquities since the 19th Century. There is no shame in looting in Cyprus. Increasing efforts are being made to educate the populace. There is a great need for a new museum (the current one dates back to Victorian times) to encourage youth to respect their past. Metal detectors continue to be a serious problem; more legislation is needed. The major collections are grandfathered in. It is Ms. Hersher’s opinion that they are no longer adding much material, but most Cypriots don’t think that looting is wrong. We shouldn’t point fingers at Cyprus, but try to fix the problem.

Anne Marie Knobloch is a CAARI board member, who teaches at Virginia Tech. She is also an AIA member. Cyprus has important religious sanctuaries that need to be studied. Virginia Tech offers students the opportunity to excavate in Cyprus and would like to do more with Cypriot students.

Laetitia La Follette is the AIA’s VP for professional responsibility. She is associated with the University of Massachusetts. Looting remains a problem, including for coins. Because ancient coins are handmade, they are all different and may be traced. The AIA can help draft the designated list. The laws in the Greek Cypriot area need to be tightened. The laws in the North are actually stronger.

Andrew McCarthy is a CAARI trustee. Looting has increased since the 1960’s. There is a famous incident where a tomb was set aside as a dowry. The Department of Antiquities is doing its best to fight against looting. A site where McCarthy works has not suffered looting from 2007-2011. There was one incident where looters struck the site, presumably looking for coins. CAARI gives all documentation created from archaeological investigations to the Department of Antiquities. MOU’s can help educate Cypriots about the importance of their heritage.

Joanna Smith of Princeton is a past CAARI Trustee. Cyprus is an academic cross-roads. Cypriot children are being taught about their history and Cyprus sends exhibits abroad.

Chris Shaegel is from the University of Cyprus. He works closely with CAARI. Because there are few manuscripts that predate 1600, the preservation of Cypriot material culture is important. Coins should be protected and the restrictions should be extended further in time. Icons also need protection. There is no internal market in Cyprus.

Peter Tompa spoke for IAPN and PNG, two trade associations that represent the small business of the numismatic trade. Each Committee member must ask themselves whether they can do so in good conscious after considering these undisputed facts: (1) Coins were evidently placed on the designated list on the orders of former Undersecretary Nicholas Burns as a “thank you” to Cypriot advocacy groups which had given him an award; (2) Jay Kislak, CPAC’s former chair, has stated under oath that the State Department misled Congress and the Public about CPAC’s vote against import restrictions on coins: (3)In 2007, the AIA claimed that Cypriot coins “rarely circulated” to justify restrictions on “coins of Cypriot type.” However, a top Cypriot official has admitted that “It is true that Cypriot coins shared the same destiny as all other coins of the ancient world. As a standard media of exchange they circulated all over the ancient world due to their small size, which facilitated their easy transport…” Moreover, this view has substantial scholarly support; (4) The CPIA requires less drastic remedies to be tried first before import restrictions are imposed, but Cyprus has no coherent regulatory scheme for metal detectors and even allows British tourists to bring them to the Island; and (5) Restrictions imposed on unprovenanced “coins of Cypriot type” only discriminate against American collectors and the small businesses of the numismatic trade; such coins may be shipped from abroad to anywhere but the USA, including Cyprus.

Moreover, he stated that there is no good reason to renew the MOU for yet another 5 years. Cyprus has already had the benefit of restrictions since 1999 on ethnological artifacts and 2002 on archaeological artifacts. Yet, a Swiss scholar reports most looted material goes to wealthy Greek Cypriot collectors, and not as has been maintained to collectors abroad. In addition, all this appears to be done with the full knowledge and acquiescence of Greek Cypriot authorities. Thus, restrictions only discriminate against American collectors.

In response to a question from JW, Tompa indicated it was wrong to so burden the small businesses of the numismatic trade just so archaeologists might occasionally get some relevant information about dating sites from a coin. He also disputed the claim by JL that import restrictions are easy to comply with. He noted that US Customs will not allow entry of coins and other antiquities unless they are pictured in a catalogue that predates restrictions. Thus, even the difficult to obtain certifications are not enough for Customs.

Wayne Sayles indicated that the ACCG represents the interests of the approximately 50,000 serious ancient coin collectors in the United States. The ACCG is interested in fair and equitable application of US law. The CPIA was meant to protect significant artifacts, not everything under the sun. In response to a question from PG, Wayne Sayles indicated that it is unrealistic to ask the small businesses of the numismatic trade to provide provenance information for every coin they import.

Eloise Ullman indicated that most ICTA members have under 5 employees. She also noted that President Obama recently recognized that it is important not to overburden small businesses with paperwork when his administration signed onto an effort to end a burdensome requirement that coin dealers prepare 1099 forms for every purchase over $600.

Tom Kline disclosed that he previously represented Cyprus. He stated that Cyprus is a leader in protecting its own cultural property, but takes a reasonable approach in doing so. The Turkish Republic is an illegal regime so he disputes that DOS look to their laws on antiquities as models. We need higher ethical standards from collectors. The import restrictions on coins should be no big deal because the restrictions only date from 2007. Collectors only have themselves to blame if they do not keep adequate documentation.

Josh Knerly spoke on behalf of the AAMD which supports the MOU with Cyprus with some limited provisos. First, the AAMD would like to know more about a proposal to extend restrictions to new types of ecclesiastical objects. It appears members of the archaeological community know details of the request, but these have not been shared by the public at large. KR asked why no Museum Director was present. Knerly indicated he would determine if some curators with specialized knowledge would be able to testify in the future.

ICOM "Red List" to Pave the Way for New Restrictions on Egyptian Cultural Goods?

In the US, Congress has established the following process for imposing import restrictions: (1) a State Party to the 1970 UNESCO Convention requests US assistance; (2) the request is vetted by the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) as to whether it meets the statutory requirements generally and for what artifacts specifically; (3) the President's Designee in the State Department considers CPAC's recommendations in making her own findings whether the statutory criteria are met: (4) if the statutory criteria are met, US Customs restricts entry of certain artifacts that meet the statutory criteria.

Unfortunately, a new extra-legal model has emerged that appears to have been perfected under the Obama Administration either through inattention by political appointees or by design: (1) Archaeologists intone that looting (real or imagined) justifies a clamp down on another collecting area; (2) their allies in the State Department Cultural Heritage Center issue a sole source contract to a NGO associated with the extreme archaeological view to prepare a list of artifacts that supposedly can be assumed to be "stolen" unless proven otherwise; (3) Archaeologists lobby the modern foreign government that sits on the land where these artifacts can be found to ask the US to impose import restrictions; (4) CPAC (which is now populated almost exclusively by those sympathetic to the extreme archaeological view) and the President's Designee in the State Department go through the motions of considering a request, but ignore all the statutory criteria in order to "get there"; and (5) artifacts are restricted based on the "Red List" prepared by the NGO associated with the extreme archaeological view.

It is quite possible that the process has already begun for imposing new restrictions on Egyptian cultural artifacts.

1. During unrest during the Egyptian revolution, there apparently was some looting, though the extent does not seem to be very extensive.

2. Archaeologists have argued this justifies a clamp down on collectors of Egyptian artifacts.

3. The State Department issued a sole source contract (See https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fa0c2fe21fd3cf5028a500f1fc4b97e4&tab=core&tabmode=list) to ICOM for the creation of a "Red List." See also, http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/special.html (noting that the Cultural Heritage Center funds Red Lists as a "special project.")

4. ICOM has now completed its work. See http://icom.museum/press-releases/press-release/article/icom-publishes-a-new-emergency-red-list-the-emergency-red-list-of-egyptian-cultural-objects-at-risk.html Note, according to ICOM: " Any cultural object that could have originated in Egypt should be subjected to detailed scrutiny and precautionary measures."

5. Although the State Department has indicated that former Egyptian Cultural Heritage Pharaoh Zahi Hawass' claim that a MOU was in the offing actually related to an agreement with US Customs, that does not foreclose the possibility that the process for imposing new import restrictions on Egyptian cultural goods has already commenced with the production of this "Red List." See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2011/10/state-department-clarifies-egyptian-mou.html

Only time will tell.

77% of Posted Comments Against Renewal of Cypriot MOU

John Hooker has performed the following analysis of the 338 comments posted on the regulations.gov website in response to the State Department's invitation to comment on the proposed renewal of the MOU with Cyprus:

The following results are rounded to 1% and are accurate to within 0.5%

Against the renewal of the MoU: 77%

For the renewal: 20%

This breaks down over the coin issue thus:

Those against the renewal that mentioned coins: 71%

Those against the renewal that did not mention coins: 6%

Those for the renewal that mentioned coins: 8%

Those for the renewal that did not mention coins: 12%

Inappropriate responses (6 people thought they were responding to a Peru MoU, one to the Bulgarian MoU): 3%

Putting a Happy Face on ECA's Work-- But No Mention of Its Import Restrictions Regime

The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs has posted this year in review on the State Department's Blog: http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/site/entry/year_in_review_educational_and_cultural_affairs

Oddly, there is no mention at all about the Bureau's deeply unpopular effort to clamp down on American coin collectors. Instead, there is only a short reference to an agreement to help "protect" Greece's cultural heritage. Wonder why?

Will the Obama State Department Uphold Import Restrictions Allegedly Founded on Cronyism?

How did the controverisal decision to impose import restriction on Cypriot coins come about? This is a significant issue because this "precedent" has formed the basis for far more extensive restrictions on Chinese, Italian and now Greek coins.

Well, here are some unrebutted allegations from ACCG's Amended Complaint in the Baltimore Test Case. They are largely based on information from FOIA releases:

48. In or about November 2005, Dr. Pavlos Florentzos, Director of the Cyprus Department of Antiquities, visited the United States at the invitation of CAARI and with the support of the U.S. Embassy in Cyprus. During this time, CAARI facilitated a meeting between Florentzos and employees of ECA’s Cultural Heritage Center, including its Executive Director, Maria Kourpoupas, and a staff archaeologist. See J. Green, Cyprus Director of Antiquities, Dr. Pavolos Flourtzos, Visits the U.S., 31 CAARI News 3 (Winter 2006).

49. Upon information and belief, CAARI has benefited from direct and/or indirect financial and/or material support from State, the Government of Cyprus and Cypriot entities, including the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation.

50. Upon information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation was established to rescue the Island’s cultural heritage, which the Foundation maintains was pillaged and destroyed by Turkish forces when they occupied the Northern part of the Island. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation maintains one of the largest collections of ancient coins of Cypriot type within Cyprus. Upon further information and belief, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation purchases unprovenanced coins on the open market for its collection of the sort now subject to U.S. import restrictions on coins of Cypriot type.

51. On January 19, 2006, State announced a five (5) year renewal of its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Italy relating to cultural artifacts. Once again, Defendants exempted ancient coins struck in Italy from import restrictions.

52. On December 7, 2006, the Federal Register carried a notice indicating that CPAC would conduct a review of the MOU with Cyprus. That notice invited public comment to be submitted no later than January 11, 2007. The Federal Register notice contained no mention of an effort to extend new restrictions to coins. See 71 Fed. Reg. 71015-71016 (Dec. 7, 2006).

53. On December 8, 2006, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch indicated in a response to an e-mail inquiry that he “d[id] not anticipate” that new restrictions on coins would be addressed at CPAC’s hearing to consider the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus.

54. On December 14, 2006, two numismatic trade associations filed a request with State to recuse CPAC member Joan Connelly from voting on any last minute effort to impose import restrictions on ancient Cypriot coins. That recusal request noted that Dr. Connelly excavated in Cyprus and had publicly thanked “the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, its Director, Dr. Demos Christou and the Ministry of Communication and Works, Republic of Cyprus, for granting us the license to excavate on Yeronisos Island.”

55. On January 12, 2007, State summarily denied the recusal request.

56. On January 17, 2007, according to a heavily redacted document released in response to a FOIA request, a State ECA Cultural Heritage Center staff archaeologist conferred with the late Dr. Danielle Parks, an archaeologist associated with the CAARI, about the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request.

57. On January 19, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Cyprus requested State to amend the designated list of artifacts subject to import restriction to include coins of Cypriot type.

58. On January 25, 2007, CPAC conducted a public hearing on the renewal of the MOU with Cyprus. At that hearing, CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak announced that he had learned that Cyprus had requested that State amend the designated list of Cypriot artifacts subject to import restrictions to include coins of Cypriot type.

59. Upon information and belief, at that same hearing, neither Cypriot authorities nor members of the archaeological community could point to any material change of fact justifying a change in the exemption from import restrictions on Cypriot coins.

60. On January 26, 2007, in response to complaints about the lack of public notice for the inclusion of coins in the Cypriot request, State announced an additional ten (10) day comment period. State made this announcement on the Cultural Heritage Center website and not in the Federal Register. Nevertheless, during this extremely short time frame, numismatic groups generated over 1100 letters opposing the extension of import restrictions to coins.

61. Upon information and belief, comments provided by ACCG and others established: (a) that Cypriot coins were common, with many known examples of coin types struck on the Island; (b) that Cypriot coins travelled widely so that one could not assume that a coin struck in Cyprus was “first discovered” there; (c) that less drastic remedies like the imposition of a treasure trove law and/or the regulation of metal detectors should be tried before import restrictions were considered; (d) and that the CPIA’s “concerted international response” requirement could not be met.

62. Upon information and belief CAARI, the AIA, the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, and the late Dr. Danielle Parks submitted comments supporting import restrictions at the behest of Cyprus.

63. In a letter dated February 5, 2007, the AIA’s president claimed that it was proper to assume that coins of Cypriot type can be assumed to have Cypriot find spots, because “Coins minted on Cyprus were very rarely taken from the island in antiquity.”

64. On May 2, 2007, Assistant Secretary of State, ECA Dina Powell, the decision maker for the extension of the MOU with Cyprus announced her departure to become the Director for Global Corporate Engagement at Goldman Sachs. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dina_Powell (last checked, 7/2/10).

65. Upon information and belief, Goldman Sachs is a bank holding company with worldwide business interests, likely including relationships with Cyprus or Cypriot entities like the Bank of Cyprus.

66. On or about May 7, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, CPAC issued its report making its recommendations concerning the extension of the MOU with Cyprus.

67. On or about May 14, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Pavolos Flouretzos, Director, Cypriot Department of Antiquities, admitted in a private communication to State, “It is true that Cypriot coins shared the same destiny as all other coins of the ancient world. As a standard media of exchange they circulated all over the ancient world due to their small size, which facilitated their easy transport… The continuous circulation of coins for many centuries amongst collectors and between collectors and museums make any attempt to locate their exact find spot extremely difficult.”

68. On or about May 16, 2007, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, upon information and belief the third ranking official at State, accepted an award from Greek and Greek Cypriot advocacy groups as these groups lobbied the State policy makers. According to a press release, "Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns was the first Philhellene to receive the Livanos Award. This award is given each year to, as its states on the award, 'that individual who, like George P. Livanos, has utilized ancient Hellenic values to realize extraordinary achievement in modern society while contributing to the improvement of our civilization.'" See http://news.pseka.net/uploads/img/documents/PSEKA-SAE_2007_Conference_EN_01_CEH_01.pdf (last checked, 7/2/10).

69. On or about May 16, 2007, State’s news service quoted Burns as stating on receipt of the Livanos award, "I wear this title of Philhellene rather proudly. You don’t spend four years in Greece, as my wife and three daughters and I did, and not come back feeling committed to Greek thought, to the Greek way of life, to Greece itself in my case....We’re personally committed to the country, to the relationship."

70. On May 17, 2007, according to a document released in response to a FOIA request, Kurt Volker, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, wrote the Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell, stating “[G]iven our general support for protection of antiquities and the importance of this MOU to our bilateral relations with Cyprus, EUR strongly recommends that ECA approve the renewal of the MOU and include the protection of coins.”

71. On May 29, 2007, according to a document released in redacted form in response to a FOIA request, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, ECA Miller Crouch wrote an “Action Memo” to the decision maker Assistant Secretary, ECA Dina Powell regarding the extension of the MOU with Cyprus. That Action Memo only provides the decision maker with the false choice of approving the import restrictions including coins in their entirety or disapproving them in their entirety. The Action Memo does not provide the decision maker the option of continuing the then current import restrictions without extending them to coins.

72. On May 30, 2007, according to that same document, Assistant Secretary of State Dina Powell signed off on that action memo that authorized import restrictions on ancient coins of Cypriot type.

73. On July 13, 2007, Defendants formally extended import restrictions to coins of Cypriot Types. See Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Pre-Classical and Classical Archaeological Objects and Byzantine Period Ecclesiastical and Ritual Ethnological Material from Cyprus, 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 72 Fed. Reg. 38470-74 (July 13, 2007).

74. On July 16, 2007, the MOU renewal with Cyprus was signed. That MOU fails to suggest that restrictions under the agreement satisfy the CPIA’s requirements, including the requirement “concerted international response” requirement or the requirement that less drastic remedies than import restrictions on coins are not available.

75. On July 19, 2007, Undersecretary Nicholas Burns conducted a signing ceremony for the MOU to coincide with Greek and Greek Cypriot lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill and at the State Department itself. Upon information and belief, representatives of CAARI were invited to this signing ceremony.

76. The official transcript of the Cyprus MOU signing ceremony omits several significant words. In the transcript, Ambassador Kakouris of Cyprus is reported as saying, "In fact, I was reminded just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and responding to someone very much on the side of the coin collectors who -- talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: ‘It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.’"

77. In fact, what Kakouris actually said can be heard (at 10:09 of the audio). There, he states, "In fact, I was reminded by [Cultural Heritage Center ED] Maria Kouroupas just before we came in about something that I had said in January when we were before the Committee and dealing with the coin collectors and somebody who was very much on their side, when he talked about the hobby of collecting coins. And I said to him: ‘It may be your hobby, but it's our heritage!" and that is the way that we look at this issue.’" (Emphasis added.)

78. On July 20, 2007, State issued a press release about the MOU. That press release stated, “With the extension of this MOU, DHS amended the designated list of restricted categories to include ancient coins of Cypriot types produced from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 235 A.D. Coins, a significant and inseparable part of the archaeological record of the island, are especially valuable to understanding the history of Cyprus. This extension of the MOU is consistent with the recommendation of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee, which is administered by the Bureau for Educational and Cultural Affairs.” (Emphasis added.)

79. On August 29, 2007, State sent a report mandated under the CPIA to Congress. Under 19 U.S.C. § 2602 (g)(2), that report is required to: (a) describe the actions taken; (b) whether there were any differences between those actions and CPAC’s recommendations; and, (c) if so, the reasons for those differences. That report, however, contains no indication whether State rejected CPAC recommendation against import restrictions on coins, and, if so, why?

80. In addition, that report also indicates that Customs acted as the lead agency for imposing import restrictions on coins. In pertinent part, the report states, “The Federal Register notice for Cyprus was amended by the Department for Homeland Security, in consultation with the Department of State, to include coins of Cypriot types which are also vulnerable to archaeological looting.”

81. In or about July 17, 2007, ECA publicized the new restrictions on coins of Cypriot types on its website as follows: “The Government of the Republic of Cyprus requested and amendment to the designated list to include coins…. Q. What was the response? A. The Cultural Property Implementation Act places the authority for the Designated List with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in consultation with the Department of State. On July 13, 2007, DHS published a Federal Register notice concerning the extension of the agreement and amending the Designated List to include certain coins from Cyprus, effective July 16, 2007.”

82. In or about May-June 2008, the Cyprus News Service quoted CAARI’s president as stating, “CAARI has been in the forefront of the successful effort to renew the Memorandum of Understanding between Cyprus and the USA restricting the import of Cypriot antiquities into the United States…..” See http://www.caari.org/CAARIat30.htm (last checked, 7/2/10).

83. On January 16, 2009, the Federal Register announced import restrictions on Chinese cultural artifacts, including those on early media of exchange to Tang era cash coins. See 19 CFR Part 12, reported at 74 Fed. Reg. 2838-2844 (Jan. 16, 2009).

84. On April 20, 2009, past CPAC Chairman Jay Kislak signed a declaration in FOIA litigation that stated in pertinent part:

o I am told that Section 303 (g) of the CPIA requires the State Department to report to Congress any differences between CPAC’s recommendations and the State Department’s ultimate decision to impose import restrictions. In this regard, the release of the most recent CPAC report related to Cyprus and its discussion about coins could clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.

o I specifically recall the Cypriot request that then current import restrictions on other cultural artifacts be extended to coins was a matter of great public controversy. CPAC considered the question specifically and I recall a special vote being taken on this particular issue.

o With that in mind, I have reviewed both an official State Department Press Release and a State Department report made pursuant to CPIA Section 303 (g) about the MOU with Cyprus…I believe it is absolutely false to suggest in those materials that the State Department’s decision to extend import restrictions to ancient coins was consistent with CPAC’s recommendations. The full release of CPAC’s recommendations with regard to coins could be in the public interest because it should clarify misleading information contained in official State Department documents.

Will the Obama Administration and CPAC investigate these allegations before deciding to renew the Cypriot MOU? If true, don't they suggest that the MOU be terminated instead because it is founded on cronyism? If not, why not?