Requests for MENA Cultural Property Agreements Originate not with the Source Country, but with the Archaeological Lobby and our own State Department

This is a follow up to CPO's February 12, 2020, blog post:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2020/02/jordanian-mou-window-into-how-mous-are.html  

The Convention on Cultural Implementation Act contemplates that UNESCO State parties will request the United States to enter into MOU's which authorize the imposition of import restrictions on cultural goods. However, it now appears that MOU requests supposedly from Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries actually originate from the State Department itself with  the help of funding from the Antiquities Coalition, a major archaeological advocacy group that has lobbied the United States Government for an import ban on so-called "blood antiquities" from the MENA region. See https://theantiquitiescoalition.org/blood-antiquities/

 According to Lynn Roche of the State Department's Near East Affairs Bureau,

“Bilateral Memoranda of Understanding, based on the 1970 UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property, are creating the foundation for long-term partnerships with governments in the NEA region. These MOUs authorize DHS’s Customs and Border Protection to seize undocumented cultural property. The first case in NEA was when Egypt committed resources to cultural heritage protection and signed an MOU with the U.S. in November of 2016. Following that, NEA provided funding to advise NEA countries in preparing their MOU request packages. ECA and NEA training and capacity building for Libyan archeologists and law enforcement personnel laid the groundwork for signing an MOU with Libya in February 2018. Post, the Libya External Office that’s based in Tunis, is now working with a Fulbright Specialist to support this effort. So, posts are looking at the whole toolkit of what they can do to bring these resources to bear and advance this cause.”

 See https://www.state.gov/acpd-official-meeting-minutes-january-23-2020

 According to the Antiquities Coalition's 2017 990 filing, the Coalition gave a grant of $60,000 which was apparently passed through the State Department to help fund these MOU requests.  requests. See https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/471206934 (Form 990, Schedule I, Part II, Grants and Assistance to Domestic Organizations and Domestic Governments)  

This new information helps confirm why collectors, dealers, museums, and representatives of displaced religious and ethnic minorities are treated as outsiders to the process of imposing import restrictions on cultural goods. It also suggests there needs to be far more transparency with regard to how import restrictions are processed. 

ICOM Red Lists-- Far More Transparency Needed

The Art Newspaper has reported on the unveiling of  the latest ICOM/US State Department Bureau of Cultural Affairs "Red List," this time for war torn Yemen.

If recent history is any guide, the US State Department funded list will now be used to help justify and frame US State Department promulgated "emergency import restrictions" on anything and everything of a type identified as "Yemeni" with the aim to suppress collecting any such artifacts in the near future.

As an ICOM official stated, "We are now strongly advising collectors to avoid the objects on the list altogether, or at least to be extra cautious and thoroughly check the legality of provenance,” says France Desmarais, the director of programmes and partnerships at Icom.  Only the Yemeni government is authorised to issue documents for the export and import of cultural goods, so how likely is it that collectors will be able to obtain such licences? “It’s difficult, but not impossible,” Desmarais says. “It is important to respect the sovereignty of nations, so if it is required by law, we must abide.”

Given the stated intent of such lists, their proliferation and their US Government funding, there needs to be far more transparency about how these lists are created, who creates them, their funding, and how they relate to US law which reserves US "independent judgment" in such matters.

Moreover,  publication of the Yemeni Red List raises particular questions whether such objects that may be seized by Customs authorities should be returned to a country in the midst of a civil war or offered "safe harbor"and whether artifacts of Yemen's displaced Jewish community should be returned at all.

Efforts to seek more specifics about these lists were met with a dismissive reference to an accompanying press kit.  The International Council of Museums is a NGO with ties to UNESCO. 

More Transparency Needed Where "T Word" Pushed

The Antiquities Coalition is pushing a link between looting and terrorism hard on its website, demanding action on behalf of "saving" antiquities and "friendly" Middle Eastern Governments, like that of Egypt.  But all this spinning of the "T word" just raises more questions about the Antiquties Coalition's aims.  CPO does not doubt the sincerity of its member's views, but if there is also a "quid pro quo" between Coalition members and those authoritarian Middle Eastern Governments with which the group has promoted "public private partnerships," that should be disclosed.  For example, to date details of the coaliton's "MOU" with the Egyptian Government have yet to be made public.

Open the Medici Archives

The Art Newspaper reports on pressure to open up the Medici archives to the public to assist collectors and dealers in their due diligence efforts.  The archives have already been disclosed selectively, so its unclear why the archaeological blogoshere is so opposed to their release.  In any event, shouldn't those who claim to act in the public interest and often demand transparency of others, promote rather than oppose transparency here?

All in for Sisi

Anyone who thinks the Antiquities Coalition is only about protecting Egyptian antiquities would do well to read Antiquities Coalition Chair Deborah Lehr's Huffington Post piece promoting General Sisi's efforts to establish business ties with Communist China.  It raises an obvious question.  Is the Antiquities Coalition about archaeology, promoting business deals with the Egyptian and Chinese governments, or both?  More transparency would be welcome.  The Antiquities Coalition entered into its own MOU with the Egyptian Government back in March, but its exact terms have yet to be revealed. 

In any event, perhaps the Egyptians could learn something from the Chinese and their promotion of collecting common ancient artifacts like coins.  Why not let people get back in touch with their past through collecting?  If the Antiquities Coalition is to be believed, looting certainly has not declined since Egypt cracked down on collecting in the 1980's. Indeed, associating antiquities with State ownership has done little more than turn artifacts into targets of rage during periods of civil unrest.

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.

Video Raises More Serious Questions About NY District Attorney's Office's Priorities

A video has surfaced raising further serious questions about the New York DA's decision to give valuable Greek coins to the Greek government rather than to a New York institution or selling them for the benefit of the New York state taxpayer.

In it, Cyrus Vance, the DA, first thanks Assistant DA Matthew Bogdanos, the office's "resident expert on all things Greek," who is leaving for vacation in the country.  (Video at around 1:08)

He then notes that the coins were forfeited as part of a plea deal in which Arnold Peter Weiss, a prominent hand-surgeon, collector and coin dealer, also had to write an essay about the dangers of collecting unprovenanced coins.  (Video at around 2:51)  For more about this coerced essay, see here.

Vance then indicates the commercial value of the Greek coins exceeds $200,000.  (Video at around 1:27). He then notes that Peter Weiss forfeited the Greek coins as part of a plea deal relating to other coins Weiss admitted were illicitly removed from Italy. (Video at around 3:04).   These coins later turned out to be clever forgeries.

As for the reason to send the coins abroad, Vance states that it's "a small price to pay" because Greece has given us democracy, astronomy and the Olympics. (Video at around 4:30)

The Greek Ambassador then thanks Vance for the windfall, asserts his country's "ethical rights" to returns, and invites Vance and all involved in the repatriation to visit the coins at their new home in his country.  (Video at around 8:17)

He then especially thanks Assistant DA Bogdanos for the efforts and his work with Greek officials.  (Video at around 8:30).

The problem with all this, of course, is that the interests of the New York taxpayer seem to have been entirely forgotten in favor of the interests of Bogdanos' beloved Greece, a foreign power, the Archaeological Institute of America, an organization Bogdanos favors, and their repatriationist agenda.

But why?  Perhaps the Vance and Bogdanos should write their own essay where they explain themselves.

Or, better yet, put them in a room full of chalk boards, and require them to write, "I work for the New York taxpayer and their interests come first" over and over again-- maybe 200,000 times for each dollar lost to the New York Treasury.

Addendum:  

CPO has now located the court approved forfeiture stipulation in the Weiss case.  It sets forth the provenance of the coins, including the provenance of a Dicea stater which dates back to the Weber collection, circa 1890's.   The stipulation authorizes the coins to be donated to "a museum or other cultural institution" if no other claimant comes forward, but does not mention whether the interests of New York's tax payers have been considered or explicitly raise the possibility that the coins could be sent abroad.  CPO wonders, therefore, whether the court was adequately informed before approving such a stipulation.  Moreover, questions remain whether New York taxpayer's interests were considered and why it was decided to send the coins abroad to Greece rather than some institution in New York, like the ANS. 

Greece Gets a Windfall While the Long Suffering New York Taxpayer Gets the Shaft?

It's looking ever more clear that there is no reason to believe that the Greek coins that were taken from Dr. Peter Weiss' possession when he was arrested on unrelated charges were "stolen" or illegally imported.  Indeed, it appears that at least some may have long collecting histories dating back to the 1920's, if not earlier.

If so, the only rational basis for them to be forfeited to NY State authorities would be as some sort of restitution for the costs of the prosecution.  New York residents are among the most heavily taxed in our nation.  So why apparently did DA Matthew Bagdanos' office arrange for such valuable coins to be given to the Greek Government rather than instead being sold for the benefit of the New York Taxpayer?

Is it possible this proud Greek American and ardent supporter of the AIA's repatriationist agenda's judgment was clouded by his personal interests?

Let's hope not.

The NY District Attorney office should certainly provide more information about this issue than found in its self-serving press release.

It's also important to learn about the disposition of the other coins taken from Dr. Weiss' possession. The DA's Press release only states, "Two of the other coins have been returned to a previous owner, and the remainder are expected to be given to cultural and academic institutions for display, research, and study."

Hopefully, these will at least be New York institutions and not ones chosen based on their fealty to the AIA's repatriationist agenda.  If so, they may be "repatriated" too in short order to where they were made millenia ago.

Feldman on State Department's Administration of CPIA

Mark Feldman, the State Department's point person on accession to the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the passage of the CPIA, continues to express concerns with how State has administered the statute. In conjunction with the upcoming April 10th Panel Discussion on the  reform of our cultural policy, he has stated,

In recent years, the State Department has implemented the program vigorously believing strongly in its mission to help protect the cultural heritage of mankind and responding to the demands of foreign states.  This is commendable provided the Department complies with its statutory mandate.  The Executive is not authorized to establish import controls without international cooperation unless an emergency condition exists as defined by law, and Congress did not intend to authorize comprehensive import controls on all archeological objects exported from a country of origin without its permission.  The purpose of the program is not to keep art at home, but to help protect archeological resources from pillage; the findings required by the CCPIA were established for that purpose.

It is not clear how the State Department makes the findings required by law as it has never explained its interpretation of the statute or disclosed the bases for those findings.  I am concerned about the lack of transparency in the decision-making process and reports of administrative manipulation of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC).  If Bill Pearlstein is correct  that State has never filed CPAC reports with Congress, as required by law, that failing should be corrected by Congress.

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.

Secret CPAC Meeting to Discuss the Italian MOU

The Federal Register has announced a closed CPAC meeting to discuss the MOU with Italy to take place on March 13-14, 2014.  CPAC should be discussing whether the MOU should be scrapped altogether   because Italy is no longer living up to its end of the bargain.  But more likely, the closed session will be used to spoon feed CPAC members with information about seizure of ancient coins in Italy in support of a claim that restrictions should be continued and even expanded.   Of course, the fact that ancient coins are widely and legally available within Italy and the rest of the EU will not warrant mention.

Speculation?  Sure.  But CPO notes that the Bush Administration conducted an open CPAC meeting to discuss the interim review of the Italian MOU so we would know at least some of what was discussed.  President Obama promised that his Administration would make transparency a priority, but apparently the State Department and its Cultural Heritage Center never got the word.  At least, State still promises that an open meeting will be scheduled if Italy asks that the MOU be renewed.

Greater Obama Administration Transparency on Government Surveillance Program and Even Golf, But Not Cypriot and Chinese Coins

Life can be strange.  President Obama has promised greater transparency on the government's top secret anti-terror surveillance program and even his golf game.   Yet, as set forth below, his administration is still stonewalling on details about why import restrictions were placed on Cypriot and Chinese coins of the sort widely collected in Cyprus and China themselves.  Yes, life and the law can be strange.

Should Transparency Be a Two Way Street?

Archaeo-Blogger and Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire wants to mandate additional record-keeping for dealers in cultural goods in the name of "transparency."  Leaving aside whether creating more red tape will accomplish anything other than to place additional administrative burdens on the small businesses of the antiquities and coin trade, one wonders whether he would also acknowledge that transparency should be a two way street. 

So, how about some transparency for the State Department and CBP concerning their process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods?  Or how about imposing new record keeping requirements on archaeologists, such as requiring them to publish their findings within in a reasonable time on the Internet so they will be easily accessible to interested members of the general public?

After all, State, CBP and the archaeological community all purport to act in the public's interest, so is some transparency from them too much to ask?

Closed CPAC Meetings on Chinese and Cambodian MOU's

There was a time under the Bush Administration that CPAC conducted open meetings in conjunction with their interim reviews of controversial MOU's, like that of Italy.  Under the supposedly transparent Obama Administration that is no longer the case.  The Chinese MOU in particular has been very controversial.  So why not hold an open CPAC meeting where the public can comment on how China has responded to what is asked of it under the current MOU?

Everyone is Entitled to Find Out What the Government is Up To

Scott Hodes, an attorney who devotes his practice to Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") cases, has commented on the archaeological blogosphere's attack on the efforts of  ACCG, IAPN and PNG to seek transparency in how the State Department and US Customs impose import restrictions on cultural goods.

The drafters of FOIA hoped that the release of government files would help the public learn what its government is up to.  The fact that ACCG, IAPN and PNG have sought to shed some light on what State Department and US Customs Bureaucrats have been up to behind closed doors should be applauded, not condemned by archaeological groups, particularly given their own demands for transparency from private parties involved in the trade in cultural goods.

District Court Again Accepts State Secrecy Claims; But Transparency Needed More than Ever

The same US District Court judge who ruled for the State Department in the ACCG-IAPN-PNG FOIA case has again ruled for the government on the remaining issues on remand from the D.C. Circuit.

Just because the US District Court gave the State Department another pass does not mean that the State Department is acting in accordance with President Obama's promise to make his Administration the most transparent ever.  To the contrary, the veil of secrecy placed over State Department decisions to impose import restrictions on cultural goods would seem to be entirely inconsistent with that pledge. 

The State Department needs to be far more transparent about its decision making processes, which after all have a real impact on the ability of American collectors, businesses and museums to import cultural goods.

Archaeologists should also support greater transparency.  The archaeological lobby harps on the need for more transparency about private transactions involving the sale or transfer of cultural goods, but has been supportive of government secrecy concerning how import decisions are made.  Why?  Could it be that it fears that any such transparency will only confirm that such decisions are actually the products of bias/and or prejudgement and/or ex parte contacts between State Department staff and members of the archaeological lobby?  The particular redacted document at issue in the remand (an email communication between an archaeologist associated with the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute and a State Department employee about including coins in the MOU that predated a Cypriot request for import restrictions on coins) certainly suggests as much.

Addendum 6/15/12): Some in the archaeological blogosphere have now claimed that using the FOIA process to seek the email mentioned above is somehow "absurd," "shameful," "disturbing" and "disgusting."  Here is my response to archaeo-blogger Paul Barford, which he apparently refuses to publish:

Well, perhaps you should give your readers the whole context of why ACCG was seeking the Parks email, and let them decide if seeking some transparency as to how the import restrictions decision was made is as disgusting or disturbing as you claim: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2011/12/will-obama-state-department-uphold.html
Either State was using Parks (the now deceased archaeologist in question)  as a supposedly neutral expert (when she was not) or conferring with her about CAARI's effort to include coins in the Cypriot MOU. Because we don't have the entire document, we don't know which it was, but since Cyprus had not yet asked for restrictions on coins when the email exchange occurred, it presumably would be the latter.

Closed "Open Access" Debate?

One of the archaeologists that has taken the AIA to task on its "Open Access" Position apparently feels free to edit my comments to his blog here:  http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/petty-bull-and-open-access-pitbulls-how-to-control-your-message-online/

I'll let the reader judge whether his own attempt to steer the debate about "open access" away from its broader implications is warranted or not.  Here is my comment in its entirety:

This actually appears to be a bit of a childish response to this press release. You admit the content is largely accurate; what you disagree with seems to be the fact that an advocacy group with a different perspective than your own has used the Open Access website for its own purposes-- welcome to the Internet! If you want, I can point out to you several archaeological blogs that regularly do the same thing. And why not? Your group put this statement out on the web for all to see. To change the link to change the message may have some "gotcha" appeal to people who agree with you, but it does also suggest that you think only fellow archaeologists have the right to criticize AIA policies.


As to what this has to do with import restrictions point, see my blog here: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-seeks-to-maintain-monopoly-on.html Basically, it is fair to point out that the AIA has suggested in public meetings before the State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee that import restrictions are necessary to promote numismatic research which then can be shared with the public.


Incidentally, it is the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, not the American Coin Collectors Guild as you state. (Though, of course, you are correct to point out the error related to the AIA.).


Sincerely,


Peter Tompa, ACCG Board Member

The Farce Continues: CPAC Hearings on Requests from Bulgaria and Belize

The State Department has announced that CPAC will receive public comments on new requests for import restrictions from Bulgaria and Belize.
For more, see http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/whatsnew.html

Despite Obama Administration promises of greater government transparency, the public summaries of the requests provide little more than a history lesson about the cultures in both countries and some general information about looting in each country. Nothing at all is said about what particular objects are subject to possible restriction or any particular justifications for such actions.

And once again, the public comment period is exceptionally short, ending on November 2nd.

Accordingly, one must again unfortunately conclude that the State Department and its Cultural Heritage Center really are not looking for informed public comment from the broadest number of stakeholders possible.

And doesn't such a tact merely confirm the suspicions of many that the State Department bureaucracy views CPAC as little more than a rubber stamp for imposing the broadest import restrictions possible?

While I'm sure Bulgaria's former Communist rulers would have approved of such a farce, what does it say about our own State Department's commitment to the democracy it preaches so loudly to others?

Generally Pro MOU Media Outlets Question Greek MOU

The Art Newspaper and "Culture Grrl" have been generally supportive of repatriation efforts, but each has expressed some misgivings about the recently announced MOU with Greece. See http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Clinton+signs+memorandum+with+Greece+restricting+import+of+antiquities/24369
and http://www.artsjournal.com/culturegrrl/2011/07/greek_cultural-property_agreem.html

And no wonder. The articles point to the lack of transparency, the apparent overbreath of the coming restrictions and Greece's own abysmal record in protecting its own cultural patrimony.

They might have also mentioned that approximately 70% of the public comment posted on the regulations.gov website either opposed the MOU in toto or the extension of import restrictions to coins.

Apparently, Secretary Clinton considers "confidence building measures" for the bankrupt Greeks to be more important than the views of American citizens or the legal limitations the governing statute places on such MOUs. But does the ordinary Greek citizen really care? See http://safecorner.savingantiquities.org/2011/07/repatriation-effects-greeces-national.html

And what will American voters who collect ancient art and coins think about these new restrictions? The ever political Hillary Clinton should also consider that as well.

CPAC Meetings on Bolivia, Guatemala and Mali

The State Department has announced CPAC review of the MOU's with Bolivia, Guatemala and Mali. See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-06-02/html/2011-13693.htm

According to the notice,

During its meeting on Monday, June 27, the Committee will begin its review of a proposal to extend the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bolivia Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from the Pre-Columbian Cultures and Certain Ethnological Material from the Colonial and Republican
Periods of Bolivia [Docket No. DOS-2011-0092]. An open session to receive oral public comment on this proposal to extend will be held from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.

On Tuesday, June 28, the Committee will conduct interim reviews of the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Guatemala Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Objects and Materials from the Pre-Columbian Cultures of Guatemala, and of the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Mali Concerning the Imposition of import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from Mali from the Paleolithic Era (Stone Age) to approximately the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Public comment, oral and written, will be invited at a time in the future should these MOUs be proposed for extension.

This continues the anti-transparency trend at the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. The public is no longer welcome to provide testimony on whether a source country is living up to its side of an MOU during an interim review hearing. Instead, comments are only welcome at the very end of the process-- when the train has almost arrived at the station.....

Not that anyone really believes that the State Department holds source countries to their promises to secure such MOU's. If they did, its doubtful many of the MOU's would continue to be extended and even expanded time and time again.