[CPProt.net] The illicit trade: US considers Chinese request for import restrictions

[FwdEB]

The illicit trade: US considers Chinese request for import restrictions
Opponents say China must first prove it is adequately protecting its own
cultural heritage

The US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) is meeting in closed
session on 17 and 18 February to consider a request from the People's
Republic of China that the US restrict import of all Chinese cultural
materials predating 1912. The request, made last September under the 1970
Unesco Convention, seeks assistance in protecting Chinese cultural heritage,
which China says is increasingly subject to pillage and smuggling. It has
elicited objections from both the US market and scholars, and faces an
uphill battle to gain approval.
The CPAC will also hold an open session to receive comments from the public.
Dealers, auctioneers and museum officials are expected to testify. CPAC
chairman Jay Kislak told The Art Newspaper that a second meeting will take
place before a decision is reached.

According to the 1987 US law implementing the Unesco accord, to approve the
request the CPAC must determine not only that China's cultural heritage is
in jeopardy from the looting of archaeological sites, but also that China
has already taken measures consistent with the convention to protect its own
cultural patrimony.

Opponents argue that China has a deplorable record of protecting its
cultural patrimony and does not effectively enforce its own export
restrictions. They further argue that the US is being singled out among many
countries that have large markets in Chinese cultural goods.

James F. Fitzpatrick, an attorney with Arnold & Porter in Washington, DC,
who serves as counsel to antiquities dealers and has been retained to work
on the China issue, told The Art Newspaper, "one of the statutory standards
requires that the requesting party be responsible stewards of their own
cultural heritage. The Chinese have a deplorable record in that regard,
inundating thousands of sites with the Three Gorges Dam, and desecrating
Tibetan culture".

James Lally, a New York dealer in Asian art, also questions the legitimacy
of the request at a time when the Chinese are rapidly building up a large
internal auction market. Experts say the most important sales in the field
are taking place at China Guardian in Beijing and other auction houses. New
pools of wealth in the country are creating a flow of material back into
China (see p.41). The Chinese appear to be cornering that market: on 1
January, China permitted foreign auction houses to do business in China, but
10 days later stipulated that they not deal in Chinese art.

"You don't impose an import ban in this country to help another country
enforce its export control system", says Mr Fitzpatrick. Mr Lally says that
"with regard to looting, this will have no impact as long as there continues
to be a growing market inside China, and strong markets for Chinese
material, such as in Japan, which dwarfs the one in the US. No other country
is going to engage on this task", he says.

Robert Mowry, curator of Asian art at Harvard University, feels the
restrictions are a form of "isolationism" that would chill cultural
exchange. Permitting export of works vetted by a cultural commission "would
allow free, if regulated, international exchange that would foster world
understanding of China. A blanket freeze could lead to a de facto embargo".

However, not everyone is opposed to the proposed ban. Gwen Bennett,
professor of Chinese archaeology at Washington University in St Louis, says,
"I'm an archaeologist who has worked on the ground in China and I have seen
the damage done by the looters first-hand. I believe that the ban will put a
small dent in the overall export of illicit antiquities from China. It will
help somewhat to curb the illicit trade if one of the major art markets is
taken away".

http://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/article.asp?idart=11710