Guatamala and Mali MOU Renewal to be Discussed by CPAC

.
The 1970 UNESCO Convention state party the USA will for some obscure reason based in the world of the 1980s be addressing once again the problem of whether it really wants to fulfil its obligations as a Convention state party with respect to Mali and Guatamala.

The Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) will meet to consider renewal requests by Mali and Guatemala for Memoranda of Understanding (MoU). A public session will be held on April 24 to consider extending the bilateral agreements that would continue America's import controls over cultural property originating from these nations [without documentation of lawful export].

Both countries are heavily looted, both countries are still afected by ongoing smuggling of collectable artefacts and both countries have collectable artefacts very eagerly collected by US collectors, and very eagerly sold by US dealers. So I suppose the question is why would the US fail to respect its obligations and allow unlawfully exported material from these countries to pass unscrutinised under the noses of US Customs and Immigration Enforcement officers? What message would that give out to the world?

St Hilaire summarises the history of the two MOUs and notes the condition placed on its 2007 extension, it

broadened Article 2's provision to include, among among other items, that "the Government of the Republic of Guatemala shall undertake an assessment with regard to improvements in broad areas such as law enforcement, cultural resource management, education, conservation, research, and the national museum system" before the agreement expired in 2012.

This no doubt will be closely watched by the naysaying Philistines of the US collecting world who regard the 'Witschonke Principle' as fundamental to any US participation in protecting the global archaeological heritage from commercial exploitation. These collectors do not want to see the US taking the moral leadership, but only tagging along behind the Third World countries.

These agreements are however bilateral. Does the CPAC impose upon the US government a parallel call for "assessment with regard to improvements in broad areas such as law enforcement, cultural resource management, education, conservation, research, and the national museum system" in the USA. Or does the CPAC consider that the USA [with its Four Corners fiasco, rampant looting, failure to adequately finance guards on sites to prevent vandalism and clandestine excavations on public lands, education (ACE and Spike TV's metal detecting programmes) and its museums], are perfect and a shining example to be followed by all nations? If not, just who do they have the arrogance to think they are, and what do they feel entitles them to treat other nations in such a manner in the guise of 'helping' them? The CPAC is to advise the President of the United States, it is not there to tell the government of Guatemala what they must do. The 1970 UNESCO Convention is quite plain on that, it is up to individual states parties to determine how they will implement the convention, not something one nation can impose on another - that is neither in the text, nor the spirit of that Convention.

It is also rich in a year when the USA has withdrawn all its funding from UNESCO itself, yet still wishes to use it as a rod to beat its neighbours. Restoring funding to UNESCO is the sine qua non precondition to the US even drawing breath to suggest how other nations should be putting UNESCO's recommendations into practice. Otherwise they can just keep out of it and let others do the talking. Let the CPAC at their meeting on 24th April send the President clear advice that for a number of reasons, his government ought to restore UNESCO funding immediately.

Rick St Hilaire, 'Mali, Guatemala, and Bulgaria Up for Discussion by CPAC - Public Session Slated for April 24', Cultural Heritage Lawyer' Sunday, March 11, 2012

.