The grandly-named Cultural Policy Research Institute (CPRI) in the US has shown its hand. Far from being the "research institute" it poses as, it has made a Freedom of Information demand, much like the numismatic trade associations have done over the US' Cyprus and China bilateral cultural agreements (Peter Tompa: "CPRI Files FOIA Request on Purported Egyptian Done Deal"). That is not really what bona fide research institutes do is it? That's the sort of thing an antiquity dealers' advocacy group would do. This is just another indicator that this "institute" is not at all what it purports to be. It looks like its an attempt to revive the defunct American Council for Cultural Policy from pre-Iraq yesteryear.It seems to me that this "research Institute" is placing rather too much weight on to the precise wording of a statement made in English on a blog by Egyptian Zahi Hawass.
Dr. Hawass’ description of their discussion strongly suggests that the statutory requirements of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CCPIA) have been completely ignored and the decision-making role of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee to the President (CPAC) has been superseded.But that is just Zahi Hawass isn't it? How much can this wording be trusted? This is just one reading of that short piece of gossip. Has the CPRI thought to contact anyone from the Capitol Archaeological Institute of George Washington University, the Archaeological Institute of America, the American School of Oriental Research at Boston University, or the National Geographic Society before submitting an FOI request to the State Department? As a "research institute" it would seem normal to contact colleagues in other bone fide research institutes, wouldn't it? Is that not actually the whole essence of being a research institute, keeping up with what other research institutes are doing in a given field?
Suppose what Hawass (or his blog ghost-writer) meant to say was that the "International Coalition to Support Protection of Egyptian Antiquities" would help draft a REQUEST for a bilateral agreement - much the same way as CPRI patron Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's "heritage workshops" coach interested organizations in how to fill out grant applications? How would that make the CPRI's kneejerk response look?
Peter Tompa alarms that the Coalition ("private group"):
has apparently guaranteed that the U.S government would sign an agreement with the Government of Egypt limiting access by all Americans to art from a founding civilization of the ancient world.well, I do not think there was a guarantee, it's not "art" but portable antiquities and any eventual agreement would only limit them in response to the reports of ongoing looting to the extent of allowing import of only those legally exported.
UPDATE 14/6/11
This is so ridiculous. Tompa reveals that the reason for the CPRIA submitting an FOI request was that
As noted in my blog, the AIA initially had something about an agreement being negotiated by these groups on its website. Then, it took it down.What that statement said was:
Zahi Hawass, Egypt's Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs, said, "The Coalition will be drafting a formal agreement between the US and Egyptian governments, and, as soon as it is signed, all of these important projects will be implemented."If however one turns to the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs webpage, there is a fairly full account of what was discussed and what agreement had to be drafted and why:
The Framework Agreement reflects partnership between the government sector (the Egyptian Foreign Ministry) and the Private Sector (the American Coalition) which would commit the American side to provide financial resources.[...] Ambassador Iman El Farr, Deputy Assistant Minister for Cultural Protocols and Agreements highlighted the cultural importance of perfect preparation reaching the final wording of the agreement to be signed so as to start implementing what agreed upon and facilitate the process of providing the necessary financial resources.No mention is made there of any kind of US import restrictions. This seems therefore to be confirmed to be wishful thinking on behalf of Zahi Hawass (or his ghost blog-writer) who put it on his blog, and thus now forces the US taxpayer to support yet another two FOI requests from the antiquity dealing lobby. You have to laugh. As I said, a proper research institute would check out the facts at source before engaging in such an action - its as simple as telephoning the people concerned in the US, or doing a simple Google search to find the Egyptian MFA webpage.
Vignette: CPR on the ACCP