On May 24th, 2004, the Chinese government made a request to the United States asking for an embargo on the import of all Chinese cultural property dated prior to 1911. Cultural property can be defined broadly as anything that the country of origin deems important to its heritage. More specifically it usually refers to items of antiquity made of pottery, bronze, porcelain or a variety of other material.

This request has caused enormous controversy and concern for museums, importers and collectors of Asian art throughout the U.S.. It has been reported in several publications including the Wall Street Journal, Art & Antiques Magazine, Orientations and Asian Art.

Because this request has received such wide press coverage and has caused such confusion among dealers, collectors and the general public, we believe a brief review of the issues will be of interest.

China's stated reason for making this request is that valuable cultural relics are being stolen from China through rampant tomb robbing which the Chinese government blames on the U.S. market for its antiquities.:

Whenever a country makes a request of the U.S. involving cultural property, the state department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee reviews the request and then makes a recommendation to the U.S. State Department. On February 17th & 18th 2005, this committee met to review the request from China.

There were several invited presenters at this meeting and they gave short statements either for or against this request. Those supporting the request either argued that

if the export of cultural relics were made illegal, the grave robbing would stop since there would be no market for the stolen items or, that importation should be halted simply because any non-archaeological excavation is immoral.

Presenters arguing against the request stated that while the U.S. was a signatory of the UNESCO convention (an international treaty by which all signing nations respect laws on the cultural relics of other nations), the Chinese request singles out the U.S, is too broad, illogical in its application, basically unenforceable and demands more than U.S. law allows.

Finally, the arguments against the restriction stated that the obligation of the U.S. is to restrict the property in question only if it is of cultural significance, is over 250 years old and if the nation making the request has its own restrictions in effect and enforced.

While the committee has not made any formal announcement of its findings or recommendations, there will most likely be some further restrictions placed on the importation of Chinese antiques. It is widely believed that this will not affect furniture or artifacts less than 250 years old. However, we will have to wait and see what the committee recommends. The next issue of AT news will have an update on this issue.

China Asks U.S. to Stop Export of Chinese Artifacts

China Asks U.S. to Stop Export of
Chinese Artifacts