Indiana Jones in Asia: China in search of legendary relics 
A note from Charles Hudon Islamic Art , Egyptian, Roman sculptures, Indian paintings ... how these works from the four corners of the planet, could they be in the greatest museums in the world? Under what conditions these pieces were acquired? Who owns the world's cultural heritage? China joined the debate and influence growing on the international scene could play a decisive role in resolving this issue.
To understand China's position, just ask a few simple questions. For example, what would you do if a stranger was seeping into your house, seized several items of value to you and, before leaving, put fire in your home? What would you do if, shortly after, in full sight of all, your items were sold without the law can not do anything to protect your rights? Although it is difficult to predict what an individual would do in such a situation, I think we can agree that it would be probably furious, and rightly so.
It's a bit in this situation that China now finds itself. In 1860, during the second Opium War, British and French troops took possession of what is now known as the Old Summer Palace. Two days later, to avenge the execution of prisoners in Europe, Britain ordered its complete destruction. These events gave rise to massive looting of artwork in what the Chinese called him the palace of palaces. Far from being the single case of looting of works of art in Chinese territory, this event is generally regarded by the people and government as a symbol.
According to the UN, nearly one million Chinese art are now dispersed in over 200 museums and in numerous private collections in nearly 50 countries around the globe. Issues relating to the restitution of these works are highly sensitive in China. This week
Huanqiu Shibao announced that the group "Yuanmingyuan Management Office (圆明园 管理 处) was preparing to send a group of experts in the United States, Great Britain, France, Japan and several other countries to establish a complete inventory of these missing works and arrange for their safe return Chinese soil.
China's position For China, the best scenario would be to see the museums of the world to demonstrate philanthropy by making voluntary donations. Earlier this year, several requests were made in this direction when Peter Berger and Yves St. Laurent began auctioning two heads of Chinese bronze from their personal collection. Both men had found the proposal interesting, Peter Berger has even said he would gladly give these parts to Beijing if he "pledged to respect human rights, to free the Tibetan people and to welcome the Dalai Lama. This example points out that politically, China is still found at a disadvantage, which leads to maintaining the status quo.
the side of public opinion
, a recent survey revealed that more Chinese would advocate the purchase of works by Chinese multinationals doing business in countries where these works. Having received greatly from rapid development is having sometimes at the expense of the environment and the poorest in China, the time would come for these multinationals to thank the Chinese people by making him the gift.
For its part, the Chinese Ministry of Culture has put forward a four-point strategy
surrounding the issue of repatriation of cultural relics in China:
(1) Improve the protection of existing assets in order to prevent loss of new cultural relics and demonstrate that the property may be returned adequately preserved;
(2) Improve and strengthen the legal provisions relating to theft and smuggling of art objects in order to obtain more credible legal support in international requests;
(3) Strengthen the investigative work on Chinese cultural relics are finding Abroad in allocating benefit funds and personnel for this task;
(4) Intensify diplomatic work to encourage the return of cultural property lost.
Law When it comes to national cultural relics plundered in wartime
international law does not yet actually closed binding may force the parties involved to make works. Currently, in order to prevent their auction on the international market, China relies mainly on moral convictions. The results are, of course, very modest.
Legally, the biggest problem lies in the definition of owner. Technically, the government would be the best candidate may, on behalf of the Chinese people, proclaim ownership of the property. However, the Chinese legal system does not recognize the legality of lawsuits filed against Beijing by foreign governments. If the Chinese government had himself to indulge in this kind of practice should recognize, in return, the right to sue other countries, thus abandoning the principle of its immunity to foreign countries. For now, China is not yet ready to take that step.
Moreover, as China does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations, a Chinese citizen can not file a complaint on his behalf at the close of this proceeding.
Faced with these legal challenges, China can always turn to some international treaties
-The Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property, signed at The Hague in 1954;
- The Convention on the prohibition of illegal import and export of cultural property, signed by UNESCO in 1970;
-convention on cultural property stolen or illegally exported, signed in Rome in 1995.
Again, difficulties abound. In most cases these treaties lack of binding capacity. On the other hand, these treaties typically include cases with less than 70 years of history and only the cases having been considered after the signing of these agreements are considered.
Redemption? The frequency with which these treasures of Chinese history can be found for auction could allow Beijing to recover several works in a relatively short time. The latest episode dates back to April 29. On this occasion, the collector
behind the event was nothing less than the direct descendant of a French general who participated in the looting of the Summer Palace, some 150 years earlier. To add insult, the collector was expressed on the blog and the website of the French newspaper, the
Echoes " We hope this auction will attract people who want to demonstrate their devotion to Beijing to encourage bids. We hope that those Chinese who have a lot of money will struggle to buy these items at any price. " Address deficiencies in the law, the redemption option could still be considered.
It seems that, although China is finally determined to repossess his works, the purchase is not necessarily the best alternative. In a way, participate in auctions imply recognition Beijing by the legality of the sale. Buy one of these works would create a precedent that could possibly harm him in the process of repatriation of other works.
The choice of words The reward of art is a complex subject which is already giving headaches to many museums around the world. To understand in what situation is now Beijing, it is important to have a look at some cases that are now schools in this area.
Take for example the case of England and Greece, where art is the source of a diplomatic cold raging between the two countries for several years. The origin of these divisions back to the early 19th century. At that time, Lord Elgin bought the Ottoman Empire, which then occupied Greece, the
Elgin Marbles, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Since 1816, these pieces are on display at the British Museum. Although the Ottoman Empire had controlled Greece from 1460 to 1833, Athens does not recognize today the legality of the transaction and demanded the return of the documents. While some museums have already made the return of fragments from the Parthenon, the British Museum are fiercely resisted, arguing that these claims would eventually empty the most important museums in the world. On this point, the major American and European museums stand together in creating a true ban on all matters of restitution.
Closer to home, Quebec has also been involved in controversies of restitution. In the late 1940s, the history of art takes a considerable growth in the United States. Soon, the Americans are developing a specialist knowledge of art Quebecois who matched with us. A period of massive purchases of religious art that leaves Quebec la Belle Province to join our neighbor to the south. Statues, ornaments, furniture, everything goes. The conditions under which these pieces were purchased today are considered "unorthodox". Convinced that these "old" items had no value, the parishes were exchanging cons of furniture "nine". Consequently, for several years, the finest collections of French Canadian furniture were exhibited in New York and Philadelphia. Following lengthy discussions, Many of these silver pieces were religious
data Museum in Ottawa. Here, the term "given" is particularly important.
In such situations, the choice of words is crucial. Return does not equal giving, lending or exchanging. In the case of England, while opposing any form of restitution, the British Museum would be pretty open to discuss the possibility of loans
. Even if these loans were to be eternal, accepting, Athens implicitly recognizes that the purchase of relics was made under legal conditions, This would avoid setting a precedent that would weaken law all major museums. Of course, Athens will not listen. Greece argues that the problem is an ethical and cultural, not legal order. To this end, the Greek culture minister is adamant
: "anything that is Greek, wherever in the world, we want it back. "These comments
open the door to the idea of" cultural property
"concept that would see the ownership of cultural property given to a group, a minority ethnic even a country, not a particular individual. According to this thinking, regardless of the terms of acquisitions, the best place to appreciate a work of art would be in its original environment. In this way, "Italy today proclaims its cultural property rights on everything that comes from the territory today known in Italy for the past 1200 years. "
China has certainly noticed this new ending to the saga of the restitution of art objects. In my opinion, it would not be surprising to see one day Beijing to initiate a recovery strategy much broader. The debate surrounding the restitution of art objects could possibly ill-gotten leverage towards a devolution strategy at large. In this regard, although legally acquired, China has already demonstrated its interest in many exhibits in the museum in Tokyo. Indeed, relations between China and Japan did not begin yesterday. The museum is full of Tokyo who now works in the show, works that were offered by China over hundreds of years that characterize the diplomatic history of both countries.
Looking at the other side of the coin a question comes to mind, whether the country is necessarily the best position to protect its antiquities, now regarded as world heritage? To this end, the British Museum likes to say that, but for his intervention, the Parthenon Marbles would probably now completely disappeared. Other examples come to give weight to this argument. The case of Egypt, which for hundreds of years, has failed to protect the artistic treasures of the pyramids is to consider, or the Taliban who proceeded the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan, site classified as World Heritage by UNESCO. Regarding the case of China, his critics could probably argue that, had they left for abroad, several works that are now the subject of restitution claims might have disappeared during the Cultural Revolution.
The idea that a museum can meet in one place a collection of worldwide cultural and open to the public, may be regarded as a "World Heritage Center, is often defended by museums like the British Museum and the Louvre. Although not totally meaningless, the fact that some parts being found in these collections are from the plunder of the country, who are now demanding their return, takes a lot of credibility to this proposal.
Through this controversy, it is clear that requests for refunds will evolve conditionally to Chinese economic development. As such, China may consider the example of some Middle East oil that offered advantages in the negotiation of bilateral refund. Without directly buy these lost items, China will have one way or another, put your hand in the portfolio. Provide economic benefits could be a solution that would enable both parties to keep their "mianzi" (face).
Charles Hudon, Kunming
