Carol J. Williams, reporting for the Los Angeles Times ('
Dutch museum perplexed over where to return borrowed Crimea goldCrimean gold artifacts' 20th August 2014) discusses a European case of clash of interests. Amsterdam's Allard Pierson Museum borrowed from several museums in Crimea, then in Ukraine, some ancient Scythian artifacts for an exhibition "
Crimea: Gold and Secrets of the Black Sea" which they were mounting. But that was before the territory was seized and annexed to Russia after a widely condemned independence referendum virtually held at gunpoint. Russia's
claim to Crimea hasn't been recognized by any country, and its forcible
change of Ukraine's border has brought international condemnation but as yet no backing for a military reversal of Putin's
fait accompli. Now that the exhibition has run its course, the museum is in a quandary, who owns Crimean gold
borrowed before annexation?
"The Allard Pierson Museum has
decided (for the time being) to not make a decision as to which of the
parties the disputed objects should be handed over to,” reads a museum communique issued Wednesday.
The museum will abide by any ruling by a court or arbitrator, or an
agreement between the Russian and Ukrainian governments, the statement
says in announcing that the museum is keeping the disputed treasures in
Amsterdam until then.
"The disputed objects will be safely stored until more becomes clear,"
the museum said.
News agency RIA Novosti noted in its report on the museum's quandary
that the Ukrainian government had demanded that the gold be returned to
Kiev now that the peninsula is claimed by Russia. The
museum is waiting for the decision of a court or arbitrator, perhaps in the meantime the best and safest place for these objects would be in a US museum which could mediate between the two factions?
No comments:
Post a Comment