In the last several months, the State Department has inked a significant number of cultural property MOUs with authoritarian governments. These include new MOUs with Uzbekistan and Pakistan as well as renewals of current MOUs with Cambodia and Communist China. Given their authoritarian nature, it is no surprise that these governments have demanded that such agreements cover the cultural heritage of displaced minorities and a wide array of artifacts, including common ones like collector's coins, which are legally, or at least openly, sold in these countries. What should be more concerning is that our State Department now apparently feels that "soft power" is more important than honestly balancing the interests of impacted groups as Congress contemplated in the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act. And in doing so, the State Department has gone so far as funding archaeological advocacy groups to help "check the box" to help justify such dubious decision making.
Monday, February 12, 2024
Monday, February 5, 2024
Public Meeting of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee to Consider Renewal with Algeria and Proposed MOU with India
On January 30, 2024, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to hear testimony regarding a proposed renewal of MOUs with Algeria and a new proposed MOU with the Republic of India. An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the scope of the requests. See Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, January 30 – February 1, 2024, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Media Center (November 29, 2023) (but subsequently updated), available at https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-january-30-february-1-2024 (last visited February 3, 2024). Although that update was subsequently deleted, it stated that Algeria sought no change to the current exceptionally broad designated list for import restrictions, and that India sought a breathtakingly broad list of items to be covered which included cultural goods made as recently as the end of the British Raj in 1950:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0040-0032
(last visited February 3, 2024).
Elias Gerasoulis (Executive Director, Global Heritage Alliance) next spoke on behalf of both the Global Heritage Alliance and the Committee for Cultural Policy with regard to the proposed renewal of the MOU with Algeria. Gerasoulis indicated that Algeria had failed to meet any of the statutory for renewal. He further indicated that CPAC should not recommend a renewal of a MOU that recognizes the rights of Algeria’s authoritarian government to the cultural heritage of its displaced Jewish population.
https://culturalpropertynews.org/careful-collector-no-22-your-tax-dollars-at-work/ (last visited February 5, 2024).)
Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (representing museums) asked Herdrich if any of these efforts were directed at preserving Jewish and Berber culture. Hedrich responded by indicating that such materials were included in the inventories of institutions that were partner organizations.
Wednesday, December 13, 2023
CPAC to Consider New MOU with India and Renewal of MOU with Algeria
The State Department has announced that the Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) will meet on January 30-February 1, 2024, to consider a request for the United States to enter into a cultural property MOU with the Republic of India. According to the Federal Register notice, public comments and requests to speak are due no later than January 22, 2024, for the public session which will take place from 2:00-3:00 PM on January 30, 2024. CPAC will consider a renewal of the current MOU with the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria at the same time.
The
Cultural Heritage Center's website should hopefully provide some clarity of the
scope of the Indian request in the near future. Import restrictions associated with the
current MOU with Algeria already encompass a wide variety of ancient and early
modern coin types. They also cover, at
least implicitly, the cultural heritage of displaced Jewish and Christian
minority populations.
The Indian request should raise a number of questions given its likely breadth. First, are all the listed
archaeological objects not only of "archaeological interest" but of
"cultural significance," and do they meet the governing statute's 250-year
threshold? Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 USC Section
2601 (C) (i) (I)(II). Second, are all the listed ethnological objects really
the products of "tribal or nonindustrial society" "that are
important to the cultural heritage of a people because of its distinctive
characteristics, comparative rarity, or its contributions to the knowledge
origins, development or history of that people?" 19 USC Section 2601
(C) (ii) (I)(II).
Third,
has India taken "measures consistent with the [1970 UNESCO] Convention to
protect its cultural patrimony" under 19 USC Section 2602 (a) (1) (B) when
concerns have been raised about India’s notoriously poor stewardship of its own
cultural heritage, including not only neglect, but outright destruction of Muslim
and Christian minority cultural heritage.
Finally,
does the State Department intend to recognize the rights of India’s sectarian
Hindu government to ownership and/or control of the cultural heritage of
today’s minority Muslim, Christian and Jewish communities? While India is a democracy, these groups have
nonetheless suffered discrimination and have even faced occasional pogroms. In particular, Muslim and Christian places of
worship have sometimes been attacked by mobs egged on by local
politicians.
Coins
also raise a number of specific issues. First, there appears to be a
substantial overlap in the types of Indo-Greek, Kushan, Indo-Sassanian, and
later Islamic coins found in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. Under the
circumstances, how can the State Department conclude that particular coins were
"first discovered within and [are] subject to export control by" India?
19 USC Section 2601 (2) (C).
Second,
coins of all periods are legally bought and sold in India. So, why should our
State Department restrict Americans from buying the same type of "Indian"
coins abroad?
The current MOU with Algeria’s authoritarian government raises similar
questions. Again, the designated list is
exceptionally broad, and includes at least implicitly the cultural heritage of
displaced Jewish and Christian populations.
The exceptional breadth of the designated list is readily
apparent regarding coins. Indeed, it
includes many Greek, Roman Provincial, Numidian, Mauritanian, Byzantine,
Islamic and Ottoman coin types that circulated either regionally or internationally.
Under the circumstances, how can the State Department conclude that particular
coins were "first discovered within and [are] subject to export control
by" Algeria? 19 USC Section 2601 (2) (C).
How to comment? According to the State Department, the
public should be able to comment on regulations.gov by searching
for docket DOS-2023-0040 and following the prompts.
As of today, however, that link is not active. CPO will update this blog post once it is
possible to comment and/or the State Department provides more clarity about the proposed designated list to be associated with any MOU with India.
Addendum (December 16, 2024): The blue "comment now" button on the regulations.gov website is now active. You should be able to directly access the ability to comment here.
Addendum (January 15, 2024): The State Department has provided some additional information about the categories of material for which import restrictions will be considered. They are as follows:
India
The Government of India seeks import restrictions on archaeological and ethnological materials dating from 1.7 million years ago to 100 years ago, including objects dating from the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, Ancient Periods (including, but not limited to, the Indus Valley Civilization, Maurayan Empire, Shunga Empire, Gandharan Kingdom, Gupta Period, and the Gurjara-Pratihara, Rastrakuta, and Pala Dynasties), and Historic Periods (including, but not limited to, the Chola Dynasty, Delhi Sultanate, Mughal Empire, and the British Raj). Categories of objects include stone tools and artifacts, terracotta figurines, toys, coins and medals, seals and sealing, molds, dies, sculpture, utensils, architectural materials, arms and ammunition, scientific instruments, and jewelry and toiletries. Protection is also sought for miniature paintings, art pieces in cloth and paper, and manuscripts dating from the 7th century CE to 75 years ago.
Algeria
Extending the Algeria agreement would continue import restrictions on certain archaeological material from Algeria, ranging in date from approximately 2.4 million years ago to approximately 1750 AD including material from the Paleolithic, Neolithic, Classical, Byzantine, Islamic, and Ottoman Periods. The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria has not requested additional categories of material.
More here.
Tuesday, October 10, 2023
Amended and Expanded Import Restrictions on Cambodian cultural goods.
The State Department and US Customs have unveiled amended and expanded import restrictions on behalf of Cambodia's authoritarian government. These include additional restrictions on a limited number of coin types.
5. Coins
Rare coinage from the
Funan area of Southern Cambodia is included. Coinage dates from the 1st through
6th centuries A.D. In gold, silver, gilded silver, or tin. Designs vary, but
coins often bear the image of a rising sun, a deer, a rooster, a Garuda, a team
of oxen, and other designs. Inscriptions may be present and in Kharosthi script
or Sanskrit.
Friday, September 1, 2023
CPAC to Consider Renewal of MOU for Honduras and Proposed MOU for Nepal
The State Department Cultural Heritage Center has announced that the Cultural Property Advisory Committee will consider public comment for a renewal of a MOU with Honduras and a proposed new MOU with Nepal. According to the State Department notice, the period for written comments will end on September 12th, with a public session to take place on September 19th for oral comments.
Based on the notice, it does not appear that Honduras seeks any new restrictions on coins. On the other hand, Nepal apparently does seek import restrictions to be placed on coins, particularly the early "Lichhavi" types.
For a direct link to comment, see here. Alternatively, go to regulations.gov, and then search for docket DOS-2023-0023.
Thursday, August 31, 2023
Cultural Property MOU entered into with Yemen without vetting by CPAC or public comment
Lee Satterfield, the Assistant Secretary, ECA, has apparently unilaterally transformed current “emergency import restrictions” for Yemen into a cultural property MOU with that country, all without input from Cultural Property Advisory Committee or the public. Unfortunately, Yemen these days is run by factions aligned with Iran, Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China.
The Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 USC Section 2605 contemplates that such agreements will only be entered into after the proposal is vetted by CPAC, which then is expected to recommend which kinds of objects are considered for import restrictions under the agreement (19 USC Section 2605 (f)). By converting the current “emergency import restrictions” into ones under a MOU, the State Department has prevented CPAC and the public (including concerned Jewish exile and collector groups) from commenting on whether import restrictions should continue for the country, which does not respect the rule of law.
When Yemeni import restrictions were last before CPAC in 2019, despite a short 2-week comment period, any such agreement faced substantial opposition from Jewish exile and coin collector groups. The State Department presumably engineered this MOU without vetting it through the Cultural Property Advisory Committee and allowing public comment as required under CPIA, 19 USC Section 2605 because they knew it would be controversial and subject to the same opposition today.
It is unclear whether this will result in a change in the current designated list, which implicitly includes the cultural heritage of Yemen’s displaced Jewish minority as well as a wide variety of coin types.
Addendum (September 3, 2023): A State Department press release suggests that the MOU does not only convert current "emergency import restrictions" into "regular ones" under a MOU, but also extends them past their current sunset date, again all without the required input from CPAC and the public.
Note that the first sentence of the press release states,
Wednesday, June 7, 2023
Public Session of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee to Review Proposed Renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and China, June 5, 2023
On June 5, 2023, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to hear testimony regarding the proposed renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the requests. See https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-april-26-27-2023 (last visited June 7, 2023). According to that website, Bulgaria has asked for import restrictions on additional categories of archaeological material dating from the Paleolithic Period to the Neolithic (c. 1.6 million years ago – 7500 B.C.) and on additional ethnological material of an ecclesiastical nature dating from 1750 through the 20th century. Id. In contrast, the PRC does not seek any additional restrictions. Id.
The
public session was postponed from April 26-27, 2023, presumably to allow all
the remaining Trump appointees to be replaced by Biden appointees to CPAC. Those replaced included Anthony Wisniewski, the
sole coin collector representative on the Committee. One of the replacements, Susan Schoenfeld
Harrington, has discernable links to the PRC, as a past Board Member of the
China Art Foundation. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/04/new-cpac-members.html
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Despite
the postponement, the public was only allowed an exceptionally short time to comment
on these MOUs on the regulations.gov website.
See https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0016-0001 (last visited June 7, 2023). Although the Federal Register notice was
posted on Friday, May 19, 2023, due to a snafu, the regulations.gov website did
not accept comments until midday Monday, May 22, 2023. The comment period closed only 4 days later,
on Friday, May 26, 2023. An analysis of the
comments that were submitted can be found here.
See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/05/low-public-support-for-mous-with.html (last visited June 7, 2023).
Oral
comments during the public session were also circumscribed. Rather than the usual 5 minutes, each speaker
was only allotted 4 minutes to speak.
At
least the following CPAC members were present for the meeting: (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise
Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community,
Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology,
related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Nii
Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department
head, Detroit Museum of Art); (4) William Teitelman (Represents General Public,
Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired));
(4) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum,
New Mexico); (5) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of
Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (6) Susan
Schoenfeld Harrington (Represents Public?, Past Deputy Finance Chair,
Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); (7) Cynthia
Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President,
Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); and (8) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents
Public?, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois).
Additionally,
at least the following State Department employees were present for the
meeting: Allison Davis (Executive
Director, CPAC) and Andrew Zander.
These individuals
spoke at the public session about one or both MOUs: (1) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee
for Cultural Policy/PRC); (2) Elias Gerasoulis (Global Heritage Alliance/PRC);
(3) Peter Tompa (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Bulgaria
and PRC); (4) Doug Davis (Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation/PRC); (5) Ömür
Harmanşah (Archaeological Institute of America/Bulgaria and PRC); (6) Douglas
Mudd (American Numismatic Association, Ancient Coin Collectors Guild/Bulgaria);
(7) Louisa Greve (Uyghur Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Peter Irwin (Uyghur
Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Josh Knerly (Hahn, Loeser & Parks, LLP for Association
of Art Museum Directors/PRC); (9) Dr. Rowan Flad (Harvard Department of
Anthropology/Society for American Archaeology/PRC); (10) Dr. Anne Underhill (Yale/Society
for American Archaeology/PRC); and (11) Dr. Rian Thum (University of Manchester/PRC).
Alexandra
Jones (AJ), CPAC’s chairperson, indicated that the Committee had reviewed all
the testimony, and asked the speakers to limit their remarks to 4 minutes
each. AJ indicated that she would allow
CPAC members to ask questions after each speaker finished their prepared
remarks. Very few questions were
actually posed.
Kate
FitzGibbon (KFG) spoke first. She
indicated that none of the criteria for renewal of the MOU found in the
Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) could be met. The second determination, related to the PRC
taking measures consistent with the UNESCO Convention concerning the protection
of its cultural patrimony, has not been met because of the PRC’s intentional
destruction of the cultural heritage of its Uyghur population. KFG pointed to the creation of concentration
camps as well as the destruction of over 500 Uyghur sites in her
testimony. Moreover, the first and third
determinations, related to the PRC’s cultural patrimony being in jeopardy, and
the effectiveness of the response, could not be met given the booming internal
Chinese market for cultural goods. The
fourth determination relating to benefits to the international system could not
be met given the PRC’s mercantilist approach to repatriating artifacts and
failing to follow through on museum loans.
The
Committee for Cultural Policy’s and the Global Heritage Alliance’s joint
written testimony can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0044
) (last visited June 7, 2023).
Elias
Gerasoulis (EG) echoed many of the concerns that KFG raised about the PRC’s
intentional destruction of minority culture.
He also noted that current import restrictions have the perverse effect
of promoting the interests of PRC auction houses associated with the government
over their American competitors. It
makes no sense for ECA to undertake to renew the MOU given the anti-American
actions the PRC has taken, including the recent spy balloon overflight. EG believes that renewing the MOU would be
tantamount to committing diplomatic malpractice.
Peter
Tompa (PT) asked CPAC to oppose any effort to expand current import
restrictions on behalf of Bulgaria to Roman Republican and Roman Imperial
coins. He explained that one cannot
assume that such coins come from Bulgarian archaeological contexts. Only a very small percentage of such coins
circulated there compared to those which circulated elsewhere. He also indicated that it is important to
distinguish Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins from Roman Provincial
coins, which are currently restricted. Roman
Provincial coins were struck for local use in contrast to Roman Republican and
Roman Imperial coins which were meant to circulate through the Empire. Due to time constraints, PT was only able to
express general concerns about the MOU with the PRC. He mentioned that the PRC should not be
rewarded for destroying the cultural property of its minority populations or
for its failure to address counterfeiting of US historical coins.
PT’s
planned oral comments can be found here:
https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/06/cpac-should-be-skeptical-about-new.html
(last visited June 7, 2023).
The
International Association of Professional Numismatist’s (IAPN’s) written
comments about the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0010
(last visited June 7, 2023).
IAPN’s
written comments about the MOU with the PRC can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0009
(last visited June 7, 2023).
PT’s
personal written comments can be found here:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0056
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Doug
Davis (DD) indicated that the PRC is a major source of counterfeits with
100,000s of coins being faked. These are
exported in bulk to the US for resale, often to unsuspecting buyers. The
Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation Task Force has worked with US law
enforcement on seizing $46 million worth of counterfeit US coins. In addition to historical US coins,
counterfeiters are also faking modern US Mint products including bullion pieces
like silver eagles. This is a global
problem because Chinese counterfeiters are faking coins of all nations.
CPAC
member Alex Barker asks DD about what kinds of bullion are being faked. DD
indicates the fakes include silver bars.
The
Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation’s written comments can be found
here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0067
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Ömür Harmanşah
(OH) indicates that the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) supports the
renewals of both MOUs. The AIA maintains
that each of the four criteria for renewal found in the CPIA are met for both
MOUs. OH mentions that the PRC recovered
66,000 stolen archaeological artifacts in the year 2021 showing that the PRC’s
cultural patrimony is in jeopardy. OH
states that it is important to ensure restrictions are imposed on mass produced
items like coins to promote their study.
He further indicates that the PRC has worked to ensure that there is
extensive collaboration with US archaeologists and museums. For example, an exhibition featuring the
famous “Terracotta warriors” has been exhibited in a number of venues around
the United States.
The
AIA’s written testimony regarding the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0068
(last visited June 7, 2023).
The
AIA’s written testimony regarding the PRC renewal can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0066
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Douglas
Mudd (DM) speaks on behalf of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) and the
Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), a member organization. DM indicates that import restrictions have
negatively impacted the study of coins. Because
coins are so durable many have come down to us from ancient times. There are
far too few trained archaeologists to study the numbers of coins that have been
found and there is no reason to sequester them all in museums. The most important thing that can be accomplished
is to ensure they are properly recorded, something that can be achieved through
programs like the UK’s Portable Antiquity Scheme. DM also asks that import restrictions not be
imposed on widely circulating Roman Imperial coins. He further believes that the current designated
list should be subject to expert review because many of the coin types
currently on that list circulated in quantity outside of the confines of
Bulgaria.
The ANA’s
written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0006 (last visited June 7, 2023).
The
ACCG’s written comments can be found here:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0031
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Louisa
Greve (LG) opposes the MOU with the PRC.
The PRC is committing genocide against the Uyghurs. CPAC should not brush aside this genocide and
cultural cleansing in order to approve the renewal. The current MOU authorizes import
restrictions through the Tang period.
The PRC has sought to rewrite history through cultural cleansing to create
a false narrative that Han was the dominant culture throughout what is today
the PRC. If CPAC and ECA approves this
MOU, the Uyghur Human Rights Project (UYRP) will protest the decision.
The
UYRP’s written comments can be found here:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0069
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Peter
Irwin (PI) is LG’s colleague at the UYRP.
The PRC has not worked to protect cultural heritage, but to purposefully
destroy that of the Uyghurs. Some 10,000
to 50,000 sites have been destroyed to date.
These includes mosques and up to 85% of the historic city of Kashgar. The
MOU should not be extended in these circumstances.
Josh
Knerly (JK) stated the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) supports the
extension of the MOU with the PRC contingent on Article II being modified to
provide for multi-year museum loans with more significant objects and the PRC
granting immunity from seizure for art sent there for display from the US. The 2019 MOU dropped any meaningful
requirements regarding loans. Multi-year
loans are necessary to make it cost effective to bring exhibits to the US. Only multi-year loans allow museums to share
the substantial costs involved. Another issue is US tariffs of 7.5% on Chinese
art, which make it impossible for US museums to purchase Chinese art internationally. Such tariffs give Chinese museums, dealers
and collectors a competitive advantage compared to their American
counterparts.
CPAC
member Susan Schoenfeld Harrington asks JK if the MOU provides an
opportunity for cultural exchange with the PRC.
JK indicates for this to happen, the PRC needs to change its policies on
long term loans and immunity from seizure.
The
AAMD’s written comments can be found here:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0061
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Dr.
Rowan Flad (RF) indicates that the PRC has undertaken significant self-help
measures to protect its own cultural patrimony.
A database of cultural heritage has been established. There is active collaboration with American
archaeologists.
RF’s
written testimony may be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0055
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Dr.
Anne Underhill (AU) states that the PRC has met its obligations under the
MOU. It has protected archaeological
sites from looting. One innovative
program has used drones to monitor a site for looting. Another development is an increase in “indoor
excavations,” for which entire depositional matrices are transported to covered
labs for careful excavation in safe conditions.
In 2020, 4,200 crimes were investigated, involving 9,700 individuals. Some
93,000 artifacts were recovered. Access
to museums has improved.
AU’s
written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0057
(last visited June 7, 2023).
Dr.
Rian Thum (RT) indicates that he could not make policy determinations, but he
could state facts. It is an unassailable
fact that the PRC has failed to take measures consistent with the UNESCO
Convention to protect its cultural patrimony.
It has demolished large parts of
the Silk Road city of Kashgar. It has
recently bulldozed two very important Uyghur shrines, and any archaeological
artifacts beneath them. Another target
is books. Initially PRC authorities
enforced a “blacklist” of forbidden books.
Now, however, that has been replaced with a “whitelist” which deems any
book not explicitly permitted to be forbidden.
This has led to the confiscation and destruction of countless books,
some of which are otherwise unknown to scholarship. It has also prompted some Uyghurs to burn
their own books in an effort to avoid being sent to concentration camps. As was discussed regarding Bulgaria, modern boundaries
don’t always correspond with ancient ones.
The same is also true with the status of the Uyghur region in the
PRC. RT observes all of the PRC’s achievements
prior speakers associated with archaeological advocacy groups praised relate solely
to the study of the PRC’s Han culture. These studies feed the PRC’s
narrative. The PRC seeks to rewrite history
to make it appear that Han culture was always the dominant culture in the
Uyghur areas. RT expresses disappointment
that his colleagues are unwilling to acknowledge the PRC’s intentional
destruction of Uyghur cultural heritage for political purposes.
No CPAC
members asked any additional questions, and AJ concluded the public session approximately
10 minutes early.