Restitution of cultural property in the age of internationalism and national identities

Abstract

This dissertation explores the relationship between nationalism and cultural heritage, illustrating the complexities inherent in the restitution of cultural properties. It argues that in the legal landscape of the twenty-first century, nationalism has emerged as the dominant force shaping the discourse surrounding cultural property, leading to the phenomenon known as cultural nationalism. More specifically, this thesis analyses the restitution of cultural properties in the context of postcolonial nation-building. This inquiry starts with the realization that the paradigm of cosmopolitanism has withdrawn because it justified the concentration of cultural wealth in the West. Central to this research is the argument that international law plays a pivotal role in the nationalization of cultural heritage. Four case studies, reviewing the implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, ground this argument. The first case study surveys the emergence of cultural property law in China during the twentieth century. The second case study analyses the judicial dispute that led to the restitution of Scythian artefacts to Kyiv instead of Crimea. The third case study reviews law and development in Myanmar. Finally, the fourth case study analyses the advocacy of Indigenous people for the protection of their lands. Thus, while the nationalization and restitution of cultural properties to their countries of origin have optimistically been advanced as the remedy for postcolonial injustices, affirming that antiquities belong to the State, has created a host of new challenges. Intra- national cultural minorities fall afoul of authoritarian interests and forms of majoritarian repression. Ultimately, this research explains why restitution offers limited solutions. By foregrounding the perspectives of marginalised communities and interrogating the implications of nationalist agendas, this research advocates for a more nuanced understanding of cultural heritage restitution, one that acknowledges the ongoing processes of colonization, inequality, and exploitation in the periphery.