Pirates of the Smithsonian

A debate has been going on for years about whether or not it is immoral for one country to remove artifacts from another country and place them on display in their own museum without proper consent (from the country that owns the artifacts). Some people do not believe organizations are really committing wrongful acts by doing this, believing the items should be displayed for every one's enjoyment instead of being confined within the borders of one country. There have been many arguments related to whether or not the widely popular Smithsonian museum should include a new exhibition featuring artifacts from ancient China that were retrieved from a ninth century Arab shipwreck. It is believed that the items were obtained by illegal means, and the Smithsonian's ethics statement says that they will not knowingly exhibit artifacts that have been stolen or removed from commercially exploited sites. I personally think the Smithsonian should not exhibit the items. It is true that Americans can gain a lot of useful knowledge from visiting the exhibit, and the museum would earn a significant profit by showing the artifacts. People are able to acquire a lot of information about the world they live in and are often more likely to develop open-minded attitudes when artifacts from other countries are readily available for them to see in their own countries. However, I don't believe the Smithsonian should go against their statement by exhibiting artifacts that were probably obtained illegally. I feel that if they do disregard their ethics statement, they will be sending a message to people all across the world that it's okay for museums to exhibit stolen items, and this could cause a rise in the interest in looting sites containing artifacts. If a well-known museum fails to show respect for artifacts by putting them on display even if they were obtained improperly, they could easily encourage disrespect for these items by the public, who could end up developing the mindset that their country has the right to take whatever it wants. I also don't think the Smithsonian should display the artifacts from the Arab shipwreck site because exhibiting them would strip the area they came from of the human right to self-determination. Many countries are able to gain a sense of power when they take items from other countries, but others experience a loss of this sense when artifacts are taken from them. They lose power when it comes to their decision-making abilities since they aren't given the right to choose for themselves what should be done when artifacts are recovered within their borders, and this sometimes generates anger and protests by people living in the victimized countries. Ownership battles have been raging for more than a century over the Elgin Marbles, half an original 500-foot sculptural frieze that was removed from the Parthenon in Greece in the early 1800s by the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. The ambassador took the piece to England to be exhibited, and the British government offered to pay for the Elgin Marbles after the act was condemned as vandalism in 1816. The artifact is still on display in the British Museum today, and Greece is still demanding its return.