Back

Reclaiming the Past: An Overview of the U.S-India Cultural Property Agreement

September 25, 2024

Indian artifact

By Atreya Mathur

Imagine walking through a museum and coming face to face with a carved statue of a deity, its ancient aura exuding centuries of history and cultural significance. Now, consider that this artifact, which rightfully belongs in a temple or local museum in its country of origin, was stolen, smuggled across borders, and sold to the highest bidder on the market, and is now at the reputable museum you are walking through. This scenario is not just a hypothetical situation—it has happened countless times across the globe, depriving nations of their cultural heritage and erasing vital pieces of history.[1]

Take, for example, a majestic bronze image of Nataraja, crafted in the 11th century CE during the reign of the Chola dynasty.[2] These artifacts were meant to reside in temples in Tamil Nadu, in India, where they would receive offerings from worshippers.[3] Instead, many of them were uprooted and now reside in museums across North America and Europe. The root cause? A combination of colonialism, war crimes, and insatiable greed.[4] During the British colonial era, the international market craved Indian artifacts, leading to an international and unscrupulous trade that flourished through auction houses and private dealers.[5] Tragically, these stolen idols are not mere statues of bronze or stone; for millions of people in India, they are sacred representations of gods and goddesses, intertwined with spiritual and cultural identity.[6]

This looting continued even after India’s independence in 1947, showing how the scars of opportunism and colonialism still affect a nations’ cultural legacy, even today.[7] Cultural property is more than just art; it is a tangible connection to the past, a representation of a people’s identity, traditions, and history. The return of these cultural treasures to their rightful places is therein not just a matter of legal restitution, but preservation of history and traditions.[8] This is why international agreements like the U.S.- India Cultural Property Agreement are crucial—they are not just about returning stolen artifacts, but about righting historical wrongs and restoring cultural heritage to its rightful place.[9] Through these agreements, nations can collaborate to protect cultural property, ensuring that the stories, traditions, and identities tied to these objects are preserved for future generations.

Background of the U.S.-India Cultural Property Agreement

After centuries of export and illicit trade, India is finally focusing on recovery of its rich cultural heritage. At this time, the Indian government is actively pursuing a campaign to repatriate artifacts dating back to the colonial era, including the iconic Kohinoor diamond.[10] Since taking office in 2014, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi prioritized the return of cultural treasures looted from India during and after British colonial rule.[11] Soon after Modi assumed office, Australia returned two significant artifacts: an 11th-century bronze idol of Nataraja from the Chola dynasty and a 10th-century Ardhanarishwara statue.[12] These items were part of a broader effort to recover stolen art. The Nataraja statue had been acquired by the National Gallery of Australia in 2008 for $5.1 million from notorious art smuggler and dealer Subhash Kapoor, while the Ardhanarishwara statue had been illegally sold to the Art Gallery of New South Wales in 2004.[13] As a note, the U.S returned 307 looted treasures to India following a 15-year investigation into international trafficking networks. Most of these items, worth over $4 million, were tied to Subhash Kapoor. Kapoor and his network trafficked thousands of artifacts stolen from temples and archaeological sites, later selling them through his New York gallery, Art of the Past, using falsified documents.

In 2014, the Indian High Commission in Canada formally requested the repatriation of the 12th-century sandstone sculpture known as the “Parrot Lady” from the Department of Canadian Heritage.[14] The sculpture had been illegally removed from Khajuraho in 2011 and detained by Canadian authorities due to inadequate documentation.[15] In April 2015, during an official visit to Ottawa, then-Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper ceremonially returned the Parrot Lady sculpture to India.[16] This marked one of the early successes of India’s efforts to recover stolen cultural heritage from Western countries, setting an important precedent. Since then, nearly every diplomatic visit to the West has resulted in the repatriation of looted artifacts, making the recovery of Indian cultural heritage a prominent aspect of India’s foreign policy and a vital part of restoring national pride.[17]

In June 2016, then- U.S President Barack Obama agreed to return over 200 ancient artifacts to India, valued at more than $100 million.[18] These artifacts, stolen from religious sites across India, had been illicitly smuggled out of the country. Among the returned items was a bronze statue of Saint Manikkavichavakar, a revered mystic and poet from the Chola period, which had been stolen from the Sivan Temple in Chennai.[19] Some of the religious statues dated back more than 2,000 years. Modi expressed his gratitude to Obama, acknowledging the importance of these artifacts in preserving India’s cultural and religious heritage.[20]

In similar efforts, on July 26, 2024, U.S. Ambassador to India, Eric Garcetti and Govind Mohan, Secretary of the Indian Ministry of Culture, formally signed the first ever Cultural Property Agreement between the two nations.[21] The objective of the Agreement is to combat the illegal trafficking of cultural artifacts and ensure the return of antiquarian objects to their place of origin.[22]

This milestone represents the culmination of nearly two years of dedicated efforts by experts from both countries. In 2022, the Governments of India and the United States initiated discussions to enhance bilateral relations under Article 9 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention, which aims to prevent and prohibit the illicit import, export, and transfer of ownership of cultural property.[23] In response to these discussions, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) sent a Diplomatic Note to the U.S., which the U.S. government acknowledged and replied to positively on March 16, 2023.[24] The Agreement fulfills the commitment made by U.S President Joe Biden and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to strengthen cooperation for the protection of cultural heritage, as outlined in their joint statement from June 2023.[25] The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, in collaboration with the U.S. Embassy in India, then worked alongside India’s Ministry of Culture and the Archaeological Survey of India to finalize the cultural property agreement.

Key Provisions of the Agreement

“This cultural property agreement is about two things. First and foremost, it’s about justice – returning to India and to Indians, what is rightfully theirs. Secondly, it’s about connecting India with the world. Every American and every global citizen deserves to know, see, and experience the culture that we celebrate here today. To know Indian culture is to know human culture.” – Ambassador Garcetti, U.S. Ambassador to India

The Agreement is a significant development, part of the global effort to combat the illicit trade of cultural artifacts. It reflects a commitment to preserving and protecting cultural heritage and aims to facilitate the swift seizure of Indian antiquities at U.S. Customs and their repatriation to India.[26] As per the agreement presently, the U.S will intercept smuggled goods at the border and return them expeditiously.[27] The current process of repatriation will be simplified, and early return of antiquities will become possible.

In addition, the Agreement restricts the importation of specific archaeological materials into the United States dated from 1.7 million years ago up to 1770, and certain ethnological materials, including civic, religious, and royal architectural items, religious and ceremonial objects, and manuscripts dated from the 2nd century BCE to 1947.[28] The U.S. government will publish a list of all the restricted items and shall offer to return to India any object or material on the list forfeited to the U.S Government.[29]

The U.S. has previously established similar agreements with countries such as Algeria, Belize, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Italy, Jordan, Mali, Morocco, Peru, and Turkey.[30]

The agreement establishes several crucial measures aimed at safeguarding Indian cultural heritage:

  1. Protection of Cultural Artifacts: The agreement focuses on protecting a range of Indian cultural artifacts, including religious and historical items. This includes provisions to restrict the import of such items into the United States if they have been illegally exported from India.[31] This restriction applies to both physical artifacts and digital reproductions that might be subject to illicit trade.
  2. Simplified Repatriation Process: One of the central features of the agreement is the streamlined process for returning looted or stolen artifacts. It facilitates the repatriation of cultural property to India by setting clear guidelines for the documentation and return of such items.[32] This process aims to reduce bureaucratic hurdles and expedite the return of stolen treasures.
  3. Cooperation and Enforcement: The agreement promotes enhanced cooperation between U.S. and Indian authorities. This includes joint efforts in monitoring and investigating illicit trade activities, as well as the sharing of information and resources to strengthen enforcement mechanisms.[33] Both countries have committed to working together to identify and recover stolen cultural property.
  4. Cultural Exchange and Education: Beyond protection and repatriation, the agreement also emphasizes the importance of cultural exchange and education. It encourages collaborative programs and exhibitions that highlight and celebrate Indian cultural heritage in the United States, fostering greater understanding and appreciation of Indian art and history.[34]

Legal Framework and Implementation

The agreement is anchored in U.S. law under the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.[35] This convention serves as the legal foundation for the agreement, providing a framework for its implementation and enforcement.[36] The agreement aligns with the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) of 1983, which authorizes the U.S. government to enter into bilateral agreements to protect cultural heritage.[37]

The Agreement builds on the successes of previous agreements and incorporates lessons learned from past experiences. By formalizing these protections, the Agreement not only enhances the safeguarding of Indian cultural property but also strengthens international collaboration in the fight against cultural trafficking.

The Agreement’s significance also extends beyond legal frameworks and diplomatic relations, impacting cultural identity, and international cooperation. The return of stolen artifacts to their country of origin is more than a matter of legal restitution; it is a restoration of cultural identity. Their return allows Indian communities to reconnect with their heritage, offering a tangible link to their past. For the communities and scholars who study these artifacts, their reinstatement provides not only a chance to restore lost cultural narratives but also an opportunity to educate the public about their historical context and significance.[38] Museums and academic institutions benefit greatly from the chance to study and display these objects within their cultural context. Exhibitions featuring repatriated artifacts can enhance public understanding of the art and history they represent. This educational aspect not only informs visitors about the artifacts themselves but also raises awareness about the broader issues of cultural property theft and trafficking.[39]

However, despite these advancements, challenges remain. Effective implementation of the agreement requires meticulous documentation and verification of cultural artifacts to prevent disputes over provenance and ownership in both countries. Ongoing vigilance is necessary to address new and evolving threats in cultural trafficking. Both the U.S. and India must continue to adapt their enforcement strategies and collaborate with national and international partners to strengthen global cultural protection initiatives.

The India Pride Project

In recent years, various initiatives and non-profits have been crucial in assisting the return of looted artwork. One particular organization is the India Pride Project (IPP) which is a grassroots initiative launched in 2014, aimed at combating the illegal trade of Indian cultural artifacts and advocating for their repatriation to India. Founded by S. Vijay Kumar and Anuraag Saxena, the project utilizes digital activism and crowdsourcing to raise awareness about stolen Indian antiquities.[40] Volunteers from across the globe participate in tracking, identifying, and documenting stolen Indian heritage artifacts that have been illicitly taken and sold to collectors, galleries, and museums worldwide.[41] The IPP has played a significant role in the return of several high-profile artifacts to India, including statues from the Chola dynasty and sacred religious idols that had been trafficked abroad.[42] The organization works in collaboration with international agencies, law enforcement, and Indian authorities to facilitate the return of these cultural treasures. By focusing on transparency and public involvement, the IPP has effectively spotlighted the systemic issue of artifact smuggling and has contributed to several successful repatriation cases.

In connection with agreements like the U.S.-India Cultural Property Agreement, the India Pride Project amplifies the efforts to recover stolen artifacts by creating public pressure and gathering evidence. The Agreement formalizes the framework for cooperation between the U.S. and India, making it easier to enforce restrictions on the illegal import and export of cultural property. IPP’s work complements these legal agreements by identifying and tracing stolen items, thus enabling faster and more effective repatriation processes. The project’s activism and research are crucial in supporting the practical enforcement of such agreements and ensuring that stolen heritage is returned to its rightful place.

Future Developments

Looking ahead, several developments could shape the future of cultural property agreements and global heritage protection. Advances in technology, such as blockchain for provenance tracking and enhanced forensic analysis, may offer new tools for combating cultural trafficking. Additionally, increasing public awareness and engagement regarding the importance of cultural heritage can drive support for stronger protections and more robust enforcement measures.

Furthermore, the ongoing refinement of international legal frameworks and cooperation mechanisms will be crucial for addressing emerging challenges. The U.S.-India agreement sets a positive precedent, but its success will depend on the ability of both countries to address these challenges proactively and to collaborate effectively with other nations and organizations.

Conclusion

The U.S.-India Cultural Property Agreement stands as the latest achievement in the global effort to combat the illicit trade of cultural artifacts and to protect cultural heritage. By addressing both the legal and practical aspects of cultural property protection, the Agreement underscores the commitment of both nations to preserving and honoring their shared cultural legacies.

The Agreement’s establishment reflects a growing recognition of the importance of international cooperation in safeguarding cultural heritage. Through its provisions, it aims to prevent the illegal trade of cultural artifacts, facilitate the repatriation of stolen items, and enhance collaborative efforts between the United States and India. This approach not only addresses the immediate challenges of cultural trafficking but also sets a precedent for future agreements and collaborations in the realm of cultural property protection. However, practical implementation and execution of the agreement could be challenging and the continuing assistance of organizations such as the India Pride Project may be critical in ensuring the objective of the agreement is actually met.

About the Author

Atreya Mathur is the Director of Legal Research at the Center for Art Law.

Additional Readings

  1. See “15 artworks stolen from India were seized from The Met Museum”The Heritage Lab, March 31, 2023. https://www.theheritagelab.in/15-stolen-artworks-india-metmuseum/ and Andy Sinclair, “Two Sculptures Returned to Republic of India in 2019 and 2022” Denver Art Museum, Oct. 31, 2023. https://www.denverartmuseum.org/en/blog/two-sculptures-returned-republic-india-2019-and-2022 ↑
  2. “Dancing Shiva: National Gallery of Australia to return allegedly stolen statue to India,” ABC News, March 26, 2023. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-26/nga-to-return-allegedly-stolen-shiva-to-india/5347404 ↑
  3. Id. ↑
  4. Saudiptendu Ray, “Repatriation of Artefacts Under PM Narendra Modi’s Leadership,” Vivekananda International Foundation, July 1, 2024. https://www.vifindia.org/article/2024/july/01/Repatriation-of-Artefacts-Under-PM-Narendra-Modi-s-Leadership ↑
  5. Id. ↑
  6. Id. ↑
  7. Id. ↑
  8. Id. ↑
  9. “India, U.S. sign agreement to protect cultural heritage,” The Hindu, July 16, 2024. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-us-sign-cultural-property-agreement/article68450309.ece ↑
  10. “India plans repatriation of Kohinoor, colonial artefacts from UK: Report,” India Today, May 13, 2023. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/india-plans-repatriation-of-kohinoor-colonial-artefacts-from-uk-report-2378878-2023-05-13 ↑
  11. “PM Modi’s quest to bring back cultural artefacts started in 2003,” The Times of India, June 8, 2016.

    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pm-modis-quest-to-bring-back-cultural-artefacts-started-in-2003/articleshow/52652090.cms ↑

  12. “Dancing Shiva: National Gallery of Australia to return allegedly stolen statue to India,” ABC News, March 26, 2023. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-26/nga-to-return-allegedly-stolen-shiva-to-india/5347404 ↑
  13. Id. ↑
  14. “India’s ‘Parrot Lady’ to fly back home,” The Hindu, April 17, 2015

    https://www.thehindu.com/news/indias-parrot-lady-to-fly-back-home/article7110667.ece ↑

  15. Id. ↑
  16. Id. ↑
  17. Id. ↑
  18. Alison Daye, “U.S. returns $100 million of stolen artefacts to India,” CNN, June 8, 2016. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/07/us/stolen-artifacts-returned-india/index.html ↑
  19. Id. ↑
  20. Id. ↑
  21. India and United States of America sign the first ever ‘Cultural Property Agreement’, PIB, July 26, 2024. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2037604 ↑
  22. Id. ↑
  23. Id. ↑
  24. Id. ↑
  25. Id ↑
  26. Swati Satish, “India-US Cultural Property Agreement,” ClearIAS (Aug. 1, 2024). https://www.clearias.com/cultural-property-agreement/#:~:text=As%20per%20the%20agreement%2C%20the,their%20repatriation%20back%20to%20India. ↑
  27. Id ↑
  28. India and United States of America sign the first ever ‘Cultural Property Agreement’, PIB, July 26, 2024. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2037604 ↑
  29. Id. ↑
  30. Id. ↑
  31. “India, U.S. sign agreement to protect cultural heritage,” The Hindu, July 16, 2024. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-us-sign-cultural-property-agreement/article68450309.ece ↑
  32. Id. ↑
  33. Id. ↑
  34. Id. ↑
  35. India and United States of America sign the first ever ‘Cultural Property Agreement’, PIB, July 26, 2024. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2037604 ↑
  36. Id. ↑
  37. Id. ↑
  38. “India, U.S. sign agreement to protect cultural heritage,” The Hindu, July 16, 2024. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-us-sign-cultural-property-agreement/article68450309.ece ↑
  39. Id. ↑
  40. See “Looted and smuggled, how India is bringing Gods and glory home,” India Today (Jul7 7, 2024), https://www.indiatoday.in/sunday-special/story/repatriation-india-pride-project-looted-smuggled-gods-statues-colonial-rule-heritage-vijay-kumar-british-museums-2563311-2024-07-07 ↑
  41. Id. ↑
  42. Id. ↑

 

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not meant to provide legal advice. Readers should not construe or rely on any comment or statement in this article as legal advice. For legal advice, readers should seek a consultation with an attorney.

Related Art Law Articles

Turkey map
Art lawCase ReviewCultural Heritage

The Mendelsohn Case: Implications for Future Restitution

August 28, 2026
Spotlight on the UK Spoliation Advisory Panel | Natasha Phillips Green | Featured Image
Art lawCultural HeritageSpotlight

Spotlight On: The UK Spoliation Advisory Panel

August 27, 2026
word image 75296 1
Art lawCultural Heritage

Beyond “Due Diligence”: Closing Loopholes in the Global Antiquities Trade

October 9, 2025