In the past, that has been considered sufficient justification by the British Museum for it to reject any requests for their return. When you add the facts that Egyptian museums have been less secure, and that had the marbles remained in position on the Parthenon they would have decomposed in the atmospheric pollution so as no longer to be recognisable, then most rational people would have supported that position.

The situation has changed, however, gradually with the passage of time; Egypt and Greece are now perfectly capable of providing dedicated, secure environments using the latest technology to preserve these artifacts intact. And it is now possible to produce close-to-perfect copies that could be put in place of the originals in the British Museum, so that the experience of the visitor would in no way be diminished.

The time has come when the British Museum should recognise the change in relative status between Britain and the rest of the world. We are no longer the imperial masters and increasingly need to build constructive working relationships as between equals. We can no longer demand and bully, but must request politely that others join with us in collaborative ventures against terrorism and other global threats.

These artifacts are of immense cultural significance to Egypt and Greece. To return them would not require any admission of legal title, or of any past wrongdoing, but would simply be a gesture of goodwill. They would be very well received (perhaps an understatement of the response that should be expected), and it would reflect well on Britain that we didn't have to give them back, but chose to do so anyway.

Pictured above: the Director of the Acropolis Museum, Professor Dimitris Pandermalis, Deputy Minister of Culture and Tourism, Ms. Angeliki Gerekou and the Chairman of Aegean Airlines, Mr. Theodoros Vassilakis. In the background one of the two new Airbus 320 bearing the image of the Acropolis Museum's Kori of Athens.

Aegean, the Greek airline, announced a national cultural initiative, ultimately aiming at boosting the country's international image, as well as supporting Greek tourism. In particular, the two new Airbus Á320 aircraft bearing the image of the Acropolis Museum's Kori of Athens were presented during an event held at the company's technical base (26.11.09). The inscription urges us to "Discover the New Acropolis Museum", not to mention the Museum's website at www.theacropolismuseum.gr. The names of the two aircraft are "Cleisthenes" and "Pheidias" - a live invitation to the New Acropolis Museum for millions of passengers throughout the world.

These two airplanes however are not the only "vehicles" promoting the Museum and Greece. From the beginning of 2010 onwards, a special video that will be provided by the Museum will be broadcast aboard all 22 brand new Airbus aircraft owned by AEGEAN during all international flights. The video will introduce the newest jewel of Greece and Athens to travellers.

The names "Cleisthenes" and "Phidias" assigned to the aircraft were recommended by the Director of the Acropolis Museum, Professor Dimitris Pandermalis. Deputy Minister of Culture and Tourism, Ms. Angeliki Gerekou, honoured the event with her presence and delivered a welcome address.

The Chairman of Aegean Airlines, Mr. Theodoros Vassilakis, stated during his speech: "In the midst of the adverse conditions we experience nowadays, there is a need for new initiatives and collectiveness in particular in the context of promoting Greece. We are fully aware of our responsibility seeing as we are the largest Greek airline. It is imperative that we bond ancient Greece's contribution to modern civilization with a creation of contemporary Greece that we must convey to the international community. The New Acropolis Museum is our gaze upon the world and embraces both of the country's historic and contemporary image. That is exactly the face of Greece we must promote, not only to attract visitors, but also to restore our sense of pride within."

The Director of the Acropolis Museum, Professor Dimitris Pandermalis, commented among other things: "I was extremely pleased when the administration of Aegean adopted the two names, which mean so much to us, to the Museum, and also reflect the works exhibited within the Museum. Cleisthenes is credited with being the first man in history who wanted to reform political life in Athens, thus providing what we know and demand today, isonomy (as per the Greek word isonomia, meaning "equality before the law"), in other words democracy, as it was expressed soon after. The new perception of man, men's rights, men's freedom, men's ability to plan their own lives, these are all political messages that were converted into art by Pheidias, hence our second name. He managed to take the ideology as a whole inherent in classical Athens and turn it into an image."

Ms. Gerekou mentioned the following in her welcome address: "Our country's cultural capital constitutes our common heritage. It belongs to all of us and each and every one of us, wherever they may be – depending on their goals, on their abilities – can truly contribute a great deal. I am therefore pleased with your initiative. I would however also like to convey our own message: Our Government, in its capacity as the political leadership of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, will be by your side. Congratulations on your endeavor are in order; not to mention congratulations on every single initiative moving towards the goal of endowing Greece with the power it deserves before the eyes of the world, the brand new dynamic identity it has rightfully earned in terms of culture, in terms of tourism, which is of course the prevailing pillar of our economy. We are called upon to redefine our national identity and local identities as part of tourism. Rest assured then that we will stand by each and every one of you in your attempt."

In promoting the Museum, AEGEAN reinforces Greek tourism, the largest Greek industry. The airline is looking to create opportunities for Athens to become a premium city-break destination. It is an opportunity for foreigners to visit Athens for the very first time as well as to attract past visitors to return again and again.

This new initiative of AEGEAN is an open invitation to all Greek companies to utilise their products to promote Greece's rich cultural heritage.

The British Committee's members are delighted with Aegean's initiative and the livery of "Cleisthenes" and "Pheidias".

James Cuno, director of the Art Institute of Chicago, seems to spend more time travelling the world promoting his books than he does looking after the encyclopedic collections over which he presides.

Yesterday evening an audience of around 60 people — academics, students, journalists and others — assembled at the London School of Economics to listen to Cuno rehearse his now familiar arguments about the ownership and fair distribution of cultural property. There on the panel to challenge him were Tatiana Flessas, professor of cultural property law at the LSE, and Dr Maurice Davies, deputy director of the Museums Association.

Cuno's big idea is that the collections of the world's great encyclopedic museums are being used as a political football by so-called "nationalist cultural property retentionists" — which is his derogatory term for source nations who were robbed of their material heritage during the imperial era and who would now like some of it returned, please.

During his allocated ten minutes, Cuno offered a summary of what has become his idée fixe, which is that most calls for the return of cultural objects are motivated by a creeping nationalism that he finds sinister and destructive. In support of his ideas, he loves referring to "cultural hybridity" "alterity", "the fluidity of cultural identity" and other tropes drawn from the discourses of cultural politics and post-colonialism. At root, however, his mission is to shore up the concept of the encyclopaedic museum — a fortress whose boundaries are everywhere under challenge. Once again he reiterated the patently absurd notion that encyclopedic museums should be established everywhere.

Cuno's highly political presentation — which, paradoxically, sought to criticize what he saw as the politicisation of culture by source nations — was followed by a few short comments from Tatiana Flessas.

Professor Flessas sought to point out that many encyclopedic museums are themselves national creations and are thus also instruments of nationalist agendas — actors taking up nationalistic positions by claiming the power to interpret, contextualise and assign meanings to the objects in their collections. "That building up the road is not a branch of museums UK plc, it is The British Museum", she said, drawing one the few ripples of laughter in an otherwise rather po-faced evening.

Maurice Davies referred to Cuno's suggestion that Italy, and effectively all countries east and south of it, are guilty of devising retentionist laws (in contrast to an implied suggestion that Britain and America do not). But he countered that Britain too has its nationalist retentionist laws to claim ownership of ancient artefacts uncovered from its soil, as does the US with its own national claims over newly discovered native American objects — "so there's a lot of nationalism about", he convincingly concluded.

Davies went on to speak of his experience in helping to forge legislation and resolve disputes concerning human remains. "I have no problem with culture being political," he said. "If repatriation of remains can return a tiny amount of power to Aboriginal peoples, a tiny amount of what was taken from them through colonialism, then that can only be a good thing." He also pointed out that former Metropolitan Museum director Philippe de Montebello had confirmed that the return of the Euphronius krater to Italy (after a welter of legal pressure forced its hand) ultimately resulted in a new wave of cultural cooperation between the two countries and a host of fresh Italian loans to the Metropolitan Museum. Cuno dismissed this as negligible and insisted that relations between the two nations were still not that good. Unlike Montebello, who saw the benefits that issued from the affair, Cuno risks coming across as a bad loser.

Finally, it was the turn of the audience to participate, but unfortunately the Institute of Ideas mistook it for an edition of the BBC's Question Time and chose to allow several members of the audience to ask their questions one after the other before turning to the panel for responses. As a result, many good questions were left unanswered and none of the panellists were pressed on any point. Events like this rely on a good authoritative chair with a sound grasp of the issues to steer the discussion. Sadly, last night we didn't have one.

One young woman valiantly tried to throw some light on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles, asking: "What does the panel suggest Greece might do to move beyond nationalism and advance its claim for return of the Marbles?" This was another good question not properly addressed, although it drew this from Tatiana Flessas: "The British Museum will literally have to fall into a hole in the ground before it gives up the Parthenon Marbles and if that's not national and nationalistic, what is?"

Finally, there were lots of calls for transparency (another nebulous buzzword), but again no clear steer on the issue. One thing that is rarely if ever talked about is the relationship between museums and the art market. As long as there is no transparency in the art market (and without some form of regulation this is not likely to change), there will never be transparency where collecting and museums are concerned.

Events like this often end up generating more heat than light. This one left us all in the cold and dark. But at least James Cuno shifted a few copies of his book, on sale outside the conference room, which I suppose was the real point of the evening.

Inexplicably, two thirds of the way through the event's allocated time, with plenty left to discuss, the chair announced it was time to get down to the pub. I suggested that before retiring to the boozer, could we please have a show of hands on the return of the Parthenon Marbles?

The result: 29 in favour of return, 32 against.

Sometimes only a couple of beers will dispel the gloom.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breaking news update
The New York Times has just weighed into this debate again, John Tierney filing a piece here criticizing Egypt's antiquities tsar, Zahi Hawass for his avowed determination to seek the return of significant Egyptian antiquities held in Western encyclopedic museums.

Unsurprisingly, Tierney quotes Cuno: "It is in the nature of our species to connect and exchange. And the result is a common culture in which we all have a stake. It is not, and can never be, the property of one modern nation or another."

Meanwhile, these objects remain the property of Western nations whose encyclopaedic museums benefit from the revenues generated by these objects through cultural tourism, etc. Possession is nine tenths of the law and 100 percent of the revenues too.

Culture and Tourism Minister Pavlos Geroulanos underlined Monday that his top priority would be to organise the newly merged ministry of culture and tourism and the solutions that need to be given to lingering problems, while clarifying that he is the only one responsible for the culture sector.

On the strategy being followed for the return of the Parthenon Marbles to Greece, Geroulanos stressed that the efforts will continue. He also noted that the British Museum appeared to be concerned, since it had taken the trouble to distribute leaflets giving its positions called "why the Marbles must stay" (at the British Museum).

"Melina Mercouri (the late PASOK culture minister) was the one to first raise the issue and we continue the efforts," he said.

The minister underlined that the state-run media should play a leading role in the promotion of culture issues.

To the Editor, The Guardian

I know that Simon Jenkins is fundamentally on the same side as I am, and I'm sure it wasn't he who chose to put that offensive phrase in his headline (A banana republic police HQ maybe, but not a home for the Elgin marbles, 23 October). But his piece did contain more than its fair share of anti-Greek prejudice. The Greeks were 'foolish' to turn down the offer of a loan of the Elgin Marbles this summer (a heavily conditional offer, confined to a few pieces, never officially proposed and withdrawn as soon as mooted). They have consigned the excavated ancient site under the new museum to a 'surreal dungeon' (unfair: it is to be open to visitors). And Jenkins cannot have it both ways: if the Greeks previously 'spoiled their case' for restitution of the Marbles by shortcomings in conservation, then he should not be complaining now that the restoration works on the Acropolis are so painstaking.
Anyway, the Greeks have now 'gone to the other extreme' with a building that 'screams the supremacy of Big Modernism' and looks like 'the police headquarters of a banana republic': Bernard Tschumi's New Acropolis Museum in Athens, which is the real target here. Comment is free, and a whole series of other expert architectural critics have commended Tschumi's building for exactly the opposite quality - 'handsome', 'unassuming', 'minimalist', 'unpretentious' - to what Jenkins detects. Simon Jenkins prefers the interior to the exterior: fair enough, so do many of us. But there was no call to package his criticism in this offensive wrapping paper.

Anthony Snodgrass
Chair, British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles

Thursday 22 October 2009, Simon Jenkins for The Guardian

A banana republic police HQ maybe, but not a home for the Elgin marbles

I am a restitutionist – but the new museum fails to clinch the case. It is not so much an argument as a punch in the face.

In 1812 Lord Elgin loaded the last of his Acropolis sculptures on to ships in Piraeus and set sail for England. Four years later and bankrupt, he sold them to the British Museum. This summer the Greeks, eager for their return, staged what they hoped would be a definitive retort by opening a £110m museum to house the marbles against the slopes of the same Acropolis. It is the most costly poison-pen letter in the history of cultural exchange.

Any lawyer can prove anything, and I happen to agree with those who regard the Elgin marbles as legally Britain's. But in any meaningful sense, they "belong" in Athens. As 56 of the surviving 94 panels of the Panathenaic procession, they should rejoin the 36 in the new museum. Precedent is not an issue, being the last refuge of reactionaries and those who have lost an argument. The Elgin marbles are, to put it mildly, a special case.

To me, architectural sculpture belongs on the building to which it was once attached. If it cannot be re-attached then it belongs in its climate, culture and context. The restitution of the marbles to Greece was thus always a noble goal of cultural diplomacy. Whenever I visited Athens, I came away ashamed at Britain's insistence that it would never return them, but this was coupled with sadness that the polluted, un-conserved and undistinguished city of Athens seemed determined to undermine its case.

Athens has now cleaned its air and its city. Last week the view of the Acropolis from the adjacent hill of Lycabettus was glorious, with the streets subdued in mist below and the deep blue bay of Phaleron shimmering in the distance. The sunlit slopes of the Acropolis were rid of traffic and immaculately landscaped. Athens seemed on its best behaviour. So was the case for restitution clinched?

I have to admit that, if anything, the case is weakened. When restitution was a futurist fantasy, idealism could rule the day. Sending back the marbles was part of a dream, in which the Parthenon itself might be restored, as the Stoa of Attalus in the agora has been restored. Perhaps the marbles might find their way back on to the temple. Perhaps a museum might be built for the entire frieze, completed with not only Elgin's panels, but missing ones conjectured from the original Pantelic quarries. Perhaps they might be repainted.

Today we can see what restitution would mean in practice. The argument has been hijacked by the gods of modern museology. Just as previously the Greeks spoiled their case by their conservation shortcomings, now they have gone to the other extreme and put their cause in the hands of archaeologists and architects – stripping it of all passion.

The new museum, designed in pastiche Corbusian style by the Swiss architect Bernard Tschumi, is not so much an argument as a punch in the face. It is big and brutal, like something flown in overnight from Chicago. Its rear hits the street with two storeys of concrete and corrugated metal, set back from the road like the police headquarters of a banana republic. The giant entrance porch cantilevers out towards the Acropolis, screaming the supremacy of Big Modernism over the serene stones of the Acropolis opposite. It is the worst case of architectural egotism, of I can do anything bigger than you.

As if to slam the point home, the excavated streets of old Athens, discovered below, have not been laid out as a public site but consigned to a surreal dungeon beneath the concrete columns and glass pavement of the museum's ground floor. Were this Pompeii, no one would have dared such an outrage. Where there should be elegance and deference, there is all the architecture money could buy.

The foyer is in the air-terminal style beloved of big-time museums – witness the Louvre, Tate Modern or New York's Museum of Modern Art. The first two floors offer a mass of structural space for little content, though the oppression is relieved by the exquisite delicacy of the classical sculptures.

These objects – ethereal maidens with plaited hair, beautifully carved boys, the caryatids of the Erechtheion, a mischievous Silenus – seem to float before the viewer, most of them free of glass and deliciously close to the eye. They suggest that Athens has treasures aplenty, without having to reclaim those lost to other cities. (Indeed, the city's new gallery of Cycladic art is one of the finest archaeological museums I know.)

The museum's undoubted coup, political as much as sculptural, is the top gallery, dedicated to the Parthenon. Fashioned as a pavilion with a surrounding colonnade, its walls are hung with the frieze panels still in Greek hands. Glassed on all four sides, the terraces look out over the roofs of Athens and to the Acropolis above. Here the absence of the London panels is undeniably painful. Their replication with plaster casts makes some amends, but the absence of the end pediments is particularly sad. The political point is made, the visual impact stunning.

While the Greeks win full marks for theatricality, the gallery is not the Parthenon, nor a copy, nor remotely deferential to the original. Architecture and museum technology have combined to dictate a lowering ceiling and heavy steel and concrete frames, overlooked by lighting gantries, window blinds and double glazing.

The whole thing is unremittingly hi-tech, with Tschumi determined to push himself forward as a rival to the builders of the Acropolis. The result is ironic. I find the British Museum's bland and gloomy presentation of the marbles somehow more pristine than these souls lost in a modernist wilderness.

Again I would be more sympathetic to Athens were it not for the continued chaos of the Acropolis itself. In a lifetime of visits, I have never seen it free of builders' yards, now more than ever. It was taken from world view by the archaeological profession in the 1980s and submitted to a protracted torture of poles, planks, cranes, rails and sheds. It seems destined to last for ever. I doubt if readers of this article will be able to photograph the Acropolis free of scaffolding in their lifetimes: I have not.

With the Propylaia also covered in scaffolding and the Erechtheion a half-rebuilt "designer ruin", the Acropolis composition is a monument not to ancient Athens but to the unknown 20th-century archaeologist. It is shocking, as if London were to keep St Paul's and Big Ben in scaffolding in perpetuity.

The squabble has now become messy. The Greeks were foolish this summer to reject the British Museum's half-mooted offer to loan the Elgin marbles back for the opening, on the grounds that acceptance might concede London's title. The Greek point would have been better made had the world seen the marbles united, however briefly, than by this legal nicety.

If I were seeking a compromise, I would return the pediments, which are the most glaring omission from the new museum. I would also return Elgin's filched Erechtheion caryatid. As for the rest of London's hoard, I remain a restitutionist, but less convinced than before. Athens has substituted a bunker for a dream and failed to end the argument.

Topkapi director Ortayli tours New Acropolis Museum

The director of the famed Topkapi Museum of Istanbul, Ilber Ortayli, was given a grand tour of the New Acropolis Museum on Tuesday by the latter's director, Professor Dimitris Pandermalis.

Ortayli arrived in Greece within the framework of an international science conference that will be organised in Istanbul by the NGO "Aegean State" late next month, where Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew will be the keynote speaker.

"From my visit to the Acropolis Museum, above all, I was impressed by its architecture for which I had been previously informed of. The style and technique of the museum are very close to the Enlightenment movement and highlight the recent findings of the Athenian Agora and the settlements around the museum in the best way possible ... Due to comparison of the treasures found here and the treasures found in the British Museum, the so-called 'Elgin Marbles', one obtains a clear picture of what should be returned to Athens.

There is no reason for the sculptures to remain in the British Museum and this is why you must continue your effort for their return," the noted Turkish scholar said.

After the tour of the museum, Athens Deputy Mayor Sophie Mytilinaiou-Daskalaki noted that the conference will be held annually, one year in Athens and one year in Istanbul, to promote the principles of civilisation and communication channels "between two civilisations through a common culture".