Pablo Picasso's "Seated Nude drying her feet" was stolen during the Nazi era. Returned after the war, it can be admired today in Museum Berggruen in Berlin. Hamburg's Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe is preparing to return an Afghan wall panel that is also regarded as looted art. Hermanus Koekoek's painting "Seesturm," from persecuted Jewish art collector Max Stern's collection, was returned a few days ago, shortly before it was put up for sale in Düsseldorf.

These represent three recent cases of restitution — two of which were expropriations by the Nazis. But according to Ronald Lauder, president of the Jewish World Congress, Germany is still reluctant when it comes to returning stolen works of art. Lauder is set to speak Monday at a conference in Berlin marking the 20th anniversary of the Washington Principles. In 1998, 44 signatory countries made a commitment to track down stolen art in public museums and find settlements for the heirs of the Nazi victims. However, this commitment does not apply to privately owned art. In the last 20 years, Germany has "done far too little," Lauder told German newspaper Welt am Sonntag earlier in November.

JWC President Ronald Lauder, seen here in October with German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas at Berlin's first Orthodox rabbinical ordination since the Holocaust, says Germany has a "done far too little" about the Nazis' theft of cultural heritage

Hartmut Ebbing, the cultural policy spokesperson for the business-friendly Free Democrats (FDP) party, told DW that he "fully agrees" with Lauder that the issue of restitution is still being "neglected" in Germany. As the country where the Holocaust took place, Germany has a "moral obligation" in the matter, he said.

Read more: What Nazis stole from synagogues during Kristallnacht

Cultural heritage legitimacy is 'up to us'

But that may be changing in the wake of increased public consciousness: The origin of paintings is now even the subject of several exhibitions, including a current show in Berlin. "The Lives of Images. Provenances in Museum Berggruen. Picasso-Klee-Braque-Matisse," shows the partly twisted and sometimes criminal paths in the histories of the exhibited works. From 2015 to 2018, experts examined whether 135 pre-1945 works from Jewish art collector Heinz Berggruen's former private collection were Nazi looted art. The works are now owned by the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation.

Watch video 03:52 Share Looted artworks returned to Poland Send Facebook google+ Whatsapp Tumblr linkedin stumble Digg reddit Newsvine Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/33s2v Looted artworks returned to Poland

Hermann Parzinger, the foundation's president, believes that his institution has done a thorough job. The foundation systematically checked the origin of its collections and, in recent years, has returned more than 350 pictures. For a long time, public museums only responded to requests from potential heirs in individual cases, instead of initiating action. Parzinger told DW that he was guided by a simple idea: "Ultimately, all cultural assets in public institutions that found their way there after 1933 are per se suspicious. And it is up to us to demonstrate the acquisition's legitimacy if the previous owners were Jewish fellow citizens."

Read more: Nazi-looted art from Gurlitt collection identified

Calls for a digital museum

The Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation may be exemplary in terms of provenance research. Ronald Lauder, however, accuses German museums of blocking digital lists of their holdings and thus preventing possible returns. Hartmut Ebbing is demanding that public museums "must register, archive and digitize the art objects that are in the depots, that we don't even know about yet, in order to give potential restitution beneficiaries a chance to find out whether a painting is in a museum." In his opinion, the federal government does too little and hides behind financial arguments. These funds would have to be provided by the state, "so that the excuse can no longer be made that 'We have no money, we have no staff.'"

Ebbing considers the current Limbach Commission, which can be called upon to deal with questions relating to the restitution of looted art, to be unsatisfactory. He says that this is because it only becomes involved if both sides are active. Museums often say that the art is not looted, Ebbing says, "in which case procedures are not even initiated by the Commission." He says it's important that either side can call on the Commission. Lauder welcomes the fact that Monika Grütters, Minister of State for Cultural Affairs, wants to reform the Limbach Commission a second time. But this time, says the Jewish World Congress' Lauder, all controversial questions must be solved.

Cultural heritage expert Parzinger admits that it naturally hurts every museum to lose an art object, but "We don't want stolen things in our collections, no matter how painful it is with an important work of art." In the case of returns, it is often possible "to agree with the heirs that it will remain with us as a permanent loan or that we can repurchase it."

Read more: Nazi-looted Cranach artworks to remain in California museum

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Max Beckmann, Zandvoort Beach Cafe, 1934 The watercolor by the Jewish painter Max Beckmann entered Gurlitt's collection only in 1945. Held by the allied occupation forces at the Central Collecting Point in Wiesbaden from 1945-1950, it was returned to Hildebrand Gurlitt in 1950. Before working for the Nazi regime, Gurlitt had collected and exhibited modern art, curating Beckmann's last exhibition in 1936 before the artist fled Germany.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Otto Griebel, Veiled Woman, 1926 This work was owned by lawyer and art collector Fritz Salo Glaser. Artists of Dresden's avant-garde scene were his guests in the 1920s — as was the young Hildebrand Gurlitt. It is not known how Gurlitt came to possess the painting. It was confiscated in 1945 and later returned. Of Jewish heritage, Glaser only narrowly avoided deportation to the Theresienstadt concentration camp in 1945.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Claude Monet, Waterloo Bridge, 1903 This painting by the famous impressionist is not suspected to have been looted. The artist sold it to the Durand Ruel Gallery in 1907. The Jewish art merchant and publisher Paul Cassirer is said to have given it to Marie Gurlitt as a present, and she left it to her son Hildebrand Gurlitt in 1923.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Thomas Couture, Portrait of a Seated Young Woman, 1850 This work by the French painter was only recently identified as a looted work of art. A short handwritten note was the clue for the provenance researchers. The picture was quite likely in the collection of the Jewish politician Georges Mandel, whose family stakes a claim to the work. It is not known how it came into Gurlitt's possession.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Auguste Rodin, Crouching Woman, approx. 1882 Hildebrand Gurlitt must have acquired this work by the French sculptor between 1940 and 1945. Previously belonging to the Frenchman Eugene Rudier, it entered circulation in 1919 at an auction by Octave Henri Marie Mirbeau, who is said to have received it as a present from the artist.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? In Gurlitt's apartment Cornelius Gurlitt hoarded the sculpture along with many other artworks for decades in his Munich apartment. Before his death in 2014, he consented to have his stocks researched and — should they include articles of stolen art — have them returned to their rightful owners in accordance with the Washington Principles on Nazi-looted art.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Albrecht Dürer, Knight, Death and Devil, 1513 This copper engraving by Albrecht Dürer once belonged to the Falkeisen-Huber Gallery in Basel. It is not known how it got there or how long it was there however. In 2012 the engraving turned up in Cornelius Gurlitt's collection. "Old masters" like Dürer were very important to the National Socialists' view of art and were often exploited for propaganda.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Edvard Munch, Ashes II, 1899 The provenance of this drawing is completely unknown. It is certain, however, that Hitler considered Norwegian artist Edvard Munch's work "degenerate art." Some 82 pieces by Munch were confiscated in German museums in 1937.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Francois Boucher, Male Nude, undated Hitler venerated 18th century French painting. He secured exceptional paintings for his own collection by targeting the collection of the Rothschild Family after the annexation of Austria. Hildebrand Gurlitt supplemented them with drawings by renowned French painters. He acquired this work by Boucher from a Parisian art merchant in 1942.

Where did the Gurlitt collection artwork come from? Carl Spitzweg: Alpine Valley with Dairymaid, 1871 This painting was probably Hitler's personal property from 1934 onward. Not a part of the Gurlitt collection, it has been on loan from the Federal Republic of Germany since 1973 and shown in Dusseldorf's Kunstpalast Museum. The image reflects Hitler's taste in art, and he wished to have such works at the "Führer Museum."



African looted art

In the case of Nazi looted art, the discussion has at least been going on for quite some time, as the Washington Principles show. However, such discussions are still at very early stages in Germany and Europe, regarding art that came to Europe from colonies in Africa and Asia. Today, many of the former colonies are demanding the works of art be returned. In France, none other than President Emmanuel Macron has committed to this. It highly controversial in his country, and he has also put Germany under pressure.

In Germany, there are two particular events next year that will put the topic on the agenda. In 1919, exactly 100 years ago, Germany lost its colonies in Africa, Asia and the Pacific under the Treaty of Versailles. And in 2019, the new Humboldt Forum will also open its doors and exhibit valuable cultural objects from different parts of the world. Grütters has said that, for far too long, the German colonial period has been "an almost blind spot" in the German culture of remembrance.