For details on the terms of a potential agreement, international media and negotiation officials now speak regarding the return of the Parthenon Sculptures, expressing optimism that such a development is feasible, and indeed in the near future. The Greek side has worked towards this direction, having strong negotiating tools at its disposal, such as the previous agreement with the Sicilian and Italian governments concerning the deposit-return of the Fagan fragment to the Acropolis Museum, which could serve as a model for achieving the agreement.

Already, however, and within a short period of time, progress has been observed in the negotiations, following initiatives taken by the Greek side with the decision to elevate the issue of the return of the Sculptures to a governmental level and indeed as a matter of highest priority. The concise statement by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer that “if the British Museum says yes, Downing Street will not stand in the way” reflects the common will of the two state leaders to resolve the issue, as well as their mutual disposition to move on to examining the details of the terms, which currently concern the two museums.

Since the two leaders appear to have agreed, after a series of meetings, that the return—or rather, better said, the reunification—of the monument is more than imperative, the directors of both the British Museum and the Acropolis Museum, Nicholas Cullinan— in Britain, an important role is also played by the chairman of the Trustees, George Osborne—and Nikolaos Stampolidis respectively, take on the next phase, which is to clarify the details and overcome any legal obstacles.

But since the devil always hides in the details, particular emphasis is placed on the thorns of the negotiations and the terms that will be used to overcome the critical legal issues. What is important, however, is that all the individuals participating in the negotiations—from Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Greek Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni and her British counterpart Lisa Nandy, the directors of the two museums, and the chairman of the British Museum—are moving in the same direction.

1. Reunification Instead of Return

One of the critical arguments presented by the British Museum is that if they return the Sculptures to us, it will open the vicious cycle of claims, prompting other museums and countries, such as Egypt, which has already raised the issue of returns, to join the fray. However, to avoid this pitfall, the Greek side has declared—through the Greek Prime Minister, the Minister of Culture, and the positions submitted to UNESCO—that what we are asking for is the reunification of a sculpture, whose parts are scattered between Greece and Britain.

As Mr. Mitsotakis stated in an interview with CNN and Christiane Amanpour, “It’s like cutting the Mona Lisa in half, with one half in the Louvre and the other half in the British Museum.” This is why the General Director of the Acropolis Museum has repeatedly argued that “what we are asking for is not a return but a reunification,” emphasizing the critical nature of our claim, which is the harmonious reunification not only of a sculpture but of a global symbol.

“It is about the parts of a single body, a monument that is a symbol not only of Greek culture but also of democracy,” Professor Stampolidis recently emphasized at the travel.gr conference, referring to the monument’s uniqueness. As he noted, “The ancient Greeks created their gods in the image and likeness of humans.

In ancient temples, we may see mythological themes, but only in this one do we see marble sculptures that reference democracy and its world—a parade of old men, youths, men, and women, depicting the order of gods and mortals, as well as all social classes. This is why no one can truly appreciate the Parthenon Sculptures anywhere other than in the Acropolis Museum.”

2. Deposit Instead of Loan

Both the Greek government and the Ministry of Culture, as well as the director of the Acropolis Museum, have frequently referred to the diplomatic success of the return of a Parthenon fragment from Sicily. In fact, as stated by the General Director of the Acropolis Museum at the recent travel.gr conference in collaboration with Proto Thema, the agreement between Greece and Sicily for the return of the Fagan fragment, which had been in Sicily for nearly two centuries, could serve as a model on which a potential agreement can be based.

Apart from the international validation of the just request through the UNESCO convention, what Mr. Stampolidis and the Greek side have repeatedly emphasized is that a legal term can be found to avoid the legal obstacle that prohibits the return of treasures and indirectly recognize ownership status in Greece. And this solution is provided by the agreement signed by the government of Sicily, outlining what exactly the United Kingdom can do for the Sculptures to return to their rightful place in their natural setting.

According to this agreement, the ideal diplomatic solution for both sides seems to be the term “deposit,” which could diplomatically replace the term “loan.” This was also influenced by the general climate created when Pope Francis agreed to return three fragments from the metopes, frieze, and pediments of the Parthenon, which had previously been exhibited at the Vatican Museum, with the ultimate goal being the return of the remaining pieces that are missing from the Parthenon sculpture.

But what demonstrated how the repatriation could be conducted from state to state, solving the diplomatic problems, was the Fagan fragment and the process followed by the government of Sicily and the Ministry of Culture of the Italian Republic for the return of this valuable treasure. “The Fagan fragment was deposited at the Acropolis Museum and was reunited with the frieze,” Ms. Mendoni recalled, adding that “the legal solution was found when the Italian Ministry of Culture and the corresponding institution of the State Legal Council found a way for its permanent stay at the Acropolis Museum. This was also adopted by UNESCO as a good practice.”

This was extremely important because it diplomatically opened the way for the return of the Parthenon Sculptures, as Mr. Stampolidis has stated, saying that “the Fagan fragment is, in a way, the first Elgin piece to return.”

3. Shared Use Instead of Ownership

In order to reach an agreement, it must be clear that both sides have good intentions, and this is evident from the cooperative atmosphere they are fostering. The fact that it is outdated to resort to absolute legal terms that complicate matters has been supported by both sides, proving that the circumstances have changed significantly since the talks reached a deadlock during the Sunak government, which eventually led to a diplomatic incident that turned out to be in Greece’s favor.

A key role in the shift in the United Kingdom’s position seems to have been played by the new director of the British Museum, Nicholas Cullinan, who, in a recent interview, admitted that by endorsing the “legal” and “moral” return of treasures to their places of origin, the British Museum is taking the next step by announcing a change in its policy.

The renovation of the British Museum’s galleries, which is currently underway, must align with a shift in its philosophy. This is something that the director of the British Museum emphasized in private meetings with the trustees, who seem to be convinced that this is the only legal solution.

In fact, he is the one who managed to convince the current UK Minister of Culture to move in this direction. As he stated in an interview with the Financial Times, the word “solution” is wrong, and a more accurate word is “response,” believing that both sides need to think “outside the box.”

For this reason, advocating that the return is such a step, it should align with Greece, achieving a feasible level of cooperation. “The word ‘cooperation’ is much more interesting than competition because it is more interesting to cooperate than to compete with the other,” he had stated. This, therefore, led to an overall change in policy and the omission of terms such as “ownership” and “property,” replacing them with the term “partnership” as preferable and more functional.

In this context, “shared use” of the Sculptures is also proposed, which omits the term “ownership” and grants both sides the right to benefit from the agreement. In the apparent achievement of the agreement, a significant role seems to have been played, apart from the crucial discussions between the two prime ministers, by the new international trend of returning treasures, as referenced by Ms. Mendoni, as well as the shift in public opinion and the attitude of the British Museum’s leaders, which until recently remained unyielding.

Mr. Cullinan had clearly supported the restoration of cultural treasures and the return of the Parthenon Sculptures from the very first day of his appointment, and he is the one who managed to change the trustees’ stance in this direction.

4. Joint Actions Instead of Exchange

As demonstrated by the case of the Fagan fragment, which is a piece of the Parthenon’s eastern frieze depicting the foot of Artemis sitting on her throne, there can be a technical act for the permanent return, and in return, treasures from Greece can be hosted, as was specifically done at the Antonio Salinas Archaeological Museum, where the fragment was kept.

This means that, instead of the heavy term “exchange” of archaeological findings, which requires clarification of ownership, “joint actions” can be explored, such as exhibitions around the findings. In this way, both parties undertake joint activities within the framework of cooperation, attracting more visitors, while avoiding the transfer of ownership and the term “exchange,” which could block a potential agreement.

5. UNESCO Instead of the Museum’s Law

One of the permanent arguments from the British side was that treasures cannot be moved from the British Museum because it is explicitly prohibited to “alienate” its collections. In fact, the term “alienation” is considered one of the terms that could block a potential agreement. This refers to an outdated law from 1963, which explicitly prohibits the museum from transferring, moving, or exchanging treasures, something which it has done in the past. The previous government argued that any initiative by the museum would constitute a violation of the law, and they would not allow it.

However, the current political leadership seems to be giving the green light to the museum’s leaders to find a formula that does not violate the law but still allows the transfer of treasures. This modification seems to be located within UNESCO’s law, which obliges museums to return treasures if such a return is proposed by the global community and by UNESCO’s laws.

Furthermore, this is imposed by the current global logic prevailing in museums, which now exchange treasures and engage in joint exhibitions. The Acropolis Museum has already proven, through Mr. Stampolidis’ initiative, that it can organize exhibitions requiring the transfer of treasures from prominent museums around the world.

Also, as a diplomatic tool against this outdated law, the general director of the British Museum has cited the 2022 Charities Law, which seems to offer a solution to the British government, referring to the general trend in museums to make concessions based on “ethical reasons.” This especially follows the unanimous decision by UNESCO in September 2021, which supports the return of the Parthenon Sculptures. Such a return seems not only ethical but also mandatory.

This is now what the global community demands, not just our country. Therefore, once everyone agrees and a common formula is found, the terms for joint actions will be specified, particularly for the treasures the British wish to host in their newly renovated hall, as this is one of the arguments presented by the new director of the British Museum to the museum’s trustees (i.e., the members of the board).

In the end, everything points to the fact that both the international public opinion, institutions, and even British society wish to see the beautiful sculptures by Phidias from the magnificent frieze depicting the imposing Panathenaic scenes — that is, the procession of the people of Athens — return to their rightful place, beneath the shadow of the Acropolis, away from the dim rooms of the British Museum.

Who knows, maybe the time has come for us to see the Sculptures that adorned the pediment of the Parthenon Temple, especially the two exquisite chariots that dominated the two ends, the distinctive one of the Moon and the “fiery” one, as Pindar called it, of the Sun (the one with which Euripides saves Medea), with the beautiful god holding the reins of the four horses with outstretched arms, and the waves covering them up to their necks, merging and becoming one with the soul of Athens.