The Mauritshuis museum in The Hague, home to masterpieces like Vermeer’s Girl With a Pearl Earring and Rembrandt’s The Anatomy Lesson of Dr Nicolaes Tulp, is reconsidering its practice of lending artwork to museums in the United States due to growing concerns over funding cuts and ideological shifts under the Trump administration.
Martine Gosselink, the museum’s director, expressed that recent political developments, particularly the administration’s cuts to arts funding and its attempts to target exhibits seen as “divisive or anti-American,” have created an atmosphere of uncertainty that has led the museum to re-evaluate its long-standing collaborations with U.S. institutions. The Mauritshuis has long been involved in a fruitful exchange with American art historians and curators, fostering a constant dialogue centered on loans and research partnerships.
However, Gosselink noted that recent political shifts have raised red flags. As funding cuts mount and fears of ideological censorship grow, U.S.-based colleagues have expressed concerns about their jobs and the direction of their institutions. “We really feel for our colleagues in American institutions about what’s happening in archives, libraries and museums,” Gosselink said. “It’s a huge catastrophe.”
The situation escalated earlier this year when President Trump signed an executive order targeting the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. The order accused the world-renowned museum complex of promoting “divisive narratives” and distorting U.S. history. Along with this, efforts to slash funding to key agencies supporting museums and the arts continue to threaten the stability of cultural institutions across the country.
Although Gosselink declined to specify the institutions in question, she confirmed that plans were in place to lend pieces to certain U.S. museums. However, she emphasized that these decisions are now under careful reconsideration. “We’re not saying we won’t do it, but we will be extra careful and need guarantees,” Gosselink explained. “If you lend a piece to a museum that lacks sufficient staff to care for it properly, then you have to question whether it’s the right decision.”
In March, a federal judge temporarily blocked the administration’s efforts to dismantle a key agency providing funding to U.S. museums and libraries. This ruling was hailed by the American Alliance of Museums as a crucial first step in a potentially lengthy legal battle. Still, the threat of continued funding cuts looms large, particularly with the National Museum of African American History and Culture facing direct attacks from the administration.
Gosselink acknowledged the uncertain future for many U.S. cultural institutions, raising the question of whether they would even remain operational during the loan period. “How can you be sure that the museum will still be open and operating during the entire period of the loan?” she asked.
While the Mauritshuis has not made any definitive decisions, Gosselink emphasized that it is not a major setback for the museum if certain pieces cannot be loaned for a few years. However, she expressed deeper concern about the long-term effects on academic collaboration, such as joint research and publications, that have historically been the foundation of their exchanges with U.S. counterparts. “Scientifically, you want to collaborate, to write books together, to conduct research together,” she said. “But I do wonder if these things will proceed in the way they have in the past decades.”
