Artists Around the World Condemn Plans to Dismantle Antwerp’s Oldest Contemporary Art Institution

6 January 2026

Protest banners against the cost-cutting exercise hang from the Museum of Contemporary Art in Antwerp. Photograph: Zeno Druyts/BELGA MAG/AFP/Getty Images

In Antwerp, a city long revered for its rich artistic heritage, the staccato of protest has replaced the usual hush of reverence that envelops its museums. At the heart of a growing cultural storm is the Museum of Contemporary Art Antwerp (M HKA), an institution founded in 1985 that has become a cornerstone of contemporary art in Belgium and beyond. Earlier this month artists, curators and cultural leaders from across Europe and the world spoke out forcefully against a controversial government proposal that would effectively strip the museum of its status, dismantle its collection and transfer it to another city — a move that many see as a profound threat to artistic autonomy and the cultural identity of Antwerp.

The plan, initiated by Caroline Gennez, the culture minister for the Flanders region, has taken many in the art world by surprise. In late 2025, Gennez cancelled the long-planned construction of a new €80 million high-rise building intended to house an expanded M HKA and instead unveiled a proposal to revoke the museum’s official status. Under the restructuring, the museum’s entire 8,000-work collection would be relocated to Ghent’s Municipal Museum of Contemporary Art, known as Smak, and M HKA’s role would be redefined as more of an arts centre than a full museum.

To many artists and cultural advocates, the plan is more than a simple logistics shift. They argue it undermines Antwerp’s place as a major hub of avant-garde activity and diminishes the city’s cultural infrastructure. At a press conference in Antwerp in early January, museum directors openly criticised what they described as “flagrant illegalities” in how the proposal was developed and announced, calling for broader consultation and transparency in decision-making. Critics say the restructuring was devised with little input from the arts community despite its drastic implications.

One of the most outspoken voices in the backlash has been Belgian painter Luc Tuymans, widely regarded as one of the country’s most influential contemporary artists. Tuymans has warned that demoting M HKA to an arts centre risks dismantling the autonomy of contemporary art institutions across the region, arguing that “to degrade a museum to an arts centre is simply insane” and expressing concern that art cannot simply be transplanted into a new ecosystem without undermining its context and relevance.

International figures have also weighed in. Renowned British sculptor Anish Kapoor wrote directly to the culture ministry protesting the removal of his works from the Antwerp museum, saying he “cannot accept that they might be removed from M HKA or otherwise put at risk as part of any institutional reorganisation.” His comments reflect a broader anxiety within the global art community about the safety and stewardship of significant contemporary works should the plan move forward.

Support for preserving M HKA’s status has spread beyond artists. Directors from major institutions including London’s Serpentine Galleries, Tate in the UK, the Centre Pompidou in Paris and the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam have signed open letters urging authorities to rethink or at least delay the changes, emphasising the importance of M HKA’s mission and independence. Opponents of the plan have also pointed to legal concerns, suggesting that the proposed transformation could violate norms regarding the governance of cultural institutions in Flanders, and arguing that key decisions should be subject to broader consultation with stakeholders in the cultural sector.

There is also debate about whether the restructuring will actually yield the cost savings the government claims. A memorandum from Flanders’s financial inspectorate warned that while moving the collection could reduce operating expenses, the broader financial picture remains ambiguous. Smak would likely need expanded storage and infrastructure to accommodate the collection, and M HKA would face costs for borrowing in exhibitions to attract visitors. Critics say the plan lacks transparency in forecasting both cultural and economic impacts.

The controversy has captured wider attention because it touches on fundamental questions about the role of museums and cultural institutions in society. For many advocates in Antwerp and beyond, M HKA represents not just a repository of art but a space for experimentation, dialogue and the development of new artistic voices. Its programming has provided a platform for emerging and established artists alike, acting as a bridge between local creativity and global contemporary discourse. Its supporters argue that reducing its authority could weaken not just a museum but the entire ecosystem of artistic exchange in Flanders.

As debates unfold in the Flemish parliament, with formal discussions scheduled for later this month, large questions remain about the future shape of art institutions in the region. Proponents of the restructuring insist their goal is streamlined collaboration between museums and expanded cultural engagement, while opponents see a reckless move that could set a troubling precedent for cultural policy.

For a city like Antwerp, long associated with artistic innovation and cultural influence, the stakes feel especially high. Artists and residents alike have taken to social media and public spaces under the banner of Museum at Risk to protest what they consider an existential threat to a vital institution. As the controversy continues to unfold, its resolution may signal much about the broader relationship between government policy, public funding and the essential value of contemporary art in civic life.