Ancient historical objects in museums around the world should be returned to their country of origin. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Most people believe that the old historical artifacts should be bought back from the countries currently possessing them. I totally agree with this sentiment; however, these nations opine that they legally own those ancient objects and can provide proof of purchase for the same. Proponents supporting the view of returning the object, argue that some of those artifacts originate from the colonized part of the world and were unlawfully confiscated by the colonists. In addition, these relics signify the rich, cultural and financial background of the original country. The best-known example of this is that the old idols, sculptures and weapons of the great Indian rulers were taken by the Britishers after India's independence and now they are displayed in the great museums of Britain. Nonetheless, the colonist countries, on the other hand, provide proofs and supporting documents of buying the ancient artifacts from the authorities of that era. Also, they have written scripts that also provide enough(unequivocal) evidence that a few of these are gifts that were given to them as a token of friendship. Thus, they argue about the total ownership of these artifacts and consequently, deny the request of return of these items to the original culture. To exemplify, the world's most famous diamond Kohinoor, mined in India, is possessed by the Queen of England and even after several attempts of the Indian authorities to get it back, they have failed to do so till date. To recapitulate, although these cultural items are maintained by the nations owning them, in time, it will only be beneficial for both types of nations to bilaterally resolve this issue and have a truce. This will not only become a stepping stone for stronger but also for a long-lasting relationship between them.