Being critical is important, but this piece is oversimplified. Okay---"there are still many significant cultural contributions from pre-war
Jewish communities that have yet to be salvaged from the remnants of
the Holocaust"---one can't refute that, but studying what Jews owned is not a worthless endeavor. Archaeologists spend their whole lives studying what material remains people leave behind---the non-Jewishly created paintings that victims of the Holocaust left behind tell us something about Jews in pre-war Europe...though admittedly, it's not the kind of thing we like to highlight: they were trying to assimilate. they were trying to look like Frenchmen, buy like Frenchmen and enjoy art like Frenchmen. good to know and remember. 

And saying resources should be directed at restoring art to its rightful owners rather than an exhibit is a false dichotomy. Isn't the best way to find rightful owners (or much more likely, their descendants) by displaying the art in the most public (and safe) place possible? People changed their names after the Holocaust---the young state of Israel encouraged people to forget their past and their history in diaspora. most owners are likely dead or untraceable.

If you ignore the history of Jews in diaspora and especially the evidence for assimilated Jewish behavior, you're not seeing the full picture.