Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06BERLIN361
2006-02-09 16:28:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Berlin
Cable title:  

VISIT OF HOLOCAUST ENVOY O'DONNELL: DISCUSSIONS ON

Tags:  PHUM SOCI GM 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0009
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHRL #0361/01 0401628
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 091628Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1427
INFO RUCNFRG/FRG COLLECTIVE
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 0433
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 000361 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/22/2021
TAGS: PHUM SOCI GM
SUBJECT: VISIT OF HOLOCAUST ENVOY O'DONNELL: DISCUSSIONS ON
INTERNATIONAL TRACING SERVICE (ITS)

REF: 05 BERLIN 3427

Classified By: DCM John Cloud. Reason: 1.4(b) and (d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 000361

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/22/2021
TAGS: PHUM SOCI GM
SUBJECT: VISIT OF HOLOCAUST ENVOY O'DONNELL: DISCUSSIONS ON
INTERNATIONAL TRACING SERVICE (ITS)

REF: 05 BERLIN 3427

Classified By: DCM John Cloud. Reason: 1.4(b) and (d)


1. (C) Summary. In January 18 meetings at the Foreign and
Interior Ministries, and the Federal Chancellery, German
officials signaled a desire to move more quickly toward a
resolution of ITS issues than they had in the past, but were
nonetheless unsure of how to do so from both a substantive
and procedural standpoint. As before (reftel) the Interior
Ministry appeared least responsive to U.S. and other pressure
for early introduction of a liberal access regime. The
Foreign Ministry was aware of the potential political costs
of delay but was largely limited to an advisory and hortatory
role. Chancellery officials agreed to look into the matter,
but had not previously been aware of the details of the case.
While the Interior Ministry said they would table a new
draft access regime at an experts' meeting scheduled for
February 20 in Luxembourg, but had nothing specific to say
about the possible contents, preferring to focus on
procedural/legal issues for the implementation of the
putative regime. End Summary.

Foreign and Interior Ministries
--------------


2. (C) Amb. O'Donnell met for 75 minutes at the Foreign
Ministry on February 18 with Foreign and Interior Ministry
officials to discuss developments at the January 13 meeting
of experts charged with developing a new access regime for
Holocaust records held by the ITS. Legal Affairs Asst.
Secretary Laeufer and Office Director Ziegler represented the

SIPDIS
MFA; National Minorities Division officer Willenberg and
attorney Buyel-Fromm attended for the Interior Ministry.
Laeufer noted that the German side had moved forward with its
proposal tabled on January 13 and that the most pressing
issue from his perspective was the question of what form and
shape such legal changes would have to take. Amb. O'Donnell
noted that the U.S. and others had been disappointed by the
German proposal, and hoped that a new proposal grounded in
the concept of "open access" would be forthcoming at the next
session. He also renewed the U.S. request for a digital copy
of the ITS records. O'Donnell also said the U.S. believed a
new access regime could be developed without amending the

Bonn Accords, which would entail a long ratification process.



3. (C) Willenberg agreed that copies of ITS holdings could
and should be provided to all 11 members of the ITS board.
However, he argued that these should be provided only after
ITS has completed digitizing all its records -- a process
expected to take another 18 months. This is, seemingly, a
step forward on the German side. However, in subsequent
conversations, Amb. O'Donnell and Emboff confirmed that, in
the German view, the copies must be handled in the same
manner as the original documents (i.e., with limited access
only for humanitarian purposes). Amb. O'Donnell suggested
that copying for the board members could proceed in parallel
with the ITS's own copying, rather than wait for the entire
process to finish.


4. (C) Willenberg also noted European Union privacy rules,
which he said the EU members of the ITS would have to apply
to the data and which, in his view should also be applied by
non-EU members of the board. Agreeing on a common data
protection plan should, he said, be a key element of the
February 20 experts group meeting. Willenberg promised that
a new draft access regime with detailed provisions on data
protection would be provided for discussion then. Willenberg
also raised concerns about liability, noting that the U.S.
and UK had both made clear that, as states, they could not
provide immunity to ITS. The Ministry thought that the best
way to proceed would be to establish a system in which
researchers assume the liability for their actions. Laeufer
raised some concern about how long it would take to make
legally-binding changes to the Bonn Accords, noting that
solving the liability issue would almost certainly require
legal action of some sort. He was more optimistic that
copying and changing the access regime could be accomplished
without legal action. At last with regard to copied records,
Amb. O'Donnell suggested that liability would apply only to
the country holding the copies; as to the original holdings,
he suggested exploring insurance options.


5. (C) U.S. Rep to the ITS Board Pattison then asked if
Germany believed amendments to the Bonn Accords were required
to come up with a liability regime, or whether this could be
decided by the ITS board. MFA's Laeufer suggested the
question was open, but Interior's Willenberg then offered a
lengthy and complex elaboration of how Interior views the
process of establishing a new access regime. Willenberg

argued that a legally binding change (requiring ratification
by at least some of the board member states) to the Bonn
Accords was required in order to give the ITS a research
function (in addition to its humanitarian purpose) and
perhaps for liability or other matters. Changes would also
be required to the agreement between the members states and
the ICRC on the administration of ITS -- these might not
require legal action, he suggested. Finally, the board
itself could approve the actual terms of the access regime
for researchers. Willenberg acknowledged the complexity of
this structure, but thought it could be perhaps abbreviated
by working on all three elements in parallel and perhaps even
implementing a new access regime on a provisional basis, if
that were legally possible. Laeufer reacted with some
consternation, saying that such a "top-down" approach would
take years and create political problems.

Chancellery (KA)
--------------


6. (C) O'Donnell met for 45 minutes with KA Division Director
for Interior an Justice matters Kuhne, Office Director for
Religious Affairs Tempel, and Americas' Desk officer Pellet.
After a discussion of the generally excellent state of
U.S.-German cooperation on Jewish- and Holocaust-related
issues, Amb. O'Donnell outlined the problems the U.S. was
having in obtaining copies of the ITS records and of setting
up an access regime for researchers. Kuhne admitted that he
had not followed the issue previously and was unaware of the
details. He promised to look into the matter with the
Interior Ministry and follow developments at the Luxembourg
experts' group meeting. He did not offer any specific views,
but said that there were times when the simple fact of KA
interest had an impact.


7. (C) On another issue, OD Tempel asked Amb. O'Donnell if he
had any information on a videoclip shown at a New York dinner
organized by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The clip,
according to Tempel and Pellet, inaccurately portrayed
Germany as facing a massive surge in neo-Nazi and
anti-Semitic activism. Amb. O'Donnell agreed to look into
the matter; he was not previously aware of the clip.


8. (C) Comment: In a subsequent meeting with Dr. Laeufer on
other issues, Laeufer expressed to Amb. O'Donnell his
personal frustration with the lack of a willingness by
Interior Ministry lawyers to come up with creative ways to
find a solution to opening the Archives and making copies for
member countries. He suggested that there would have to be
an approach from the American side to the Interior Minister
or political level to get more flexibility. (Embassy will
follow up with the Interior Minister's office.) Laeufer also
said that he wasn't worried about the liability issue, but
was more concerned about finding a way to reach agreement
with the U.S. on how the documents would b used after they
were copied and are in the hands of member countries.
Laeufer promised to again consider the U.S. proposal for
copying the digitized records that was put forward by the
U.S. delegation at the February working group meeting in the
Hague. End Comment.
TIMKEN JR