SPECIAL ENVOY OPPOSES GERMAN CHANGES TO SLAVE

C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 001136

SIPDIS

SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EUR/AGS AND EUR/OHI

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/06/2017
TAGS: GM PGOV PREL
SUBJECT: SPECIAL ENVOY OPPOSES GERMAN CHANGES TO SLAVE
LABOR FOUNDATION

REF: BERLIN 925

Classified By: Political M/C John Bauman for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (SBU) Summary: Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues, J.
Christian Kennedy, met May 21 with the leader of a Jewish
group in Berlin and parliamentary leaders of the CDU/CSU and
SPD parties to exchange views about the proposed German
government changes to the Board of Trustees of the German
slave labor foundation (Remembrance, Responsibility, and
Future Foundation) (reftel). The Foundation is transitioning
into a new phase in which it will no longer handle Nazi-era
slave labor payments, but will instead administer a Future
Fund dedicated to Holocaust remembrance, tolerance education,
and non-compensatory humanitarian projects. The German
government has floated a proposal in which it would have
greater control over the Foundation -- a proposal which the
U.S., other countries, and Jewish groups oppose. Kennedy
expressed U.S. opposition to this proposal, stressing that
the U.S. requires a single board with a substantial
international presence and role. End summary.


2. (C) The principal figures behind the push, according to
Deidre Berger, Managing Director of the American Jewish
Committee office in Berlin, are the group of German
businesses that provides half the Foundation's funding, Board
of Trustees Chairman Dieter Kastrup, and outgoing Foundation
Executive Director Michael Jansen. They envisage a two-board
structure instead of a unitary board. Under their plan all
substantive policy-making would be made in an all-German
Foundation Council. She added that these individuals have
been successful in convincing Dieter Wiefelspuetz, MdB, an
SPD Trustee, to work with them. Kennedy and Berger agreed
that the U.S. should indicate to the German government its
preference for the continuation of a single board with an
international character.


3. (C) Kennedy informed Wolfgang Bosbach, CDU/CSU deputy
parliamentary leader, of the U.S. position. Bosbach
indicated that a drive to lower administrative costs is the
main goal of efforts to revise the board structure. Bosbach
shares German industry's view that costs should be reduced,
but is also sympathetic to retaining a unitary board. He
would agree, in principle, to retaining a single board if the
number of members, travel costs, and meeting costs could all
be significantly reduced. Kennedy suggested that all member
countries should begin to pay their own travel costs, as the
U.S. does, instead of drawing on Foundation funds.
Acknowledging that it might prove difficult, Kennedy also
suggested that the German side propose to the five Eastern
European partner organizations currently on the board that
they rotate three seats among the five. Both Kennedy and
Bosbach agreed that the International Organization for
Migration no longer requires a seat on the board, since its
role as a disbursing agency for slave labor funds is now over.


4. (C) The SPD's Wiefelspuetz was less agreeable to the U.S.
view. He claimed that, since the work of the slave labor
foundation has come to an end, the board structure should be
revised to reflect the goals of the Future Fund, an entity
funded by German industry and taxpayers. He questioned the
need for a single board, said he does not wish a dispute with
the U.S. on this issue, and concluded by saying that the
final decision has not been made. Kennedy emphasized that
the U.S. could support certain cost-saving measures, but
would continue to insist on a single board, adding that
international participation is necessary because the work of
the Foundation takes place in many countries and because all
nations are viewed as responsible for the Foundation's
success.


5. (C) Kennedy informed the Embassy that following his
visit, he spoke telephonically with Georg Witschel, the MFA
Legal Adviser, Michael Jansen, Dieter Kastrup, and Private
Sector Representative Manfred Gentz. All told Kennedy that
they could &live with8 a single or unitary board. Gentz
qualified his statement, though, with the concern that the
current foreign board members are too strongly focused on
compensation and may not be able to move on to a
project-oriented way of doing business.


6. (SBU) Comment: Our contacts indicate that the German
government, in its desire to avoid confrontation with the
U.S. on this issue, would ultimately defer to a strongly-held
U.S. position. The June meeting of the Board of Trustees
offers further opportunities to raise U.S. concerns with
German officialdom, but also to impress German industry with
our views. End comment.

TIMKEN JR