AMBASSADOR'S FOLLOW-UP WITH ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH

C O N F I D E N T I A L ISTANBUL 000234 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/21/2017 TAGS: PHUM PGOV TU SUBJECT: AMBASSADOR'S FOLLOW-UP WITH ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH REF: A. ISTANBUL 0120 ¶B. ISTANBUL 0136 ¶C. ISTANBUL 0212 ¶D. ISTANBUL 0162 Classified By: Ambassador Ross Wilson for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) Summary: Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I reiterated Patriarchate grievances against the GOT to Ambassador during a March 16 meeting intended to follow-up recent USG discussions with the Patriarchate and GOT officials. His All Holiness expressed hope that progress would be made after this year's parliamentary elections but remained skeptical, questioning why the government had not done anything earlier when elections were not an obstacle. Ambassador reaffirmed USG support for the Patriarchate and his personal commitment to continue efforts to resolve these issues. End summary. ¶2. (C) Fresh off a trip to Vienna, where the Catholic Archbishop presented him with the Franz Koenig peace prize, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew reiterated the problems facing the Greek Orthodox community in Turkey. Reciting a list of familiar grievances against the GOT (e.g., inability to re-open Halki Seminary, lack of juridical personality, lack of recognition for the ecumenical title and numerous property disputes among others),Bartholomew said he feared the community would not survive very long with these problems. ¶3. (C) Bartholomew, for the first time, flagged as a priority the problem of foundation board elections. He stated that deaths, departures and resignations over a 15-year period had left gaps in the administrative boards of community foundations, making it difficult for local parishes to resolve problems associated with schools, hospitals and other properties. The Patriarch added that reforms instituted in 2004 permitted elections to take place but only with the permission of the Governor of Istanbul. One parish was able to hold elections as a result of the 2004 reforms but the Governor has denied all subsequent parish applications to hold elections. ¶4. (C) Expressing disappointment with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP),the Patriarch explained he had been optimistic when AKP came to power because he believed it was a party that had respect for religion. He lamented that his hopes for resolutions to the Patriarchate's problems had not borne fruit. Though he understood it would be difficult for the government to make decisions that could appear to be concessions during an election year, he questioned why nothing had been done years earlier when elections were not an issue. Still, Bartholomew remained hopeful that if the Prime Minister felt confident enough after elections, there might still be reason for optimism regarding the potential for positive changes. ¶5. (C) Referring to the state of minority affairs in the wake of the Hrant Dink assassination, Bartholomew told Ambassador the Armenian Patriarch for Istanbul and all of Turkey Mesrob II had told him that he fears for the security of the Armenian community, in particular school children. Echoing statements we've heard recently from our Turkish-Armenian contacts, the Ecumenical Patriarch stated that Mesrob had told him many within the community were thinking about leaving Turkey (ref A). Bartholomew said that he had not personally received threats. ¶6. (C) Ambassador assured the Patriarch that both he and Washington continue to work on resolving these issues. He noted he had several recent conversations with advisors to the Prime Minister regarding the plight of the Church and cited recent EUR DAS Bryza discussions on the re-opening of Halki Seminary with both the Patriarch (ref B) and with the Deputy Governor of Istanbul (ref C). ¶7. (C) Comment: The problem concerning foundation board elections stems from the fact that many parishes do not have sufficient members to nominate candidates to the boards from within their local communities. The 2004 reforms permitted candidates to be nominated from outside of the local community with the permission of the Governor. Though the Patriarch claims he has not personally received threats, Patriarchate staff informed us last month of threats directed against Greek Orthodox clergy (ref D). End comment. JONES