JEWISH PROPERTY RESTITUTION PROCESS SLOW TO

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RIGA 000468 SIPDIS STATE FOR EUR/OHI (J BECKER) E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/06/2018 TAGS: PHUM PREL SOCI LG SUBJECT: JEWISH PROPERTY RESTITUTION PROCESS SLOW TO RE-START REF: 07 RIGA 00507 Classified By: Ambassador Charles W. Larson for reasons 1.4 (b) & (d) ¶1. (C) Summary: The GOL says that it intends to move forward on Jewish claims to pre-holocaust communal property, but has sent mixed signals about chances for rapid action. GOL also advised against a unified effort from foreign embassies to push for resolution. Both the Ambassador and American representatives of the Jewish community have signaled the importance of progress on the issue in meetings with GOL, but signs of movement are still scant and that is unlikely to change any time soon. End Summary. ¶2. (U) Background: In 2006, an umbrella organization of Jewish groups, the Council of Latvian Jewish Communities (CLJC),reached an agreement with the GOL to settle outstanding restitution claims for both communal and heirless properties. However, when the negotiated agreement was put to an initial vote, the majority of representatives in the Saeima abstained, which killed the measure rather than allowing further debate (See Reftel). The CLJC decided that it had exhausted all possible local approaches to the issue, and signed an agreement with the World Jewish Restitution Organization (WRJO) to conduct future negotiations on behalf of the Latvian Jewish community. The WRJO is now pushing for the re-formation of the task force that developed the initial agreement. -------------- Recent Activity -------------- ¶3. (C) On July 3, the Ambassador, DCM, and Pol/Econ Chief, along with the UK Ambassador to Latvia, Richard Moon, met with Ambassador Gints Jegermanis, the MFA lead on holocaust legacy issues, and Martins Lazdovskis, State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice. Jegermanis affirmed that the GOL will again need to form a task force to negotiate possible solutions. However, he said the formation of the task force has been stalled by debates over which GOL institution should serve as the lead, with the Prime Minister's office and the Ministry of Justice as the primary candidates. While he explained that numerous difficulties have prevented the decision, Jegermanis said that the issue would be raised again the following week, but was unwilling to promise that the leadership of the task force would be determined with certainty in that time frame. Lazdovskis indicated that the previous task force had resolved the legal issues at hand, and that the remaining issues were not legal but political, and therefore best handled by the PM, not Justice. He said the Justice Minister had been firm with the PM on this point. ¶4. (C) Jegermanis advised against forming a large coalition to press for movement on the issue and encouraged the Ambassadors to take up the issue directly with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. To follow up, the UK and U.S. Ambassadors wrote a joint letter to the MFA on July 8, requesting prompt action to form the promised commission. No response has yet been received. ¶5. (C) Later in July, representatives of the WRJO came to Riga. Post arranged meetings with both the MFA and the President's foreign policy adviser. WRJO reports a cordial meeting with the President's office, but no promises of action. The MFA, however, told WRJO that Justice should indeed lead the new task force. WRJO representatives emerged from the meeting with the impression that the Prime Minister had instructed Justice to form the task force and that they could be expected to act quickly to do so. Subsequent discussions with MFA indicate that this reflects an ideal "scenario," but does not reflect a course of action decided with any finality. In early August, MFA representatives told us that FM Riekstins would be pushing in the cabinet for the task force to be formed, and that no reply to the letter from the U.S. and UK Ambassadors would be sent until that occurred. We responded that we had no intention of simply waiting idly until Latvian politicans determined they were willing to move forward. ¶6. (C) Comment: Post continues to encourage the GOL to re-form the task force and work with WRJO to bring about a mutually agreeable solution. While the GOL continues to express a desire to resolve the issue, we do not see any signs of imminent movement. The Justice Ministry claims this is a political issue best handled by the Prime Minister, while the Prime Minister (and the MFA) argue that it is a legal issue, best handled by Justice. In fact, this is clearly a political issue at this point, and one that will not gain Latvian politicians much goodwill if they solve it. RIGA 00000468 002 OF 002 The continued delays in the simple task of forming a task force to discuss what the previous task force had agreed on are a clear indicator of the lack of political will to move this process forward. Given the current tensions in the political landscape and the level of economic hardship in the country, it is hard to foresee substantial progress on property restitution in the near future. Nevertheless, continued engagement by U.S. officials with Latvian counterparts on this issue will be essential in at least keeping it on the radar. LARSON