Between the Alps and a Hard Place Read Free Page A

told her before the war that he had deposited a lot of money in a Swiss bank. She didn’t know how much or in which bank, much less had she ever seen a passbook or an account number. Pitifully,
she recounted that after the war, she and her mother had gone from bank to bank, and that no bank had come up with any money. 6 What monsters , asked D’Amato, would oppose justice for a sweet old lady like Mrs. Beer? (And how shameful should someone note that D’Amato had proved nothing.) Shame too on the bank employees who refused to hand money to a stranger walking up to the window with a story about a dead depositor.
    Then came the threat, and it involved more money than the combined total of what families such as the Beers ever possessed. Edgar Bronfman testified that
    . . . the documents uncovered by your committee and by others working elsewhere demonstrate that during the Nazi era the Swiss were far from neutral. Their assistance to the Nazi war machine through the clandestine conversion of looted gold into Swiss francs enabled the Germans to buy fuel and other raw materials they needed to prolong the war. Some estimates in testimony before the U.S. Senate hearings following the war suggest the costs may have been staggering in the lives of American soldiers, Allied soldiers, Jews, and other civilians across the continent.
    Having transformed suggestions into facts and accusations into proof, Bronfman asserted: “I speak to you today on behalf of the Jewish people. With reverence, I also speak to you on behalf of the six million who cannot speak for themselves.” 7 Then, having taken onto himself all that power and moral authority, Bronfman took on the right to dispose of what he called the rightful patrimony of the victims of Nazism. D’Amato spoke of “hundreds of millions” of dollars, while Bronfman spoke of “billions.” The money, said Bronfman, would go to survivors of the Holocaust,
as well as to individuals and institutions, museums and writers who would keep alive the memory of the Holocaust. The survivors were few and dwindling, while the latter categories would become long-term political supporters of those who would provide their livelihoods with Swiss money.
    Note that at this point Bronfman and D’Amato intended the money to come from the Swiss government—that is, from Swiss taxpayers. Why should the Swiss people have paid any attention to these demands, much less felt the need to comply? Because behind the demands was the threatening insistence of the Clinton administration. The threat was first delivered by Ambassador Stuart Eizenstat, U.S. special envoy for property claims in Central and Eastern Europe, U.S. undersecretary of commerce, and a friend of President Clinton.
    Eizenstat reported to the Senate that his purpose was to achieve openness in reporting about unclaimed accounts in Swiss banks, to make sure that heirs got what was properly due them and that heirless assets were distributed to poor elderly Jews in Eastern Europe. Who could object? But Eizenstat also reported that his practical job was to add the authority of the U.S. government to the claims of Mr. Bronfman’s organization, through “government to government conversations and facilitation with international and local organizations.” 8 The practical meaning was that, until Bronfman et al. were happy with Switzerland, the U.S. government wouldn’t be happy either. D’Amato underlined this as he concluded Eizenstat’s testimony: “I have every confidence that we will have a full court press led by you on behalf of the Administration.” This full court press included U.S. Ambassador to Bern Madeleine Kunin’s countless interventions as well as a speech to the Swiss parliament by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

    Note that Ambassador Eizenstat’s formal job description—to promote “the nondiscriminatory, transparent, and just resolution of