Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "135839660",
    "label": "Wallenberg, Raoul (2 of 3)",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/135839660"
}

{
    "id": "135839660",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/135839660",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Wallenberg, Raoul (2 of 3)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/135839660",
    "identifierLocal": "485",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)",
        "John Roberts' Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-056-020-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-056-020-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-056-020-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/135839660",
    "naId": 135839660,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1986-12-31",
        "year": 1986
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1982-01-01",
        "year": 1982
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/6908381/40-485-6908381-056-020-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "998e9ed1163db78a",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Roberts, John G.: Files\nFolder Title: Wallenberg, Raoul\n(2 of 3)\nBox: 56\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\nUnited States Department of State\nWashington, D.C. 20520\nJanuary 13, 1984\nMr. John G. Roberts\nAssociate Counsel to the President\nThe White House\nDear Mr. Roberts:\nI am pleased to have had the opportunity to study\nProfessor Wolff's letter to the President concerning Raoul\nWallenberg. It seems to me that there are three subjects\nraised by the letter. The first involves the pertinence\nof 22 USC 1732; the second, whether the enactment of Public\nLaw 97-54 would give the United States a basis under\ninternational law to extend diplomatic protection to Mr.\nWallenberg; the third, what steps the United States has\ntaken under Section 2 of that law.\nSection 1732 of Title 22 of the United States Code\nrepresents a codification of section 3 of the Act of July 27,\n1868, 15 Stat. 224. The Act, which contains three sections,\nis entitled \"An Act concerning the Rights of American\nCitizens in foreign States\". Section 1 establishes the\nright of expatriation. Section 2 provides that naturalized\ncitizens in foreign countries shall be entitled to the same\nprotection as native born citizens. Section 3, which has\nbeen codified as 22 USC 1732, appears to have been intended\nto insure that naturalized and native born citizens receive\nequal protection when imprisoned abroad. Although section\n1732 has been the law of the United States for more than a\ncentury, it has seldom been invoked. The President has not\nmade regular reports under the section. Indeed, one of the\nfew instances of its invocation was to buttress several of\nthe Executive orders issued by President Carter under the\nInternational Emergency Economic Powers Act during the\nIranian hostage crisis.\nIn any event, inasmuch as the United States did not have\nZ\nhonorary citizens in 1868, section 1732 is not pertinent\nto the case of Raoul Wallenberg.\nThe question of whether enactment of Public Law 97-54,\n95 Stat. 971, conferring honorary citizenship on Wallenberg\nwould afford a basis under international law for the United\nStates to seek his diplomatic protection was addressed in\n- 2 -\nhearings held by the Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees,\nand International Law of the House Committee on the Judiciary\non June 23, 1981. Acting Assistant Secretary of State for\nEuropean Affairs H. Allen Holmes, who testified on behalf\nof the Department of State, noted that the granting of\nhonorary American citizenship to Wallenberg would not confer\non the United States any new international legal right to\nconfront the Soviets on their incarceration of Wallenberg.\nHe noted that under international law conferral of honarary\ncitizenship does not entitle an individual to diplomatic\nprotection from the country honoring him. Mr. Holmes cited\nthe Nottebohm case (Liechtenstein V. Guatemala), [1955]\nI.C.J. Rep. 4, as authority for the proposition that under\ninternational law the Swedish Government would retain the\nright to demand that the Soviet Union account to it for the\ntreatment of Wallenberg and that no such right would enure\nto the United States. In briefs filed in a number of cases\nbefore the United States-Iran Claims Tribunal within the\nlast year the United States has urged that the Tribunal\nfollow the underlying rationale of the Nottebohm case.\nSince President Reagan approved Public Law 97-54 on\nOctober 5, 1981, the Department of State has raised the\nmatter with representatives of the Soviet Union on a number\nof occasions. Pursuant to section 2 of that law the Depart-\nment of State has also raised the Wallenberg case at the\nConference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and before\nthe United Nations Human Rights Commission. It intends to\ncontinue to raise the matter whenever it considers that such\nan initiative would be useful.\nI hope that the information set out above will assist\nyou in responding to Professor Wolff's letter to the\nPresident. If you would like additional information, I\nwould be glad to have Robert Dalton, one of our lawyers who\nis familiar with the Wallenberg case, give you an oral\nbriefing.\nSincerely,\nDaniel M.Mistoren\nDaniel W. McGovern\nDeputy Legal Adviser\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 25, 1984\nMEMORANDUM FOR FRED F. FIELDING\nFROM:\nJOHN G. ROBERTS\nord\nSUBJECT:\nRaoul Wallenberg and the\n\"Hostage Act\"\nMorris H. Wolff, a Professor at the Delaware Law School of\nWidener University, has written the President concerning\nRaoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat whose courageous\nefforts saved many Hungarian Jews during World War II. Many\nbelieve that Wallenberg is still alive, held captive in a\nSoviet prison. Wolff, who states that he has been retained\nby the Wallenberg family to help secure Raoul's release,\nsuggests that the President take action to that end under\n22 U.S.C. § 1732. This provision directs the President to\ndemand and take steps to secure the release of American\ncitizens unjustly imprisoned abroad. The Act provides:\nWhenever it is made known to the President that\nany citizen of the United States has been unjustly\ndeprived of his liberty by or under the authority\nof any foreign government, it shall be the duty of\nthe President forthwith to demand of that government\nthe reasons of such imprisonment; and if it appears\nto be wrongful and in violation of the rights of\nAmerican citizenship, the President shall forthwith\ndemand the release of such citizen, and if the release\nso demanded is unreasonably delayed or refused, the\nPresident shall use such means, not amounting to acts\nof war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain\nor effectuate the release; and all the facts and\nproceedings relative thereto shall as soon as\npracticable be communicated by the President to\nCongress.\nOn October 5, 1981, President Reagan signed a law conferring\nhonorary U.S. citizenship on Wallenberg (an honor Wallenberg\nshares only with Winston Churchill). Pub. L. No. 97-54,\n95 Stat. 971. Wolff now contends that Wallenberg, as a\ncitizen, is entitled to action under 22 U.S.C. § 1732.\n- 2 -\nThis statute was enacted in 1868, in response to the\npractice of several European countries of refusing to re-\ncognize the citizenship of naturalized Americans traveling\nabroad, repatriating them against their will. The statute\nwas largely dormant until the Iranian hostage crisis, when\nit suddenly surfaced as the \"Hostage Act,\" a convenient if\ninaccurate sobriquet coined by the government lawyers\nseeking to rely upon the law as support for action taken to\nsecure the release of the hostages. See Dames & Moore V.\nRegan, 453 U.S. 654 (1981). The Supreme Court ruled that\nthe \"Hostage Act\" did not by itself provide authority for\nthe suspension of private claims against Iran, although it\nwas pertinent in assessing, under Justice Jackson's famous\ncriteria in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. V. Sawyer, 343 U.S.\n579, 637-38 (1952) (concurring opinion), whether Congress may\nbe considered to have acquiesced in such an exercise of\nexecutive authority. What little case law exists indicates\nthat exercise of authority under 22 U.S.C. § 1732 is\ncommitted to the discretion of the Chief Executive (despite\nthe \"shall\" language) and is not subject to mandamus. See\nWorthy V. Herder, 270 F. 2d 905 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied,\n361 U.S. 918 (1959) Redpath V. Kissinger, 415 F. Supp. 566\n(D.C. Tex.), aff'd, 545 F.2d 167 (5 Cir. 1976) (American held\nprisoner in Mexican jail).\nThe President has frequently demanded an accounting con-\ncerning Wallenberg from the Soviets. See, e.g., 19 Weekly\nCompilation of Presidential Documents 177 (Feb. 2, 1983)\nid. 533 (April 11, 1983). While the President has never\nasserted a belief that Wallenberg is still alive, he has\nrecognized the possibility. At the Holocaust ceremony at\nthe White House on April 20, 1982, the President said of\nWallenberg:\nBut the one man who I think must be remembered\nabove all was Raoul Wallenberg. One such man, at\nincredible risk, saved tens of thousands. And on\nthis day of remembrance let us especially recall\nthis man, and if he's alive, as some suggest, let\nhis captors know they' be forgotten long before\nRaoul Wallenberg is forgotten.\nHowever unenforceable in court and however committed to\nunreviewable discretion, 22 U.S.C. § 1732 does, by its\nterms, impose a duty on the President. The nature of the\nduty is admittedly very vague. The duty to demand the\nrelease of a citizen and to take action to secure his\nrelease is triggered if he is being held by the foreign\npower \"in violation of the rights of American citizenship,\"\na peculiarly difficult concept. If Wallenberg is alive and\n- 3 -\nimprisoned in the Soviet Union, is his imprisonment \"in\nviolation of the rights of American citizenship?\" The\nSupreme Court doubted that the imprisonment of the Iranian\nhostages satisfied this prerequisite for action under\n22 U.S.C. § 1732, see Dames & Moore V. Regan, supra, and the\nSoviets, if they are holding Wallenberg, are probably not\ndoing so because they fail to recognize his newly-conferred\nAmerican citizenship.\nOf course, we can contend that we have already done what the\nstatute envisions. The President has demanded an accounting\nfrom the Soviets, and has done so repeatedly. In this\nregard it is also worth noting that the law conferring\nhonorary citizenship on Wallenberg itself requested the\nPresident \"to take all possible steps to ascertain from the\nSoviet Union the whereabouts of Raoul Wallenberg and to\nsecure his return to freedom.\"\nI called Dan McGovern, Deputy Legal Adviser at State, to\nobtain his views on Wolff's request. McGovern asked for a\ncopy of Wolff's incoming, which I provided. McGovern has\nnow responded, rather facilely dismissing Wolff's 22 U.S.C.\n§ 1732 theory on the ground that since there were no\nhonorary citizens when that statute was passed, it cannot\napply to honorary citizens. McGovern presumably also thinks\nthat the Commerce Clause does not apply to air travel, that\nthe First Amendment is irrelevant with respect to television\nand radio, and that the President has no authority to send\nambassadors to countries that did not exist in 1787. On a\nmore substantive ground, McGovern noted that during hearings\non Public Law 97-54 the State Department took the position\nthat the law would not give the United States any new rights\nunder international law with respect to Wallenberg.\nI recommend a reply to Wolff over your signature,\nessentially dodging the question of the applicability of\n22 U.S.C § 1732. Not only am I not convinced that the\nstatute does not apply to Wallenberg, but I am\ninstitutionally disposed against adopting a limited reading\nof a statute conferring power on the President. We can\nprovide Wolff with a copy of the State and Justice\ntestimony at the hearings on Public Law 97-54, note that the\nlaw was intended to be symbolic, and stress all that has\nbeen done by the President to promote the cause of\nWallenberg. We can also note that we have referred his\nletter to the State Department, which has raised the\nWallenberg issue in the past and will continue to do so.\n- 4 -\nA draft reply is attached. I have also attached a cover\nmemorandum transmitting a copy of the reply to Faith\nWhittlesey. Wolff wrote Whittlesey asking for her\nassistance in bringing the matter to the appropriate office,\nand Whittlesey referred it to us. Wolff has received a\ntelephonic interim reply from Whittlesey's office, advising\nhim that his letter was being considered.\nAttachment\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 25, 1984\nMEMORANDUM FOR FAITH R. WHITTLESEY\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nFOR PUBLIC LIAISON\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING\nOrig. signed by\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nCorrespondence from Professor Wolff\nConcerning Raoul Wallenberg\nYou asked for our guidance concerning a response to a letter\nto the President from Professor Morris H. Wolff of the\nDelaware Law School. Professor Wolff's letter discussed the\ncase of Raoul Wallenberg, and raised questions concerning\nthe applicability of a particular statute to Wallenberg.\nAfter consulting with the Department of State, we prepared\nand sent the attached reply.\nAttachment\nFFF: JGR:aea 1/25/84\ncc: FFFielding/JGRoberts/Subj/Chron\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 25, 1984\nMEMORANDUM FOR DANIEL W. MCGOVERN\nDEPUTY LEGAL ADVISER\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE\nFROM:\nFRED F. FIELDING Crig. signed by FF\nCOUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT\nSUBJECT:\nCorrespondence from Professor Wolff\nConcerning Raoul Wallenberg\nAs you know, Professor Wolff of Delaware Law School has\nwritten the President concerning Raoul Wallenberg. Attached\nfor your information is a copy of my reply to Professor\nWolff. You will notice that I have advised Professor Wolff\nthat I would refer his correspondence to the State\nDepartment for appropriate review and consideration.\nAttachment\nFFF; JGR:aea 1/25/84\nCC: FFFielding/JGRoberts/Subj/Chron\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 25, 1984\nDear Professor Wolff:\nThis is written in response to your letter to the President\nconcerning Raoul Wallenberg. In that letter you referred to\nPublic Law 97-54, 95 Stat. 971, signed on October 5, 1981 by\nthe President, which conferred honorary citizenship on\nWallenberg. You suggested that now that Wallenberg was an\nhonorary citizen, the President could take action under\n22 U.S.C. § 1732 to secure his release.\nAt the hearings on the bill to confer honorary citizenship\non Wallenberg, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Allen\nHolmes testified that the bill:\nwould serve to underscore the seriousness with\nwhich the American Government and people view\nSoviet behavior in the Wallenberg case. Conferral\nof honorary U.S. citizenship on Wallenberg would\nalso serve to reaffirm to the Government of Sweden\nthat the United States firmly supports the quest\nto resolve Wallenberg's fate.\nAssistant Attorney General Theodore Olson testified that the\nbill \"is essentially symbolic in nature.\" The testimony at\nthe hearings suggests that the bill was not intended to\naffect legal rights but rather to serve the important\npurpose of reaffirming our national commitment not only to\nthe values epitomized by Wallenberg but to a clarification\nof his fate as well. I have enclosed for your information a\ncopy of the hearings.\nQuite apart from any question of the applicability of\n22 U.S.C. § 1732, section 2 of Public Law 97-54 requests the\nPresident \"to take all possible steps to ascertain from the\nSoviet Union the whereabouts of Raoul Wallenberg and to\nsecure his return to freedom.\" Not only the State\nDepartment but the President personally have spared no\neffort to obtain information about Wallenberg and, if he is\nalive, secure his release. The President has repeatedly\nreferred to Wallenberg and demanded an accounting of his\nfate from the Soviets. To cite just a few instances, on\nFebruary 2, 1983, the President remarked that if the Soviets\ntruly want better relations with the West \"they could give\nus an accounting of one of mankind's true heroes, Raoul\nWallenberg.\" On April 11, 1983, the President again stated:\n\"I would affirm, as President of the United States and, if\n- 2 -\nyou would permit me, in the names of the survivors [of the\nHolocaust], that if those who took him from Budapest would\nwin our trust, let them start by giving us an accounting of\nRaoul Wallenberg.\"\nThe Department of State has raised the matter with\nrepresentatives of the Soviet Union on several occasions,\nincluding at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in\nEurope and before the United Nations Human Rights\nCommission. That Department will continue to raise the\nWallenberg issue whenever such an initiative would be\nuseful. I have taken the liberty of referring your\ncorrespondence to the State Department for their appropriate\nreview and consideration.\nThis Administration shares your concern for Wallenberg and\nyour commitment not only to help him if he is alive but to\npreserve his memory whatever his fate. As the President\nnoted in 1982, on the Day of Remembrance:\nBut the one man who I think must be remembered\nabove all was Raoul Wallenberg. One such man, at\nincredible risk, saved tens of thousands. And on\nthis day of remembrance let us especially recall\nthis man, and if he's alive, as some suggest, let\nhis captors know they'll be forgotten long before\nRaoul Wallenberg is forgotten.\nThank you for sharing your views on this important question\nwith us.\nWith best wishes,\nSincerely,\nOnly. simed BY IFF\nFred F. Fielding\nCounsel to the President\nProfessor Morris H. Wolff\nThe Delaware Law School\nWidener University\nPost Office Box 7474\nConcord Pike\nWilmington, Delaware 19803\nEnclosure\nFFF:JGR:aea 1/25/84\nbcc: FFFielding/JGRoberts/Subj/Chron\nWHITE HOUSE\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\nhas\nO OUTGOING\nprior correop.)\nH INTERNAL\nI INCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nMorris H. wolff\nName of Correspondent:\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject: Writes President a king Per him to release\nRaoul Wallenberg,from the Soriet Union\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency\n(Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nCULTOLL\nORIGINATOR 83,12,06\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nWAT/8\nD 83/12/06\n583,12,16\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\n-\nReferral Note:\n/ /\n/\n/\n-\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nI\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA Appropriate Action\nI - Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA Answered\nC Completed\nC - Comment/Recommendation\nR - Direct Reply w/Copy\nB - - Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD - Draft Response\nS - For Signature\nF Furnish Fact Sheet\nX - Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode = \"A\"\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments: See ID 188754CU\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\n188754\nag\nID #\nWHITE HOUSE\nC0165\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\no . OUTGOING\nH INTERNAL\nI . INCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nmarris H. Woulf\nName of Correspondent:\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject: Request to discuss with President in atcff 3)\nActions to has takenste implement law which Ling CA secure\nreleasent Raoul (nu walff has been\nRetained Lg Wellenberg family as then legal connect)\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency\n(Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nAC/RAWL\nORIGINATOR 83/12/02\nRAN C 83112102\nReferral Note:\ncu Fulling\nAS\n83112103\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nCu Holl\nA 83,12,06\n/\n/\nReferral Note: Dg\nCuAT 18\nD 83,12,06\n5831/2116\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA Appropriate Action\nI - Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA Answered\nC Completed\nC Comment/Recommendation\nR - Direct Reply w/Copy\nB - Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD Draft Response\nS For Signature\nF . Furnish Fact Sheet\nX Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode = \"A\"\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments: SCUID 188754 all\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\nDELAWAR\nTHE\nSCHOOL\n18875\nTHE DELAWARE LAW SCHOOL\nWIDENER UNIVERSITY\nP.O. BOX 7474 CONCORD PIKE\nstate\nWILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19803\n(302) 478-5280\nNovember 7, 1983\nPresident Ronald Reagan\nRECEIVED IN SCHEDULING\nThe White House\nOFFICE 11-30-83\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue\nWashington, DC 20004\nDear Mr. President:\nOn October 5, 1981, you took the iniative to sign a law\ngranting honorary citizenship to Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish\ndiplomat whose heroic and humanitarian efforts in Budapest,\nHungary during World War II were responsible for the rescue and\nprotection from death of approximately 100, Hungarian Jews.\nAt the time of the signing, at a ceremony at the White House, you\nexpressed your hopes and prayer that this new law would help in\nthe effort to achieve the release of Raoul Wallenberg. You\nfurther expressed the hope that someday diplomat Wallenberg would\nhave the opportunity to leave the Soviet Union and sit \"under the\nshade of the tree planted in his honor at Yad Vashem in Israel.'\nYour signing the law followed the joint action of the House of\nRepresentatives and the Senate in voting to approve a resolution\ngranting citizenship to Wallenberg.\nMany people throughout the United States and the world share\nthe deep interest which you have in achieving freedom from Soviet\nimprisonment for this great hero. It would appear to be a good\ntime now for new action to be taken. Under Title 22, United\nStates Code 1732, the President has the power to take action to\nsecure the release of \"any citizen of the United States\" who \"has\nbeen unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority\nof any foreign government.\" The statute states that:\n\"It shall be the duty of the President forthwith to\ndemand of that government the reasons of such imprison-\nment; and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation\nof the rights of American citizenship, the President\nshall forthwith demand the release of such citizen, and\nif the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or\nrefused, the President shall use such means, not\namounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary and\nproper to obtain of effectuate the release.\"\nPresident Reagan\nNovember 7, 1983\nPage Two\nThis law gives you the power to seek the release of\nWallenberg. Wallenberg today enjoys dual nationality (Sweden\nand United States). The law makes no distinction between\nhonorary and other citizens, and absent this distinction it\nwould apply to the needs and rights of Raoul Wallenberg.\nI would like to have an opportunity to discuss with you or\na member of your staff, in advance, the actions which you might\ntake to implement this law on behalf of Raoul Wallenberg. His\nfamily has retained me as their legal counsel to take\nappropriate steps to help to achieve their brother's release.\nI was pleased to discover this law as part of your presidential\npowers. Will you please let me know when I might visit with\nyou to discuss the steps which could be taken to accomplish\nthis goal.\nInterested people throughout the United States and the\nworld will welcome any intiative you might take under this law\nto obtain our shared objective.\nI am enclosing a transcript of a recent radio interview, in\nwhich I discuss my representation of Raoul Wallenberg and steps\nwhich might be taken to secure his release. Nothing at this\npoint in time could be better than to have your strong and\nexplicit support.\nVery truly yours,\nmorris H.Wolf\nMorris H. Wolff\nProfessor of Law\ncrh/474x\nEnclosure\nRADIO PROGRAM INTERVIEW\nof Professor Morris H. Wolff\nSeptember 14, 1983\nRadio Station WKEN\nWednesday afternoon, Bill Satterfield with you. This\nafternoon we're going to be talking about a Swedish Diplomat,\ntaken captive by the Soviet Union at the end of the Second\nWorld War in January of 1945 in Hungary. It's a very\ninteresting topic and it's getting more publicity and if during\nthe course of our conversation you have questions about this\nman and about what's going on in the effort today to free him\nor at least find out if he's dead or alive, give us a call at\n674-1234, our phone lines will be open throughout the show.\nOur guest today is Morris Wolff, Professor of Law at The\nDelaware Law School of Widener University. He is involved in\nthe matter of Raoul Wallenberg. He has been asked by members\nof the Wallenberg family to file a court suit. We are going to\nbe talking about that and about Wallenberg himself. Professor\nWolff, we welcome you to Dover\nW. It's a pleasure to be with you.\nS. You are associated with the Delaware Law School of Widener\nUniversity, you are a Professor What is your involvement\nwith Raoul Wallenberg? And then we'll find out a little\nbit about Wallenberg and what this matter is all about.\nW. Early this summer I was contacted by Professor Anthony\nD'Amato from Northwestern Law School. He had been con-\ntacted by the family of Raoul Wallenberg with regard to\ntheir interest in securing the release of Wallenberg.\nTogether with Professor D'Amato, we considered the pos-\nsibility of filing a law suit against the Soviet Union to\nseek his release. In my position as a Professor of\nInternational Law at The Delaware Law School of Widener\nUniversity, I also have a great deal of help from my\nstudents. Together with the research that my students have\ndone and the interest of the family, we're planning to pro-\nsecute this matter as a law suit against the Soviet Union\nto secure the release of Wallenberg and to seek civil\ndamages as well.\nS. Before we go into the specifics of the law suit, who is\nRaoul Wallenberg and what is his story?\nW. Raoul Wallenberg was a member of a well-to-do Swedish\nfamily. In 1945, he was abducted from his position as a\nSwedish Diplomat in the Legation at Budapest, Hungary. He\ngot to that post through the request of the U. S. Govern-\nment. In 1944, the War Refugee Board began to see that a\ngreat deal of needless suffering was occurring in Europe\nwith regard to the extermination of Jews and other minority\ngroups. They sought to use personnel from neutral count-\nries, such as Sweden, to go and observe the extermination\nefforts. Wallenberg was selected by the Swedish govern-\nment after an interview with Herschel Johnson, our\nUnited States Ambassador to Sweden. In other words,\nit was our U. S. Government that initiated the pro-\ngram. Wallenberg was chosen. He went to Budapest,\nsimply to observe what was happening. He did more than his\nassignment. His assignment was merely to observe and report\nback. He began to create ingenious ways of saving many\nmembers of the Jewish population. This included issuing\nSwedish passports, which then the Jewish people were able\nto use to get out of Hungary. It included his going on the\ncattle cars where they had been put for transport to concen-\ntration camps and getting them off by claiming these people\nwere Swedish citizens. He was a human being, a humanitarian\na private citizen in Sweden, a businessman who, in effect,\nwas drafted by the Swedish Government to become a diplomat\nto go and do this mission.\nS. Was what he was doing in Hungary totally within Interna-\ntional Law as far as the capabilities of a diplomat, or was\nhe sort of going beyond what the normal diplomatic matters\nare?\nW. Well, what he was doing was very innovative. Diplomats, by\nnature, tend to be more conservative in carrying out the\ninstructions of their country. What happened here, was\nthat Wallenberg, when he saw that Eichmann was using\nBudapest as one of the final chapters of the \"Final\nSolution,' as part of an effort to make Europe free of the\nJewish population. Some may say he overreacted and he\nbegan to issue passports. Now, diplomats don't normally go\nto their basement, print up passports, and give them out to\ncivilian populations. Technically, one might say that is a\nviolation of International Law and that diplomats could be\nexpelled from the country of location if they did that.\nBut, in this case, all bets were off. It was war time; it\nwas slaughter time; and Wallenberg, in the larger humani-\ntarian context of international human rights, behaved quite\nproperly under International Law.\nS. So, from his arrival in Budapest in 1944, until his capture\nin January 1945, he was involved in these activities.\nW. That's right. Much of it self-created; but everybody knew\nwhat he was doing. By everybody, I mean the Swedish govern-\nment knew what he was doing, the U. S. government knew what\nhe was doing and they gave him high marks for his behavior.\n2\nS. If my history serves me right, the Soviets were allies of\nAmerica in 1945, in January. Why then would the Soviets\nhave taken Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish Diplomat, into\ncustody?\nW. There are several explanations offered. John Bierman, in\nhis book called \"The Righteous Gentile,\" which is a story\nof Wallenberg's work and Lenore Lester in her book, \"Wallen-\nberg, The Man in the Iron Mask,\" have a number of theories\nas to why the Russians found it necessary to take Wallen-\nberg into custody. First, they had their own game plan\ncoming into Hungary. Their plan was not merely to over-\ncome the Hungarian government, but was to begin the Iron\nCurtain strategy of clearing Europe, or as much of Europe\nas possible, for Russian control. They had already\naccomplished this in Poland. Hungary was part of the next\nstage. They wanted Wallenberg out of there. Wallenberg\nhad ideas of helping Hungary remain independent. The\nRussians didn't need any observers of foreign element to\nbe there while they were going to do their project.\nS. So he was trouble for the Russians.\nW. He represented trouble. He was perceived as trouble and\nalso the Russians thought whoever should be swept into the\nnet as, those who opposed the Russian effort, should be\nremoved from the scene. Apparently, Wallenberg was removed\nin this way. An anecdote, in which your listeners may\nbe interested, Wallenberg was abducted when he went from\nBudapest to a small town called Debrecen. He was going\nthere, he thought, to discuss ways in which the city of\nBudapest could be rehabilitated and the population put back\nto work. That was a rather naive and innocent assumption.\nThe Russians took him then into what they call \"protective\ncustody.\" They took him by train through Rumania, to Moscow\nwhere he ended up in Lubianka prison. The effort to save\nthe Jews was only part of Wallenberg's interest. He\nhad an interest beyond that to help Budapest get back on its\nfeet.\nS. We're talking about Raoul Wallenberg. Our guest is\nMorris Wolff, Professor of International Law at The\nDelaware Law School of Widener University -- 674-1234\nis our telephone number if you have questions about our\ntopic for the day. So, in 1945, Wallenberg goes out to\nthe small town and is taken into protective custody by the\nSoviets and then is transported to Moscow in Lubianka\nPrison. In 1957, twelve years later, the Russians finally\nadmitted he was a prisoner there. Right?\n3\nW. That's correct. And it's interesting to note that the\nperson who wrote that letter of admission was none other\nthan Andrei Gromyko, who now is one of the top three persons\nin the Russian government. Gromyko, in his letter, said\nthat an investigation of the records in the prisons revealed\nthat a man named Wallenberg had been in custody from 1945\nthrough 1947, then alleged in the letter that he had died of\na heart attack. Well, that was hard to believe even at that\ntime because Wallenberg would have been only 36 at the time\nof his alleged heart attack, was in excellent health when\nlast seen in Hungary, and the letter was disbelieved. Pri-\nsoners later coming out of Soviet prisons l'ent credibility\nto the fact that the letter was false, because they had\nsighted Wallenberg. They had spoken to him either directly\nor through the tapping system, which is installed in Russian\nprisons by the prisoners themselves, where they tap on walls\nor the pipes to make communication in their own language.\nSo, the original letter of Vischinsky in '47, saying that\nWallenberg had never been seen in Russia, and the sub-\nsequent letter of Gromyko in '57 saying that he had been, in\nfact, in custody but had died in custody are both rejected\nby most historians as being false.\nS. Why then is there interest in the man? For you it's an\nattorney-client relationship as you have been requested by\nthe family to file the lawsuit. But for a lot of people\nthere are committees to Free Raoul Wallenberg Committees,\nto Find Raoul Wallenberg and all this other sort of thing.\nWhat is the motivating force for these people who are\ninvolved with this committe type of work?\nW. Well, there are two bases. First of all, I consider it an\nhonor to be retained by the family to represent Wallenberg,\nI consider it a high honor. The family is providing the\nexpenses so that we can file the suit and litigate the\nmatter. It is the International Law aspect which is of\ninterest to me and also the humanitarian aspect. Number\none, I want to try to develop new International Law if we\ncan, that is to have a U.S. Federal Court find that the\nSoviet Union is subject to our jurisdiction in this\nlitigation. There are two laws which help us. The Alien\nTort Statute, which is a Federal Statute in the United\nStates which says that anyone who violates the Law of\nNations will be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.\nFederal Courts. The recent case, Filartiga, in which\nofficials in Paraguay tortured a young 16 year old boy\nand killed him. Later the Chief of Police, who had\nbeen responsible for that torture, came to New York City.\nHe was there arrested and the U.S. Courts took jurisdic-\ntion. He came to New York City peacefully, not knowing that\nhe would be arrested. It is interesting to note that the\nU.S. Courts have begun to expand their sense of jurisdiction\n4\nover these matters of violation of human rights. I want to\nsee the U.S. Courts expand that jurisdiction to include a\nscrutiny of the kidnapping and abduction of this inter-\nnational diplomat. To answer the second part of your ques-\ntion, other people, including myself as well, are inter-\nested in the humanitarian aspect. Here was a man, living\ncomfortably in Sweden, who took this courageous and humani-\ntarian step to save hundreds of thousands of people whom he\nnever knew. History should balance the story of World War\nII. That while there were stories of great evil, the evil\nof Adolph Eichmann and his methodical Final Solution; the\nevil of Adolph Hitler and his efforts to annihilate certain\npopulations. While there are these stories of terror and\nevil, history needs to be balanced by these stories of\ngreatness and individual courage. Not enough is known about\nRaoul Wallenberg. Also, I harbor the great hope that\nWallenberg is still alive. He is 71 years old today. Other\npersons have been buried alive in the Gulag prison system\nand have emerged, even as old as 71. If there is the\nslightest chance that he is still alive, and if there are\npeople in your listening audience who have any information\nabout the case, or know about anyone who has information, I\nwould welcome it at my location at The Delaware Law School,\nBox 7474, Wilmington Delaware, where I work as a Professor\nof International Law. I want to gather information, I want\nto file the law suit, I want all the help I can get and my\ngreatest moment would be one day bringing this man home.\nS. Is there any evidence, Mr. Wolff, that Raoul Wallenberg is\nalive?\nW. Well, there are conflicting reports. We have reports as\nrecently as 1981 that he is still alive, that he is still\na prisoner in the prison system. And that's just two years\nago. And I think that if someone as evil as Rudolph Hess\ncan still be alive in Spandau Prison at 95, then maybe\nsomebody as good as Raoul Wallenberg is still alive at 71.\nS. Raoul Wallenberg has been made an honorary citizen of\nAmerica, has he not?\nW. Yes he is. By act of Congress and by signature of\nPresident Reagan on October 5, 1981, Raoul Wallenberg\nbecame a citizen of the United States. He is the only\nperson, other than Winston Churchill, accorded this high\nhonor.\nW. We're talking aboaut Raoul Wallenberg. Our guest is Dela-\nware Law School Professor Morris Wolff, and we will be to\nthe telephones in just a moment for a message on \"Speak\n5\nYour Piece\" on WKEN, Dover.\nS. We're talking with Delaware Law School Professor Morris\nWolff. We're talking about Raoul Wallenberg and let's go\nto the phones. We thank you for calling and you're on the\nair on WKEN.\nC. I saw this program on TV once and I kind of like it what\nthey are doing, but I don't know how much, how far they\nare going to accomplish with that, 'cause I'm from there.\nW. Where are you from? Were you there duing the war?\nC. Yes.\nW. Do you know the factual background\n....\nC. I didn't at the time. I was about 13 years old\n12.\nW. Is the account that we know about his heroic work correct?\nC. Yes. What I've read about him, yes. So that's about all I\ncan tell you about him. He went to Debrecen, and that's\nright next to the Russian border.\nW. Next to the Russian border.\nC. Pretty close to the Russian border.\nW. Was it a transport center from which railroads went?\nC. Yes. There's another little town close by there that\nRussian railroad tracks are changing sizes, you know, for\nRussians are wider than ours.\nW. Why do you think they bothered to take him into custody?\nC. Oh, well, I haven't got any idea on that because it was\nchaos. There was a hell of a chaos there and I suppose\nit as just like you said, it was threat.\nW. How big is it?\nC. Almost half the size of Budapest.\nW. Thank you for your help and if you have anything further, I\nwould be happy to hear from you.\nC. Alright, thank you very much.\nS. Thank you for calling. Bye-bye. Hi, you're on \"Speak\nYour Piece\" on WKEN.\n6\nC. Hi Ben! I have a question for him. I am curious to know if\nthere is any difference in interpretation of law between\nRussian and the United States.\nW. On what particular law?\nC. Well, in any aspect.\nW. Well, there is a difference in their interpretation of\nInternational Law, but most nations agree that where a dip-\nlomat has been kidnapped and abducted from his initial\nposition, that is a clear violation of International Law.\nI don't think they have ever challenged that aspect of the\nlaw. They have just given us different stories as to\nwhether they have him in custody. The violation of Inter-\nnational Law is clearly recognized by all civilized count-\nries, and also by the Treaty of Vienna of 1961 which pro-\nvides for the protection of diplomats, and also there was\na 1927 Treaty between Sweden and Russia at that time, still\nin existence in 1944, in which both countries pledged the\nprotection of diplomats from each of their countries.\nC. Sounds very interesting. Thank you.\nS. Thanks for calling. Bye-bye. Before we go back to the\nphones, and let me ask our callers to be just a little\nbit patient. As we say, it took twelve years for the\nSoviets to acknowledge that Wallenberg was still alive\nback in 1957, and now efforts to. receive any official word\non his status are just ignored. What's the big deal with\nthe Soviets? Why will they not say one way or the other\nthat Wallenberg is alive or dead or in a prison or some-\nwhere else?\nW. 1 think that by this time they are deeply embarrassed\nbecause they are aware that they have given two or three\nconflicting stories and they have someone of the high\nimportance of Gromyko now involved in what clearly has been\na misstatement of fact. This is not a simple case where\nthe record is clean as to their behavior. The Russians\nnormally are very sensitive to Federal litigation in the\nU.S. Courts. For example, recently in Chicago there was\nthe Frolova case in which a U.S. citizen filed an action\nagainst the Soviet Union seeking to be rejoined by her\nhusband, who was a Russian National. Russians had held\nhim and refused rights of immigration for six months.\nThree days after the law suit was filed, they freed him.\nThat's one of our bases of optimism, that they will be\nsensitive to Federal Court litigation. They do not like\nto be sued in our Federal Courts.\nS. Why? I mean, what penalties can they pay?\n7\nW. Well, the interesting penalty which was sought in the\nFrolova case was the suspension of all activity on the\nChicago Board of Trade. Had the Judge reached this issue,\nthe Judge would have been obliged to determine whether the\nwheat deals with Russia would go through, or be enjoined.\nThe Russians wanted to avoid that possible confrontation.\nAs soon as they got word that Mrs. Frolova was suing to get\nthe release of her husband, they put this man on a plane and\nhe was in the United States within three days. Thus, ending\nthe case because you can't argue the case when you get the\nrelief that you're seeking.\nS. We go back to the phones. We're talking about Raoul Wallen-\nberg. Morris Wolff is our guest and you're on \"Speak Your\nPiece\" on WKEN.\nC. Yes, I don't know as much about Wallenberg as I should. Why\nwas he not released in the general amnesty after Stalin's\ndeath about '56, '57 like Trepper and the others were. Did\nyou every bother to quiz Trepper or Bianca at the same time\nas to whether he knew of Wallenberg or not?\nW. What's the full name of the person you're talking about?\nC. Leopold Trepper.\nW. How do you spell his last name?\nC. Trepper.\nW. What is that again?\nC. Trepper. He was the chief agent of the Red Orchestra.\nW. That's an excellent lead. We are pursuing all leads\npossible as to people\nC. Trepper is dead. He died in Israel some years ago. He was\na Communist agent under Berezin and then, of course, because\nhe was under Berezin he engaged in a very interesting double\ngame when he was finally caught by the Gestapo. He eventu-\nally escaped and was imprisoned by the Soviets at Lubianka\nand released at about '56, '57 and went to Israel, went to\nwent to Poland after that and then went to Israel.\nW. Any books you can recommend that we can read about him?\nC. Well, I looked up in the book that I have as to whether he\nmentioned Wallenberg. He did, according to the Index. Let\nme check the title for you one second, it's within reach.\nW. Thank you.\n8\nS. We're talking about Raoul Wallenbeg on \"Speak Your Piece\"\non WKEN, and as the man checks his book\nC. The book is called \"The Great Game\" by Leopold Trepper and\nit's available at a reduction and I got this in Walden\nBooks. The thing that's intriguing about this was he was in\nLubianka at the same time, he met a lot of these people who\nhad been in prison for 20 years, 30 years, 40 years, passing\nthrough. And he was held in Moscow and moved in the prisons\naround Moscow. He was not shipped to one of the outside\ncamps. Why are they holding him? What's his importance? I\nmean, now why?\nW. That's an excellent question and I cannot give you a defini-\ntive answer. We can only speculate that\nC. What does he know that would embarrass them?\nW. I don't think it's so much what he knows, I think it's the\nfact that his release would now contradict their previous\nallegations that he's dead.\nC. No, that's not sufficient. The Wallenberg's are the most\nprominent banking family in Sweden, that I do know.\nW. That's correct.\nC. One characteristic that's very interesting that was remarked\nby one of the individuals who was serving with Baneash, I\nforget his name, he's an officer who went into a\nduring the war he was cooperating with the Soviets and he\nwas in an intelligence category. He went to one of the\ndepartments of the Intelligence Services where they had\npictures of all the people who had crossed them in the past\nwhich were mounted on the wall, and a couple of them were\nturned to the wall and he was interested to find his\npicture, but, of course, he was working with them at the\ntime. They have a long memory and they have habits of doing\nthis. Do they have something against the Wallenbergs?\nW. Well, there is an interesting background. That is, that one\nmember of the Wallenberg family was Ambassador to Germany\nduring World War II.\nC. I know that. The Wallenbergs, well I won't go into all the\nrest of the stuff on the air, but the point was that the\nWallenberg's, of course, were connected with the steel com-\nbines and the Bolfore Works which were engaged in supplying\nthe Germans with iron during the war. Out of necessity, not\nout of choice, the Germans had them by the throat. The\nSwedes were in a very difficult position, just like the\nSwiss during World War II.\n9\nW. I agree with that.\nC. A very, very difficult position.\nW. It was a complex situation, but the thing that interests me\nat this point is, can you, through your reading or other\nknowledge help us possibly to identify any persons. I'm not\nasking you to do it on the air, possibly to call me at the\nLaw School, any persons who might be in the United States,\nwho would be willing to serve or to help us. That is people\nwho were former KGB Agents or officials in Russian prisons.\nA jailer in a Russian prison. This would help us in terms\nof the jurisdiction in our case.\nC. This would be exceedingly difficult, because most ex-KGB are\ngiven other identities in the United States. You'd have to\noperate and ask the FBI about that or the CIA.\nThe problem is the CIA, or any one of the other cover\nagencies. You might be able to get some people who were\nrefugees at that particular time. The book that I mention\nhas a number of people who were--that he mentions in the\nvicinity--but most of these are very old, as I said, and he\ndied about five or six years ago.\nW. You say the book is generally available?\nC. It's an overprint that I got, as I said, locally at Walden\nBooks.\nW. Locally, you mean where?\nS. In the new Dover Mall.\nW. We'll stop by there on our way home.\nC. If they still have a copy of it. I don't know whether this\nwill give you any information about Wallenberg. He was in\nLubianka at the same time. The thing that I don't under-\nstand, as I said, is why, if they released Trepper, okay,\nand they released a lot of other people. They released\nHauckman, they released a number of other people, they even\nreleased about 7,000 left-over prisoners from the Stalingrad\nimprisonment. Why are they holding Wallenberg?\nW. What would your theory be?\nC. He knows something. There are two theories. I have two\ntheories about this. One of them, that he knows something\nthat's so exceeding sensitive about possibly, I would say,\nI'll throw out a very, very long shot. He knows something\nabout German Nazi, no, Nazi-Soviet negotiations during the\n10\nWar. '42, '43, in Liddell Hart's book there was a story\ncirculating around British Intelligence, which he accepts at\nface value that Molotov meant Ribbentrop in '42 to\ndiscuss an armistice and Stalin demanded to roll the\nborders back and Hitler refused to give in. Whether he was\nusing the Swede for that I don't know. The other\npossibility is that he knows something through his banking\nfamily about negotiations that were going on before the war\nsay, '39, '40. The other possibility is that he knows\nsomething very sensitive for someone who's still alive in\nthe hierarchy, conceivably in relation to a Swiss bank\nor operations abroad. Another possibility is that if they\nregarded him as an intelligence agent, I don't know why they\nkept him alive this long and they haven't released him.\nThat's why I kind of leave that out. And then the third\npossibility - another possibility is just they feud, that\nthey have something against the Wallenbergs and are using\nthis to punish them.\nS. OK, well, we thank you very much for calling. Appreciate\nit. We move on, we're talking about Raoul Wallenberg.\nDelaware Law School Professor Morris Wolff is our guest\non \"Speak Your Piece\" and you're on the air, we thank you\nfor calling.\nC. I knew about Raoul Wallenberg many, many years ago. Then\nI came to America and I never hear nobody knew anything\nabout Raoul Wallenberg at this time. Then one day about\nthree, four years ago I have a meeting with a man who was a\nhelp at this time. I think he is a Representative\nfrom California, his name was Tom Lantos. I wonder\nif the name says something to the gentleman who is with you.\nW. Yes, it does. Congressman Lantos invited me to Washington\non August 3, and I had the privilege of testifying before\nthe House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on\nInternational Organizations and Human Rights with regards\nto my plans to file this law suit. Tom Lantos was a\nrefugee from Hungary, and was saved by Wallenberg.\nMr. Lantos and I are working together on the development\nof this case.\nC. I was almost sure that you must know something because I\ntalked to Senator Lantos very long time, and his wife I\nthink she initiated everything, all the interest in the\nUnited States about Raoul Wallenberg.\nW. That's correct. Annette Lantos.\nW. Do you know anything from your own first-hand experience\nwhich could help us?\n11\nC. No. I wouldn't think about anything that Mr. and Mrs.\nLantos doesn't know already. But I know only one thing,\nthat reading newspapers in different languages from time\nto time I read that somebody, a prisoner from some kind of\nGulag in Siberia say that she saw Mr. Lantos and talked to\nhim, and the last time I was in Israel and I read that in\nthe Israeli paper that a Soviet Jew who came to Israel, he\nsaw I would say that that was in '81 or '82 maybe, I don't\nremember when it was, but it was three years ago or one\nyear ago.\nW. Yes, '81. You're quite right. There was someone who was\nout of a Russian prison temporarily, who wrote to his\ndaughter in Israel saying that he had met Wallenberg while\nin prison. This is why we continue to be optimistic about\nthe chances that he may still be alive.\nC. Yes. I read in different papers from time to time that\nthere is hope that he is still alive, because he was a big\nhero.\nW. Were you from Hungary?\nC. No. I am from Poland.\nW. From Poland. I thank you very much for your help and, of\ncourse, your mention of Congressman Lantos is quite accu-\nrate. Were it not for Tom Lantos and Annette Lantos, his\nwife, I probably would never have learned about this and\nwe need to develop the educational importance of this case.\nC.\nnobody knew before. I asked the people, you know, I\nam quite active in different organizations. Nobody ever\nhear, then Mr. Lantos you know ask the audience if some-\nbody who hear about Raoul Wallenberg. I knew about Raoul\nWallenberg and his aristocratic family very much.\nS. We thank you very much for calling. Bye-bye. Professor\nWolff, what have the United States governments and the\nSwedish governments done to find out about Raoul Wallen-\nberg and to secure his freedom?\nW. The effort to get citizenship, the effort that Congress-\nman Lantos initiated very soon after he became a member of\nCongress, led to the interest of the Congress in the case.\nAs I mentioned to the caller, the grant of citizenship was\nmade on October 5, 1981. At that time, President Reagan,\nin very eloquent fashion said, \"We will work for the day\nwhen Raoul Wallenberg will have a chance to sit and enjoy\nthe shade of the tree planted on his behalf in the Avenue\nof the Righteous Gentiles in Israel.\" Let me take a moment\nto tell you about that. In Israel, there is a special\nsection, as you may know, set aside for those who did\n12\nhumanitarian and heroic work on behalf of the Jews in World\nWar II. Those people lent their effort to save Jewish\nlives. Wallenberg has a tree planted there, a living tree,\nof course. It's not a living memorial, it's a symbol that\nhe lives just as the tree lives. And that one day, hope-\nfully he will have this option to travel to Israel, or to\ntravel to his new nation of citizenship, the United States,\nand enjoy the rights and privileges of the United States.\nNow, to directly answer your question, as to what the U. S.\ngovernment has done and the Swedish government has done.\nI would have thought that a good lawyer, long before this\ntime, on behalf of the Swedish government would have filed\na law suit for the release of Wallenberg on the basis of\nnationality. It's the injury directly to Sweden that is\nmost felt. I will use the same nationality theory, that\nhe is now a citizen of the United States, as part of my law\nsuit, but there was a time when the Swedish government had\ntrapped a Soviet sub and they could have sought the swap of\nthe sub for Wallenberg and regretably they did not. So\nthat perhaps it can be said that the Swedish government has\nnot done as much as it might have done.\nS. Why do you think that's the case?\nW. Well, they're very close to Russia. The proximity of Sweden\nto Russia, the fact that Sweden doesn't have the military\nprotection that we would have, the problem that even Finland\nhas in its close proximity to Russia. So I am sympathetic\nwith the foreign policy aspects of their problem. Nonethe-\nless, they put this son of Sweden, now son of the United\nStates into the fray of the saving of lives in Budapest and\nI would have thought they would have done more. The U. S.\ngovernment can do more also. The U. S. government can come\nin and file an Amicus Curiae Brief, that means a friend of\nthe court. When I file my brief in Federal Court and say\nthat they stand a full 100% behind this effort to secure his\nrelease. The U.S. government is directly responsible\nfor Wallenberg's trip to Hungary. The U. S. or War\nRefugee Board put up the money and instigated the\ntrip. They went to the Swedish government and said, \"find\nfor us a good human being to do this work.\" Had the U. S.\ngovernment not acted, Wallenberg would be alive and at home\nliving as a Swedish citizen today. I think the U.S.\ngovernment has a deep moral and legal obligation to lend its\nfull support. The U.S. government can do a lot more\nthan the Swedish government. The U.S. is a major\npower. This was part of their own war strategy. It is\nunfinished business of the U.S. government to go and to help\nsecure the release of this diplomat.\nS. We will be back with some concluding thoughts about Raoul\nWallenberg on \"Speak Your Piece\" in just a moment.\n13\nLet's go back to the law suit, Professor Wolff. What is it\nexactly, without going into too much legal mumbo jumbo, that\nyou all are filing suit and what are you hoping to do and\nwhat's the process.\nW. One of the reasons to file suit is to determine whether a\nFederal Court will hold a sovereign nation accountable for\ncriminal behavior. Up until this time under International\nLaw, only human individuals could be brought into court and\ncharged with violations of International Law on a criminal\nbasis. We are seeking to extend the international criminal\njurisdiction of the U.S. courts in this matter. We are\nalleging that the Soviet Union is directly involved in the\nabduction and kidnapping and the confinement of Wallenberg\nand consequently should be brought to the bar of justice.\nS: And the remedy you seek is Raoul Wallenberg's freedom,\nobviously.\nW. We want two things. We want a full accounting of each and\nevery day of his life in custody. Whether he was ever given\nany drugs, like amminozine to alter his mind. Whether he\nwas given dental care, medical care, why he was moved from\nprison to prison. The family is entitled to this informa-\ntion. The writing of history is entitled to know just what\nhappened to this hero from the date of his abduction either\nuntil the date of his freedom, which we hope to accomplish\nor until the date of a verifiable death. The Russians keep\nvery careful records. When they want to be honest with us\non this point, they can tell us in exhaustive fashion just\nwhat happened. Secondly, we want to receive monetary\ndamages. The family is not interested in the money, but we\nwant to use that money to set up a Wallenberg Foundation to\ngive scholarships to worthy people who engage in projects\nwhich demonstrate humanitarian concern.\nS. Almost anybody can file suit in Federal Court. What are\nyour chances of success?\nW. We are carefully preparing the case with regard to\nevery basis of Federal Statutory Law, International Treaty\nLaw and basic customary International Law possible. People\nof goodwill, with discretion, such as Federal Judges can\nread the facts and read the law in the manner most favorable\nto a just, fair and decent outcome. We have a very tough\ncase, but we are very hopeful that it will come out success-\nfully. It's tough because we have jurisdictional problems\nof getting the U.S. court to accept jurisdiction. I am\nhopeful that the Federal Courts will look with favor on our\nplea.\nS. Suppose the Soviet Union chooses not to respond to the\nbriefs or to the papers or anything. What impact will that\n14\nhave on the case?\nW. Well, there is a very good chance they will not respond as\nwe see even during this week with the Korean Airline inci-\ndent. Their tendency has been to ignore claims for compen-\nsation, but then the possibility exists that if we estab-\nlish jurisdiction that the court may enter a default\njudgement against the Soviet Union which would be a success\nsuccess. If they don't show up on the day of the game and\nwe win, it is still our victory.\nS. There are international tribunals. Are you going through\nany of those to seek Wallenberg's release?\nW. We would like to go to the International Court of Justice\nat the Hague, but regretably under International Law we can\nonly do that if the Soviet government agrees to the juris-\ndiction of the International Court. We would also like to\ngo to the International Court for Human Rights at Stras-\nbourg in France, but again we have jurisdictional problems.\nOur best shot is the U.S. Federal Courts. Otherwise we\nwouldn't be going there.\nS. Professor Wolff, you are working for the Wallenberg family.\nYou are also working with a number of the Wallenberg commit-\ntees in America. Is there anything. that our listeners can\ndo? Can they join these Committees, or learn more about the\ncause, and if so, how can they do that?\nW. Yes, we have an active Wallenberg Committee here in the\nPhiladelphia, Wilmington and Dover area. It is called the\nWallenberg Committee of Greater Philadelphia. The Chair-\nperson is Leona Feldman. She is the President at 251 South\n18th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Her phone number is\n215 area code, and then the number, 472-0989. In Phila-\ndelphia, on September 27th, in Room 202 at City Hall there\nwill be a reception and a ceremony held by the Mayor of\nPhiladelphia to honor Raoul Wallenberg. This is the second\nanniversary of the grant of citizenship by the United\nStates. Technically, the grant of citizenship day is\nOctober 5th, but we are going to celebrate on September 27,\n1983. The event is open to the public. There is no charge.\nThis year's annual observance celebrates the second anniver-\nsary of the conferral of honorary U.S. citizenship on\ndiplomat Raoul Wallenberg.\nS. I suppose if our listeners have information for you or per-\nhaps want more information, they can contact you at the\nDelaware Law School at Widener University in Wilmington.\nW. That's correct. I would deeply appreciate any information\nin writing that could be supplied that would lead to infor-\n15\nmation about this case. We are still in the process of\nwriting the history of the case. Any Hungarian citizens who\nhave come to the United States or any other persons can\nwrite to me at the Law School, or call me, I would welcome\nyour call.\nS. We are out of time. Professor Morris Wolff from The\nDelaware Law School, thanks for being with us. An inter-\nesting program. Maybe we have spread the word a little bit\nabout Raoul Wallenberg.\nW. Thank you for inviting me. I've enjoyed my visit.\nS. Good. We're glad to have had you here.\n16\nID # 188754 CU\nWHITE HOUSE\nC0165\nCORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET\nO OUTGOING\nHP previousley OR handled\nH INTERNAL\n1 INCOMING\nDate Correspondence\nReceived (YY/MM/DD)\n/\n/\nName of Correspondent: Morris H. wolff\nMI Mail Report\nUser Codes: (A)\n(B)\n(C)\nSubject: letter to President requesting release 3\nRaoul Wallenbery prom Seviet Inion\nROUTE TO:\nACTION\nDISPOSITION\nTracking\nType\nCompletion\nAction\nDate\nof\nDate\nOffice/Agency\n(Staff Name)\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nResponse\nCode\nYY/MM/DD\nCUHOLL\nORIGINATOR 83,11,23\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nWAT 18\nD 383,11,22\n583,12,03\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\n/\n/\n/\n/\nReferral Note:\nACTION CODES:\nDISPOSITION CODES:\nA . Appropriate Action\nI - Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary\nA Answered\nC Completed\nC Comment/Recommendation\nR Direct Reply w/Copy\nB * Non-Special Referral\nS Suspended\nD Draft Response\nS For Signature\nF - Furnish Fact Sheet\nX Interim Reply\nto be used as Enclosure\nFOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:\nUPD\nType of Response = Initials of Signer\nCode\n=\n\"A\"\nCompletion Date = Date of Outgoing\nComments: nov 18 83 Faith Whittlesey memo\nto Fred Frelding attached\nKeep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.\nSend all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).\nAlways return completed correspondence record to Central Files.\nRefer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.\n5/81\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nNovember 18, 1983\nMEMORANDUM FOR FRED FIELDING\nFROM:\nFAITH RYAN WHITTLESEY FRW\nI have received the attached correspondence, concerning\nRaoul Wallenberg, from Morris H. Wolff, Professor of\nLaw at the Delaware Law School. To whom should this\nmatter be referred?\nUNIVERSITY STATE FORGOLA\nTHE DELAWARE LAW SCHOOL\nWIDENER UNIVERSITY\nP O. BOX 7474 CONCORD PIKE\nWILMINGTON DELAWARE 19803\n(302) 478-5280\nNovember 7, 1983\nNOV 9 1983\nFaith Whittlesey\nSpecial Assistant\nto the President\nThe White House\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue\nWashington, DC 20004\nDear Faith:\nCan you help me in bringing this matter to the attention of\nthe President?\nVery truly yours,\nMORRO\nMorris H. Wolff\nProfessor of Law\ncrh/492x\nDELAWARE\nSCHOOL\nEXPIRATE\nPARAITY\nTHE DELAWARE LAW SCHOOL\nWIDENER UNIVERSITY\nP.O. BOX 7474 CONCORD PIKE\nWILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19803\n(302) 478-5280\nNovember 7, 1983\nPresident Ronald Reagan\n188754\nCa\nThe White House\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue\nWashington, DC 20004\nDear Mr. President:\nOn October 5, 1981, you took the iniative to sign a law\ngranting honorary citizenship to Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish\ndiplomat whose heroic and humanitarian efforts in Budapest,\nHungary during World War II were responsible for the rescue and\nprotection from death of approximately 100, 000 Hungarian Jews.\nAt the time of the signing, at a ceremony at the White House, you\nexpressed your hopes and prayer that this new law would help in\nthe effort to achieve the release of Raoul Wallenberg, You\nfurther expressed the hope that someday diplomat Wallenberg would\nhave the opportunity to leave the Soviet Union and sit \"under the\nshade of the tree planted in his honor at Yad Vashem in Israel.\"\nYour signing the law followed the joint action of the House of\nRepresentatives and the Senate in voting to approve a resolution\ngranting citizenship to Wallenberg.\nMany people throughout the United States and the world share\nthe deep interest which you have in achieving freedom from Soviet\nimprisonment for this great hero. It would appear to be a good\ntime now for new action to be taken. Under Title 22, United\nStates Code 1732, the President has the power to take action to\nsecure the release of \"any citizen of the United States\" who \"has\nbeen unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority\nof any foreign government. The statute states that:\n\"It shall be the duty of the President forthwith to\ndemand of that government the reasons of such imprison-\nment; and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation\nof the rights of American citizenship, the President\nshall forthwith demand the release of such citizen, and\nif the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or\nrefused, the President shall use such means, not\namounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary and\nproper to obtain of effectuate the release.\"\nPresident Reagan\nNovember 7, 1983\nPage Two\nThis law gives you the power to seek the release of\nWallenberg. Wallenberg today enjoys dual nationality (Sweden\nand United States). The law makes no distinction between\nhonorary and other citizens, and absent this distinction it\nwould apply to the needs and rights of Raoul Wallenberg.\nI would like to have an opportunity to discuss with you or\na member of your staff, in advance, the actions which you might\ntake to implement this law on behalf of Raoul Wallenberg. His\nfamily has retained me as their legal counsel to take\nappropriate steps to help to achieve their brother's release.\nI was pleased to discover this law as part of your presidential\npowers. Will you please let me know when I might visit with\nyou to discuss the steps which could be taken to accomplish\nthis goal.\nInterested people throughout the United States and the\nworld will welcome any intiative you might take under this law\nto obtain our shared objective.\nI am enclosing a transcript of a recent radio interview, in\nwhich I discuss my representation of Raoul Wallenberg and steps\nwhich might be taken to secure his release. Nothing at this\npoint in time could be better than to have your strong and\nexplicit support.\nVery truly yours,\nmornis wolf\nMorris H. Wolff\nProfessor of Law\ncrh/474x\nEnclosure"
}