What changed

Motion for a European Parliament resolution on the return of Romanian national treasure illegally appropriated by Russia

B90178/2024

European Parliament resolution on the return of Romanian national treasure illegally appropriated by Russia

(2024/2605(RSP))

– having regard to its previous resolutions on Russia,

– having regard to Articles 36 and 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), particularly to Articles 6, 36 and 167 thereof,

– having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), particularly to the preamble thereto and to Article 3(3) thereof,

– having regard to Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 and to the Commission communication of 13 December 2022 on the EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods (COM(2022)0800),

– having regard to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict,

– having regard to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s Opinion 193 (1996) entitled ‘Russia’s request for membership of the Council of Europe’ and to its Resolution 1896 (2012) entitled ‘The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation’,

– having regard to Opinion 193 (1996) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 25 January 1996 entitled ‘Russia’s request forFramework membershipConvention ofon the CouncilValue of Europe’Cultural andHeritage tofor ResolutionSociety 1896(CETS (2012)199) of the27 ParliamentaryOctober Assembly2005 ofand the Council ofConvention Europeon ofOffences 2relating Octoberto 2012Cultural entitledProperty ‘The(CETS honouring221) of obligations and commitments by the19 RussianMay Federation’,2017,

– having regard to the Russian-Romanian Treaty on Friendly Relations and Cooperation of 4 July 2003 and the accompanying joint statement by the Romanian and Russian Ministers of Foreign Affairs, which established the Romanian-Russian Joint Commission for the study of issues arising from the history of bilateral relations, including the issue of the Romanian treasure,

– having regard to the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, adopted by the UNESCO General Conference at its 16th session on 14 November 1970,

– having regard to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict,

– having regard to the UNESCO 1970 Convention Concerningon the ProtectionMeans of World CulturalProhibiting and NaturalPreventing Heritagethe Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of 16Ownership Novemberof 1972,Cultural Property,

– having regard to Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012,

– having regard to the general principles of international law recognised by states, such as the principle of good faith and the principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 13 December 2022 on the EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods (COM(2022)0800),

– having regard to Rule 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the Council of Europe Framework Convention of 27 October 2005 on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (CETS No 199),

A. whereas during the First World War, as the Central Powers had occupied a significant part of Romania and threatened to occupy the rest, the Romanian Government at the time, under pressure from its ally, Tsarist Russia, agreed to transfer Romania’s national treasure to Russia, with the aim of keeping it safe from the armies of the Central Powers;

– having regard to the Council of Europe Convention of 19 May 2017 on Offences relating to Cultural Property (CETS No 221),

B. whereas this treasure included the treasure of the National Bank of Romania, which included 91.48 tonnes of fine gold, royal collections of jewels and rare coins, jewellery, heritage paintings and art collections, religious artefacts and archives, rare historical manuscripts, collections and valuables belonging to several public institutions, private banks, commercial companies and individuals, spanning over five centuries of Romanian history; whereas the rare gold coins which represent a large proportion of the treasure of the National Bank of Romania deposited in Moscow possess a numismatic and cultural value distinct from the value of the gold itself;

– having regard to the general principles of international law recognised by states, such as the principle of sovereignty and non-interference, the principle of good faith and the principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes,

C. whereas the Romanian and Russian Governments signed official protocols for the transfer of this treasure to Moscow, with a detailed inventory documenting the gold reserves of the National Bank of Romania, with the Russian Government’s guarantee regarding the safety of transport, the safety of deposit and safety of return to Romania, as witnessed by other states at the time; whereas the transfer of the treasure took place through two train transports in December 1916 and July 1917; whereas in Moscow, the treasure was stored at the Kremlin and inventoried by the Russian side, and was found to be in complete accordance with the statements of the National Bank of Romania;

– having regard to Rule 132(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

D. whereas after the October Revolution in Russia and the seizure of power by the Communists under Lenin’s leadership, the newly established Soviet regime broke off diplomatic relations with Romania, seized the Romanian treasure and refused to return it;

A.E. whereas a state’s gold reserves serve as a crucial financial asset, providing stability to its currency andcurrency, bolstering confidence in the nation’s economic strength; whereas the Soviet Union’s refusal to return this treasure weakened the Romanian State as it emerged from the First World War and has remained a major point of contention in relations between the two countries;

B. whereas a state’s gold reserves play a unique and long-term role in finance and economics, representing a key component of the currency reserves that nations hold; whereas during financial crises, central bank gold reserves function as a safe-haven asset in periods of market turmoil;

F. whereas on two occasions, in 1935 and 1956, the Soviet Union agreed to return a portion of the archives and items of historical and cultural value to Romania; whereas, however, the bulk of the Romanian treasure, including the gold component of the reserve of the Romanian National Bank, were not returned; whereas these two restitutions are clear indications that the Soviet/Russian side acknowledged that it has a duty to return the Romanian treasure;

C. whereas the preamble to the TEU states that the signatories draw ‘inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe’ and desire to ‘deepen the solidarity between their peoples while respecting their history, their culture and their traditions’, and Article 6 TFEU lists culture as a policy area under the ‘categories and areas of Union competence’, with different actions that can be undertaken by the EU to ‘support, coordinate or complement the action of Member States’; whereas under Article 36 TFEU, Member States have the prerogative to define their national treasures within their jurisdiction and to implement the requisite measures for their safeguarding;

G. whereas the Russian Federation is the legal successor to the Soviet Union, which continued the legal personality of Tsarist Russia, and is thus under an obligation to return these assets belonging to Romania;

D. whereas the term ‘Romanian national treasure’ comprises 91.5 tonnes of fine gold belonging to the gold reserves of the National Bank of Romania, royal collections of jewels and rare coins with a numismatic and cultural value that is distinct from the value of the gold itself, as well as cultural, religious and archival goods belonging to the country’s national heritage;

H. whereas in 2012 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted Resolution 1896 (2012) entitled ‘The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation’, asking the Russian Federation to continue efforts to rapidly settle outstanding issues on the return of cultural and other property by direct negotiation with the countries concerned;

E. whereas there are legislative grounds for the return of cultural goods and national treasures that have been removed from the territory of an EU country unlawfully through a breach of the legislation in force or a breach of the conditions under which temporary authorisation was granted for their removal; whereas Romania has a fully legally valid claim to its national treasure that was evacuated to Russia in 1916 and 1917;

I. whereas, following the joint statement of the Romanian and Russian foreign ministers of 4 July 2003, the two sides established a Romanian-Russian Joint Commission for the study of issues arising from the history of bilateral relations, including the issue of the Romanian treasure deposited in Moscow during the First World War; whereas during a period of 15 years, the Commission met only five times, with the last meeting occurring in 2019; whereas in the protocols concluded at the end of these meetings, the Russian side acknowledged Romania’s claim against the Russian Federation and agreed that the documents presented by the Romanian side represent authentic documents, with the status of an international treaty, attesting to Romania’s deposit of its treasure, including its National Bank’s treasure, in Russia;

F. whereas the treasure was stored in Russia under the assurance that it would be restituted in full, in accordance with the documents that were signed, which have the value of international treaties;

J. whereas Directives 93/7/EEC and 2014/60/EU represent key pieces of legislation on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State; whereas the EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods confirmed the EU’s broader commitment to protecting cultural heritage; whereas EU legislation addresses the return of unlawfully removed cultural objects, whether they have been relocated within the Union or removed from the territory of a Member State unlawfully through breach of the legislation in force or breach of the conditions under which temporary authorisation was granted;

G.K. whereas the illicitillegal appropriation of Romania’s national treasure by Russia representsremains a breach ofunique international law and customs,case, asin thewhich transfera ofstate’s gold reserves along with the substantial collection of cultural, religiousreserve and archivalheritage objects forwere safekeepingentrusted duringto exceptionalanother circumstancesstate waswith coveredlegally byvalid adocuments properlyand documentedguarantees andof legallyreturn, validonly officialfor agreementthe withreceiving legalstate guaranteesto ofdisregard return,these thesigned stipulatedobligations, obligationsthereby ofviolating whichinternational werelaw ignored;and customs;

H. whereas, following the joint statement of the Romanian and Russian foreign ministers of 4 July 2003, the two sides established a Romanian-Russian Joint Commission for the study of issues arising from the history of bilateral relations, including the issue of the Romanian treasure deposited in Moscow during the First World War; whereas during a period of 15 years, the Commission met only five times, with the last meeting occurring in 2019; whereas in the protocols concluded at the end of these meetings, the Russian side acknowledged Romania’s claim against the Russian Federation and agreed that the documents presented by the Romanian side were authentic and had the status of an international treaty attesting to Romania’s deposit of its treasure, including its National Bank’s treasure, in Russia;

L. whereas the restitution of the appropriated Romanian national treasure is of great importance for both the national and institutional memory of the country; whereas Romania has consistently sought the restitution of all its treasure deposited in Moscow for over a hundred years and will continue to keep its claim on the agenda until the treasure’s full restitution;

I. whereas the Russian Federation is the legal successor to the Soviet Union, which continued the legal personality of Tsarist Russia, and is thus under an obligation to return these assets belonging to Romania;

1. Deplores Russia’s failure to fully return the Romanian national treasure to Romania, as explicitly outlined in the official bilateral agreements between the two states and as expected under international law and norms;

J. whereas the restitution of the appropriated Romanian national treasure is of great importance for both the institutional and national memory of the country; whereas the restitution of cultural heritage unlawfully seized from its country of origin is crucial for the protection of the universal value of cultural heritage;

2. Expresses its dismay that despite multiple negotiation efforts in the aftermath of the First World War and, more recently, the work of the Romanian-Russian Joint Commission of experts, Russia has shown an overt reluctance to return Romania’s national treasure;

K. whereas bringing about the return of the Romanian national treasure requires a tailor-made European response;

3. Calls on the Government of the Russian Federation to take the necessary steps to fully return to Romania the remainder of Romania’s national treasure sent to Moscow for safekeeping in 1916 and 1917;

1. Deplores Russia’s failure to fully return the Romanian national treasure to Romania, in accordance with the obligation explicitly outlined in the official bilateral agreements between the two states and as expected under international law and norms;

4. Calls for the EU and its Member States to support in solidarity Romania’s efforts to reclaim its national treasure, a matter of enduring concern to Romanian society; calls for the EU and its Member States to cooperate with the Romanian State and the National Bank of Romania in order to raise awareness of this matter and coordinate their actions with the goal of returning Romania’s national treasure to its rightful place;

2. Urges the Russian Federation to fully return to Romania the remainder of Romania’s national treasure that was sent to Russia for safekeeping in 1916 and 1917;

5. Calls for the EU and its Member States to include the return of the Romanian national treasure on the diplomatic agenda governing their relations with Russia; stresses that Romania is not the only EU Member State whose national treasures and cultural heritage have been looted and stolen by Russia, and therefore calls for a thorough analysis, in particular of the treasures of countries which suffered Soviet and Tsarist Russian occupation and repression, and for joint action at EU level to recover them;

3. Recalls that the illicit appropriation of Romania’s national treasure by Russia is a unique international case in which a state’s monetary gold reserves, together with cultural, religious and archival objects that are part of that state’s national heritage, were entrusted for safekeeping to another state, under an agreement set out in legally valid documents giving legal guarantees of return, but the obligations were ultimately disregarded, in breach of international law and customs;

6. Calls for the EU and its Member States to develop a more significant and comprehensive reassessment of EU-Russia relations, given Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine and hybrid warfare against the EU and its Member States; considers that this reassessment should also address other instances in which Russia has acted in complete disregard of international norms to the detriment of EU Member States; insists that the return of stolen national treasures and cultural and historical heritage of EU Member States must be one of the conditions in the future EU relations with Russia;

4. Recognises that the national treasure deposited for safekeeping in Russia in 1916 and 1917 during the difficult times of the First World War, with the Government of Imperial Russia’s guarantee regarding the safety of transport, the safety of deposit and the safety of return to Romania, is an unparalleled international case of illegal appropriation of gold reserves and heritage objects and a matter of perpetual concern to Romanian society;

7. Welcomes the EU’s substantial efforts to protect national, cultural and historical heritage by implementing legislation and cooperation mechanisms governing the return of cultural and heritage assets unlawfully taken from EU countries’ territories and its efforts to combat the traffic in cultural objects;

5. Notes that the First World War forced the Romanian Government of the time to entrust Romania’s national treasure to an allied state for protection against destruction; recalls that, during the wartime hardships, dozens of train carriages transported the majority of Romania’s national treasure to Tsarist Russia for safekeeping until times of peace, with a detailed inventory documenting the gold reserves of the National Bank of Romania, under Russia’s guarantee of protection and return, as witnessed by other states at the time; underlines that the national treasure legally given into Russian custody comprised 91.5 tonnes of fine gold belonging to the reserves of the National Bank of Romania, royal collections of jewels and rare coins, together with priceless cultural and historical assets, such as state archives, documents, precious historical manuscripts, heritage paintings, rare books and collections from many public and private institutions, spanning over five centuries of Romanian history;

8. Calls for the EU and its Member States to consider broadening the scope of EU policies governing the protection of cultural goods in order to encompass the recovery of national treasures relocated under bilateral agreements between states, as well as to strengthen EU support to Member States in conducting their actions; highlights that the exceptional nature of the Romanian national treasure’s illegal appropriation underscores unique specificities that demand a tailor-made European response to facilitate its return, thus expanding the scope of EU’s approach towards the restitution of assets unlawfully removed from EU countries’ territories;

6. Emphasises that despite several attempts at diplomatic negotiations in the aftermath of the First World War, the Romanian national treasure has never been fully returned by Russia, as had been legally stipulated in the official bilateral agreement between the two states;

9. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and to the Russian Government.

7. Notes that some of the cultural, religious and archival goods belonging to the national treasure illegally appropriated by Russia were returned to Romania in 1935 and 1956; highlights that, to date, however, none of the outstanding 91.5 tonnes of fine gold, which are part of the reserves of the National Bank of Romania, have been returned, despite the protocols signed upon the transfer of the treasure to Russia;

8. Expresses its concern that, despite the creation of the Romanian-Russian Joint Commission of experts mandated to enable discussions regarding this issue, efforts to bring about the return of the Romanian national treasure, including the illegally appropriated gold reserves of the National Bank of Romania, through bilateral diplomatic channels between Romania and Russia have met with Russia’s refusal to return what previous regimes have unlawfully kept in disregard of the restitution protocols that were signed;

9. Highlights that special attention must be paid to the preservation of Member States’ national treasures, as stipulated in the EU Treaties;

10. Welcomes the EU’s substantial efforts to protect national, cultural and historical heritage by implementing legislation and cooperation mechanisms governing the return of cultural and heritage assets unlawfully taken from EU countries’ territories and its efforts to combat the traffic in cultural goods;

11. Acknowledges that Directive 2014/60/EU is the key pillar of the EU’s commitment to safeguarding national treasures and cultural objects, while the EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods has confirmed the EU’s broader commitment to protecting cultural heritage; emphasises that unlawfully removed cultural objects must be returned, regardless of whether they have been relocated within the Union or exported to a non-EU state; notes that, while under the relevant provisions of the TFEU, current EU legislation covers the return of cultural goods and national treasures unlawfully removed before 1 January 1993 by one Member State to another, the repatriation of the Romanian national treasure remains a special case requiring a specific solution; highlights that the exceptional nature of the Romanian national treasure’s illegal appropriation underscores unique specificities that demand a tailor-made European response to facilitate its return, thus expanding the scope of the EU’s approach towards the restitution of cultural assets unlawfully removed from EU countries’ territories;

12. Emphasises that bringing about the return of an EU Member State’s cultural assets and national treasures that are unlawfully appropriated by a non-EU state requires substantial diplomatic dialogue, both bilaterally and within international forums;

13. Calls on the Commission to expand the scope of the EU policies governing the protection of cultural goods to include the recovery of national treasures relocated during wartime under bilateral agreements between states;

14. Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service to include the return of the Romanian national treasure on the diplomatic bilateral agenda governing EU-Russia relations once the regional context permits the resumption of political dialogue between the parties;

15. Calls on the Commission to create concrete synergies with the Romanian State, the National Bank of Romania and other relevant institutions in order to mobilise coordinated efforts and to pursue all diplomatic means of mediating, promoting communication – where appropriate – with Russian counterparts and seeking solutions to ensure that the missing national treasure is returned to where it belongs without delay;

16. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of acting as a partner to the Romanian representatives involved in the Romanian-Russian Joint Commission mandated to discuss the return of the Romanian national treasure;

17. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European External Action Service, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the state institutions of the Russian Federation.