VZCZCXYZ0016
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHWN #0181 0431338
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 121338Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY BRIDGETOWN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4186
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRIDGETOWN 000181 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAR-COLLINS AND L/CID-WALTER 
COMMERCE FOR TODD FOX 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/02/2017 
TAGS: EINV CASC PGOV KIDE AC
SUBJECT: ANTIGUA/BARBUDA: TWO STEPS BACK ON HALF MOON BAY 
CASE 
 
REF: A. 12/06/06 ROGERS-SHANNON LETTER (NOTAL) 
 
     ¶B. 06 BRIDGETOWN 1706 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Mary M. Ourisman for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (C) On January 22, EconOff met with Amcit Natalia Querard, 
Managing Director of Half Moon Bay (HMB).  Querard complained 
about harassment she has been experiencing, allegedly 
instigated by the Government of Antigua and Barbuda (GOAB), 
and the perceived apathy of the State Department.  Querard 
came close to a resolution with the GOAB in September 2006, 
but this prospective settlement now seems to have fallen 
apart, prompting her attorney to send a letter to the 
Departments of State and Commerce requesting immediate 
action.  End Summary. 
 
Threats and Harassment 
---------------------- 
 
¶2. (C) On January 22, EconOff met with Natalia Querard, 
Managing Director of Half Moon Bay, to obtain an update 
regarding her property dispute with the GOAB.  Querard 
thanked EconOff for requesting a face-to-face meeting. 
Querard discussed recent incidents of harassment and threats 
that she believed to be retaliation by the GOAB for her 
lawsuits against the government for its expropriation of Half 
Moon Bay.  These incidents include damaged property, illegal 
break-ins, denied access to the Internet, and enormous 
electricity charges levied against her by the GOAB's utility 
company.  These incidents were also described in a December 
6, 2006 letter to Ambassador Ourisman, Assistant Secretary 
Shannon, and Todd Fox from Querard's counsel, William D. 
Rogers (ref A).  Post understands that L/CID will respond to 
Rogers' letter. 
 
Inaction of Department of State 
------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (C) Querard also used the meeting to criticize the U.S. 
Embassy in Bridgetown and the Department for their inaction, 
but did imply she had a contact in the State Department who 
has been very helpful to her.  When asked for the person's 
name, Querard changed the subject and asked that the U.S. 
government consider imposing sanctions on GOAB under the 
Helms-Burton Act, or other forms of retaliation. 
 
So Close, Yet So Far Away 
------------------------- 
 
¶4. (C) As indicated in reftels, Embassy's repeated efforts to 
facilitate a mutually satisfactory resolution of the dispute 
have been unsuccessful.  William D. Rogers, Querard's 
attorney and a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for 
Inter-American Affairs, negotiated a Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) with the GOAB last fall.  The MOU was 
considered a breakthrough and was supported by Querard and 
both the Attorney General and Prime Minister of the GOAB. 
According to Rogers and Querard, however, it was later 
sabotaged by another attorney hired by Querard, who engaged 
in parallel discussions with the Attorney General, without 
Querard and Roger's prior knowledge.  In light of the 
apparent collapse of the MOU, Rogers requested in his 
December 6 letter (ref A) that the Departments of State and 
Commerce take immediate action against the GOAB. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶5. (C) The September 2006 MOU appeared to be a significant 
step toward a mutually acceptable resolution.  It now appears 
the resolution has taken the proverbial two steps back.  A 
negotiated settlement is the best way to resolve this 
dispute.  However, each new setback in a mutually acceptable 
resolution appears to increase mutual suspicion, which 
prevents progress toward resolution of this longstanding 
expropriation. 
OURISMAN