VZCZCXRO9153
RR RUEHAST RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHDBU #0887/01 1851118
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031118Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0733
INFO RUCNCLS/SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE VIENNA AU

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 DUSHANBE 000887 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR SCA/CEN 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM KIRF TI
SUBJECT: DEMOLITION OF TAJIKISTAN'S SYNAGOGUE: WHAT HAPPENED? WHAT'S 
NEXT? 
 
REF: (A) 2005 Dushanbe 1737 
 (B) 2006 Dushanbe 329 
 (C) 2006 Dushanbe 511 
 (D) 2008 Dushanbe 396 
 (E) 2006 Dushanbe 986 
 
¶1. (U) Summary: In late June 2008, the Tajik authorities leveled 
what remained of the Dushanbe synagogue.  The Jewish Community had 
fought plans to tear the synagogue down since 2003, sporadically 
garnering attention from the international media.  The case 
demonstrates the Tajik Government's lack of respect for property 
rights generally, and its lack of understanding of the importance of 
maintaining a positive international image.  End summary. 
 
¶2. (U) Despite legal challenges, a local court upheld an April 2008 
eviction order against the Jewish Community, despite irregularities 
in the manner in which the authorities stripped the Community of its 
property rights.  Moreover, the court ruled that the Tajik 
authorities are not obliged to compensate the Community for its 
losses.  During the life of this case, Post has reported on the 
attempts by the Tajik authorities to raze the synagogue, (reftels B, 
C). 
 
A Government That Lacks Respect 
------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (U) EmbOffs looked at the Jewish Community's documentation, and 
spoke to the Community's most recent lawyer, Yakub Marupov.  In this 
case, the authorities have relied on a weak legal infrastructure and 
lack of transparency to strip the Jewish Community of rights it has 
held since the 1950s.  Moreover, the authorities have relied on a 
compliant judiciary to reinforce their contention that they are not 
obliged to provide the Community with any compensation for its loss, 
despite the fact that some of the buildings destroyed were privately 
owned.  This treatment is consistent with other property rights 
cases Post outlined in reftel D. 
 
¶4. (U) Post believes that the Tajik Government has not been 
motivated by anti-Semitism in its treatment of the Jewish Community. 
 The synagogue case is not unique; the authorities have stripped 
numerous people of their property rights in the center of the city, 
to make way for the grounds of President Rahmon's lavish Palace of 
the Nation (reftel D).  However, government officials do not appear 
to understand that such violations, particularly those against 
religious communities, negatively affect Tajikistan's public image. 
 
 
A Cast of Characters - But No Leadership 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) While the Tajik Government has shown little regard for 
property rights, the Jewish Community in Tajikistan has not been 
blessed with pragmatic leadership.  The Head of the Community, 
Mikhail Abdurahmonov, has been unable to maintain a coherent 
strategy for dealing with the Government.  In speaking with Embassy 
officials, he has been unclear about what government officials have 
said or promised.  He has also been unable to retain the consistent 
support of potentially influential international actors, such as the 
Bukharan Jewish Community of the United States and Canada, the 
National Council for Soviet Jewry, and the Euro-Asian Jewish 
Congress.  Representatives of each of those organizations have 
traveled to Dushanbe since 2004 and discussed the synagogue case 
with officials and Community members, but none have remained engaged 
in the case for a significant period of time. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Abdurahmonov also appears to have been the victim of some 
bad advice.  He placed a great deal of faith in the negotiations 
between Rabbi Gurevitch, the formerly Tashkent-based rabbi who 
served the Dushanbe Jewish Community, and Tajik officials in 2006 
Qserved the Dushanbe Jewish Community, and Tajik officials in 2006 
(reftel E).  Abdurahmonov deferred to Gurevitch on discussions with 
Tajik officials, but those discussions led nowhere.  The Community's 
first lawyer, Abduzarif Mukhturov, advised the Community in 2006 
that they "did not have a case."  The Community's current lawyer has 
a different perspective, but he took the case over at a late stage, 
when it was essentially too late to prevent the Government from 
prevailing. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Post has followed this case from the beginning and tried to 
assist the Community as much as possible.  Post has demarched the 
Tajik Government, and has helped facilitate meetings with Tajik 
officials and interested parties, including the Bukharan Jewish 
Community of the United States and Canada.  The case has been the 
subject of extensive reporting, and has been featured in the 
International Religious Freedom and Human Rights reports. 
 
The Future is Hazy 
------------------ 
 
 
DUSHANBE 00000887  002 OF 002 
 
 
¶8. (U) International attention has once again focused on the 
synagogue, but the synagogue has now been torn down, and the Jewish 
Community has little leverage.  The media reported on June 24 that 
Lev Levayev, the billionaire head of the World Congress of Bukharan 
Jews, discussed the case with President Rahmon in Dushanbe, and that 
land had been offered to relocate the synagogue.  Levayev reportedly 
said that he would have more information on the financing for 
construction of a new building in September 2008.  In a conversation 
with EmbOffs on July 2, Abdurahmonov said he did not know about 
these plans, and that he had not spoken to Levayev. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Comment: An agreement to relocate and rebuild the synagogue 
would have only addressed a short term problem; the most likely 
location for a new synagogue would have been practically 
inaccessible to Dushanbe's aging Jewish population.  Such an 
agreement would have still left the underlying problem - the Tajik 
Government's lack of commitment to protecting property rights, 
treating its citizens fairly, and subjecting its legal and 
administrative processes to any degree of transparency.  We do not 
know whether there are concrete plans to build a new synagogue, or 
whether the Tajik authorities have actually allocated a plot of land 
(particularly in light of the court finding that the authorities do 
not have to compensate the Community).  Levayev does not live in 
Tajikistan, and EmbOffs have so far been unable to find out more 
about his meeting with President Rahmon.  We suspect that the media 
reports contain a small amount of what was actually discussed; 
Levayev is an influential figure with many interests, and he has 
unique contacts in the region.  End comment. 
 
JACOBSON