Russia Threatens to Sue Library of Congress over Books Loaned to Jewish Sect Chabad in Response to Court-Ordered Sanctions Against Russia

In the ever-widening ramifications of the Brooklyn-based Jewish sect Chabad's attempts to obtain a library and archive from Russia, the brawl is spreading from a private party's lawsuit -- and resulting in $50,000/day court-ordered sanctions against Russia -- to an intergovernmental one of Russia vs. the U.S.

Russia's Foreign Ministry has recommended that its Culture Ministry and Russian State Library sue the Library of Congress demanding the return of seven books the Russian State Library sent in 1994 to the LOC for the use of Chabad that have not been sent back.  The idea behind the threatened lawsuit -- to be brought in Russia -- is payback for the sanctions in Chabad's own ongoing suit, according to Moscow's state-run press.

Chabad's suit against Russia triggered Russia's more than two-year-old embargo on lending art to U.S. museums.  Read more in my latest article in The Art Newspaper.

Text (c) Copyright 2013 Laura Gilbert

In Major Victory for Chabad, Court Orders Sanctions Against Russia of $50,000 a Day; Ruling Is Contrary to U.S. Position

In a major victory for Chabad, the D.C. District Court has found Russia in contempt and ordered it to pay $50,000 a day until it obeys the court's July 2010 order to turn over to Chabad two collections of books and manuscripts.  The court issued the sanctions order yesterday.

The District Court rejected the Justice Department's argument that sanctioning Russia would interfere with the executive branch's conduct of foreign relations.

The U.S. had argued that sanctions would purport to dispose of property held by another state in that state's territory, which would be contrary to international law.  The court responded:  "The United States has conflated a court's issuing of contempt sanctions with execution or enforcement of an award by, for instance, attaching tangible property."

The court also criticized the government's argument that sanctions would undermine the State Department's attempts to resolve Chabad's dispute with Russia diplomatically -- it had engaged in such efforts going back to 1991.  "Though the United States may indeed be 'committed to continuing these efforts,' it provides neither any information regarding its future plans, nor any other reason to believe that its new efforts will be more likely to succeed than past failures."

Art Embargo

The Chabad case triggered Russia's embargo on lending art to U.S. museums, now well into its third year, and in its court papers the U.S. said sanctions would interfere with its efforts to end the embargo.  The court was not convinced:  "The United States fails to reasonably and specifically explain the connection between the proposed sanctions and its ability to negotiate a resolution to the moratorium."

Most experts contacted prior to yesterday's decision expected Chabad to lose.

The ruling comes at a time of deteriorating relations between Russia and the U.S., with the latest example being Russia's banning adoptions by Americans.

Text (c) Copyright 2013 Laura Gilbert

U.S. Says No to Sanctioning Russia in Art Embargo Case

The Obama Administration has asked a federal court to keeps its nose out of U.S. foreign affairs and Russia's internal affairs in the case brought against Russia by the Jewish sect Chabad.

The Department of Justice urged the court not to impose monetary sanctions against Russia on the grounds that they "would be contrary to the foreign policy interests of the United States," impermissible under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and, on the facts of the case, "entirely without precedent internationally."

Chabad had requested that Russia be sanctioned for failing to comply with the court's order to turn over two collections of books and manuscripts to the U.S. embassy in Moscow or to representatives of Chabad.  The judgment in that case triggered Russia's embargo on lending art to U.S. museums, which has passed its second anniversary.

Read more about the U.S. position in my story in The Art Newspaper, here, and more about the dispute and the embargo in my New York Observer piece, here.

Taking Stock at Year-End: The Google Search

Richard Prince (left) and Larry Gagosian

As some of you have no doubt noticed, thanks to you my articles published here and elsewhere frequently appear in the top five of Google search results, even months after they are published. 

Today I performed some searches on Google (using Firefox) for rankings of news that I broke and exhibitions that I reviewed.

Cezanne loan nixed

Here are results -- as of this morning -- for some of my top-ranked articles, indicating what words I typed in, the number of results for that search, and who placed above or below me.  I could include more stories but you get the idea, and my gratitude.

Search:  Russian art loan embargo      

Number of Search Results:  1,190,000

Rankings:

            1.  My New York Observer article on Chabad v. Russian Federation, the court case that triggered Russia’s embargo on loaning art to U.S. museums

            2.  Jerusalem Post

            3.  New York Times

            4.  New York Times

            5.  Los Angeles Times

Search: Richard Prince copyright lawsuit

Number of Search Results: 153,000

Rankings:

            1.  New York Times

            2.  My New York Observer article breaking the news of Prince’s strategy on appeal and what happened to his unsold, copyright-infringing paintings

            3.  New York Observer

            4.  New York Times

            5.  New York Times

Soutine portrait

Search:  Soutine Bacon

Number of Search Results: 141,000

Rankings:

            1.  My review of the Soutine/Bacon show held in New York

            2.  New York Times

            3.  Huffington Post

Search:  Metropolitan Museum cancels loans

Number of Search Results:  106,000

Rankings:

            1.  My Observer article breaking the news that the Met had canceled loans to Russia in response to Russia’s art embargo

            2.  New York Times (kindly and appropriately crediting my article with breaking the news)

Search: Picasso Marie Therese lamour fou

Number of Search Results: 17,300

Rankings:

            1.  My review of the "Picasso and Marie-Therese: L’amour fou" show at the Gagosian Gallery

            2.  Gagosian

            3.  Artnet

            4.  nymuseums

            5.  New York Magazine

On loan from Koons

Search:  Jeff Koons Old Masters Metropolitan Museum

Number of Search Results: 39,400

Rankings:

            1.  New York Observer (kindly and appropriately referring to my article, which broke the story)

            2.  My story uncovering Koons’ secret loans of his Old Masters to the Met

            3.  Telegraph

Search:  Poussin fails to sell

Number of Search Results:  3,560,000

Rankings:

            1.  My piece on Poussin’s “Ordination” flopping at Christie’s

            2.  BBC

            3.  Wall Street Journal

Search: Cervera Hebrew Bible Metropolitan Museum

Number of Search Results: 104,000

Rankings:

            1.  My piece on the opening of the Cervera Hebrew Bible display at the Met

            2.  My piece on pages of the Bible showing unicorns in the context of French and Islamic art

           

Search: Richard Prince Larry Gagosian copyright infringement

$2.43 million paid

Number of Results:  7,670

Rankings:

            1.  The Art Newspaper

            2.  My story (different from my Observer article mentioned above) exclusively revealing some of the buyers of Prince’s infringing paintings and how much they paid

Search: Rauschenberg Short Circuit

Number of Search Results: 8,660

Rankings:

            1.  New York Times

            2.  My piece analyzing Robert Rauschenberg’s “Short Circuit”

Search: Passion in Venice Man of Sorrows

Number of Search Results: 292,000

Rankings:

            1.  Museum of Biblical Art

            2.  Amazon

            3.  Wall Street Journal

            4.  New York Times

            5.  My review of the “Passion in Venice” show that examined the Man of Sorrows at New York’s Museum of Biblical Art

Images: Top from Artinfo, Cezanne and Soutine pulled from the internet, bottom image from court documents. 

Image of Koons loan and text Copyright 2011-2012 Laura Gilbert

In Case that Triggered Russia's Art Embargo, Chabad Tells Court It Is "In Direct Discussions" with Russia

In the closely watched case that triggered Russia's embargo on lending art to U.S. museums, Chabad v. Russian Federation, Chabad has informed the federal court in Washington, D.C. that it is "in direct discussions" with the Russian government about the archive and library of religious books and manuscripts that gave rise to their dispute. 

The disclosure was made late Friday in a request that the court temporarily stay until March 1, 2012 all proceedings and not rule on Chabad's pending motion for sanctions.  Chabad had moved for sanctions in April because Russia had not complied with the court's default judgment ordering Russia to turn over the archive and the library to Chabad.  (A discussion of the case and the embargo, which I reported and wrote and then sold to a New York publication, can be found here.)

Russia instituted its art embargo -- which has affected U.S. museums nationwide -- in August 2010, saying that it feared Chabad would seize its art to enforce the judgment.  In its Friday filing Chabad states that it "will not seek to enforce the judgment against Defendants by requesting attachment of any Russian property in the United States or otherwise on or before March 1, 2012."

Two months ago, Chabad had requested a 60-day stay from the court "to facilitate Chabad's attempts to commence negotiation with the Russian Government," so with direct talks underway there has apparently been some movement.

Chabad has aggressively litigated in the U.S. courts for seven years.  What precipitated its drastic change in strategy?  And Russia had walked away from the litigation, claiming no U.S. court has jurisdiction over it.  Why is it willing to talk with Chabad now?

Attempts to speak with Chabad's lawyers and the Russian Embassy have so far been unsuccessful.

Text Copyright 2011 Laura Gilbert

In Case that Triggered Russian Embargo on Loans to U.S. Museums, Chabad Now Says It Wants to Negotiate; Russian Ship Refuses to Land in San Francisco, Citing Dispute

This story of the latest developments in Chabad v. Russian Federation was up briefly and then purchased exclusively by the New York Observer (it was reported and written by me).  Read it here.

Art in the Crossfire: A Jewish Sect's Claims Lead to U.S-Russia Art Wars

Not since the Cold War, it seems, have strained diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Russia spilled over into the public arena with such ferocity—only this time the war is over art and two collections of religious books.

The art wars were triggered by the private agenda of Chabad, a Jewish sect seeking religious books and manuscripts possessed by Russia. In 2004, Chabad brought suit as the successors to earlier owners of these pieces and claimed to be their rightful owner. Russia instituted an embargo on art loans to U.S. museums after Brooklyn-based Chabad obtained a default judgment in July 2010 from the District Court in Washington, D.C. Russia had walked out on the proceedings, claiming no U.S. court has jurisdiction over it.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art turned up the heat in this standoff another notch when it confirmed on August 11 its decision not to send 35 works by fashion designer Paul Poiret to the Moscow Kremlin Museum for an upcoming exhibition there. The Met’s chief spokesperson, Harold Holzer, said the museum was acting in response to Moscow’s recent cancellation of loans to the Met as part of Russia’s now year-long embargo.

Continue reading my story in The New York Observer, which brings to light Russia's history of fierce nationalism, especially when it comes to what it considers threats to its patrimony, which discussions of the case and the embargo have until now ignored.

Photo of  Kremlin Museum by Alexander Bokovoy.

U.S. and LACMA Seek Federal Court Help in Russian Embargo on Art Loans: Litigation as Diplomacy in Incendiary Chabad Case

A federal court in Washington, D.C. hearing Chabad v. Russian Federation, the case that set off Russia’s embargo on lending art to U.S. museums, has apparently become the latest forum for some extraordinary diplomacy in the U.S.-Russia art wars.

The case puts into sharp relief how Russia's nationalism and protection of its sovereignty have been frequently underestimated in diplomatic and cultural matters over the centuries, which occasionally led to war.  Chabad, for its part, is no stranger to making incendiary statements, including here.

Among other comments, Chabad's co-counsel in this case stated that it would use "any means permissible" to enforce the default judgment it holds against Russia.  "If the Russians are concerned about the art they send to America, I am happy they are concerned.  If they comply they won't have to be concerned," the lawyer said.

Chabad, a Jewish sect based in Brooklyn, is seeking to recover the "Schneerson Collection," an archive and library of religious books and manuscripts gathered by one of its leaders.  Russia, after an adverse ruling from the D.C. Court of Appeals, abandoned the case, saying the U.S. courts had no jurisdiction over it.

Chabad obtained a default judgment in July 2010 that ordered Russia to turn over the collection.  Russia fears that if it sends art to the U.S. it will be seized by Chabad to force Russia to comply with the judgment, and imposed its art embargo, according to a report by the Agence France Presse, in August.

The embargo has seen loans to the Met and National Gallery cancelled (a few are shown here) and others recalled.

Chabad is now seeking to enforce the judgment, and on April 4 made two motions that are currently before the court -- one requesting sanctions and one requesting permission to begin attachment proceedings.

Unexpected Maneuvering

In the last couple of weeks there has been some unexpected maneuvering by nonparties and Chabad alike.

The U.S. government is considering filing a statement with the court explaining “the U.S. position on the seizure of art loans,” one of Chabad attorneys, Seth Gerber of Bingham McCutchen, told this reporter.

The L.A. County Museum of Art has asked Chabad to stipulate that it will not seize any of the 38 art objects the museum still hopes Russia will lend for its “Gifts of the Sultan” exhibition opening June 5.

And Chabad has filed two sets of papers whose purpose is “for the reassurance of the Russian government” and museums, in addition to the court, Gerber said.

In the just-filed papers — one a letter from Chabad’s lawyers to the U.S. government and one the stipulation with LACMA — Chabad promises not to seize art that federal statutory law protects from seizure anyway.  To quote the letter, “Our client intends fully to comply with the federal law.”

Federal law -- the federal Immunity from Seizure Act -- protects cultural objects on temporary loan to nonprofits like museums.  Chabad’s lawyers have contended — to this reporter as recently as Sunday — that they will go after any of Russia's cultural assets that do not receive federal protection, such as those in the U.S. for commercial purposes.

Incendiary Comments?

Why would an organization feel compelled to state in court, twice, that it wouldn’t do something prohibited by law?

“The law has always been clear,” says Charles A. Goldstein, counsel to the Commission for Art Recovery and a specialist in art restitution: temporary loans to museums “can’t be seized.”  Chabad’s filings, he said, are simply “a statement of the obvious.”

Chabad, Gerber said, thought it “prudent” to file the papers to “clarify” its position because of extensive “media coverage.”  He acknowledged in particular certain incendiary statements by co-counsel Marshall Grossman and Nathan Lewin.

In February, for example, the New York Times reported that when asked whether he would consider seizing art, Grossman had said, “Chabad will exercise every remedy under law to enforce the judgment.  No exceptions.”

And the Jewish Chronicle, in an article that also appears on Chabad's website, quoted Lewin as saying that Chabad would use "any means permissible" to force Russia to comply.  "If the Russians are concerned about the art they send to America, I am happy they are concerned.  If they comply they won't have to be concerned."

Questioned about the statements, Gerber was quick to say they were consistent with the latest court filings, emphasizing the words “under law” and "permissible."  He also pointed out that they were made after the embargo had gone into effect.

Why had Chabad waited until now to clarify its position, given the media attention starting in February?  “No museums had  contacted" him, Gerber said.

But he knew that Russia had cancelled loans to the Met and the National Gallery?  He “didn’t know” the cancellation were “because of the ban,” which hadn’t been confirmed until very recently, he said.

U.S. Government Concerns
 
It seems the court-filed assurances were more likely the result of Chabad’s attorneys' recent conversations with the U.S. government and LACMA.

On April 4, Chabad filed its motion requesting court approval to begin enforcement proceedings.  Ten days later, the government filed a Notice of Potential Participation, citing unspecified “concerns” about the motion. The government stated that it required 30 days to evaluate the situation and requested the court not rule on the motion before then.

Chabad’s attorneys contacted the State and Justice Departments to find out what the problem was.  On hearing the government’s concerns about Russia’s cancellation and recall of loans — according to Gerber, the government was considering filing a statement of “the U.S. position on the seizure of art loans” — the attorneys assured the government in a May 2 conference call that Chabad would not attempt to seize artworks that were protected from seizure by federal law.

They memorialized that assurance in the letter addressed to the government, and filed the letter on May 13.

On May 16, the government filed a Supplemental Notice, stating that there had been “certain recent developments,” including Chabad’s May 13 filing, and that it needed another 30 days to “evaluate the impact” of that submission.

LACMA then contacted Chabad — the only museum to have done so, Gerber said — and the stipulation was filed May 18.

Impact
 
 Have Chabad’s assurances had any impact?

The Legal Times on May 17 quoted a Russian embassy spokesman saying that negotiations with the U.S. would begin  “very soon.”  If anything’s been scheduled, Gerber said, Chabad hasn’t “been asked to the table.”  Attempts to obtain confirmation from the U.S. State and Justice Departments have been unsuccessful.

At LACMA, a staffer declined to comment beyond saying that the situation was “fluid” and the museum was “moderately hopeful.”

Phone calls to the Russian embassy and consulate for its perspective went unanswered.

As for Chabad’s assurances, they only cover art that comes within federal law — i.e., on temporary loan to nonprofit institutions.  Any art that Russia sends to the U.S. for a “commercial purpose” is fair game, Gerber said.

Will the Mariinsky/Kirov Ballet cancel its trip to New York this July for fear that its sets and costumes will be seized?  Are we witnessing the beginning of a broader breakdown in cultural exchange?

These two intransigent parties may well deserve each other, but the repercussions may be large indeed. 

Images of cancelled art loans, top to bottom:  A Gauguin at the Pushkin; a Cezanne and a Canaletto at the Hermitage.

Copyright 2011 Laura Gilbert