Natalie Gerhardstein: The foundation was established in part to promote and preserve the memory of the Holocaust, and also to look at concerns surrounding the assets seized from the Jewish community in Luxembourg during the occupation, which this agreement will address. Could you tell us more about facts and figures around these assets?

François Moyse: The foundation was established generally for remembrance, not specifically for issues of restitution, but the issues of restitution have been pending since the war. And so the main issue was that there are still dormant bank accounts since the war belonging or having belonged to foreign Jews and stateless Jews. And, because they were killed, because their heirs were scattered around the world, they really had difficulties in just getting any kind of information, because of banking secrecy as well. This issue was never met with a global answer.

We just know that for decades, banks still held some dormant bank accounts, and there was never a global solution to try and force the banks or to try to impose on them that they would pay out. And that's also one of the reasons why the foundation was created that, indeed, when there are no heirs anymore, the money still in bank accounts would be paid to the foundation. And the same is for insurance companies, where we know that some insurance policies were never paid out, and where the foundation is also deemed to receive the proceeds of these insurance policies.

A 2019 The Times of Israel article called Luxembourg a “deadbeat” since it was the last western European country to sign a proper resolution, citing that a “1950 law prevents about 75% of roughly 4,000 Jews who had lived there before the Nazi invasion of 1940 from applying for compensation for stolen property.” Why do you think Luxembourg has been so late on an agreement?

That’s a good question. I don't know if I have the answer. What I know is that the 1950 law only addressed the citizens of Luxembourg. And, as you pointed out, I mean, we thought there were 4,000 Jews in 1940, but the last records showed that 5,000 names have been recorded. So this means that out of around 5,000 Jews, probably not more than 1,000 were Luxembourgers. So this law only addressed--not only for Jews, but generally for everybody--only the citizens of Luxembourg. A second law came in 1967 about pensions for victims of the war, and the Jews were completely left out as a category of victims of the war. So these are just explanation of what happens. 

Now as to why the Jews, and especially the foreign Jews, were never included in compensation, it’s difficult to tell. What we know is that for the last 20 years, we are a new generation, we push Luxembourg to do the same as the neighbouring countries--France and Belgium--to face their history. It has been a difficult task because I believe Luxembourg was also a victim of the Nazis, and it took a lot of time to for the authorities to understand that we are not seeking to point any kind of responsibility of any group, but what we are seeking to do is a measure of justice, to recognise what happened and to have a general solution so long after the war that would [address] what happened there--that the Jews were not only persecuted, but all the other belongings taken away… It took a long time of maturation to understand that it is time to turn this page and that this acknowledgement needs to be done.

Have records been well kept, and if so by the state or by the victims and/or their heirs?

There are a number of archives, but even so long after the war we found out that some of the archives have not been studied, which is really astonishing. State archives have a lot of archives, and we know that other players have archives. For example, some municipalities have looked through their own archives, like Differdange, but we know that has not been a general effort of everybody, so there’s a lot to be researched.

We hope with this agreement, we will push for more research again because there are a number of things that need to be checked but also because generally we enter now a period which will not be live memory of the victims because they are leaving us, they’re dying, but we are entering into history. We want to have research so that we understand better what happened and that we can show how much has been looted. That's the purpose also of us now opening a new chapter.

From your own personal perspective, has Luxembourg had problems coming to terms with certain aspects of the Nazi occupation, and has that played a role in this?

I believe yes. I think that like every country, there is a narrative which was told after the war. Luxembourg took longer maybe than other countries to understand that narrative is not absolute, that there needs to be additional research and additional comments, and that's what happens with some historians. It’s a difficult task to confront the past, and that’s what is happening now, with some delay. But it needs to be done because we always said that if you want to face the future, you have to study the past, and this recognition took a long time, in my view, here in Luxembourg.

There have been reports of an increase in anti-Semitism in Europe, including in Luxembourg, for example acts of vandalism. Can you talk a bit about anti-Semitism in Luxembourg and how the foundation plays a role to help fight it and discrimination more broadly?  

Well, generally, there is, thank God, no violent anti-Semitism in the country, but I think like everywhere, there is discrimination, [including] racism, hatred on social media, xenophobia. There are some people who still haven't understood that history has to be understood. These phenomena do exist. 

Our goal in the foundation is obviously to teach the Holocaust and show its lessons, but we have in our statutes also the mission generally to fight against racism, intolerance, etc. It’s not our primary goal, but it’s true that by showing minorities, and not well seen minorities looked upon as foreigners, they can be persecuted, and we need to be very, very careful in these times that such a phenomena won't reappear in our country, or generally in Europe. We’re definitely also there to help fight anti-Semitism, even if it's not our primary goal.

Although I understand you are unable to discuss details of the agreement before its signature, are you satisfied with what has been laid out in it? 

You’ll see that the agreement includes a lot of issues that are satisfactory, and I think that without forgetting about the past, we have to work towards the future. That memory of the Shoah will be an important element of teaching people, not only youth, about what happened and what could happen, and therefore it's not only about the past but also about building the future. So we are satisfied, even if we would have wished that maybe the situation would have been different in the past decades, but at some point you have to agree on a global solution, and that’s what is happening. 

Will the Foundation take a more central role surrounding this restitution agreement in terms of practical aspects moving forward?

The Foundation will be strengthened in its role, and that will also appear as a consequence of this agreement.