WikiLeaks Cables Cited in Lawsuit Over $500 Million Sunken Treasure

A deep-sea treasure-hunting company in Florida says that diplomatic cables recently released by WikiLeaks have exposed the U.S. government’s backdoor interference in a lawsuit over $500 million in silver and gold coins recovered from a Spanish galleon.

A deep-sea treasure-hunting company in Florida says that diplomatic cables recently released by WikiLeaks have exposed the U.S. government’s backdoor interference in a lawsuit over $500 million in silver and gold coins recovered from a Spanish galleon.

According to Odyssey Marine Exploration, based in Florida, the U.S. State Department cables show that the U.S. ambassador to Spain made a quid pro quo deal to assist that country in its battle with Odyssey for the treasure.

In exchange for the United States siding with Spain in the lawsuit, Odyssey says, Spain was asked for assistance in returning a $20 million Pissarro painting to a U.S. family that says it was unfairly obtained by the Nazis in Germany.

Claude Cassirer is embroiled in a lawsuit with Spain over possession of the painting, claiming that in 1939 the Nazis forced his Jewish grandmother to sell it for about $360 in exchange for an exit visa to escape Germany. The painting is currently hanging in Spain’s Thyssen museum.

Separately, in 2007, Spain sued Odyssey for ownership of the gold and silver coins, which were recovered from the ocean floor off the coast of Portugal in 2007. The company shipped 17 tons of treasure out of the port of Gibraltar on a chartered 757 airline.

Prior to the discovery, Odyssey had been searching for a ship it believed was the Merchant Royal, a British ship that sunk in bad weather in 1641. But the company claimed it didn’t actually know the identify of the ship the treasure came from, dubbing the vessel the “Black Swan.”

But Spain claimed the treasure came from the Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, a Spanish navy frigate that was sunk by a British warship in 1804 during the Battle of Cape Saint Mary, taking about 200 sailors to their deep-sea death, along with the treasure.

In 2009, a judge in Florida ruled in favor of Spain’s sovereignty over the wreckage and treasure. The case is currently in the U.S. Appeals court for the 11 Circuit in Atlanta, Georgia.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and the Justice Department filed a brief supporting Spain’s claim to the treasure.

But Odyssey says the recently disclosed WikiLeaks cables show the government isn’t a disinterested party. This week the company filed a motion asking the court to strike the government’s brief and force it to disclose that it has an ulterior interest in the lawsuit, according to The New York Times.

“Based on the evidence available to us so far, we are quite concerned,” Greg Stemm, Odyssey’s chief executive told the Times. “The WikiLeaks cables are opening a window into the inner workings of international diplomacy for the general public, and it isn’t always pretty.”

One of the published cables reports on a conversation between U.S. Ambassador in Madrid Eduardo Aguirre and Spanish culture minister César Antonio Molina, in which the ambassador appears to tie the issue of the ship treasure with attempts to recover the Pissarro painting and reports that the Spanish government is willing to meet with Cassirer to discuss his claim on the painting.

“The Ambassador stressed the USG’s interest in direct discussions between the Spanish government and Claude Cassirer,” the cable reads.” The Ambassador noted also that while the Odyssey and Cassirer claim were on separate legal tracks, it was in both governments’ interest to avail themselves of whatever margin for maneuver they had, consistent with their legal obligations, to resolve both matters in a way that favored the bilateral relationship. The minister listened carefully to the Ambassador’s message, but he put the accent on the separateness of the issues.”

A U.S. attorney representing Spain in the lawsuit over the Pissarro painting scoffed at the suggestion of a quid pro quo deal.

“These are two totally separate issues,” William Barron told The New York Times. “Somebody is spinning this into a quid pro quo agreement, but the documents do not show that.”