VZCZCXRO2995
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #0139/01 0321311
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 011311Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6434
INFO RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RUCNFRG/FRG COLLECTIVE
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 1976
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0701
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1218
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2719
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1739
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0900
RHMFIUU/HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE//J5 DIRECTORATE (MC)//
RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
RUZEADH/UDITDUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 BERLIN 000139 
 
STATE FOR INR/R/MR, EUR/PAPD, EUR/PPA, EUR/CE, INR/EUC, INR/P, 
SECDEF FOR USDP/ISA/DSAA, DIA FOR DC-4A 
 
VIENNA FOR CSBM, CSCE, PAA 
 
"PERISHABLE INFORMATION -- DO NOT SERVICE" 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.0. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR IR CH IR UK YM XF ECON EU GM
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: IRAN, CHINA, IRAN, UK, YEMEN, MIDEAST, 
ECONOMIC;BERLIN 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (Iran)   U.S. Beefs Up Military Presence in the Gulf 
¶3.   (China-U.S.)   Arms Shipments to Taiwan 
¶4.   (Iran)   Opposition Movements 
¶5.   (UK)   Iraq War Inquiry 
¶6.   (Yemen)   Anti-Terror Measures 
¶7.   (Mideast)   Goldstone Report 
¶8.   (Economic)   Davos World Economic Forum 
¶9.   (EU)   Greece' Financial Problems, Stability of Euro 
¶10.  (U.S.-Germany)   Relations 
 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
Print media led with the controversy over whether the government 
will accept stolen files on Germans who have parked money in 
Switzerland to avoid paying taxes in Germany.  Editorials focused on 
the same issue, on the Economic Forum in Davos, and on the reaction 
to FDP leader Pinkwart's suggestion to rescind the decision to cut 
the VAT for overnight stays at hotels in half.  ZDF-TV's early 
evening newscast heute opened with a report on German politicians 
haggling over buying stolen data on tax evaders in Switzerland, 
while ARD TV's early evening newscast Tagesschau opened with a story 
on the controversy between the CDU/CSU and the FDP on healthcare 
reform. 
 
¶2.   (Iran)   U.S. Beefs Up Military Presence in the Gulf 
 
All major dailies (2/1) carried factual news reports on the U.S. 
plan to beef up its military presence in the Persian Gulf. 
Sueddeutsche Zeitung carried a lengthy report under the headline: 
"U.S. Rearms Its Arab Allies" and wrote: "With a view towards a 
possible escalation in the nuclear conflict with Iran, the United 
States is rearming its Arab allies with advanced anti-missile 
defense systems.  In cooperation with the governments of several 
Gulf states, the protection of oil terminals, harbors and other 
facilities will also be improved."  Frankfurter Allgemeine carried a 
report under the headline: "America Strengthens Missile Defense 
System - Patriot Missiles for the Persian Gulf States," while Die 
Welt headlined: "U.S. Extends Missile Defense System in the Gulf." 
 
In an editorial under the headline: "A Missile Umbrella for 
Diplomacy," Sueddeutsche Zeitung (2/1) argued: "The U.S. government 
under President Obama is now getting serious in the conflict about 
Iran's nuclear program.  After Tehran did not make up its mind and 
grabbed the U.S. hand for a dialogue, the second part of the U.S. 
strategy will now attempt to force Iran to give in.  This is only 
logical and correct, even though it is not clear whether this 
strategy will succeed.  The deployment of U.S. missiles in the Gulf 
is another element in this strategy, one Tehran is likely to take 
seriously.  It will weaken Iran's ability to terrorize the region 
with missiles in case of an escalation of the situation.  It will 
also diminish Iran's ability to impede the shipment of oil for the 
global economy.  These defense missiles, however, also underscore 
the credibility of the U.S. threat to eliminate Tehran's nuclear 
facilities through military means.  These [U.S.] missiles are 
defensive missiles...and it is now up to politicians and diplomats 
to do everything that they will not be used." 
 
¶3.   (China-U.S.)   Arms Shipments to Taiwan 
 
All papers (2/1) carried reports on the planned U.S. arms shipments 
to Taiwan.  FAZ carried a front -page report headlined: "Beijing is 
Threatening Sanctions against America - 'Considerable Negative 
Consequences' for relations."  Die Welt reported: "American Weapons 
for Taiwan Anger China," and wrote: "With a series of strong 
protests, threats to impose sanctions and the freezing of military 
contacts with the United States, China's leadership reacted to the 
 
BERLIN 00000139  002 OF 005 
 
 
planned U.S. arms shipments to Taiwan.  In a concerted action, the 
Foreign, Defense and three other Ministries condemned the plans 
initiated by President Obama."  In a report under the headline: 
"Beijing Is Threatening Washington," Sueddeutsche Zeitung noted: 
"This time, open threats from Beijing are new in that Washington's 
position will have adverse effects in regional political talks. 
Political scientist Jin Canrong from Beijing University told the APN 
news agency that 'the United States will now pay a price for these 
shipments.'  He added: 'As of today, China will really take 
retaliatory measures, for instance with respect to cooperation in 
the conflicts with North Korea and Iran and with respect to 
anti-terror cooperation.'" 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (2/1) carried an editorial under the 
headline: "Serious," and argued: "If the 'unity of the fatherland' 
is involved, the Chinese leadership is not open to arguments.  It 
always wants to decide on its own whether and when unity is 
involved.  The problem from a Beijing point of view is that the 
people in Taiwan do not want to return to the fold of the 
fatherland.  But Beijing has never accepted such minor quibbles. 
That is why the anger at the United States, which now wants to send 
arms shipments to Taiwan for its own defense, is so great.  This 
anger is free from any kind of artificial thunder.  China is very 
serious about it.  Hopefully, the Americans have kept this in mind 
before.  If they did, they should now not criticize China.  They 
must now get through this crisis in relations." 
 
Die Welt (2/1) editorialized under the headline; "Misguided Gesture 
of Threat" that "the outrage in Beijing was artificial.  China had 
known for weeks of these planned arms shipments to Taiwan.  Both 
sides know that the arms shipments do not signal a new anti-China 
policy of the Obama government but only meet a large weapons order 
that was initiated by the Bush administration in 2001.  Beijing's 
shrill tones do not aim at the shipments that cannot be stopped 
anyway but they are also thought to be a shot across the bow not to 
supply any of the promised offensive weapons  Otherwise, relations 
could really be burdened.  Beijing should now try to find out why 
Taiwan's new President Ma Ying-jeow welcomes these arms shipments. 
They will help him pursue his overtures to China from an equal 
position....  Taiwan is rightfully afraid of the more than 1,300 
missiles which are pointed from China's southern coast at Taiwan. 
Instead of rattling its saber, China's leadership should begin 
dismantling its missile threat and renounce violence in the 
reunification question.  This would not only result in new relations 
with Taiwan and the United States, but would also resolve the 
question of U.S. arms shipments." 
 
Under the headline: "Beijing is Testing its Own Strength," die 
tageszeitung (2/1) opined: "These shrill tones from Beijing do not 
come unexpectedly.  This criticism is to test the U.S. government 
but also the mood in China itself.  For the first time, Chinese 
politicians are not only threatening political consequences but they 
are also threatening economic sanctions on U.S. companies.  Since 
the U.S. Congress must approve the deal within one month, time will 
tell to what extent strong America's politicians and companies are 
still backing Taiwan.  But the most important audience for the 
warnings is not the United States and the Taiwanese but the Chinese 
and the military.  They should realize that the Communist Party 
leadership would no longer just sit back and take everything, not 
even from the U.S. superpower." 
 
¶4.   (Iran)   Opposition Movements 
 
Under the headline: "Iranian Power Struggle," Frankfurter Rundschau 
(1/30) judged: "The power struggle in Iran has by no means been 
decided yet...and both sides apparently are awaiting the next 
confrontation on February 11, the Day of the Revolution.  Then again 
millions of people will take to the streets and abuse the highest 
 
BERLIN 00000139  003 OF 005 
 
 
religious leader Ali Khamenei as murderer, dictator, and new Shah. 
But this trend is also worrying the three opposition leaders.  In 
their loose coalition of government critics and the dissatisfied, 
the number of those people is growing who want to completely abolish 
the system of the Islamic Republic.  The opposition leaders want to 
dampen such a development and their latest remarks aim at this.  The 
core of the most recent message to the part of the regime that is 
willing to make compromises is that they want a change personnel but 
not the system.  But they add that the right of the people is not 
negotiable to call for measures against the deception that the 
controversial president used to stay in power.  That is why the 
opposition leaders have now for the first time mentioned the price 
for the internal pacification of the country - Ahmadinejad's 
resignation." 
 
According to die tageszeitung (2/1), "February 11 could be decisive 
for the future development in Iran.  That is why it is all the more 
surprising that the West ignores this situation and continues to 
concentrate on the nuclear conflict with Iran.  The United States 
and the EU are pushing for tough sanctions and Washington is 
increasing the pressure by deploying an anti-missile defense system 
along the Persian Gulf as if the U.S. and the EU deliberately wanted 
to distract attention from the internal Iranian conflict and back 
the regime.  The radicals in Iran are likely to secretly welcome the 
escalation of the conflict with the West. They argue that the 
fatherland and Islam would be in danger.  In this emergency 
situation, the people should unite and support the government.  And 
every criticism that divides the people is considered collaboration 
with the international enemies.  This is the logical consequence of 
the current western strategy." 
 
¶5.   (UK)   Iraq War Inquiry 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/30) editorialized: "A part of the British 
public and political elite would have liked to see former Prime 
Minister Blair go down to his knees before the inquiry into the Iraq 
War and ask for forgiveness...  Of course, Blair did not submit to 
the huntsmen.  He did not apologize but vehemently defended his 
decision to topple Saddam Hussein....  It is unlikely that Blair 
persuaded his critics.  However, they must realize that September 11 
changed the foundation on which those responsible in London and 
Washington made decisions.  The issue of weapons of mass 
destructions was given a higher priority.  Without 9/11, there would 
not have been a war in Afghanistan and Iraq." 
 
In a front page editorial, Die Welt (1/30) remarked: "Those who 
thought Tony Blair would come as a contrite sinner were mistaken. 
Blair gave all he had in this rhetoric battle.  He did so because 
this is also about his place in history books, in which he does not 
want to be written off as somebody who was wrong.  However, he said 
what he said on the Iraq War because he is convinced that it was 
right.   Once again he made clear to a public that tends to forget 
that the first decade of the millennium, which began so joyfully, 
turned into one of a lethal terrorist threat..  What happened on 
September 11 was not a computer game.   And it was good that there 
were leaders who thought that this problem could not be resolved in 
a diplomatic and multilateral dialogue.  Who knows which tragedies 
were prevented by the fact that they took action in Iraq (and 
Afghanistan)?  Tony Blair admitted the mistake of not having found 
Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.  However, he stuck to 
the conviction that it was right to fight the war.  He was eloquent 
and convincing, reflecting the passion for democracy which is so 
genuine for the Westminster parliament." 
 
¶6.   (Yemen)   Anti-Terror Measures 
 
"Why Yemen is Important" headlined Sueddeutsche Zeitung (2/1), and 
editorialized: "The interest of the West for Yemen will rise if 
 
BERLIN 00000139  004 OF 005 
 
 
there are growing concerns that al-Qaida could move unimpededly in 
Yemen.  This is not new...but the Saudis should have greater reason 
to be worried.  It is not the Huthi rebels with which the Saudis 
have clashed along the border but it is the disintegration of the 
Yemenite state that is so dangerous for Saudi Arabia.  For the 
United States, too, there is also a reason to build up a presence in 
the country right now, even though no one speaks about it: between 
the Indian subcontinent and the Red Sea, the Chinese are looking for 
a strategic basis.  But everywhere they are faced with a clientele 
from Washington.  In Yemen, which has not yet been firmly embedded 
in the U.S. system of states, they see a chance." 
 
¶7.   (Mideast)   Goldstone Report 
 
Several papers carried articles on the Goldstone Report, noting that 
"the Israeli government is apparently considering allowing limited 
investigations into the Gaza War" (Frankfurter Allgemeine 1/30). 
Tagesspiegel (1/30) headlined a short report "Government defends 
Gaza offensive," adding that "in a response to the UN report on the 
Gaza offensive, Israel defended itself against the allegations of 
war crimes."  Frankfurter Rundschau (1/30) carried a lengthy report 
by Mideast correspondent Inge Gnther, highlighting that Prime 
Minister "Netanyahu suggested allowing independent experts to 
investigate Gaza War."  Frankfurter Allgemeine's Mideast 
correspondent Hans-Christian RQler noted under the headline "Israel 
denies war crimes" that "the Israeli government refuted allegations 
that soldiers deliberately attacked civilians during the Gaza War" 
(2/1). 
 
In a Frankfurter Rundschau (1/30) editorial, Mideast correspondent 
Inge Gnther noted: "Israel did not spare any efforts to respond to 
the Goldstone Report.  It moved heaven and earth to refute the 
allegations that the Israeli army deliberately aimed at Palestinian 
civilians.  The office of the prime minister recruited numerous 
volunteers for a counter-campaign.  However, it was left to the army 
to examine what really happened in Gaza.  Most Israelis have 
confidence in their army and believe it has the highest moral 
standards in the world.  Outside of Israel, the question of why 
Operation Cast Lead killed 1,400 Palestinians, including many 
children and women, remained unanswered.  The Goldstone Report's 
allegation of war crimes is going far, maybe too far.  However, only 
an independent commission can provide evidence to the contrary. 
This is beginning to get through even to Prime Minister Netanyahu. 
By doing so, Israel would not compromise itself.  On the contrary, a 
critical view would steel Israel against future mistakes and 
enemies." 
 
¶8.   (Economic)   Davos World Economic Forum 
 
Deutschlandfunk (1/30) commented:  "The situation in the global 
banking world cannot go on.  New stricter rules must be implemented. 
 This was the number one issue in Davos, and it is reassuring that 
the managers from trade and industry, politics, and science have 
learned this lesson.  But what is worrying is the still existing gap 
between these camps....  Davos showed that the suggestions from 
Washington, Paris, Brussels, and Berlin are still too contradictory 
and every banker must be afraid that these proposals will be 
implemented.  The bankers are rightfully warning against quick 
populist moves but offer enough points of attack and are then 
wondering why their factual arguments are not accepted by the 
public.  The world is complex and multidimensional.  Nevertheless, 
new solutions for banks must be found and developed. This Economic 
Forum is elitist but there is no doubt that it is also necessary." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (2/1) opined: "a first evaluation of the 
World Economic Forum in Davos has revealed that the interest of 
international media in the event is declining.  This is not 
surprising because prominent political actors and rousing issues 
 
BERLIN 00000139  005 OF 005 
 
 
were not present this year.  This year's meeting could not send a 
strong message because there were no clear answers to many 
questions.  In the snow flurry of Davos, the issues could only be 
broached.  But the mood among the U.S. and European managers was 
clearly better than last year." 
 
¶9.   (EU)   Greece' Financial Problems, Stability of Euro 
 
Sddeutsche (2/1) commented: "Of course, the Europeans could let 
Greece fail.  They could stand by and watch what happens when one of 
the Euro-zone countries goes bankrupt.  However, this would be a 
risky experiment, and all Euro countries, in fact the entire EU, 
would have to pay dearly for it.  The Europeans would try out what 
the U.S. government and Federal Reserve did in the case of Lehman 
Brothers....  Chancellor Merkel will not be able to reject a bailout 
program because Greece's bankruptcy would be more dangerous in the 
end.  The conditions of the emergency loans are more important 
because the wrongdoing must be punished, regardless of whether it is 
a bank or a state. The EU must strip Athens of its power and dictate 
its budget.  This would make clear that it would not be a carte 
blanche for everybody to live on money you don't have.  The EU must 
also apply this lesson to banks.  It is not good enough that banks 
just repay the loans.  They must be strictly regulated to stop them 
from making mistakes again." 
 
¶10.   (U.S.-Germany)   Relations 
 
In a front-page editorial, Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/30) remarked: 
"Germany has special relations to three countries: the United States 
of America, France and Israel.  Their developments mirror Germany's 
foreign policy after the Second World War and their significance 
defines Germany's position in today's world policy.  The 
relationship with America is based upon the Marshall Plan and the 
integration into the West.  It is linked to Germany's economic rise 
and its return to the civilized world community after the crimes of 
the Nazis.  The U.S. promoted the process of European unity and 
guaranteed Europe's security in the Cold War, from which 
particularly Germany as a leading state benefited.  In addition, the 
U.S. played a major part in the [German] reunification, which it 
supported without any reservations, unlike some European neighbors. 
The East-West conflict is history; the relations of the mentor to 
its former model student were seriously disrupted during the Iraq 
war; the elites who fostered close relations between Germany and 
America are now beginning to leave the political stage. 
German-American relations are no longer fundamentally different from 
the obligations and interests that determine the relationships other 
regional medium-sized powers have with the only real world power." 
 
MURPHY