This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PARIS 000212 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPT FOR INR/R/MR; IIP/RW; IIP/RNY; BBG/VOA; IIP/WEU; AF/PA; 
EUR/WE /P/SP; D/C (MCCOO); EUR/PA; INR/P; INR/EUC; PM; OSC ISA 
FOR ILN; NEA; WHITE HOUSE FOR NSC/WEUROPE; DOC FOR ITA/EUR/FR 
AND PASS USTR/PA; USINCEUR FOR PAO; NATO/PA; MOSCOW/PA; 
ROME/PA; USVIENNA FOR USDEL OSCE. 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR FR
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Iran GWOT - Guantanamo Israel 
PARIS - Thursday, January 12, 2006 
 
 
(A) SUBJECTS COVERED IN TODAY'S REPORT: 
 
Iran 
GWOT - Guantanamo 
Israel 
 
B) SUMMARY OF COVERAGE: 
 
Two stories lead today, Iran and the conundrum facing the 
international community, and Guantanamo. Le Figaro, Le Monde 
and La Croix lead with Iran. La Croix asks "Why Does Iran Play 
With Nuclear Fire?" Le Figaro headlines "The West's 
Embarrassed Stance" while Le Monde leads with: "Iran Takes One 
More Step Towards Nuclear Escalation." While Le Monde's 
editorial explains why the West is caught up in "The Iranian 
Trap," Le Figaro devotes a full page to "Washington's Search 
for a Response to the Iranian Challenge," and to "The EU-3 and 
the UN." One op-ed emphasizes why "it is urgent to answer the 
challenge" and the other contends "an embargo is necessary 
against the Ayatollahs." (See Part C) 
 
Liberation carries a two-page report on "Guantanamo: Four 
Years Outside the Law." For the editorialist, Guanatanamo and 
the methods used are in themselves "a defeat of democracy, 
because the war against terror does not require the use of 
similar (terror) methods." One story is devoted to detainees 
being abused, "according to witness reports from lawyers made 
to Amnesty International, which "has not visited the base." 
(See Part C) Liberation also interviews Eugene Fifell, a U.S. 
lawyer specializing in military law: "The concept of `illegal 
combatants' is perfectly legitimate. but the U.S. has not 
abided by the Geneva Convention. A special tribunal should 
have been created. While pressure is on the U.S. to send back 
detainees to their home countries, I do not believe the U.S. 
will dismantle Guantanamo. This is a prison built to stay." 
 
The government's response to the threat of an Avian flu 
epidemic is today's other major story. Le Figaro details 
France's plan as revealed by the Health Minister, Xavier 
Bertrand, who is interviewed in France Soir: "By 2007, France 
will have stocked 33 million doses of anti-viral medication. 
The World Health Organization has determined France is among 
the best prepared countries (to deal with an epidemic.)" 
In Le Figaro, Alexandre Adler doubts "that Ehud Olmert can 
bring peace to the Middle East conflict, not unless progress 
is made in Iraq, Syria and Iran." In Liberation, Jacques 
Amalric writes on "Netanyahu, the Nightmare," for the Middle 
East and for the Bush administration. (See Part C) 
 
(C) SUPPORTING TEXT/BLOCK QUOTES: 
 
Iran 
 
"Determination" 
Guillaume Goubert in right-of-center La Croix (01/12): 
"Determination is necessary with regard to Iran but also North 
Korea. The way both nations are playing with the international 
community, one step forward and two backward, demands a full 
stop. This is why it appears today that the UNSC is the only 
possible recourse available. We must not fool ourselves about 
the effectiveness of the means available to pressure Iran. The 
Iraqi example proves that the most severe economic sanctions 
can remain useless when dealing with a dictatorial regime. But 
if the UNSC is sufficiently firm, it may influence a country 
that aspires to play an international role. This may also help 
contain other nuclear ambitions in the Middle East, like Saudi 
Arabia's. But the fight against nuclear proliferation requires 
that the other nuclear powers take a step back. Why do they 
(the U.S., France, Russia, China, Great Britain, India, 
Pakistan) have more rights than Iran to develop their nuclear 
arsenal? The argument of democratic control does not hold for 
countries such as China or Pakistan. Nuclear disarmament has 
been forgotten for too long. It needs to be debated again." 
 
"The Iranian Trap" 
Left-of-center Le Monde in its editorial (01/12): "On January 
10 Iran took one more step in its confrontation with the West. 
The Europeans are caught between two concerns: re-launching 
nuclear proliferation in a sensitive region, which is also 
close-by, and a unilateral military action by either the 
Americans or the Israelis. The Europeans have therefore chosen 
the way of negotiations. Iran has tried to undermine every 
agreement, as if it was testing the Europeans. Washington has 
supported the EU-3 initiative, from a distance and later more 
firmly. Meanwhile Iran has been using every hesitation to its 
advantage, including Europe's negotiations with Russia and 
China. But it may have gone too far. The U.S. is mired in Iraq 
and wants to avoid confrontation with this largely Shiite 
nation. It is therefore counting on negotiations and 
sanctions. The Iranians seem impervious to the threat. They 
are counting on a divergence between Russia and China, and on 
Europe's leniency. It is high time we proved to Iran it is 
making a mistake and that the trap is slowly closing in." 
 
"Diplomacy Versus Action" 
Philippe Gelie in right-of-center Le Figaro (01/12): "Iran is 
not Iraq. After three years of going to battle almost single 
handedly against Saddam Hussein, the U.S. approach to Iran 
looks like the exact opposite. Diplomacy, a gradual 
progression and the search for a consensus seem to be the key 
words in Washington. But the word `action' still applies to 
both situations. Washington has always remained firm towards 
Iran. But for the hardliners in Washington, the diplomatic 
approach (of the EU-3) has not proven its effectiveness. Under 
pressure, the Bush administration is looking over its options, 
including a program of `multilateral sanctions' with the 
Europeans. The military option remains on the table, but this 
time around it looks very much like an option of last resort." 
 
"Why It Is Urgent to Respond to the Iranian Challenge" 
Pierre Lellouche, the head of the Parliamentary Assembly group 
on NATO, in right-of-center Le Figaro (01/12): "The difference 
between Hitler and Ahmadinejad is that the former failed where 
the latter is succeeding: building the bomb. What is the rest 
of the Muslim world saying? Nothing. The way things are going 
Ahmadinejad's Iran will have the bomb in a year or two at 
most. Before the situation gets totally out of hand, the UNSC 
must get involved with the hope that it will not, once again, 
prove its lack of effectiveness." 
 
"Imposing an Embargo on the Ayatollahs" 
Bernard Debre, a former Minister for Cooperation, in right-of- 
center Le Figaro (01/12): "Instead of being firm, the West is 
half-heartedly condemning Iran. Will we have to wait until 
Iran carries out nuclear testing. or allies with Afghan, 
Pakistani, Iraqi and Syrian extremists? And it's possible this 
has already happened. Now is the time to act, while Iran is 
still hesitant. The intervention in Iraq., which has led to. 
civil war and extremism., should not prevent us from taking 
action against Iran. This is why an embargo is necessary. The 
days of drawing room diplomacy are over." 
 
GWOT - Guantanamo 
 
"Defeat" 
Antoine de Gaudemar in left-of-center Liberation (01/12): 
"Four years later, Guantanamo remains true to its sinister 
reputation. Among the five hundred detainees. not all were 
made prisoners in Afghanistan: some were arrested illegally in 
other countries. This scandal is one of many. Only nine 
detainees in Guantanamo have been formally charged. Despite a 
Supreme Court decision, arbitrary attitudes and ill-treatment 
of detainees continue. Such lack of transparency suggests the 
worst may be happening, as witness reports indicate. The only 
glimmer of hope is the release of a few detainees, after 
months of detention, often without reason. Along with the 
torture of prisoners in Iraqi prisoners and CIA secret 
prisons, Guantanamo symbolizes that which is most detestable 
in the Bush administration: the desire to stand above domestic 
and international law. Because the fight against terror does 
not require the use of those methods used by terrorists, the 
existence of Guantanamo in itself stands as a serious defeat 
of democracy." 
Israel 
"Netanyahu, the Nightmare" 
Jacques Amalric in left-of-center Liberation (01/12): "The new 
situation in Israel is leaving the Bush Administration 
perplexed. While President Bush supported Sharon 
unconditionally, his disappearing from the political scene 
will undoubtedly revive the divergence between the realists, 
such as Secretary Rice, and the staunch partisans of Netanyahu 
and Greater Israel, a concept which the Christian Right is 
defending with furious energy." 
 
"Questions on the Future of Israel" 
Alexandre Adler in right-of-center Le Figaro (01/12): "One of 
the questions surfacing about Israel's future is whether 
Olmert can indeed make peace. The answer is no. Peace will be 
delayed as long as the Middle East has not found a solid base. 
And this will be possible only if three things happen 
simultaneously: stabilization of Iraq, Bachar el-Assad's 
victory over Syria's hard-liners, and the marginalizing, or 
better yet, the elimination of Ahmadinejad in Iran. It is 
possible to achieve these three goals. Sharon's unilateral 
withdrawal was part of a wider regional stabilization plan. 
But until the wider plan is underway, Israel is condemned to 
act with staunch determination, yet without guarantees for 
success." STAPLETON