VZCZCXRO0546
RR RUEHIK RUEHYG
DE RUEHFR #7729/01 3421613
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 081613Z DEC 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3666
INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE
RUEHMRE/AMCONSUL MARSEILLE 1464
RUEHSR/AMCONSUL STRASBOURG 0270

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 007729 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EUR/PPD, EUR/WE, INR, R 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC PREL KPAO FR
SUBJECT:  MEDIA WRAP-UP:  CHAVEZ RE-ELECTED, CASTRO FADES; FOREIGN 
POLICY IN FRENCH DOMESTIC ELECTION DEBATE; BAKER RECOMMENDS SHIFT IN 
IRAQ; NEW FRENCH ALL NEWS TV STATION LAUNCHED. DECEMBER 08, 2006. 
 
 
PARIS 00007729  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
Sensitive but unclassified.  Please protect accordingly. 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) The Chavez re-election and Raoul Castro's "gesture" towards 
Washington illustrated French views on Latin America's relationship 
with the U.S. during the first part of the week, while a fierce 
domestic debate raged about Socialist presidential candidate Royal's 
controversial trip to the Middle East.  By the end of the week the 
media focused on the Baker Commission's "rebuke" of the President's 
Iraq policy and Robert Gates Senate hearings.  The run-up to the 
launching of France's 24 hour multilingual all-news channel elicited 
commentary about its limited funds to counter "contenders such as 
CNN, BBC World and Al-Jazeera" but also about the need to balance 
world news presently broadcast in an "American version."  End 
Summary. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
LATIN AMERICA AND THE U.S.--THROUGH FRENCH EYES 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Left-of-center Le Monde described the events of the past 
weekend -- Castro's "missed" birthday and Chavez's re-election -- as 
a repetition of history "thirty years later," with the transfer of 
"a shared history" between two commandants who "projected unfailing 
anti-Americanism on Latin America."  For Jean-Francois Fogel, the 
comparison spoke for itself because "the two men shared a common 
enemy, the U.S."  But right-of-center Le Figaro concentrated instead 
on Raoul Castro's "opening" towards the U.S., which it characterized 
as "the first conciliatory gesture" of a new Cuban era.  Chavez's 
re-election was portrayed as a setback for the relationship between 
Venezuela and the U.S., and Jean-Christophe Ploquin in Catholic La 
Croix argued that "while Chavez was enjoying the windfall of his 
nation's oil revenues, he had better do more than call President 
Bush 'Satan' if he wanted to set his country on the road to 
development."  Ploquin warned that "siding with his Iranian 
counterpart set Chavez apart on the international stage" and that 
while "his oil diplomacy" allowed for a special relationship with 
Cuba and other Latin American regimes, "it was not enough to get him 
elected by his peers at the UN." 
 
-------------------------------------- 
ROYAL TRIES HER HAND AT FOREIGN POLICY 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Socialist presidential candidate Segolene Royal's trip to 
the Middle East triggered a fierce debate about her foreign policy 
qualifications.  Publicist Jacques Seguela, who was President 
Mitterrand's and PM Lionel Jospin's campaign manager, argued in an 
interview in right-of-center France Soir that "with this visit, 
Royal had not only overtaken Nicolas Sarkozy, she had become a 
public opinion icon."  In an Internet poll conducted by 
right-of-center Le Figaro, however, 71 percent of respondents 
responded that "her trip was not beneficial for her image as a 
future president."  Right-of-center Le Journal du Dimanche argued 
that "Royal was aware of the risks when she chose to go to the 
Middle East."  Former Socialist FM Roland Dumas agreed, in 
right-of-center France Soir, that "one can and must speak with all 
the players in the Middle East, where diplomacy must make use of 
every weapon to counter the signs of chaos." 
 
¶4. (SBU) Royal's apparent passivity, while in Lebanon, in the face 
of a Hezbollah representative's comparison of Nazism and Zionism, 
her "agreement" with his criticism of the U.S. and her position on 
Iran's nuclear ambitions (stricter even than the Non-Proliferation 
Treaty) fueled a domestic debate that played out in the press along 
predictable editorial lines.  Right-of-center Le Figaro argued that 
Royal had "fallen for Hezbollah rhetoric," while left-wing 
Liberation characterized her trip as "worthy of a head of state." 
In an interview in right-of-center Le Parisien, think-tanker Pascal 
Boniface concluded that "the Middle East was now officially part of 
the French presidential race."  But in regional La Republic du 
Centre, editorialist Jacques Camus countered that "foreign policy 
was so far from the preoccupations of the French that when the time 
came to vote, the French would remember neither Royal's messy trip 
to the Middle East, nor Nicolas Sarkozy's 'too courteous' visit with 
President Bush."  FM Douste-Blazy rebuked Royal for her condemnation 
of Iran's commercial nuclear ambitions, because it "cast doubt on 
the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty."  But in regional La Liberation en 
Champagne, Jorge D'Hulst argued that Royal "was saying aloud what 
many capitals thought but did not dare proclaim."  D'Hulst contended 
that "once Iran developed commercial nuclear capabilities, it would 
be impossible to keep it from developing the bomb." 
 
 
PARIS 00007729  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
------------------------- 
BAKER COMMISSION AND IRAQ 
------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Commentators predicted a policy shift induced by the "need 
to acknowledge failure in Iraq" where a "civil war" was raging.  In 
regional L'Independent du Midi, Bernard Revel predicted that "soon, 
even Robert Gates would be talking about a 'civil war,' like the 
media and the Democrats."  In right-of-center Le Figaro, Pierre 
Rousselin predicted that "James Baker would not, as if by magic, 
change the catastrophic course of Iraq or find an honorable way out 
for the U.S."  But all commentary pointed to "a change of course" in 
the wake of Robert Gates's statement that the "U.S. was not winning 
the war."  Left-of-center Le Monde saluted Gates's admission "as no 
small feat" for a man chosen to replace Donald Rumsfeld.  Catholic 
La Croix characterized Baker and Gates as "the old guard to the 
rescue" of a President who, "having turned a deaf ear to his 
father's advisors was now turning to them for help." 
 
¶6. (SBU) Philippe Gelie noted in right-of-center Le Figaro that 
President Bush "saluted Baker's 'tough evaluation' of the 
situation," while left-of-center Le Monde editorialized on "a lesson 
in diplomacy" and an "admission of failure in Iraq, the Middle east 
and vis-a-vis the American people."  Left-wing Liberation described 
the recommendations as "an admission that a military victory in Iraq 
was not possible," while Philippe Grangereau proclaimed this to be 
"the harshest rebuke of the President" since he took office. 
Laurent Joffrin commented in left-wing Liberation that the President 
"was confessing America's mistake by proxy" through the Commission's 
"confession of defeat in Iraq."  Thirteen regional editorials on 
Thursday were devoted to "the sounding of the death knell for 
American conservatism" (Le Courrier Picrad), "a diplomatic and 
political Tsunami for Washington" (La Provence) and "the end of the 
Bush Administration's illusions" (La Liberte de l'Est).  Dominique 
Vales in La Montagne argued that "whatever option the President 
chose, it would contradict everything he had said and done for the 
past three and a half years."  Patrick Fluckiger in l'Alsace 
contended that "calling Iran and Syria to the rescue" was proof that 
the U.S. "had destabilized its own foreign policy."  But Jules 
Clauwaert in Nord Eclair argued that "a diplomatic offensive" that 
would "shake-up established taboos" was the one option left to a 
President "who will have learned that in the Middle East, one cannot 
always have the luxury of picking one's interlocutors." 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------- FRANCE 24 TO 
"BALANCE AMERICAN VERSION OF THE WORLD" 
--------------------------------------------- ------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) With the splashy launch of France-24, the news television 
with a French "vision" and hefty government support in French, 
English and (eventually) Arabic, Catholic La Croix's Guillaume 
Goubert asked "whether the French channel would measure up to such 
contenders as CNN, BBC World and Al-Jazeera."  While he asserted 
that "the wager had yet to be won," he also insisted that "the 
challenge was worth the risks."  Goubert concluded that "a French 
voice" would contribute to more "plurality" in the face of 
Anglo-Saxon and Arab stations. Goubert used the Middle East as an 
example and proclaimed that "an equidistant voice would be priceless 
to address the mass of incomprehension separating the Arab world and 
the West as broadcast in its U.S. version."  In regional Le 
Telegram, Hubert Coudurier warned against "a voice from the Elysee 
or the Quai" but argued that "for a nation so greatly defined by the 
look of the beholder, France needed this showcase."  In 
right-of-center Le Parisien, Alain de Pouzilhac, CEO of France 24 
(and friend of President Chirac) said that the network would remain 
"impartial and independent" and that its target audience was "world 
opinion makers with responsibilities and who earned more than one 
hundred thousand euros per year." 
STAPLETON