R 291143Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 4719
INFO WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC
SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
DIA WASHINGTON DC
CIA WASHINGTON DC
DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
FRG COLLECTIVE
AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 
AMEMBASSY LONDON 
AMEMBASSY PARIS 
AMEMBASSY ROME 
USMISSION USNATO 
USMISSION USOSCE 
HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE
HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE//J5 DIRECTORATE (MC)//
CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
UDITDUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE

UNCLAS BERLIN 000905 
 
 
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" 
 
E.0. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO GM US CU MD SO IT RS UP GG KG
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-ISRAEL U.S.-CHINA, IRAN, RUSSIA, 
MOLDOVA 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (U.S.-Israel)   Netanyahu-Mitchell Meeting 
¶3.   (U.S.-China)   Washington Summit 
¶4.   (Iran)   Western Reaction 
¶5.   (Russia)   Influence on Central Asian Neighbors 
¶6.   (Moldova)   Re-Election 
 
 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
One main item in today's print media centers is on the second 
quarter profits of Deutsche Bank.  Other items are the meeting of 
the fact-finding committee that is investigating the Hypo Real 
Estate scandal and the question of who is going to pay for swine flu 
vaccinations.  Editorials focused on Deutsche Bank's profits. 
ZDF-TV's early evening newscast heute and ARD-TV's early evening 
newscast Tagesschau opened with reports on the bailout program for 
the Hypo Real Estate bank. 
 
¶2.   (U.S.-Israel)   Netanyahu-Mitchell Meeting 
 
Under the headline "No Agreement Between Netanyahu and Mitchell," 
Frankfurter Allgemeine wrote: "U.S. Mideast envoy George Mitchell 
and Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu did not reach a compromise in 
their talks on Tuesday on the demand of the international community 
for a complete stop of construction for Israeli settlements in the 
occupied territories.  For the Palestinian government this is a 
precondition for a resumption of Palestinian peace talks with 
Israel." 
 
"Settlement Question Unresolved," is the headline in Sueddeutsche 
Zeitung which wrote: "despite intense talks with officials of the 
Israeli government, U.S. special envoy for the Mideast, George 
Mitchell, did not succeed in achieving a breakthrough in the 
controversy over the expansion of Jewish settlements on the West 
Bank.  Mitchell had met Palestinian President Abbas the night 
before.  Members of Abbas's office said later that Mitchell conceded 
to Abbas that he had not yet achieved an agreement in his talks with 
officials of the Israeli government.  According to these reports, 
Mitchell will meet Netanyahu again in August.  Israeli media 
reported on Tuesday that Netanyahu is considering a three-month 
construction stop in order to signal to the U.S. government his 
willingness for compromise." 
 
Handelsblatt reported under the headline: "Netanyahu Does Not Make 
Concessions to Washington in Settlement Question," and wrote: 
"Israel's settlement policy continues to obstruct progress in the 
Middle East peace process.  It is true that U.S. special envoy 
George Mitchell called a meeting with Israel's Premier Netanyahu to 
be 'very productive,' but the evening before, Mitchell stressed in a 
meeting with Palestinian President Abbas that there is still a gap 
between the United States and Israel concerning their view on the 
Middle East conflict.  Israel's government has thus far not even 
demonstrated a willingness to stop the construction of Jewish 
settlements on Palestinian territory.  Because of Israel's 
inflexible position, the peace talks with the Palestinians have been 
interrupted for four months now." 
 
¶3.   (U.S.-China)   Washington Summit 
 
Sueddeutsche reported on its front page under the headline: "Obama: 
Beijing is our Most Important Partner," and wrote that: "More than 
ever, the United States and China wants to seek cooperation.  At the 
conclusion of their historic summit in Washington, top politicians 
from both sides said they wanted to stabilize the global economy 
together, stop looming climate change and stop the proliferation of 
nuclear weapons.  In a keynote address, President Obama said that no 
other bilateral relationship in the world is as important as 
cooperation between Washington and Beijing....  Behind closed doors, 
Chinese officials reiterated their proposal of setting up a new 
global monetary system.  The U.S. dollar as key currency should be 
replaced by a new artificial currency that is made up of different 
currencies.  U.S. officials, however, reacted with restraint to the 
Chinese proposal.  Treasury Secretary Geithner only said that his 
government would stand up for a greater say of China in the IMF. 
This would primarily weaken Europe's influence." 
 
In an editorial Sueddeutsche opined: "We have hardly seen America 
acting in such a meek way.  It is true, the United States did not 
kow-tow to the Chinese, but the Obama government ensnared the 
officials from China with surprisingly deep bows.  The times are 
over when U.S. politicians gave the politicians from the Middle 
Kingdom lectures on the miserable state of human rights.  The U.S. 
side also did not stick to the ritual to criticize China because of 
its monetary policy.  Instead: Washington showed modesty, for 
Washington comprehends what it owes to China.  Beijing has U.S. 
treasuries worth 800 billion dollars, and America is up to its ears 
in debt mostly financed by China.  Secretary Clinton lauded 
Sino-U.S. dialogue as a new beginning and Barack Obama said both 
nations would make their mark on the 21st century.  These were great 
words but it is totally open which balance of power both sides will 
find.  But Americans and Chinese are self confident enough to 
squander any thoughts on third parties.  At this summit, no one 
talked about Europe, the old world." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine noted: "America and China are talking to each 
other, and in this context, we often hear the term 'partner.'  But 
nobody should deceive himself, China is primarily a competitor. 
This becomes very obvious when talking about natural resources.  But 
even politically China is pursuing a strategy that aims at dominance 
and control.  For this reason alone, it would be wrong if the 
Americans declared its power policy relations with China a model of 
the future.  Not everyone [of China's] neighbors is enthused about 
the prospect that China is becoming increasingly powerful.  This 
includes U.S. allies.  Even though major powers are willing to 
sacrifice the interests of their smaller partners in case of an 
emergency, Washington should keep in mind that it could need each 
friend it could get.  And China should not only speak of 
responsibility, but also seize it, for instance, in North Korea, for 
instance, in the case of Iran." 
 
¶4.   (Iran)   Western Reaction 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine judged on its front page under the headline: 
"The Dilemma of the West," that "it is true that the street protests 
in Iran have ebbed but the power struggle within the Islamic system 
is fiercer than any time before.  This development about the Iranian 
presidential election must be seen against the background of 
President Obama's extended hand.  The fear of a kind of Gorbachev, 
who is endangering the system by making overtures to the West, is 
one important reason for preventing Moussavi's election victory. 
The West has a dilemma now.  If it enters into talks with the 
Ahmadinejad government during the repression, it will stab the 
opposition in the back.  In addition, it would lose its credibility 
as advocate of democracy and human rights.  But if it clearly 
opposes the rulers in Tehran, it will lose the rest of the influence 
on Tehran it still has.  And then the danger that Iran would soon 
have the ability to build the bomb can hardly be avoided.  Iran is 
supposed to present a solution to the nuclear conflict before the 
G-20 meeting in September, as requested by the summit meeting in 
L'Aquila.  What do we expect from Tehran now?  That it gives up the 
enrichment of uranium, as a response of the UN Security Council 
demands? Tehran will not do this.  Does Obama's extended hand mean 
that he is willing to ignore the UN decision?  The West would be 
better advised to show restraint for the time being but continue to 
insist on the adherence to principles, on the release of political 
prisoners, on freedom of opinion and freedom of assembly and, at the 
same time, on maintaining its offer for talks.  We cannot expect too 
much from Tehran for the time being." 
 
 
¶5.   (Russia)   Influence on Central Asian Neighbors 
 
Sueddeutsche Zeitung editorialized under the headline: "Russia's 
Satellites Are Leaving the Orbit," and judged: "Tajikistan's leader 
Rachmon has banned Russian as the second official language.  This is 
a small nationalistic gesture to his people, but it is also a symbol 
of the growing self-confidence of the former Soviet republic.  It 
may be possible that Rachmon has to rescind this step but then he 
will demand a price for it.  This is an experience Moscow has had 
more frequently over the past few months.  Russia's allies are 
standing up, forcing the vast Russian empire to make concessions 
that cost a lot of money and also part of its political power.  And 
the economic crisis is now even intensifying the centrifugal forces 
in the so-called Community of Independent States (CIS).  More than 
ever before Moscow must fight for influence among its historical 
partners and enter into difficult talks with each country....  It 
was Premier Putin who criticized the U.S. dominance in the world 
over the years and advocated instead a multipolar world.  But at the 
latest since Barack Obama entered office, Russia has come closer to 
this goal.  But at the same time, the classical Russian friends have 
adopted Putin's appeal, for it is their only chance to loosen the 
shackles of this crisis.  And China and Europe are playing a central 
role since they have the financial instruments these states need to 
eliminate their economic dependence on Russia." 
 
¶6.   (Moldova)   Re-Election 
 
Tagesspiegel headlined: "Second Try in Moldova with Elections," and 
reported: "Today the approximately 32.5 million Moldovans are 
electing a new parliament in the poorest country in Europe.  But it 
is questionable whether it will clearly resolve the power struggle 
between the governing communists or the opposition.  But these 
elections are of great significance.  They will decide who will 
succeed outgoing leader Vladimir Voronin and whether the country 
will orient itself toward Europe or Russia in the future....  The 
opposition stands for a rapprochement with the EU with the goal of a 
future membership, while the communists have pursued an increasingly 
pro-Russian course over the past months." 
 
 "Elections on Future Course of Europe's Poorhouse," is the headline 
in Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which reported: "This Wednesday, Moldova is 
making a second attempt to elect a parliament that is capable of 
acting. The latest opinion polls see the communists in the lead with 
30 percent but the four opposition parties, which are all pushing 
for EU membership of Moldova, could reach a lead of five percent. 
Moldovan commentators are writing that the election will determine 
Moldova's future course: the Moldovans have to decide between a 
return to under Moscow's umbrella or a pro-European course. 
According to an opinion poll by the Institute for Public Policy in 
Chisinau, almost two-thirds advocate an EU accession, but two-thirds 
also describe Russia as a strategic partner." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine carried a report under the headline: 
"Boundless Thirst for Power," and noted: "Moldova's communists are 
afraid of losing their power in the election on Wednesday.  With a 
campaign of fear they are trying to counter this development.  With 
all their power they are bracing themselves against the looming loss 
of power.  Even though the party of acting President Voronin is 
likely to become the strongest force in the election this Wednesday, 
its sole rule over Moldova is in jeopardy.  It will have great 
difficulty winning the necessary three-fifths majority of the 
election of its state president." 
 
BRADTKE