VZCZCXRO8962
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #1228/01 2741138
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 011138Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5353
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 1587
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0288
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0811
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2328
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1337
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0520
RHMFIUU/HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE//J5 DIRECTORATE (MC)//
RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
RUKAAKC/UDITDUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 BERLIN 001228 
 
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 KPAO IR GG RS AF
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: IRAN, GEORGIA-RUSSIA, AFGHANISTAN;BERLIN 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (Iran)   Resumption of Talks 
¶3.   (Georgia-Russia)   EU Report 
¶4.   (Afghanistan)   Future Strategy 
 
 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
Primetime newscasts opened with stories on the natural catastrophes 
in 
Samoa and Indonesia.  Several papers showed front-page photos of the 
 
disasters.  Broadcast and online media focused this morning on an 
additional earthquake in Sumatra.  Most papers led with stories on 
the 
aftermath of the Bundestag elections.  Editorials focused on the 
situation of the SPD and the surprisingly strong job market. 
 
¶2.   (Iran)   Resumption of Talks 
 
Under the headline "Ahmadinejad's show," Frankfurter Allgemeine 
(10/01) editorialized: "The outrage Ahmadinejad is showing because 
his 
country has again been caught cheating with its nuclear program 
gives 
rise to speculation.  Is Iran simply trying to improve its situation 
 
prior to the today's negotiations by appearing particularly tough? 
 
Even Medvedev indicated that Moscow is considering tougher 
sanctions. 
If this is the case, the noise from Tehran would be a good sign 
because it is only supposed to conceal diplomatic shortcomings.  Or 
is 
this Ahmadinejad's negotiating strategy?  Tehran wants to be 
diplomatically aggressive instead of being forced onto the 
defensive. 
One thing is clear: the willingness of Iranians to seriously talk 
about their program depends on whether they will really face tough 
sanctions if they reject negotiations.  If Beijing and Moscow do not 
 
join in, the West must go forward." 
 
Under the headline "They are spitting on Obama's hand," Die Zeit 
(10/01) highlighted that "Iran's leadership is challenging the 
American president."  The weekly adds: "Obama wants a peaceful 
solution to the nuclear conflict because he knows about the 
devastating consequences of a military strike, including an Israeli 
 
one.  However, he must not allow others to make a fool out of him. 
 
His government is therefore now preparing tougher sanctions against 
 
Iran.  To do this, he needs the Russians, and President Medvedev has 
 
at least suggested that sanctions are indispensible.  There is 
hardly 
anything else that would hit Iran harder than stopping fuel 
deliveries." 
 
Sddeutsche (10/01) editorialized: "Prior to the talks in Geneva, 
western diplomats have reduced their expectations.  The hurdle Iran 
 
has to take is very low.  Tehran's envoys simply have to generally 
talk about the nuclear program, it was said....  The reason for the 
 
reservation is obvious: the West does not have good options in the 
 
BERLIN 00001228  002 OF 004 
 
 
nuclear dispute with Iran.  It is now about attaining what is 
possible 
and not losing sight of the goal: Iran must not get hold of nuclear 
 
weapons.  Russia and China are unlikely to support tough sanctions. 
 
If you want to stick to the unity of the world powers, which was 
always seen as a condition for influencing Iran, you have to expect 
 
this.  After 30 years of embargo, the U.S. alone can no longer 
impress 
Iran....  However, if Iran does not move at all, sanctions are the 
remaining alternative." 
 
Under the headline "The military option is getting closer," 
Tageszeitung (10/01) opined:  "Today's talks on Iran in Geneva are 
doomed to fail.  A precondition for success would be the willingness 
 
of at least one side to reach a compromise on the conflict over 
Iran's 
nuclear program.  Barack Obama's gestures of dtente in the 
beginning 
of his presidency raised hope that a political solution could be 
found, particularly because the President did not repeat the demand 
 
for a complete stop of uranium enrichment activities.  However, this 
 
was not enough to help moderate forces in Tehran who favor a 
compromise to succeed.  Also because the Iranian president believed 
he 
would have more chances to be re-elected if he pursued a tough 
stance...." 
 
¶3.   (Georgia-Russia)   EU Report 
 
All major papers carried reports on the EU report on the outbreak of 
 
the conflict between Georgia and Russia.  All papers emphasized 
that, 
according to the report, it was Georgia's President Saakashvili who 
 
ordered his forces to fire the first shots.  Sueddeutsche headlined: 
 
"Georgia Repudiates accusations of Guilt in Causing the War."    Die 
 
Welt headlined: "Georgia Began Caucasian Conflict," and emphasized 
in 
a sub-headline that "Russia is Co-Responsible."  Frankfurter 
Allgemeine carried a report under the headline: "Russia Welcomes 
Report on Georgia." 
 
Sueddeutsche (10/01) carried an editorial under the headline: 
"Looking 
Back To Dark Years," and judged: "Self-defense, which Georgian 
President Saakashvili has always used as a reason for the attack on 
 
the sleeping Tskhinvali until today, was nothing but a lie.  Moscow 
 
has always said this....  But the EU report also documents the 
Russians' 
share in the war: Moscow deliberately destabilized the situation in 
 
Southern Ossetia; it undermined Georgia's statehood by massively 
issuing Russian passports...etc.  The report confirms what has been 
 
clear since those days in August: Georgia can bury its hopes for 
NATO, 
let alone EU, accession for a very long time to come, and the 
chances 
 
BERLIN 00001228  003 OF 004 
 
 
for a return of the separated areas around Abkhazia and Southern 
Ossetia are not much better.  However, the Tagliavini report does 
not 
reveal too much on the U.S. role.  Even if it had revealed a more 
obvious role of U.S. military advisors in Tbilisi, it would not have 
 
produced much of an impact.  The report has been postponed for such 
a 
long time that the political situation has profoundly changed.  What 
 
value does Southern Ossetia have compared to Afghanistan, Iraq or 
even 
Lehman Bros?  For Moscow, the Georgian conflict is part of the dark 
 
Bush years; but, in the meantime, all sides progressed and are 
showing 
greater responsibility.  There will certain be no lack of 
opportunities to demonstrate this in the future." 
 
Under the headline: "There is no Room For Georgia in NATO," Berliner 
 
Zeitung (10/01) editorialized: "At the latest since yesterday it 
must 
be clear that there is no room for Georgia in NATO in the 
foreseeable 
future.  Under the current leadership, the country would be a 
security 
risk for the Alliance as a whole.  During the Bucharest summit in 
2008, NATO promised to accept Georgia.  Former President Bush wanted 
 
it that way.  Fortunately, Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy 
were able to prevent the naming of a concrete date.  In light of the 
 
findings in the report, it would now be reasonable to withdraw this 
 
promise for Georgia's accession.  Since Russia has extended its 
military presence in Abkhazia and Southern Ossetia, an acceptance is 
 
no longer realistic." 
 
According to Die Welt (10/01), "it is important civil progress that 
 
such a report complains about the suffering of civilians, but the 
claim of the report that there are 'no winners in this conflict' is 
 
based on wishful thinking.  Real politicians in Russia know that the 
 
Kremlin, with its punitive mission in Georgia, achieved an important 
 
victory whose sobering effect reaches far beyond the Caucasus.  By 
creating a new mini state in the Caucasus, Russia created new facts. 
 
It does not require a report of the European Commission to recognize 
 
this." 
 
Tagesspiegel (10/01) judged: "As long as the same actors both in 
Georgia and in Russia are in power as during the brief war in 
summer, 
it is hardly imaginable that they will learn a lesson from the past. 
 
On the contrary, the tensions are beginning to rise again.  That is 
 
why the question to the Europeans is all the more important:  Why 
did 
they not act earlier?  Let us remember one thing: after five days 
[of 
the war], France managed to achieve a cease-fire between he parties 
in 
 
BERLIN 00001228  004 OF 004 
 
 
the conflict.   Would a similarly courageous intervention in the 
preparatory stages of the war probably have prevented it?" 
 
Regional daily Volksstimme of Magdeburg (10/01) judged: "If more 
evidence had been necessary to discuss who caused the Caucasian war, 
 
then the EU report is delivering it.  It was Georgia's President 
Saakashvili....  But the Russians only seemed to have waited for the 
 
opportunity to checkmate Georgia by using force.  Both parties are 
to 
blame that the war almost turned into an international crisis.  What 
 
is left is a humiliated Georgia and two mock republics at the mercy 
of 
Moscow.  Not even the EU can change that." 
 
Regional daily Nrnberger Zeitung (10/01) argued; "What would have 
happened if Georgia had been a NATO member on August 8, 2008?  Would 
 
Saakashvili's lie have been enough to prompt other NATO members to 
back Georgia and to plunge the Alliance into a conflict with Russia? 
 
Former Foreign Minister Steinmeier had always warned against a 
speedy 
enlargement to the East.  The new government should continue to back 
 
this legacy." 
 
Badische Neueste Nachrichten of Karlsruhe (10/01) observed: "Western 
 
diplomats in Tbilisi already warned in May 2008 that there were 
active 
warmongers in the Georgian government.  But the international 
community only watched and underestimated the seriousness of the 
situation; it acted too late and was not resolute enough.  It did 
not 
succeed in preventing the hothead Saakashvili from stopping the 
escalation.  The Caucasus is suffering from the consequences even 
today.  But the West in particular will take years to restore 
damaged 
relations with Russia." 
 
¶4.   (Afghanistan)   Future Strategy 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/01) headlined "Obama discusses 
Afghanistan" 
and wrote in its intro: "President Obama has started consultations 
over the future strategy on Afghanistan on Wednesday.  In this first 
 
of five rounds of negotiations, VP Biden, Secretaries Clinton and 
Gates as well as Admiral Mullen and General Petraeus participated." 
 
Weekly Die Zeit (10/01) noted: "Afghanistan could be more dangerous 
to 
Obama than Iran.  The President has made Afghanistan his war.... 
The 
war in Afghanistan is about to enter year nine and an increasing 
number of Americans can no longer see that it makes sense.  Obama 
appears to be hesitating...  If he does not stop the debate between 
the 
generals and the Vice President immediately, he will damage his 
authority." 
 
  DELAWIE