VZCZCXRO3427
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #1364/01 3021315
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 291315Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5611
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 1680
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0392
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0909
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2420
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1435
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0612
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 07 BERLIN 001364 
 
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 AF AF XF IR EU GM KGHG
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: AFGHANISTAN, AFGHANISTAN MIDEAST, IRAN, EU, 
 
U.S.-GERMANY, ENVIRONMENT;BERLIN 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (Afghanistan)   Bomb Attack, U.S. Strategy 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   Karzai Brother on CIA Payroll 
¶4.   (Mideast)   Clinton Visit 
¶5.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
¶6.   (EU)   Future President 
¶7.   (U.S.-Germany)   Relations 
¶8.   (Environment)   Climate Talks 
 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
Primetime newscasts and most newspapers opened with Chancellor 
Merkel's re-election, noting that not all CDU/CSU and FDP 
politicians 
voted in favor of her.  Die Welt led with a story on Postbank's data 
 
security problem.  Editorials focused on Merkel's second term and 
the 
election of the first woman to head the most senior office in the 
Evangelical church. 
 
¶2.   (Afghanistan)   Bomb Attack, U.S. Strategy 
 
Many papers carried reports on the attacks on UN officials in Kabul 
 
and on the bomb attack in Peshawar.  Frankfurter Rundschau (10/29) 
headlined: "Attack For a Welcome," while Sueddeutsche (10/29) wrote: 
 
Taliban Killing UN officials in Kabul Ten days before run-off 
elections in Afghanistan.  As under the headline: "Dissonance in the 
 
Clinton-Holbrooke-Kerry Triangle, Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/29) 
reported that "while Secretary Clinton is trying to improve 
confidence 
between Washington and Islamabad, special envoy Holbrooke and 
Senator 
Kerry are sending different signals.  While Clinton praised the 
Pakistani offensive in South Waziristan as a turning point in 
Islamabad's fight against the Taliban, Holbrooke expressed his 
skepticism saying that one has to find out first of all whether the 
 
Pakistan armed forces really want "to destroy or only disperse" the 
 
Taliban this time.  Kerry's name, in turn, is linked to a law, which 
 
will allocate $7.6 billion in civil aid for Pakistan provided that 
its 
use corresponds with U.S. requests.  In this Clinton-Holbrooke-Kerry 
 
triangle, one can hardly make out the U.S. policy towards 
Pakistan." 
 
ARD-TV's primetime newscast Tagesschau (10/28) noted: "A nuclear 
Pakistan is caught in between terrorism and the hope of defeating 
it. 
Pakistanis show determination in the fight against extremists 
because 
they have realized that the Taliban and al Qaida fighters do not 
just 
pose a danger to the Afghan-Pakistani border region, but threaten 
the 
entire country." 
 
Deutschlandfunk (10/28) broadcast the following commentary: "It is 
painstaking to see how long it takes to develop a strategy (for 
Afghanistan) and then implement it.  It is simply not enough to send 
 
BERLIN 00001364  002 OF 007 
 
 
 
more soldiers; then the Taliban will become even stronger. 
Everywhere 
that economic recovery is in the offing, the Taliban are losing 
their 
base.  And if the international community finally implements the 
things it agreed upon before, the Taliban's influence would be 
considerably weakened.  But the international community is doing too 
 
little, and thus the Taliban maintain their bases, and in turn the 
international community does even less.  It is a downward spiral. 
And 
all this is also, to a great extent, destabilizing Pakistan, a 
country 
with nuclear weapons.  What we are missing is a clearly visible 
counter strategy from the international community, which first of 
all 
looks to the United States." 
 
FAZ (10/29) editorialized: "[Following the attacks in Peshawar and 
Kabul], one thing has become clear: the security situation in the 
Af/Pak region has become precarious.  Those calling for a withdrawal 
 
from Afghanistan or who consider support for Pakistan one matter 
among 
many others have not understood what is at stake.  Af/Pak should not 
 
become an address for Taliban, Jihadists, and al-Qaida.  The 
international organizations and states which are engaged in 
Afghanistan with military and civil projects should not allow anyone 
 
to intimidate them - as difficult as this might be.  That is why 
President Obama must finally make up his mind and say which means he 
 
wants to use against whom in Afghanistan and in the Afghan-Pakistani 
 
border region.  The longer he hesitates, the more the opponents of 
the 
West will feel encouraged to launch new terrorist attacks." 
 
Under the headline: "Trial Balloon," Frankfurter Rundschau (10/29) 
argued: "We are excited to see how the Americans will react to the 
White House's trial balloon with respect to the future Afghanistan 
strategy.  The offensive, launched early this year with much ado, 
has 
obviously failed.  Afghanistan has not become safer.  This shows 
that 
the military card alone will not lead to success.  If the 
international community does not ultimately intensify the 
reconstruction of the country and does not integrate neighboring 
countries such as Pakistan and Iran into this process, it will fail. 
 
Then the withdrawal from the region will resemble the start of the 
withdrawal from Afghanistan." 
 
In an editorial Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung (10/29) opined: "It 
is 
absurd that the attack in Kabul was directed against the UN....  Who 
is 
backing democratic elections and the development of the country more 
 
than the UN?  The Taliban are wrong to think that they can wage war 
 
against the rest of the world.  They do not know the impact of their 
 
blind hatred.  The attempt to prompt the West to give up via 
increasing violence could backfire.  The leading powers in the world 
 
will not leave Pakistan or Afghanistan to the Taliban." 
 
BERLIN 00001364  003 OF 007 
 
 
 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   Karzai Brother on CIA Payroll 
 
Under the headline: Al Capone in Kandahar," Frankfurter Rundschau 
(10/29) reported: "For President Karzai, the latest report on the 
activities of his brother Ahmed Wali Karzai in the New York Times, 
which refers to CIA sources, is very unfortunate.  On November 7, he 
 
will enter run-off elections which will not improve his chances of 
winning if his brother turns out to be a U.S. puppet.  A U.S. 
general 
in Afghanistan said about Ahmed Karzai's role in Kandahar: 'If we 
wanted to clear Chicago, it would be necessary to get rid of Al 
Capone.'  The former U.S. ambassador to Kabul, Ronald Neumann, 
called 
Ahmed Karzai a 'political embarrassment.''' 
 
"Karzai Compromised by His Own Family," headlined Die Welt (10/29) 
and 
added: "[In view of all the bad news], the revelation that President 
 
Karzai's brother Ahmed Wali Karzai, has been on the payroll of the 
CIA, could  compromise the entire U.S. strategy for Afghanistan. 
The 
new debate is now overshadowing President Obama's expected decision 
 
about the future U.S. strategy for Afghanistan.  The impression that 
 
the United States applied double standards in Afghanistan will make 
it 
even more complicated for President Obama to convey a convincing 
strategy for Afghanistan." 
 
Die Welt (10/29) opined: "This news is not surprising. The 
camaraderie 
between the CIA and Afghan drug lord Ahmed Wali Karzai follows a 
simple logic: 'If he is a bastard, he is at least our bastard.'  The 
 
debate over the meaning of the Afghanistan mission has once again 
been 
fueled.  In this situation, Barack Obama appears to be acting too 
hesitantly.  In addition, the pre-emptive award of the Nobel Peace 
Prize is now turning into a burden for him that will strengthen the 
 
Taliban.  If the mountainous and rugged landscape cannot be 
safeguarded, Obama and NATO must concentrate on the important 
centers 
of the country while politicians must hope that stone-age Islamic 
extremists delegitimize themselves in the remote areas of the 
country. 
There is no doubt that when looking at the overall situation, 
Pakistan 
is more important.  The large neighboring country with its nuclear 
arms arsenal should by no means turn into a failed state." 
 
¶4.   (Mideast)   Clinton Visit 
 
According to Sueddeutsche (10/29),  "Since January, Hillary Clinton 
 
has been at the top of the State Department but only now is she 
concentrating on the two biggest chunks of U.S. foreign policy.  On 
 
Wednesday, she will travel to Pakistan.  The fact that the trip 
remained secret until her arrival in Islamabad and coincided with a 
 
horrible slaughter in Peshawar shows how dramatic the situation is. 
 
The second trouble spot is the Mideast:   Over the past few months, 
 
 
BERLIN 00001364  004 OF 007 
 
 
she sent two special envoys to the region unsuccessfully, resulting 
in 
a lot of wasted time.  Only now is Clinton apparently realizing that 
 
there are problems in foreign policy which the secretary of state 
should take care of herself - nine months too late." 
 
¶5.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
 
Frankfurter Rundschau (10/29) reported under the headline: "Iran 
Will 
Only Accept Portion of Enriched Uranium Plan  and wrote: "Iran will 
 
accept the 'framework' of the draft treaty that was signed last week 
 
in Vienna on the enrichment of Iranian uranium, but demands a few 
'amendments.'  With this statement the planned conference between 
the 
P5 plus Germany and Iran, scheduled to take place in Geneva this 
Thursday, has been thwarted." 
 
Sueddeutsche (10/29) opined in an editorial that "The most important 
 
rule in the nuclear conflict with Iran is as follows: if all sides 
involved want to achieve a solution via negotiations, Iran's 
justified 
security interests must be respected.  At the same time, no one 
should 
be so naQve to insinuate that Tehran has only defensive motifs for 
its 
nuclear armament.  It is true that Tehran is still a few years away 
 
from possessing the bomb, but it would hardly be so senseless as to 
 
attack Israel.  The regime is interested in preserving its power, 
not 
in committing suicide.  However, there is one path upon which all 
sides could embark.  First of all, Iran should stop the enrichment 
of 
uranium and re-apply the NPT additional protocol.  [IAEA] inspectors 
 
could then search for secret facilities.  Like in the case of Libya, 
 
Iran's violations from the past should be revealed but it should not 
 
be punished for them.  Then the West should back a lifting of 
sanctions and keep its promise to cooperate on the civil use of 
nuclear energy - and guarantee Iran's security.  But the much lauded 
 
security system for the Middle East or a nuclear-free Israel should 
 
not be preconditions for this.  If a basis of confidence were to be 
 
established, it would be enough to give Iran a non-aggression 
promise. 
However, if the talks fail, the only option that remains will be to 
 
impose tough sanctions." 
 
¶6.   (EU)   Future President 
 
Tagesspiegel (10/29) headlined: "Britons are at odds over EU office 
 
for Blair" and Die Welt noted in a lengthy piece on the former 
British 
Prime Minister that "Tony Blair's candidature for the EU presidency 
is 
raising skepticism from Europe's capitals.   The Britons are even 
plunging into an identity crisis."  Die Welt added: "A Tory 
 
BERLIN 00001364  005 OF 007 
 
 
government 
in Downing Street and an EU President Blair in Brussels: this would 
 
mean nothing good for the island's relationship with the continent. 
 
Only those who want a strained relationship would like to see such a 
 
pair.  It would not be to Europe's benefit...  Tony Blair should 
instead 
take the time to write his memories." 
 
FT Deutschland (10/29) headlined: "Merkel will choose the council's 
 
president," adding: "The Chancellor's candidate will be important 
for 
deciding who will get what post within the EU."  The paper wrote: 
"The 
camps are clear prior to the summit in Brussels.  Larger EU 
countries 
such as Britain, France and Italy support Blair's candidature for 
the 
new office of EU council president.  Smaller countries like Belgium, 
 
Austria and Luxemburg have forged a front against Blair.  Nobody yet 
 
knows the decisive answer: who is Merkel's candidate?" 
 
Frankfurter Rundschau (10/29) headlined: "Juncker competes against 
Blair - Luxemburg's head of government wants to become EU council 
president and defeat former British Prime Minister Blair." 
 
Under the headline "One for all," weekly Die Zeit wrote on the EU's 
 
efforts to pursue a common foreign policy: "Can 27 countries really 
 
pursue a common foreign policy.  The European Union is attempting 
the 
impossible by creating a European Foreign Office for the first 
time.... 
EU diplomats will not achieve much in the beginning. Progress could 
be 
made if the Europe speaks with one voice. " 
 
According to Sueddeutsche, "Sarkozy's peacock-like style usually 
does 
not have a lasting effect - one example is the Mediterranean Union, 
 
while Merkel's owl-like stoicism does not meet with great public 
applause.  That is why the pair compliments each other in the best 
possible way.  Next to this European leadership duo, there is little 
 
room for a third guiding star, yet Tony Blair wants to be this star. 
 
He would like to be European president, and with a gloriole, as 
Newsweek sees him.  It would be a laudable act for the Franco-German 
 
alliance to bury Blair's hopes." 
 
¶7.   (U.S.-Germany)   Relations 
 
In a front page article, Die Zeit remarked on Chancellor Merkel's 
visit to Washington and address to the Congress: "The invitation is 
a 
demonstrative honor for the chancellor and a gesture of respect for 
 
all Germans 20 years after the fall of the wall.  However, the core 
of 
U.S.-German relations must be unearthed again: for Germany, America 
 
 
BERLIN 00001364  006 OF 007 
 
 
represents the revolutionary, egalitarian and democratic principle 
and 
an unprecedented power of change.  Twice, the U.S. was the midwife 
of 
Germany's freedom, not just during the foundation of the Federal 
Republic in 1949 but also after the downfall of communism in 1989. 
 
The European powers, France and Britain, as well as many West 
Germans 
were not keen on overthrowing the post-war world, in which many 
lived 
comfortably.  East Germans forced German unity-and it was the United 
 
States that calmly responded: 'Why not? And 'If not that, then 
what?' 
The reception of Merkel will be an unmistakable reminder of this 
interplay of forces.  The chancellor would not be in the position 
she 
is today without the last democratic revolution, inspired by the 
ideals of the West, and she will start down the path paved by the 
first revolution, the American Revolution.  Germany never had an 
epochal revolution of its own.  Its revolution was America's.  The 
old 
authoritarian state could not survive without its alliance with the 
 
U.S. after the Second World War.  The U.S. was not perfect at the 
time, and neither is it perfect today.  However, U.S. society is 
based 
on equal rights for all people-and the pursuit of happiness.... In 
the 
conservative time of Konrad Adenauer, President John F. Kennedy was 
 
the model for social democratic reformers like Willy Brandt. 
Student 
protests against the Vietnam War originated in the United States. 
And 
today?  It is not a pilgrimage to the temples of democracy when the 
 
German chancellor travels to Washington.  The model has since been 
tainted.  Despite the great tuning point of President Obama's 
election, the pathological features of U.S. policies are obvious: 
the 
excessive role money plays as well as the polarized and hateful 
debate 
over the President's reform projects.  Barack Obama has not come 
very 
far with his project to return to reason and to change the political 
 
culture of his country.  The state of Europe's democracy is 
different, 
but not much better.  Populists and pseudo-cesarean leaders like 
Sarkozy and Berlusconi pose the greatest threat." 
 
¶8.   (Environment)   Climate Talks 
 
Center-left, weekly Die Zeit of Hamburg (10/29) carried a lengthy 
article on the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks and opined: "The 
hundreds of high-ranking diplomats, almost 200 ministers, and even 
some government leaders will bid each other farewell after two weeks 
 
of talks in Copenhagen, but they will hardly have agreed on a treaty 
 
to protect the earth from human-induced global warming.  That is why 
 
they will not declare the end of the conclave but will continue it 
in 
a different theater.  For more than two years, all those who feared 
 
for the fate of the blue planet, have awaited this event.  And now? 
 
BERLIN 00001364  007 OF 007 
 
 
 
They must wait and see, have a cup of tea, and not lose patience, 
although the fight against global warming cannot tolerate one 
postponement after the other.  As of next Monday, environmental 
experts will try to find a common denominator at a meeting in 
Barcelona.  But why should more come of it than during the previous 
 
meetings in Bonn and Bangkok?  Too much is at stake.  Primarily... 
chances of development in the 21st century.  Once this century was 
called the century of the environment but it could also turn out to 
be 
the century of environmental disasters if the agreement on global 
climate protection continues to be long in waiting." 
 
 MURPHY