VZCZCXRO7178
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #1387/01 3071233
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031233Z NOV 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5660
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 1697
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0409
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0927
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2437
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1452
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0629
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 001387 
 
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 XF AG GM KGHG IR EFIN US GM
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: MIDEAST, AFGHANISTAN, U.S.-GERMANY, 
CLIMATE, 
IRAN ECONOMIC, U.S., GERMANY;BERLIN 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (U.S.-Mideast)   Clinton Visit 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   Karzai Winner of Elections 
¶4.   (U.S.-Germany)   Chancellor Merkel to Address Congress 
¶5.   (Environment)   Climate Change 
¶6.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
¶7.   (Economic)   CIT Collapse 
¶8.   (U.S.)   President Obama's First Year in Office 
¶9.   (Germany)   Future Foreign Policy 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
ZDF-TV's early evening newscast Heute opened with a story on 
President 
Karzai's election victory and ARD-TV's early evening newscast 
Tagesschau opened with a story on the rapidly increasing number of 
H1N1 cases.  Newspapers led with diverse stories, including 
Afghanistan, the military draft, and the German tax debate. 
Editorials focused on the situation in Afghanistan. 
 
¶2.   (U.S.-Mideast)   Clinton Visit 
 
Under the headline "U.S. rejects Arab criticism," FT Deutschland 
(10/03) reported that "Secretary Clinton rejected the criticism Arab 
 
countries expressed on the U.S. government's policy change on the 
Mideast.  Clinton said in Morocco that Israel had responded to U.S. 
 
and Arab demands for a settlement freeze by limiting settlement 
activities.  After his inauguration, President Obama supported the 
demand for a complete settlement freeze.  However, the U.S. 
government 
now expresses willingness to make concessions to its traditional 
ally 
Israel."  Tagesspiegel carried a similar short story. 
 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   Karzai Winner of Elections 
 
Lead headlines: "End of electoral farce in Afghanistan" (Die Welt), 
 
"Runoff Cancelled-Karzai declared as winner" (Frankfurter 
Allgemeine), 
"The Winner is Karzai," (Sddeutsche), "Karzai Remains President 
Without Runoff" (Tagesspiegel). 
 
Westdeutscher Rundfunk radio (10/02) remarked: "The international 
community needs a partner with sufficient political support to 
accelerate the stabilization of the country.  This person must be 
unflappable enough to push through unpopular measures, such as a 
strict fight against corruption and drug trade.  Karzai is not that 
 
man.  The electoral chaos might have ended, but not the crisis in 
Afghanistan." 
 
Deutschlandfunk radio (10/02) opined: "Given that Karzai's rival 
candidate Abdullah no longer wanted to participate in the runoff, it 
 
was clear that Karzai would remain Afghanistan's president. 
However, 
the way it happened is a scandal....  Abdullah rightly demanded to 
replace the leadership of the electoral commission after the massive 
 
fraud, but he was not heard.  The international community and 
particularly the U.S. did not want to confront Karzai but rather 
supported him after the fraud.  One can no longer make the claim 
that 
one wants to export democracy to Afghanistan." 
 
BERLIN 00001387  002 OF 007 
 
 
 
Tagesspiegel (10/03) remarked: "Democratic advocates should not 
exaggerate their outrage.  NATO is in Afghanistan to prevent the 
Taliban from becoming stronger again and Al Qaida from returning to 
 
the country.  It must also stop the Af/Pak region from plunging into 
 
chaos, so that Islamic radicals do not obtain nuclear bombs. 
Anything 
else - democracy, human rights, emancipation, education, hospitals - 
 
is of secondary importance.  Will the Pashtu Karzai be helpful to 
pursue this strategy?  This is the important question." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/03) editorialized on the front page: 
"Maybe the international community should not interfere too much and 
 
leave it up to the Afghans to organize their state.  There is only 
one 
thing where no compromise should be made: when our security is at 
stake." 
 
Under the headline "Weak president at Washington's mercy," 
Sddeutsche 
(10/03) commented: "Afghanistan has a new president. It's the old 
one 
and he lacks legitimacy....  If it was not Afghanistan that would be 
 
sufficient reason to isolate the government but there is no 
alternative.  The West is particularly to blame for this situation. 
 
It was a mistake right from the start to support only Karzai.  The 
tribal leaders in the region are powerful and don't care much what 
is 
decided in Kabul.  Afghanistan will not turn into a strong democracy 
 
with a strong president like in the U.S. only because this is what 
Washington wanted....  Support for the international mission is 
waning 
in the West as a whole, not just in the U.S., because there is no 
longer a clearly defined goal. The electoral chaos will increase 
this 
fatigue.  We need more success - and quickly - to stabilize the 
situation.  The West must give up its focus on Kabul's central 
government and intensify its contacts with tribal leaders." 
 
In a front-page editorial under the headline "Karzai - No Democrat," 
 
Die Welt (10/03) said: "The procedures produced more questions than 
 
answers.  Although we know who will lead the country for the next 
five 
years, Karzai's legitimacy was badly undermined by the massive 
election fraud....  At a moment when the West faces the difficult 
question of whether to deploy more soldiers, serious doubts have 
arisen.  To fight insurgents successfully, you need a locally 
accepted 
partner.   Karzai no longer fully meets these requirements.  He has 
 
undermined the efforts of the West to establish democratic 
conditions....  However, this is not the moment to give up 
everything. 
Too much is at stake for the West.  It is, however, the moment to 
set 
clear conditions.  If Karzai is not a good democrat, he must at 
least 
be a good technocrat - or lose the West's support....  The West must 
 
BERLIN 00001387  003 OF 007 
 
 
 
come up with alternatives.  Karzai will only take care of 
Afghanistan's future if is concerned about his own future." 
 
¶4.   (U.S.-Germany)   Chancellor Merkel to Address Congress 
 
Many papers (11/03) carried factual news reports on Chancellor 
Merkel's trip to the U.S. and her "historic" speech to both chambers 
 
of Congress.  Sueddeutsche (11/03) headlined: "Partners out of 
Reason," while Die Welt (11/03) carried a lengthy report under the 
headline: "Chancellor Merkel Addresses U.S. Congress."   Both papers 
 
emphasize that Merkel is the second chancellor after Konrad-Adenauer 
 
who has been invited to do this.  They emphasize that it is a "great 
 
honor" (Die Welt) to do this.  The papers emphasize that Merkel will 
 
primarily address the climate issue and try to convince Congress of 
 
the need to adopt climate protection goals. 
 
Commercial TV station n-tv (11/02) aired the following report from 
its 
Washington correspondent: "The chancellor is well known and she is 
held in high regard in the U.S.  An insider, a Democrat from the 
White 
House, told me last week that the relationship between President 
Obama 
and Chancellor Merkel is not as close as the one between Merkel and 
 
Bush, but, nevertheless, there is a good working atmosphere and the 
 
president is always interested in what Mrs. Merkel has to say on 
certain issues.  Foreign Minister Westerwelle, however, is an 
unknown 
quantity.  His last trip to the U.S. took place in 2004.  But one 
expects that he will follow the great lines of Germany's foreign 
policy as a 'post-post-successor' of ex-Foreign Minister Genscher 
and 
that there will not be great changes in German foreign policy. 
 
Die Welt (11/03) judged: "In her speech to both houses of Congress, 
 
Chancellor Merkel will thank the American people.  The chancellor 
will 
take advantage of this honor to look back at the Fall of the Wall. 
 
The former GDR civil rights activist Merkel, whose biography 
reflects 
the decision and the unification of the nation, has never had any 
doubt about the significance of German-U.S. friendship. 
Nevertheless, 
despite her reliability...it will not be easy for her to strike the 
 
right tone in Washington.  The political agenda in Berlin and 
Washington is currently different.  She wants to press the United 
States to take farther reaching steps in climate protection.  But 
the 
corresponding committee in Congress that deals with climate 
protection 
will also make clear on Tuesday how controversial a corresponding 
bill 
will be in Congress. That is why Congress will open a friendly ear 
to 
the guest from Germany, but more cannot be expected." 
 
BERLIN 00001387  004 OF 007 
 
 
 
Berliner Zeitung (11/03) has this to say: "For the Americans, Merkel 
 
is the personification of a grand U.S. idea:  It is worthwhile to 
fight for freedom and democracy, as the Americans did when fighting 
 
for Germany's liberation from fascism.    In the American eye, there 
 
is no better evidence of a better world than the democratic 
economically prospering Germany.  But when the United States 
celebrates Merkel, tit is also celebrating itself." 
 
Thringer Allgemeine of Erfurt (11/03) argued: "At the latest today, 
 
the climate chancellor will run out of steam in Washington.  In an 
historic speech to U.S. Congress she will try to convince America of 
 
the need to agree on far-reaching climate protection goals.  But 
Merkel will not have the stamina to do this.  In Afghanistan, the 
situation is very bad for the U.S. President.  A troop surge costing 
 
one billion U.S. dollar per month and an expensive healthcare reform 
 
initiative at home -- and Germany is not supporting U.S. requests? 
 
This is something the White House is unable to explain even to the 
Democrats.  Maybe Merkel will learn today that climate protection, 
according to the U.S. view, begins in the camps in Afghanistan." 
 
Regional daily Mnchener Merkur (11/03) opined: "Merkel owes her 
extraordinary popularity to the fact that she cuts a good figure on 
 
the red carpets of the world.  An insignificant PR success at a 
third- 
class EU summit leaves a greater impression among German voters than 
a 
really important decision in finance policy.    Being well aware of 
 
how important foreign policy is for her self-marketing, the global 
stateswoman clearly orchestrates her public appearances.  In this 
context, the rare honor to deliver an address to both houses of 
Congress comes at a perfect time." 
 
Regional daily Schweriner Volkszeitung (11/03) observed: "Credit 
where 
credit is due.  In the eyes of Americans, Angela Merkel stands for 
reliability and accountability, integrity and a special circumspect 
 
policy.  The fact that the chancellor as the German state leader is 
 
allowed to deliver a speech to both houses of Congress is an 
expression of the esteem she enjoys [in the U.S.]. 
 
¶5.   (Environment)   Climate Change 
 
ARD-TV's Tagesthemen (11/02) broadcast the following commentary: 
"The 
climate summit from Copenhagen has been often characterized a 
failure 
even before it has begun.  O.k., the Europeans are stonewalling the 
 
conference, while the Americans are blocking it.  Nevertheless, 
Copenhagen is an historic chance, and as always when as much is at 
stake, a poker game is taking place.  But when looking back, there 
is 
reason to hope.  In the meantime, an ecological way of thinking is 
part of midstream society.  It is no longer a matter for the 
 
BERLIN 00001387  005 OF 007 
 
 
opposition but also for state leaders.  In view of these 
developments, 
it is fitting that Chancellor Merkel now have a serious talk with 
President Obama about this and it is why she is pressing the U.S. 
president to take a leading role in the climate process and not come 
 
to Copenhagen empty-handed.  We must concede that Obama did not have 
 
much time to correct all the mistakes his predecessor made.  It is 
not 
yet certain that Copenhagen will be a success.  If the conference 
fails, then the protection of the climate is no longer binding 
according to international law, and we would all feel this.  The 
number of climate ignorants is on the decline, especially among 
those 
who share global responsibilities.   This is the best reason not to 
 
consider Copenhagen a failure before the summit has even started." 
 
¶6.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
 
Several papers carried factual news reports on the nuclear deal the 
 
Iranian government concluded with Russia and France. Sueddeutsche 
(11/03) headlined: "Iran's Opposition Criticizes Nuclear Agreement," 
 
and wrote that "not only conservative hardliners but also moderate 
politicians who back reforms are opposed to sending uranium abroad 
as 
the West demanded.  The internal debate about the project to send 
lowly enriched uranium from Iran abroad is being carried out in 
Tehran 
not between supporters of President Ahmadinejad and his opponents, 
and 
not between reformers and orthodox politicians either. The 
differences 
of opinion are visible in all political camps." 
 
¶7.   (Economic)   CIT Collapse 
 
All major dailies reported that with CIT, the 106th U.S. bank has 
gone 
bankrupt since the beginning of the financial crisis.  FAZ (11/03) 
carried a report under the headline: ""CIT Insolvency Cost State 
Billions - The Financier of Medium-Sized Businesses is Turning into 
 
Biggest Bank Insolvency This Year."   The daily reported: "CIT, 
based 
in New York, filed for insolvency on Sunday.  Measured against 
assets 
it has, it is the greatest bankruptcy of a bank since the insolvency 
 
of Lehman Bros. and Washington Mutual, and the fifth largest 
insolvency case in U.S. history.  But unlike Lehman Bros., CIT hopes 
 
to continue to exist and to conclude the insolvency procedures by 
the 
end of the year.  But it is already clear now that there will be 
some 
losers.  The collapse of the bank is the first case in which the 
U.S. 
government must write off a loan from the rescue fund (TARP) for the 
 
financial sector.  Previous shareholders will also end up with 
nothing." 
 
In an editorial, Handelsblatt opined: "'Don't waste a crisis,' was 
 
BERLIN 00001387  006 OF 007 
 
 
the 
early reaction of President Obama's advisor Rahm Emanuel when he 
warned against forfeiting the chances for a new beginning following 
 
the financial crisis.  But it was clear that there was only a small 
 
time window for a financial reform.   Now that many people are 
speaking of an end to the crisis and bankers are waking up from 
their 
state of shock, this window of opportunity is closing again.  But 
politicians only partly took advantage of this chance.  We achieved 
 
the least progress with respect to globally acting banks.  As long 
as 
the big banks can rely on an implicit state guarantee to survive, 
they 
continue to remain a risk for the entire financial system.  The 
dangers of  'too-big-to-fail' have now become even bigger." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/03) had this to say: "The CIT collapse 
cost 
the taxpayer about 2.3 billion U.S. dollars.  This is the bad news, 
 
the good news is that the government withstood the temptation to 
give 
CIT more loans in addition to the ones the bank had already 
received. 
The government is right to let CIT go bankrupt. And lo and behold: 
All 
of a sudden, the bank has found a solution on its own and developed 
an 
insolvency plan, which is being supported by the creditors.  It does 
 
not guarantee the long-term survival of the bank but without an 
additional state loan, the bank has a chance for a new beginning." 
 
Regional daily SchwQbische Zeitung (11/03) of Leutkirch 
editorialized: 
"There was once a tsunami that was proclaimed in advance.  For 
months, 
people had expected the large CIT bank to go bankrupt.  Everyone was 
 
prepared and that is why this insolvency did not cause the same 
great 
shock as did the insolvency of Lehman Bros a year ago.  This shows 
that there is again confidence in the markets.  The dangerous mood 
of 
fear from the high point of the financial market crisis seems to be 
 
over." 
 
¶8.   (U.S.)   President Obama's First Year in Office 
 
Under the headline: "Yes, We Could," Washington correspondent 
Christoph von Marschall judged in an editorial in Tagesspiegel 
(10/03) 
that "the United States is not as progressive as Obama's victory a 
year ago might have us believe. A year ago, the Americans elected 
Barack Obama with a large majority as their president.  But if a 
miracle does not happen soon, his party will lose several upcoming 
regional and local elections.  The broad coalition that helped him 
triumph in 2008 is dissolving and splitting into several groups. 
The 
large middle class of society did not want a revolution but elected 
 
Obama because many of his proposals sounded like reasonable 
alternatives to Bush's policy.  Today, these Americans are waiting 
 
BERLIN 00001387  007 OF 007 
 
 
to 
see whether he will really be able to implement them.  America's 
middle class is skeptical whether the approaches he uses for his 
policy will be successful.  That is why it is so difficult to use 
his 
parliamentary majority for political advantage.  The Democrats want 
to 
be re-elected in 2010, while the Republicans do not grudge him a 
success.  In everyday life, the United States is not as progressive 
as 
Obama's victory made us believe a year ago.  The center in the 
United 
States is situated further to the right than in Germany.  The goals 
 
for which Obama fought in 2008 are now considered to be too leftist. 
 
A year ago, it seemed that Barack Obama would leave his mark on the 
 
U.S.  But in the meantime, it is vice versa.  Yes, he can - but only 
 
if America allows him to do so." 
 
¶9.   (Germany)   Future Foreign Policy 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/03) commented:  "Continuity is 
particularly 
important in foreign policy because the reliability of a country 
depends on it.  A new minister can therefore only marginally differ 
 
from his predecessor. Westerwelle has made use of this little leeway 
 
to set his own priorities during his first courtesy calls. 
Steinmeier 
would have probably travelled to Russia after his visits to France 
and 
Poland.  The former global leader Fischer would never have dreamed 
of 
making a stopover in The Hague on his way from Poland to Paris. 
However, particularly with this visit, which will soon be followed 
by 
courtesy calls to Belgium and Luxemburg, Westerwelle is continuing a 
 
tried and tested CDU/CSU-FDP tradition.  As Europe's largest 
country, 
Germany did well for a long time by expressing its respect to 
smaller 
countries.  You can never have enough friends when things get 
difficult in Brussels." 
 
Delawie