VZCZCXRO5671
PP RUEHIK
DE RUEHRL #1527/01 3361802
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 021802Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5946
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RHMFIUU/COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE
RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
RHMFIUU/HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 001527 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL MARR NATO GM AF PK
 
SUBJECT: GERMAN POLITICAL REACTIONS TO THE PRESIDENT'S ANNOUNCEMENT 
ON THE WAY FORWARD IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN 
 
REFS: A) STATE 123222, B) BERLIN 1507 
 
BERLIN 00001527  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: German politicians across the political spectrum 
welcomed and endorsed President Obama's plan for the way forward in 
Afghanistan and Pakistan, seeing their own views largely confirmed 
in his speech.  However, the opposition SPD and Greens criticized 
the CDU-CSU/FDP coalition government for declining to reveal its 
plans for possible additional contributions until after the January 
28 Afghanistan Conference in London.  Both the SPD and Greens 
emphasized civilian reconstruction and the build-up and training of 
the Afghan police over the possible deployment of additional German 
troops.  The Left Party, which polls only about 10 percent 
nationwide, was alone in criticizing the U.S. way forward, arguing 
that deploying more soldiers would just exacerbate current problems. 
 END SUMMARY. 
 
MERKEL: STICKS TO POSITION 
¶2. (SBU) After her telephone conversation with President Obama 
yesterday, Chancellor Merkel reiterated her position publicly that 
the government would wait until after the January 28 London 
Conference to decide "whether and if so, what" Germany would further 
contribute to the international effort in Afghanistan.  In the face 
of uncertainty over the U.S. strategy and the Afghan presidential 
election results, the government decided in early November to seek 
only a simple roll-over of the parliamentary mandate for Bundeswehr 
participation in ISAF when it came up for renewal this month.  The 
Bundestag vote on the renewed mandate is scheduled for December 3. 
The current troop ceiling of 4,500 will remain unchanged.  Before 
the December 3 vote, Merkel is especially keen to avoid giving any 
indication that her government is already considering a possible 
troop increase. 
 
CDU: DECLINES TO PLAY THE "NUMBERS GAME" 
 
¶3. (SBU) The foreign and defense policy spokesmen from Merkel's 
Christian Democratic Union also supported the planned U.S. troop 
surge, noting that it would provide a window of opportunity during 
which the international community and the Afghan government could 
put the country on a path toward sustainable stability.  They argued 
for focusing efforts on civilian construction and the build-up of 
the Afghan national security forces.  Like Merkel, they referred to 
the January Afghanistan conference as key for determining possible 
additional troop contributions, declining to participate in a 
"numbers game" before then.  They referred to the announcement last 
week that the German Development Ministry would increase its 
assistance for Afghanistan by an additional 52 million Euros beyond 
the 92 million Euros budgeted for 2009 (ref B) as showing that 
Germany was ready to do its part. 
 
FM WESTERWELLE: SPEECH CONFIRMS VIEW 
 
¶4. (SBU) In a press conference following the President's speech, FM 
Westerwelle (Free Democratic Party) refused to discuss additional 
German military contributions, arguing that a debate on troop 
numbers at this point was counterproductive.  He said that there 
would not be a "European and German position" until after that 
January 28 conference.  "The U.S. Government does not expect an 
answer from us before we have spoken with our Allies and the Afghan 
government at the Afghanistan conference," said Westerwelle.  While 
declining to discuss the possibility of increasing troop levels, 
Westerwelle said Germany was prepared to do more in building up and 
training the Afghan police forces.  "That is the only way that 
Afghans can guarantee security for themselves, and the only way 
there can be a transfer of responsibility," he said.  "No one wants 
this mission to go on forever."  Westerwelle said he had emphasized 
since becoming foreign minister in late October that Germany had to 
pursue a strategy that would allow German withdrawal within the 
current legislative period (i.e., by 2013): "I really feel confirmed 
in this view from what the President said in his speech." 
 
SPD: CRITICIZES DELAY IN DECIDING CONTRIBUTIONS 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Social Democratic Party defense and foreign policy 
spokesmen welcomed the President's speech and called on the 
government to inform the Bundestag about its plans for additional 
contributions right away rather than waiting until the January 
conference.  They confirmed that the SPD put a priority on civilian 
reconstruction and attributed strategic significance to the build-up 
and training of the Afghan national security forces.  They warned 
against restricting the discussion on the way ahead in Afghanistan 
to just troop increases. 
 
 
BERLIN 00001527  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
GREENS: PUSH FOR DRAMATIC INCREASE IN CIVILIAN AID 
 
¶6. (SBU) The Greens foreign policy spokeswoman also argued that with 
the U.S. plan on the table, it was time for the German government to 
provide a concrete plan and time schedule for ending the Afghanistan 
deployment and turning over responsibility to the Afghans.  She said 
that a troop increase, like the one proposed by President Obama, 
made sense in certain areas of the country, like the Pakistan border 
region.  However, she thought that the arming of tribal leaders in 
other areas would be counterproductive because it would weaken the 
Afghan state.  She called for a "civilian development offensive" by 
dramatically increasing development funds and immediately deploying 
at least another 500 police trainers. 
 
LEFT PARTY: PREDICTABLY CRITICAL 
 
¶7. (U) The Left Party, which has consistently opposed the 
Afghanistan deployment, predictably said the U.S. decision to send 
more troops would just lead to more fighting and did not really 
represent a strategy.