VZCZCXRO0404
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #0124/01 0281354
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 281354Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6402
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 1965
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0690
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1207
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2707
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1726
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0889
RHMFIUU/HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE//J5 DIRECTORATE (MC)//
RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
RUZEADH/UDITDUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 BERLIN 000124 
 
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 AF YM HO CE IR GM
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S., AFGHANISTAN, YEMEN, HONDURAS, SRI 
LANKA, IRAN, GERMANY-U.S.;BERLIN 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
¶2.   (U.S.)   State of the Union Address 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   London Conference, German Strategy 
¶4.   (Yemen)   London Conference 
¶5.   (Honduras)   Lobo Inauguration 
¶6.   (Sri Lanka)   Outcome of Elections 
¶7.   (Iran)   Nuclear Program 
¶8.   (Germany-U.S.)   German Family Gets Asylum in the U.S. 
 
 
¶1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
ZDF-TV's and ARD-TV's primetime newscasts opened with stories on 
Holocaust Memorial Day. Newspapers led with a broad variety of 
stories, including Iran, Afghanistan, the Holocaust, and the Left 
Party.  Frankfurter Allgemeine headlined: "Berlin rejects Iran's 
'absurd' allegations," and Tagesspiegel highlighted Chancellor 
Merkel's speech on Afghanistan: "Merkel: Mission in Afghanistan has 
been correct."  Editorials focused on Israeli President Peres' 
speech to the German parliament, the situation in Afghanistan and 
presidential elections in Sri Lanka.  Several papers also carried 
editorials on the German family that was granted asylum in America. 
Frankfurter Allgemeine carried a front-page photo of the family. 
 
¶2.   (U.S.)   State of the Union Address 
 
Broadcast and online media led with stories on President Obama's 
State of the Union address, highlighting that he would stick to his 
healthcare plans and make the creation of jobs his greatest 
priority. 
 
ZDF-TV's Heute reported: "In his address on the State of the Union, 
President Obama admitted that his government has made mistakes.  He 
said that the change that was promised had not come fast enough for 
many Americans.  The priority will now be the creation of jobs and 
the regulation of the financial markets.  In addition, Obama will 
stick to the healthcare reform.  He expressed optimism about a 
success in Afghanistan.  As of July 2011, Afghan soldiers are 
supposed to gradually take over the leadership." 
 
Deutschlandfunk radio reported: "U.S. President Obama wants to stick 
to his healthcare reform plans despite the increasing opposition. 
Obama said in his first State of the Union address that millions of 
Americans would lose their insurance this year.  He will not walk 
away from these people.  The President called on Democrats and 
oppositional Republicans to overcome their differences of opinion. 
Obama also announced that job creation would become a main priority 
of the government's policy next year.  He proposed using the 30 
billion dollars in repaid government loans to support smaller 
enterprises." 
 
ARD-TV's Tagesthemen opined: "The man in the White House never 
lacked courage.  Without the economic crisis, he would shine as a 
determined reformer.  His frustration is understandable.  However, 
given the huge burden of the national debt, the state of the nation 
remains gloomy.  Barack Obama must perform a miracle in his second 
year: create jobs and boost the economy with less money.   If he 
succeeds, he would be the hero of the world and would deserve the 
Nobel Prize - for economics." 
 
Spiegel Online reported under the headline "Messiah in short 
sleeves" that, given "electoral setbacks, bad polls and a stronger 
opposition, Barack Obama is going through his first great crisis as 
U.S. President-and has now responded to it with a great speech.  In 
Congress, he reached out to his critics and described the fight 
against the unemployment crisis as his most important mission.... 
Obama made a comeback with a convincing presentation.  Whole 
passages of his 70-minute-speech expressed the panic of low polling 
 
BERLIN 00000124  002 OF 005 
 
 
results.  Two-thirds of the address was devoted to the economic 
situation.  He criticized banks, promised a lot of money for better 
schools, nicer streets and quicker trains....  He made clear that he 
wants to listen to the skeptics who fear the national debt and 
unemployment.  It took an hour until he had time for foreign 
policy....  In his first real crisis speech as the President, Obama 
did not walk away from change but said that he never said that 
change would be easy....  Obama is faithful to himself, also in his 
first great crisis-and he is reinventing himself.  Obama still 
speaks like a messiah, but one in short sleeves." 
 
¶3.   (Afghanistan)   London Conference, German Strategy 
 
Almost all papers carried reports on Chancellor Merkel's 
governmental address on Germany's future strategy in Afghanistan and 
on the upcoming conference in London.  Tagesspiegel (1/28) 
headlined: " Merkel: Afghanistan Mission is Correct," While FAZ 
(1/28) carried a front-page report under the headline: "Merkel 
Opposed to Date for Withdrawal from Afghanistan," and reported: 
"Even though Chancellor Merkel refused to announce the withdrawal of 
the first German soldiers from Afghanistan by the end of 2011, she 
did not want to mention and end of the mission."  In a governmental 
address on the Afghanistan conference in London, she said in the 
Bundestag that the issue is to 'transfer responsibility' [to the 
Afghan government]. 
 
Under the headline: "The London Crutch," Sueddeutsche Zeitung (1/28) 
editorialized: "If conferences had decided Afghanistan's fate, then 
the country would have been an oasis of peace, prosperity and a 
fertile ground for peaceful co-existence for a long time...but 
Afghanistan's fate will not be decided in conferences.  The meeting 
in London was convened because there are mounting doubts about the 
success and even the meaning of the operation in the 43 troop 
contributing countries.  But the conference in London will not 
decide on a new strategy.  So many new strategies have been invented 
for Afghanistan that we should rather speak of tactical twitchings. 
The conference does not decide on peace with the Taliban or the 
performance of the Afghan government either.  The conference is a 
political crutch with which the allies support each other - it is an 
exercise which is intended to encourage all parties involved for the 
final stage of this intervention....  More important than London are 
now Washington and Kabul.  The final decision on success or failure 
will be made in Washington.  It is important what the United States 
does or does not do.  The international community will act in a 
defensive way and under pressure from its voters strive for a 
halfway honorable withdrawal.  This is America's goal.  But Kabul 
will make the final decision on the treatment of the Taliban. And 
this is President Karzai's task.  He will integrate the Taliban, 
turn the country a bit more towards Islamic extremism and, if he is 
lucky, separate the Taliban in a credible and lasting way from 
al-Qaida.  More will not be possible in Afghanistan." 
 
Rhein-Neckar Zeitung of Heidelberg (1/28) judged: "The Afghanistan 
conference in London will not bring the country a step closer to 
peace.  It is this political theater which serves the West in 
initiating an orderly withdrawal.  Following months of silence, the 
German change of strategy is only an un-original imitation of the 
U.S. decision.  The United States has given up the maximum goal of 
returning Afghanistan to the Afghans in an orderly way and to do 
this by excluding the former occupants.  But they already failed 
when they began the second Iraq War following the reconquest of 
Kabul." 
 
In an editorial, Die Welt (1/28) dealt with the German position at 
the Afghanistan conference and judged under the headline: "Delusion 
of a German Strategy" that "the Germans were primarily interested in 
a decision on how and to what extent Germany could integrate into an 
overall concept for Afghanistan when they discussed their strategy. 
 
BERLIN 00000124  003 OF 005 
 
 
As always the German principle was to wriggle out of excessive 
demands and be as smart as possible.  The plan that has come out of 
this strategy now it is at the border of things that the German 
government is able to convey to a skeptical German public.  And it 
represents the minimum it can offer to the allies without being 
considered a refusnik.  It is now up to Angela Merkel to sell this 
bad compromise as a silver bullet for stability in Afghanistan that 
will then lead to a withdrawal.  With it, [the German government] 
leaves President Obama, who wanted 10,000 soldiers from the allies, 
coolly in the lurch. 
 
Regional daily Mittelbayerische Zeitung of Regensburg (1/28) argued: 
"When talking about an Afghanistan strategy, then we should be fair 
and say that Germany is now only complying with the demands of the 
United States.  But the German government does not have a plan on 
its own.  The former SPD chairman Kurt Beck was the only one who had 
presented an individual plan two years ago.  Following a visit to 
Kabul he suggested entering into talks with moderate Taliban.  But 
at that time, foreign policy experts unanimously criticized him for 
this.  Today, the search for Taliban who are willing to talk is part 
of the political situation games in Germany and the United States. 
The global politicians in Berlin should probably ask Beck whether he 
has new plans. He probably has another future-oriented concept." 
 
¶4.   (Yemen)   London Conference 
 
Under the headline: "U.S. Military Helped Yemenite Army to Hunt 
al-Qaida," Sueddeutsche Zeitung (1/28) reported: "The southern Arab 
country wants support in the fight against terrorists but does not 
want to allow international forces on its territory."  U.S. security 
experts have known for a long time that the impoverished Yemen has 
turned into a reservoir for radicals, especially al-Qaida fighters. 
But the U.S. government does not want to speak loudly about its 
military support of the Yemenite armed forces because Washington is 
afraid that this could further weaken the position of the Yemenite 
government.  Several U.S. military officials now reported to the 
Washington Post that they did not directly take part in military 
operations but offered assistance in planning operations against 
al-Qaida....  The report was published on Wednesday, the day of the 
Yemen conference in London to which British government officials had 
invited representatives of 20 nations.  Secretary Clinton also took 
part but it lasted only two hours and ended with a rather general 
declaration of solidarity." 
 
Tagesspiegel (1/28) headlined: "120 Minutes for Yemen - A Conference 
in London is to Prevent Yemen from Becoming a Failed State," and 
reported: "Out of fear of new terror attacks, the international 
community wants to aid Yemen.  That is why it promised more aid in 
the fight against the al-Qaida terror network to the poorest Arab 
country during a brief conference in London.  The United States took 
the meeting very seriously and evidence of this was the 
participation of Secretary Clinton who, for this reason, did not 
take part in the President Obama's State of the Union address in 
Washington on Wednesday.  The U.S. coordinator for the fight against 
Terrorism, Ambassador Dan Benjamin, said similar to the situation in 
Afghanistan, a 'double strategy' is planned for Yemen.  For weeks, 
the Americans have worked closely with Yemen in the fight against 
al-Qaida on the Arab peninsula.  Benjamin also said that 'in 
addition to security cooperation, another issue was sustainable 
long-term engagement of the international community [in Yemen]." 
 
Regional daily MQrkische Oderzeitung of Frankfurt on the Oder (1/28) 
judged: "It has been clear that Yemen, similar to Somalia, is a 
hopeless case because no one has been interested in it for a long 
time.  A turnabout now comes too late.  Increasing poverty caused by 
a decline in oil revenue, is now driving the poor population into 
the arms of radical Islamists.  Formally, Yemen continues to exist 
as a state.  But the government, which pins its hopes on a military 
 
BERLIN 00000124  004 OF 005 
 
 
solution, is increasingly losing control.  Anarchy and chaos are 
taking their course." 
 
¶5.   (Honduras)   Lobo Inauguration 
 
Under the headline: "A Coup is Being Rubber Stamped," die 
tageszeitung (1/28) opined: "These were great words: Secretary 
Clinton said that one would no longer tolerate coups and Honduran 
President Zelaya must be re-installed immediately and without any 
preconditions.  But Roberto Micheletti, who planned the March 28 
coup and proclaimed to be the next president, prevailed and Zelaya 
will now go into exile.  With Porfirio Lobo another oligarch has now 
come into office   His election on November 29 was everything but 
fair and free. Can such a president be recognized?  A few 
conservative Latin American states already recognized him, and no 
one had expected anything else....  The reactions to the coup and 
protests that are becoming smaller are a fatal sign for the region. 
Lobo's recognition has now sealed it: coups will continue to be 
tolerated.  In Honduras's neighborhood, there are enough oligarchs 
and generals who will certainly view this sign with benevolence." 
 
¶6.   (Sri Lanka)   Outcome of Elections 
 
Frankfurter Rundschau (1/28) opined: "Following the triumph over the 
Tamil rebels, Sri Lanka urgently needs a government leader that can 
reconcile the people.  Whether Singhalese hardliner Mahinda 
Rajapaksa can be that man must be doubted.  Under his leadership, 
the former model democracy of Sri Lanka turned into a lawless state 
with a corrupt elite....  The government shamefully used the 
state-run media in the election campaign and prevented Fonseka's 
supporters from casting their ballots... This means nothing good for 
the minorities in the country, particularly the Tamils." 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/28) editorialized: "If there was election 
fraud during the presidential elections in Sri Lanka, the 
masterminds did a sophisticated job.  It is not unlikely that 
current President Rajapaksa would get 60 percent of the vote, so 
that the people must not be angry over the current and future 
government leaders.  Rival candidate Fonseka responded accordingly. 
He wants to challenge the results at court.  This would not go 
beyond the borders of the system.   However, the situation might 
still escalate because Rajapaksa's supporters suggest that Fonseka 
is considering a coup...  Sri Lanka has never been a model of a 
democracy." 
 
Berliner Zeitung (1/28) commented: "Sri Lanka has the choice between 
the known evil of current President Rajapakse and an unknown of the 
name of Sarath Fonseka, a former army leader.  The large majority of 
the Buddhist Singhalese voted for Rajapakse because they like the 
policy of the radical nationalist, despite the corruption and 
nepotism.  The Muslim minority and the Hindi Tamils are not 
expecting anything good to come from the former and new head of 
state and government.  However, the winner must now demonstrate the 
willingness to take care particularly of the social and political 
maters of the Tamils.  From his powerful position, Rajapakse could 
build bridges between the rivaling groups.  Unfortunately, it looks 
like he will miss this opportunity." 
 
¶7.   (Iran)   Nuclear Program 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/28) argued in a front-page editorial: The 
Iranian regime that is threatening [to destroy Israel] whose 
trademarks are the support of terrorism and repression and which is, 
in addition, striving for the bomb, is not only a danger for Israel. 
 It is regrettable that in the UN Security Council, Russia and China 
continue to minimize or even deny this danger.  This attitude has 
prevented the necessary international cohesion and resolve when 
dealing with Iran.  This is a policy which the German government in 
 
BERLIN 00000124  005 OF 005 
 
 
particular has tried to achieve again and again.  It is also 
regrettable that Tehran ignored Washington's offer for a dialogue. 
The chancellor said that time is running out.  At least Israel hopes 
that these words from Germany are seriously meant.  The nuclear 
conflict with Iran is turning into a litmus test for German-Israeli 
relations, which are and will remain special." 
 
¶8.   (Germany-U.S.)   German Family Gets Asylum in the U.S. 
 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/28) editorialized: "The U.S. state of 
Tennessee has granted the Romeikes political asylum because they 
were not allowed to home-school their children in Germany.  The 
Romeikes are not the first family to be granted asylum in the U.S. 
And they are not the first German parents who considered leaving the 
country because of the compulsory schooling in Germany.  Given the 
situation of some schools in larger cities, the desire of parents to 
teach their children at home is understandable.  Some would even be 
able to do this.  However, the few that would benefit from it face a 
huge number of victims if the compulsorily school attendance were 
lifted.  In some parts of southwestern Germany, compulsory schooling 
is law for more than four hundred years.  It was a major step 
forward in the path of the Enlightenment and general progress. 
Homeschooling has only become popular in the U.S. over the last 30 
years, particularly among Evangelicals like the Romeikes.  They 
should not refer to Luther." 
 
Under the headline "Exaggerated," Die Welt (1/28) commented: "This 
persistence must be admired.  For years, Uwe and Hannelore Romeike 
from Baden-Wrttemberg have been fighting against the state's 
compulsory school attendance.  They want to home-school them for 
religious reasons and because they do not accept the values 
communicated at schools.  This is their right....  Although the 
concerns of the parents are honorable, they are also exaggerated: a 
judge in Memphis has granted them political asylum in the U.S.   For 
a long time, it has been difficult for parents in Germany to teach 
their children differently from the state's school agenda.  Schools 
often do not take individual ways of life into account.  However, 
much has happened there in recent years.   There is an increasing 
number of private schools of which many are affiliated to a 
religion.  Grants also make it possible for poorer families to send 
their children there.  Why didn't the Romeikes spare the children 
all the problems by sending them to such a school?" 
 
MURPHY