Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 09BERLIN1521, MEDIA REACTION: AFGHANISTAN, IRAN, RUSSIA, CLIMATE, WTO,

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09BERLIN1521.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
09BERLIN1521 2009-12-02 11:39 2011-08-24 01:00 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Berlin
VZCZCXRO5212
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #1521/01 3361139
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 021139Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5935
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 1788
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0506
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1026
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2531
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1551
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0716
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 06 BERLIN 001521 
 
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 IR RS KGHG ETRD ZP
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: AFGHANISTAN, IRAN, RUSSIA, CLIMATE, WTO, 
DUBAI;BERLIN 
 
1.   Lead Stories Summary 
2.   (Afghanistan)   President Obama's Address 
3.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
4.   (Russia)   Medvedev's Security Initiative 
5.   (Climate)   Copenhagen Conference 
6.   (Economic)   WTO 
7.   (Economic)   Dubai's Financial Problems, Implications 
 
 
1.   Lead Stories Summary 
 
Print media opened with reports on the ruling by the Constitutional 
 
Court that banned shops from opening on Sundays.  Sueddeutsche, 
however, dealt with the future U.S. strategy in Afghanistan under 
the 
headline: "Obama Wants to Force End to the War."  Editorials focused 
 
on President Obama's speech on Afghanistan and on the Constitutional 
 
Court's ruling to ban shopping on Sundays.  ZDF-TV's early evening 
newscast heute and ARD-TV's early evening newscast Tagesschau also 
opened with stories on the shopping hours. 
 
2.   (Afghanistan)   President Obama's Address 
 
In a front-page editorial under the headline "Obama's decision," 
Frankfurter Allgemeine (12/02) wrote: "The price of failure would be 
 
enormous, although some of it would only have to be paid at a later 
 
date.  Because Obama thinks this price would be too high, he will 
send 
tens of thousands of additional soldiers to Afghanistan.  To fight 
the 
decisive battle over Afghanistan next year?  The President has 
obviously not made this first major security policy decision of his 
 
presidency easily.  He sought advice and then basically followed the 
 
recommendations of his military commanders.  Maybe he could have 
made 
a decision earlier, particularly because the situation in 
Afghanistan 
has not gotten better and sentiment in the U.S. finally turned to 
the 
worse, given the high death toll.  Concerning the prospects of 
military engagement, American skepticism has almost reached the 
European level....  It is obvious that a strong physical presence is 
 
necessary...  There is no guarantee that the President's strategy 
will 
work.  At least, Americans have now heard from his mouth why they 
should not give up the matter after eight years.  Neither should we, 
 
despite all the events that make us pessimistic.  We should clarify 
 
what we think Afghanistan is worth to us.  The announced increase of 
 
troops will have consequences, some of which will be bad.  However, 
a 
hasty withdrawal and the status quo would have had disastrous 
consequences." 
 
Berliner Zeitung (12/02) editorialized: "U.S. President Obama is 
begging for more soldiers for the Afghanistan mission - and his 
allies 
coolly abandon him.  French President Sarkozy does not want to send 
 
BERLIN 00001521  002 OF 006 
 
 
 
soldiers at all, British Prime Minister Brown only a few, and 
Chancellor Merkel postpones the matter...  The German government 
knows 
that it cannot stick to this position because it is clear that the 
adventure in Afghanistan will be successfully ended only if the 
military and civilian engagement is simultaneously increased." 
 
Under the headline "Obama is hesitating in the fight," Spiegel 
Online 
(12/02) led with a story saying: "30,000 additional U.S. soldiers, 
withdrawal as of 2011 and the focus on Pakistan.  Obama's speech on 
 
Afghanistan at the military academy in West Point offered some 
details, but little vision.  The U.S. President missed an 
opportunity 
to explain a war many Americans no longer understand." 
 
Handelsblatt (12/02) reported under the headline: "Obama Makes the 
War 
His Own,": "By increasing U.S. forces...the President is now 
assuming 
full responsibility for the war in Afghanistan.  In view of the 
immense state indebtedness of the United States, the costs of the 
war 
are increasingly the focus of fierce debate.  But Obama cannot 
expect 
quick support from Europe.  Yesterday, Berlin and Paris expressly 
rejected a quick decision." 
 
Under the headline: "A Mandate to Fear," Sueddeutsche Zeitung 
(12/02) 
opined: "For months, the U.S. government has been brooding over the 
 
question of how to break the trend in Afghanistan and on how to 
stabilize the country in order to leave it.  President Obama has 
taken 
a lot of time for his Afghanistan presentation, with which the ISAF 
 
Alliance will probably get its last chance.  In the meantime, 
Germany 
is faced with an extension of the Afghanistan mandate but the 
government and the Bundestag are discussing the matter as if the 
strategic approach from Washington did not exist.  Obama is calling 
 
upon allies to send more forces.  But Germany is again postponing 
the 
decision to the end of January.  There are reasons for this: the 
government is still busy with itself and it wants to get the 
approval 
of the SPD.  But one impression remains: patchwork is added to 
patchwork.  Fear of the public is promoting hesitancy." 
 
In an editorial, regional daily Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung 
(12/02) said: "President Obama is now planning a similar tour de 
force 
as the one in Iraq: only after an increase in forces and an immense 
 
joint effort with domestic security forces in the anti-terror fight 
 
will a withdrawal come within reach.  In November, the number of 
victims in terrorist attacks in Iraq declined to the lowest level 
since the U.S. invasion in March of 2003.  In Afghanistan, there is 
no 
easy way out.  In Afghanistan one thing is true that SPD leader 
Gabriel said yesterday with a view to the unpopular issue of an 
increase in forces:  It is not the task of politics to give in to 
moods, but politicians must seek the best solution." 
 
BERLIN 00001521  003 OF 006 
 
 
 
In an editorial, Neue Osnabrcker Zeitung (12/02) observed: 
"President 
Obama will massively increase the U.S. armed forces contingent in 
Afghanistan.  At the same time, the supreme commander of the U.S. 
armed forces is expecting more European forces in Afghanistan.  This 
 
approach is expensive but it is the only correct one.  The sad days 
of 
terrorism - 9/11 for the U.S., 3/11 for Spain, and 7/7 for the UK - 
 
have been burnt into the collective mind.  In order to prevent such 
 
cowardly attacks and to help the Afghans live in peace, an 
intensified 
engagement must finally serve the training of police and armed 
forces 
and the reconstruction of this downtrodden country." 
 
Foreign policy editor Christian FrQhlich wrote in an editorial in 
Thringer Allgemeine Zeitung (12/02):  "Obama is sending his last 
reserves to Afghanistan.  With more than 120,000 troops in Iraq and 
a 
future deployment in excess of 100,000 at the Hindu Kush, even a 
superpower like the U.S. is pushing the limits of what is militarily 
 
feasible.  The enormous personal burdens resulting from the 
eight-year 
offensive have brought home to American the dark side of what it 
means 
to be a soldier.  To send more than an additional 35,000 troops was 
 
simply not possible without putting the concept of a voluntary army 
in 
question.  By the same token, it would have been hardly an option to 
 
reintroduce the draft considering the growing domestic resistance to 
 
the Afghanistan mission.  As a result, Barack Obama is putting all 
his 
remaining eggs in one basket.  The Afghanistan conference at the end 
 
of January will show whether the international alliance will go 
along 
with this." 
 
Regional daily Ostsee-Zeitung of Rostock (12/02) argued: "The allies 
 
in Germany, the UK, and France cannot help but increase their forces 
 
in Afghanistan, too.  It is true that Chancellor Merkel is still 
hesitating but she cannot allow the U.S. president to resolve the 
problem on his own.  The course for the fight against the Taliban, 
al- 
Qaida, and criminals is set in Washington.  Unease is spreading; 
this 
is understandable because previous troop increases have not 
increased 
security. For the time being, the call for an increase in civilian 
reconstruction efforts has gone unheard....  Obama's strategy is 
risky, 
success uncertain, and its failure would be fatal.  The Nobel peace 
 
laureate has put his political fate into the hands of generals." 
 
Regional daily Der Neue Tag of Weiden (12/02) had this to say: 
"Democrat Obama is now using the same means in Afghanistan with 
which 
 
BERLIN 00001521  004 OF 006 
 
 
Republican Bush succeeded in stabilizing the situation in Iraq to 
such 
an extent that U.S. forces could withdraw without losing face.... 
But 
the U.S. president does not have too much time left.  The Americans 
 
are war-weary and in almost two years, the pre-election campaign 
will 
begin.  And then one thing is all the more true: Afghanistan is 
Obama's war." 
 
3.   (Iran)   Nuclear Conflict 
 
Under the headline: "Tehran's Dream - Iran's Announcement that It 
Wants to Build Half a Million Uranium Centrifuges is a Defiant 
Reaction," Sueddeutsche Zeitung (12/02) judged: "France has 59 
nuclear 
power plants which generate three-quarters of the electricity that 
France needs.  But it has only one enrichment plant for nuclear 
fuel. 
Iran does not have a single functioning nuclear power plant but 
wants 
to build ten enrichment plants. The construction of so many 
enrichment 
plants would turn Iran into an unprecedented nuclear state.  But 
Tehran's announcement cannot be implemented; it is simply a defiant 
 
reaction to the sharp rebuke it received from the IAEA.  And it was 
 
very painful because China and Russia backed it.  If the decision 
were 
seriously meant, it would reveal a loss of reality reminiscent of 
the 
self-overestimation of the former Shah.  But even if there is no 
material basis, this blustering is isolating Iran even more. 
Obviously, the ruling circles in Tehran are unable to agree on a 
common position.  President Ahmadinejad is now taking the bull by 
the 
horns and talking about a dream empire with half a million 
centrifuges 
that are supposed to deliver sufficient uranium for the production 
of 
20,000 Megawatts in electricity in the coming years.  As a matter of 
 
fact, Tehran's goals remain unchanged despite all verbal invectives. 
 
Iran's nuclear potential is to be developed to the threshold of 
weapons gradability by bypassing sanctions and, if necessary, even 
under restrictions." 
 
4.   (Russia)   Medvedev's Security Initiative 
 
Berliner Zeitung (12/02) analyzed: "Russian President Medvedev has a 
 
favorite foreign political project: a new security pact for the area 
 
between Vancouver and Vladivostok.  He was hardly in office when he 
 
proposed this pact during a visit to Berlin.  Since then, stormy 
times 
have passed....  Even now it is clear that Russia and the West 
define 
the term 'attack' in different ways.  The West thinks in terms of 
security against non-state threats or of security created by 
democratic institutions.  Russia understands security rather as a 
conventional military threat.  As a result, the draft treaty does 
not 
clarify anything.  Germany, at least, cannot simply reject the 
 
BERLIN 00001521  005 OF 006 
 
 
proposal, since former Foreign Minister Steinmeier encouraged 
Medvedev, and we would like the president to enjoy a success. 
However, one cannot accept the treaty as it is.  It is far too 
obvious 
that Russia does not want so much to create a new alliance as to 
weaken an old one, namely NATO....  It is remarkable that the draft 
 
allows every country to be neutral, but not to choose partners 
freely. 
This is unacceptable." 
 
Under the headline "Medvedev's Project," Frankfurter Allgemeine 
(12/02) commented: "Medvedev first proposed his idea of a new 
European 
security setup in June 2008 in Berlin.  It has taken a long time for 
 
Russia to present a draft treaty.   This has domestic reasons: the 
powerful man in Russia, Prime Minister Putin, did not like the 
project.  There were even doubts whether the project, which was so 
badly received by the West, should be pursued any further....  The 
draft 
does not contain any surprises.  It is obvious that it is aiming 
against NATO's enlargement.  There is no talk of human rights. 
However, this was also the case with the Conference on Security and 
 
Cooperation in Europe, the successor of the Organization for 
Security 
and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).  In tough diplomatic struggles, 
the 
Soviet Union made important concessions.  Let's see whether history 
 
can be repeated." 
 
5.   (Climate)   Copenhagen Conference 
 
Under the headline "China Is Playing Tricks with Respect to Carbon 
Dioxide [Emissions] Trading," Financial Times Deutschland (12/02) 
reported: "Shortly before the Copenhagen climate summit, China is 
under pressure as a profiteer of global emissions trading. 
According 
to FT Deutschland, the responsible UN agency rejected dozens of 
Chinese wind park projects.  The background is the suspicion that 
the 
government in Beijing misuses emissions trading to attract foreign 
investments to the country.  China is by far the greatest profiteer 
of 
the so-called Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).  Beijing is now 
suspected of having intentionally scaled down state subsidies for 
domestic wind energy projects to qualify for CDM funds." 
 
In an editorial, FT Deutschland (12/02) noted: "If the UN 
secretariat 
rejects projects such as the Chinese wind park, then this is a sign 
 
that the CDM works.  But the question is whether it is sufficient to 
 
argue that China cut its national subsidy program.  The UN 
secretariat 
cannot tell a government which industries it has to subsidize. 
Nevertheless, it is not in the sense of the inventors of CDM that 
governments use this mechanism to scale down their own efforts to 
protect the climate.  That is why it is right that CDM is turning 
into 
an issue in Copenhagen and beyond.  It should be the goal of 
amendments to promote less strictly checked projects which make a 
genuine contribution to development and climate protection." 
 
6.   (Economic)   WTO 
 
BERLIN 00001521  006 OF 006 
 
 
 
Handelsblatt carried a report on the WTO talks in Geneva under the 
headline: "America Pilloried at the WTO Talks," and reported: "At 
the 
WTO ministerial in Geneva, the United States has come under fire. 
The 
threshold and developing countries are accusing the United States of 
 
delaying a conclusion of the Doha Round.  Egypt's Trade Minister 
Rachid Mohamed said: 'We are wasting our time. The United States is 
 
unwilling to move.'  Outgoing EU Trade Commissioner Catherine Ashton 
 
warned that the talks would not progress enough to conclude the Doha 
 
Round....  A successful conclusion could result in an additional 
push 
for the global economy worth up to 700 billion dollars.  The poor 
countries in particular hope for such a conclusion, because they, in 
 
contrast to the large nations, cannot rely on economic stimulus 
programs.  In return for a quick conclusion of the Doha Round, the 
Americans demand greater market access for industrial goods 
primarily 
in countries such as China, India, and Brazil.  U.S. Trade 
Representative Ron Kirk said: 'We are willing to enter into the 
final 
round of talks but we expect other countries to open their markets 
more than they did before.'   Brazil's Foreign Minister Celso 
Amorim, 
however, made the unclear U.S. position in trade policy responsible 
 
for the standstill. He said: 'The Americans do not say what exactly 
 
they want from us.'  At the same time, he made clear that it is 
unacceptable to call upon the developing countries to make 
unilateral 
concessions." 
 
7.   (Economic)   Dubai's Financial Problems, Implications 
 
"Dubai's Ruler Must Realize that He Overestimated his Capabilities," 
 
is the headline in Sueddeutsche Zeitung.  The daily judged: "At the 
 
latest this Friday, the National Holiday in the UAE, everyone in 
Dubai 
should have realized that the golden times are over....but there is 
only 
one person who does not want to accept this;  the absolutist ruler 
sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktum.   The ruler does not seem to 
be 
impressed by the crisis of his country. Even if he does not want to 
 
accept this, he has overreached himself.  This insight requires the 
 
capability of self-criticism.   But the speech that he wants to 
deliver on the National Holiday reveals that he is unable to do so. 
 
Instead he wants to go on as before: to nationalize success and to 
privatize debts." 
 
MURPHY