VZCZCXRO4582
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHRL #1310/01 2931225
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 201225Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5533
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 1654
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0363
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0879
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2395
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1404
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0587
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 03 BERLIN 001310
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 GM IR AF SU
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: IRAN, AFGHANISTAN, SUDAN
1. Lead Stories Summary
2. Iranian Talks in Vienna
3. Afghanistan Election Fraud
4. New U.S. Policy on Sudan
1. Lead Stories Summary
ZDF-TV's primetime newscast Heute opened with a story on the
criticism
of the H1N1 vaccine and ARD-TV's primetime Tagesschau opened with a
story on the government's plans to cut taxes. Most newspapers led
with stories on the government's plans to reduce taxes.
Sueddeutsche
headlined: "Karzai snubs the West" by opposing a runoff. FAZ led
with
a story on EU subsidies for farmers. Tagesspiegel and Bild focused
on
the debate over H1N1. Editorials focused on the coalition talks,
H1N1, and food security.
2. Iranian Talks in Vienna
Many newspapers carried factual reports on the talks on the Iranian
nuclear program in Vienna. Frankfurter Allgemeine headlines
"Constructive Nuclear Talks," referring to a statement by IAEA
Director El Baradei who described the meetings as "quite
constructive." Sueddeutsche headlined: "Tehran snubs Paris in
nuclear dispute," noting in the intro: "Serious problems seem to
have
arisen in the talks between Iran, the U.S., Russia, France and the
IAEA over the potential delivery of nuclear fuel rods for the
research
plant in Teheran. The Iranian TV network PressTV reported that Iran
took Paris off the list of potential suppliers." Several newspapers
also continued to focus on the recent bomb attack in Iran that
killed
42 people. Sueddeutsche headlined: "Iran threatens U.S. and Britain
with retaliation."
3. Afghanistan Election Fraud
Die Welt headlined "Election Commission presents devastating
analysis," and reported: "Sources say Karzai is outraged about the
prospect of a second round of elections." Sueddeutsche headlined
"Karzai snubs the West" by opposing a runoff," while Spiegel Online
headlined: "U.S. pushes Karzai to runoff," asking: "Will Hamid
Karzai
give into American pressure? Given the massive election fraud last
summer, the Afghan president is supposed to run once again against
his
rival Abdullah. According to the latest agency reports, he seems to
be willing to reach a compromise."
In a front page editorial, Frankfurter Allgemeine highlighted: "The
elections in Afghanistan have brought the country into a hopeless
situation. Only the Taliban will benefit from it." The editorial
elucidates: "Through involuntary cooperation with the former darling
Karzai, the international community has managed to maneuver the
BERLIN 00001310 002 OF 003
country into an absolutely hopeless situation.... If it comes down
to
it, a runoff will not lead to more legitimacy simply because there
will be low voter turnout. Neither would the option of cooperation
between Karzai and Abdullah be promising. Voters will feel deceived
if Karzai and Abdullah agree to cooperate. Given the inherent
centrifugal forces of a national unity government, such a situation
would soon result in new elections anyway. The Taliban are watching
maliciously. They could not make a better fool out of the
international community and the Karzai government than if they were
doing this themselves."
Sueddeutsche editorialized: "Karzai faces two unpleasant options: if
he gives in to international pressure and allows a runoff, he would
again be more popular in the West. However, he would also lose
respect among his Pashtu voters, from whose point of view, there can
be no doubt that one of them has to run the country.... The second
option is that Karzai ignores the evidence of massive election fraud
and rejects the runoff that he is offered as a means to regain his
legitimacy. He would then make any cooperation with the 42 nations
rebuilding his country impossible."
Tagesspiegel commented: "It can be debated whether a runoff is
necessary or whether the will of the people would be legitimately
expressed if Karzai and Abdullah share the power. Together, they
received some 70 percent of the votes. However, the blackmailing
must
be stopped. The West cannot create the elite it needs there, but it
is also true that those who need help must credibly earn it through
their own efforts. Stabilization efforts will not succeed if the
Afghans don't help themselves. If the goal is unreachable, the
sacrifices would no longer make sense."
FT Deutschland remarked: "Two months after the presidential
elections
in Afghanistan, things are becoming clearer. This is the good news.
However, on the other hand, the UN commission's results have plunged
NATO allies into a serious dilemma with no good way out. The camp
of
President Karzai, which the West supported, did not just massively
manipulate the elections, but also failed to get the absolute
majority
despite the use of fraud. This does not mean that any of his
opponents would have won the elections. All sides tried to
manipulate
the outcome. However, given these facts, one thing no longer
works:
the fraud can no longer be played down as insignificant, suggesting
that Karzai would have won anyway. The democratic legitimacy of the
president is no more. However, it is completely unclear what the
West's response should be. A runoff would be the only option under
BERLIN 00001310 003 OF 003
normal circumstances.... However, Afghan circumstances are anything
else but normal, particularly because of the extremely tense
security
situation in the country. "
4. New U.S. Policy on Sudan
Die Welt headlined: "Obama no longer wants to isolate Sudan," and
added: "The U.S. government has presented a new strategy on Sudan-
Darfur conflict is no longer the focus but instead the stabilization
of the whole region." Under the headline "And nobody is interested
in
Hillary Clinton-America's foreign policy is not defined by its
appropriate secretary," Frankfurter Allgemeine reported: "On Monday,
Secretary Clinton announced Washington's new strategy to create
peace
in Sudan. Hardly anybody in the country took notice of her
presentation and the change of American policy on Sudan. Special
Envoy Scott Gration had already discussed in the press the basics of
the new approach... All that was left to the official head of the
State
Department was to officially announce the change," the paper notes.
Under the headline "Obama the cold-blooded realist," Sueddeutsche
editorialized that "the pragmatic course towards Sudan's murderous
regime shows the President's view.... There was a time when Barack
Obama simply viewed Sudan as hell.... As a candidate for the most
powerful office in the world, he promised in the election campaign
to
deploy international troops and exert more pressure on Khartoum by
imposing sanctions. After nine months in office, the President
takes
a different view on the world and seeks a qualified dialogue with
Sudan's regime. The dictator Bashir, formerly outlawed as the
devil,
can now hope for some American respect. America's new strategy on
Sudan means a change indeed-not just in the sense of the promises
the
prophet of change and hope made, but particularly compared with the
saber-rattling policy of the Bush administration. America now tries
to take a different route. In the style of classic diplomacy,
Washington now offers many carrots and not many sticks."
Under the headline "Policy on the verge of an illusion," Die Welt
opined: "The discrepancy between word and action must be highlighted
concerning Obama's new strategy on Sudan. The difference might not
be
larger than that of other politicians but it does reduce the
unrealistic redemptive expectations that we saw during the
inauguration of the 44th President. The wheel has been invented
before."
MURPHY