MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Lebanese Crisis - Iran and

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 005216 SIPDIS DEPT FOR INR/R/MR; IIP/RW; IIP/RNY; BBG/VOA; IIP/WEU; AF/PA; EUR/WE /P/SP; D/C (MCCOO); EUR/PA; INR/P; INR/EUC; PM; OSC ISA FOR ILN; NEA; WHITE HOUSE FOR NSC/WEUROPE; DOC FOR ITA/EUR/FR AND PASS USTR/PA; USINCEUR FOR PAO; NATO/PA; MOSCOW/PA; ROME/PA. E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR FR SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Lebanese Crisis - Iran and Diplomacy Transition in Cuba PARIS - Wednesday, August 02, 2006 (A) SUBJECTS COVERED IN TODAY'S REPORT: Lebanese Crisis - Iran and Diplomacy Transition in Cuba B) SUMMARY OF COVERAGE: Fidel Castro's "twilight" and temporary "handover of power to his brother is today's leading international story. As part of its wide coverage on Cuba, Le Figaro reports that "Washington is following developments closely." (See Part C) The situation in southern Lebanon continues to be a major story, as France turns to Tehran "to stabilize" the situation, according to Le Figaro's front-page. A regional editorial harshly criticizes Secretary Rice's handling of the crisis. (See Part C). In Le Monde, Alain Frachon describes Israel's war against Hezbollah as "an indirect but fundamental conflict with Iran" while Daniel Vernet explains that common sense dictates that "an international force can be implemented only after the end of hostilities." (See Part C) Liberation reports on 'milblogs' sprouting in the U.S. Army, "where soldiers' reports are often in contradiction with the media." "The reports aim to present a vision of the war without intermediaries, directly from the front." (C) SUPPORTING TEXT/BLOCK QUOTES: Lebanese Crisis - Iran and Diplomacy "In Lebanon, France Puts Its Hopes In Iran" Georges Malbrunot in right-of-center Le Figaro (07/02): "France is looking to strengthen the dialogue with Iran in the hopes that it will help find a solution to the present crisis... For Tehran, the fact that Paris is no longer asking for Hezbollah to disarm, as a prerequisite to an agreement, represents a 'positive move...' Iran would be amenable to an international force in Southern Lebanon, in exchange for 'western concessions' on the nuclear issue. Tehran is no longer hiding the fact that it is linking its nuclear issue to the Lebanese crisis... Clearly, Paris wants to play a double role in Lebanon: reinforcing the Lebanese government and establishing a dialogue with Iran. In return, France expects Tehran to demonstrate a sense of responsibility... The meeting in Beirut between the French and Iranian Ministers confirms the recent rapprochement between Paris and Tehran... With this renewed dialogue, Paris hopes to climb back to the front of the international scene in the Middle East... But many observers are underscoring the contradictions of a diplomacy which is ready to talk to Iran but not to Syria in order to resolve the Lebanese crisis. Paris's response is that it is better to speak to Iran, who is the one making the decisions, rather than to its Syrian vassal." "Europe Encourages Dialogue With Syria" Alexandrine Bouilhet in right-of-center Le Figaro (07/02): "France's European partners do not share France's stance. Europe is encouraging a dialogue with Damascus... a position strongly upheld by Great Britain and Germany. France's boycotting of Damascus leaves its partners bewildered..., as does FM Douste Blazy's comment that 'Iran plays a stabilizing role in the region...' Some diplomats think France's game of pitting Iran against Syria is dangerous." "Diplomatic Abyss" Regional Les Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace in its editorial (07/01): "Secretary Rice was persona non grata in Beirut. Not FM Douste-Blazy and his Iranian counterpart. For the Americans, seeking Iran's help to resolve the crisis is anathema: Iran is the devil. Beyond the anecdotal aspect of the incident, France's demarche proves the extent of the abyss that separates its diplomatic efforts from Washington's. But the question that comes to mind is whether there is still an American diplomacy. Secretary Rice, who has been upheld as the Bush administration's most brilliant asset, has to date been a disappointment. Faced with her first major crisis since her nomination, she managed only to mumble a few stilted words after the Qana tragedy, before returning to Washington for new orders. We are almost tempted to regret the likes of Kissinger, Baker and Albright, who had strong personalities and who were trained negotiators as well as pragmatists, fundamental requirements of diplomacy. America's diplomacy has changed: it is defined by neo-conservative ideology rather than realism. The White House would rather keep the war going, with the regional risks it entails, and 'remodel' the Middle East to its liking... France's diplomacy will be hard-pressed to be convincing at the UNSC." "Israel's Indirect Confrontation With Iran" Alain Frachon in left-of-center Le Monde (07/02): "Israel's fight against Hezbollah represents the antechamber to an indirect but fundamental conflict with Iran... Jerusalem intends disarming what it calls Iran's armed extension of itself... But one cannot help but wonder whether Hezbollah's provocation elicits such reprisal... The present war will determine Iran's future role in the region. Many Arab nations, (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) would like to see Hezbollah crushed by Israel: they all fear the birth of a radical Shia crescent going from Tehran to Baghdad and passing through a Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon. Saddam Hussein's fall has unleashed an Iraqi Shia power very close to Iran's regime. And the role the Shia crescent will play in the region is largely dependent on the outcome of this umpteenth Lebanon war." "The United States Applies Pressure, Negotiates, But Does Not Bend." Stephanie Fontenoy in Catholic La Croix (07/02): "Secretary of State Rice's plan for resolving the conflict is the U.S. 'throwing its weight' in the UN, where it is 'isolated' for refusing to support an immediate ceasefire. In light of competing proposals- among them the French call for an end to hostilities as a prerequisite for political negotiations- the talks at the UN Security Council will be long and stressful before any resolution comes to a vote. CSIS think tanker Haim Malka dismisses any fundamental change in the American strategy with Secretary of State Rice's plan. By its apparent willingness to advance the diplomatic process at the UN, the American administration is only pursuing its premier objective: to establish, in accordance with its principal ally, Israel, a lasting peace in the region." "What International Force for the Middle East?" Daniel Vernet in left-of-center Le Monde (07/02): "Everyone agrees that an international force is needed, albeit for different reasons... But practical and strategic issues are at stake... Chirac's three-prong proposal: a ceasefire, a political agreement and the deployment of an international force makes perfect sense, because no state wants to send troops if the fighting has not ceased and Hezbollah has not agreed to disarm. But this is also an admission of weakness, because it means that to implement the solution, one needs the problem to be already practically resolved." Transition in Cuba "A Wind of Hope for Cuba" Luc de Barochez in right-of-center Le Figaro (07/02): "Finally, change for Cuba is a possibility... Castro is a survivor... His exceptional resistance in the face of the U.S. has often been described as a battle between David and Goliath. But the truth is much more different. Castro, listed by Forbes as one of the world's richest men, compromised himself in drug trafficking. Meanwhile his country's people have had to fight to survive. Political repression has been ferocious... Castro's illness represents a rare opportunity to put an end to this communist regime. But the exercise is risky. Castro's brother heads the military and chaos could erupt. The champagne corks popping in Miami may be premature: Castro and his followers have strong backers: namely Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. The U.S., whose interventionism in Cuba has been ineffective, will be facing a major challenge, in Cuba but also in Latin America: keeping a continent, which is hesitating between reformism and radicalization, on the path of democratization." STAPLETON