MEDIA WRAP-UP: NATO SUMMIT AND AFGHANISTAN; TURKEY--THE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 007636

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/PPD, EUR/WE, INR, R

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC PREL KPAO FR
SUBJECT: MEDIA WRAP-UP: NATO SUMMIT AND AFGHANISTAN; TURKEY--THE
POPE AND A BID TO JOIN THE EU. DECEMBER 01, 2006.


PARIS 00007636 001.2 OF 002


Sensitive but unclassified. Please protect accordingly.

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. (SBU) The NATO Summit in Riga and President Bush's support for a
Global Partnership Initiative elicited commentary highlighting
divergent French and American views, while discussion on Afghanistan
illustrated the "urgent need to help NATO reverse the growing
impression it was losing its grip." The Pope's visit to Ankara and
Istanbul made headlines throughout the week, with widespread
discussion of his gesture towards Turkey's Muslims in the context of
his new and "conditional" support for Turkey's EU membership. End
Summary.

-------------- --------------
NATO SUMMIT AND AFGHANISTAN - U.S. AND FRANCE DIFFER
-------------- --------------


2. (SBU) According to left-of-center Le Monde, at the end of the
summit's first day, NATO leaders had agreed that the situation in
Afghanistan was "an emergency." Laurent Zecchini contended that the
26 heads of state and governments were "convinced the future of the
Atlantic Alliance would be played out in part in the Hindu Kush."
In Catholic La Croix, Jean-Christophe Ploquin argued that "NATO had
neither the means nor the will to react to what Afghanistan was
becoming, a drug-trafficking nation," and concluded that the Riga
Summit would be "dominated by the battle against the Taliban."
Joseph Limagne in his editorial in regional Ouest France described
the opening dinner of the Summit as "a war council" because, in
Afghanistan, "NATO was losing on all fronts." Earlier in the week,
right-of-center Le Figaro editorialist Pierre Rousselin
characterized NATO's situation in Afghanistan as "an impasse" and
compared NATO's "grim future" to that of the Americans and the
British in Iraq, "where they were losing their wager."


3. (SBU) In right-of-center Le Figaro, Arnaud de La Grange quoted
Minister of Defense Alliot-Marie's warning against "diluting the
Alliance in unclear missions." De La Grange described Paris's
"opposition to NATO's 'civilian shift'" and contrasted President
Chirac's idea of a "contact group" with the democratic partnerships
proposed by the U.S. Right-of-center Le Figaro concluded that
President Chirac was eager to avoid "the mixing of the genres" or,
as one French diplomat warned in right-of-center Le Figaro, "using
the Alliance like a Swiss Army knife, everywhere and for
everything." In right-of-center Le Figaro, Alexandrine Bouilhet
argued that the "a la carte partnerships which NATO wanted to
implement were irritating Paris" and claimed that "this was becoming
a new bone of contention" between Washington and Paris. Bouilhet
argued that "Washington did not look favorably on Iran lurking over
NATO's shoulder in Afghanistan."


4. (SBU) On the second day of the Summit, right-of-center Le Figaro
concluded that "France was instrumental in limiting the political
aspirations of the Atlantic Alliance" and managed to push through
"the principle of a 'contact group' on Afghanistan." Arnaud de La
Grange commented in right-of-center Le Figaro that "French diplomacy
did not want the Riga summit to turn into a summit for NATO's
expansion, its globalization or its dilution" and concluded that
"none of this had happened, as a dose of realism emanating from the
harsh situation in Afghanistan had doused these high ambitions." In
Catholic La Croix, Jean-Christophe Ploquin agreed that "NATO had
kept its distance from President Bush's ambitions" and concluded
that "one was left with the feeling that George W. Bush had not been
able to convince the Europeans of the urgency of the situation in
Iraq and Afghanistan." In regional Ouest France, Joseph Limagne
warned that "increased troop commitment in raging war zones carried
the seeds of a worrisome shift" and affirmed that there was a
"perceptible shift from peace-keeping to imposing peace," which in
his view meant "war." In left-of-center Le Monde, Laurent Zecchini
concluded that NATO leaders reached a consensus in Riga about the
need to "reverse the growing impression that NATO was beginning to
lose its grip in the battle with the Taliban guerrilla." Arnaud de
La Grange concluded in right-of-center Le Figaro that "France
managed to keep the principle of a global partnership from being
formalized," which he saw as France's way of "leaving a door open
for a future role for Europe's defense."

-------------- --------------
TURKEY: THE POPE'S VISIT, ANKARA'S BID TO JOIN EU
-------------- --------------


5. (SBU) Pope Benedict's visit to Turkey was widely publicized in
the context of his previous controversial remarks on Islam. In an
editorial entitled "Papal Diplomacy," left-of-center Le Monde argued
that the "controversy had encouraged the Pope to reflect on Turkey's

PARIS 00007636 002.2 OF 002


EU membership and see it in a different light." For left-of-center
Le Monde, "the Pope's stopover in Ankara was re-opening the debate
in a constructive manner." On FR2 television, the Pope's spokesman
clarified what some analysts termed "the Pope's change of stance,"
and explained that "the theologian was learning the other aspect of
a Pope's job, diplomacy." In right-of-center Le Figaro,
editorialist Yves Threard characterized the Pope's trip as "a
courageous gesture" because of the Pope's "personal opposition to
Turkey's EU membership." Catholic La Croix pointed to the "risks"
the Pope was taking, because his trip "would be seen as a political
event and scrutinized as such." Left-wing Liberation called the
visit a "charm offensive" directed at the Muslim world.


6. (SBU) The Pope's softer stance on Turkey's EU membership,
characterized in right-of-center Le Figaro as "a real revolution,"
was offset by the EU Commission's recommendation to "partially
freeze" the EU-25 talks with Ankara, leading Catholic La Croix to
editorialize on a "message with two voices," which mixed the Pope's
"comforting words to PM Erdogan" with "the insult by the EU-25."
While right-of-center Le Figaro contended that "the EU decision was
the equivalent of a de facto break in the negotiations," Dominique
Quinio in Catholic La Croix argued that "despite appearances, the
Pope and the EU's messages complemented each other." Quinio
concluded that "Turkey's EU integration could only come about if
Turkey complied with the requests made by both." Quinio further
admonished Erdogan to "heed the demands" for religious freedom and
"make the necessary concessions on Cyprus" if he wanted his country
"to stay on course" with the European Union.
STAPLETON