MEDIA REACTION: PAKISTAN, TURKEY-ISRAEL, UNHRC,

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 BERLIN 001292

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 PK TK UN EV EU
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: PAKISTAN, TURKEY-ISRAEL, UNHRC,
ENVIRONMENT,
EU-U.S.;BERLIN


1. Lead Stories Summary

2. (Pakistan) Series of Bomb Attacks

3. (Turkey-Israel) Relations

4. (UNHRC) Goldstone Report

5. (Environment) Climate Change

6. (EU-U.S.) Dollar, SWIFT



1. Lead Stories Summary

Primetime newscasts opened with stories on Germany's economic
forecast. Newspapers led with the ongoing coalition talks and other

stories. Frankfurter Rundschau highlighted an interview with SPD
Bundestag Caucus Chairman Steinmeier, warning his party against
moving
to the left. Berliner Zeitung headlined "Clever Immigrants - Bad
Jobs." Editorials focused on the coalition talks and the situation
in
Pakistan.


2. (Pakistan) Series of Bomb Attacks

FT Deutschland (10/16) headlined "Taliban spread terror in
Pakistan,"
and added in its introduction: "With an unprecedented spate of
attacks, the Taliban are trying to destabilize the country." Under

the headline "Pakistan's nuclear weapons and terrorists,"
Frankfurter
Allgemeine wrote: "Experts fear that the world will hear about lost

nuclear material when it is too late." Sddeutsche remarked: "The
Taliban again spread fear and terror in the nuclear Pakistan."

Under the headline "Pakistan is already a failed state," Berliner
Zeitung (10/16) editorialized: "Senior U.S. officials have stressed

that Pakistan is the most dangerous place in the world, and we would

add,, particularly for Pakistanis. Some 160 people, mostly soldiers

and police officers, have died in recent assassinations and
attacks....
Islamic radicals have declared war on the Pakistani state and are
now
trying to spread conflict to the most populous province of Punjab.

The state will respond with war. The government might even win the

war on the ground.... However, politically, nothing can be achieved

with a war in Pakistan, least of all stability. The country between

Afghanistan and India is a failed state.... The lethal deadlock in

Pakistan seems to be insurmountable. Also the U.S. government had
no
idea what to do, apart from appointing an Af/Pak envoy. This is not

good enough to create peace in the most dangerous part of the
world."

Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/16) opined: "Fears that the country might

plunge into the chaos of a civil war and that authority will
breakdown

BERLIN 00001292 002 OF 006


due to pressure from the Islamic militias, might be exaggerated.
However, recent incidents do not make us optimistic that the country

will get things under control anytime soon.... For too long, parts
of
the security apparatus have exploited, promoted and sympathized with

the militant extremists. The recent attacks... are a challenged to
the
heart of the country; Pakistan must not avoid this challenge. The
government and the society must finally realize the seriousness of
the
threat. Referring to the usual scapegoats is childish self-
deception."

Die Welt (10/16) editorialized: "The nuclear power, Pakistan has
been
the target of attacks for years.... It is disturbing that the
Taliban
and their al Qaida allies are now spreading terror throughout the
whole country, not just the provinces close to Afghanistan. The
professionalism with which the terror groups operate is highly
frightening.... The Afghan problem cannot be resolved without
focusing
on Pakistan.... Withdrawing from Afghanistan would also mean giving
up
Pakistan to an ideology that despises freedom and human rights....
Pakistan is not so strong to rule out the possibility that one day
the
Taliban might gain access to the center of the military apparatus.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of the Taliban? What a nightmare."

Under the headline "Beginning of the last-ditch stand," Frankfurter

Rundschau (10/16) commented: "Only a few weeks after the death of
the
Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, Pakistan boasted that it had broken

the back of the Taliban. However, the extremists seem to be more
dangerous than ever. For two weeks, almost daily attacks have
shaken
the country. The Taliban seem to have quickly gotten back on their

feet again under their new leader Hakimullah Mehsud.... The
extremists
have thrown down the gauntlet to the army, and the army is about to

pick it up. The U.S. is breathing down the army's neck, wanting to

cut of the Taliban's escape routes from Afghanistan to Pakistan. It

remains to be seen whether the army can win a guerilla war."


3. (Turkey-Israel) Relations

Under the headline: "Erdogan; The Will of the People Guides [Our
Policy] towards Israel," Die Welt (10/16) wrote: "Turkish Prime
Minister Erdogan has a simple explanation for the fact that his
country has embarked upon a confrontational course with Israel:
"The
will of the people,' is determining his policy. This has been the
thus far most obvious statement on the change of paradigms in
Turkey's
policy towards Israel.... In the meantime, it is becoming
increasingly
clear that Syria will take over part of Israel's role in this

BERLIN 00001292 003 OF 006


strategic alliance. The Turkish people have hardly had any hint of

the joint maneuver with with the Israeli air force...but Erdogan's
statement raises the question whether Turkey will be considered
Israel's only Islamic ally in the foreseeable future.... Erdogan's

emphasis of the people's will make it conceivable that Turkey's
attitude towards Israel could gradually change and come more into
line
with the view of the other Islamic countries."

"Turkey does Not Want To be Only A European Partner," is the
headline
in Berliner Zeitung (10/16),which argued: "Turkey's Foreign
Minister
Davutoglu said that the strategic partnership with Syria would also
be
open for other countries, such as Iraq, Lebanon, the Gulf states,
and
Egypt, and Turkey would by no means do any harm to Iran. This
sounds
like a profound re-orientation of [Turkey's foreign policy]. It
seems
to confirm warnings that Turkey no longer primarily feels like a
partner of Europe but like the leading power of the Middle East.
And
can it be a coincidence that the countries to which Ankara has now
offered a partnership are all Muslim countries? We should be
careful
and not jump to conclusions. The basic question is whether the
policy
of the West is the same as western policies? The current
disgruntlement has tactical and principle causes which are both
temporary...but Turkey's criticism of Israel's operations during the

Gaza War is more serious...and to take this report seriously is not
a
sign of anti-western policies. As far as domestic policy is
concerned
the incident shows that the government has disassociated a great
deal
from the tutelage of the generals and now also has a military say.

And this is a genuinely western tradition."

die tageszeitung (10/16) judged: "The turnaround happened after the

Gaza War. The Turkish government felt duped in its [Mideast]
mediation
efforts, fiercely criticized Israel and fully backed anti-Israeli
resentments in the municipal elections at the beginning of this
year.
Obviously, the Turkish government no longer wants to act as a bridge

builder between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Instead it is now
striving for a leading role in the Muslim camp. Otherwise, it would

not have thrown out the Israeli air force and shown anti-Semitic
movies on state controlled Turkish TV. Prime Minister Erdogan and
his
Foreign Minister Davutoglu consider themselves to be so successful
in
their new roles as 'new Ottomans' that they think it no longer
necessary to show consideration for the West. The demonstrative
disinterest in the EU's Progress Report is making this clear
again."


BERLIN 00001292 004 OF 006



4. (UNHRC) Goldstone Report

"Again UNHRC Condemns Israel," headlined Die Welt (10/16),and
wrote:
"Moderate Israeli observers do not deny that Goldstone has tried to

uncover the truth. But this cannot be said of the draft resolution
of
the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Goldstone - to a modest
extent
- pointed to the war crimes of Hamas, but this view is not reflected

in the draft resolution. Neither is the firing of Hamas missiles at

Israeli cities, a measure that has also been classified as a war
crime. The UNHRC is well known for its one-sided condemnation of
Israel and that is why it is no longer being taken seriously by
western states."

According to Sueddeutsche Zeitung (10/16),"Israel strongly
criticized
the deliberations in the UNHRC about the Goldstone Report on war
crimes during the Gaza War." Under the headline: "Tough Wrestling
Over the Truth," the daily reported: "The Report accuses Israel and

armed Palestinian groups of having committed war crimes.... In
addition
to the Palestinian government and several Arab states, some western

governments are also pressuring Israel to examine the accusation of

war crimes during the Gaza War. The Deputy U.S. Ambassador to the
UN,
Alejandro Wolff, expressed his deep concern about the results of the

Report and said that Israel must seriously examine the accusations.

Israel has always criticized the report of human rights activist
Richard Goldstone as being unimportant."

In a profile of Goldstone, Sueddeutsche Zeitung (10/16) cited
Goldstone as having said: "I feel disappointed that some Jews think

that I as a Jew should not examine Israel's attitude during the Gaza

War. But Israel did not help him," the paper wrote, and added: "The

Netanyahu government refused to cooperate with Goldstone and refused

him entry into the country but it speaks for Goldstone's
independence
that he conducted 180 interviews with Palestinian victims for more
than three weeks, that he looked through 10,000 pages of documents
and
then published a 600-page report, in which not only Israel is being

pilloried but also the radical-Islamic Hamas. In Goldstone's view,

the missile war of Hamas was a war crime but so was the Israeli
operation, in which hospitals, schools, and water supplies were
destroyed."

Handelsblatt (10/16) reported under the headline: "UN Pillories
Israel," and wrote: "Israel is increasingly coming under pressure in

the UN because of its policy towards the Palestinians. Four country


BERLIN 00001292 005 OF 006


groups and the Palestinians filed a motion calling upon the UNHRC to

condemn Israel. It is likely that the motion will get the necessary

support and this is then likely to intensify the conflict between
Israel and the Palestinians."

Regional daily Neue Osnabrcker Zeitung (10/16) editorialized: "The

psychological warfare between Israel and the radical Islamic Hamas
continues; this time before the UNHRC. The name of this body itself

is grotesque, because many member states are governed by regimes
which
do not show any respect for freedom. After innumerous anti-Israel
resolutions, Israel will now again be presented as the bogeyman.
The
reason is the Goldstone Report which accuses Israel but also Hamas
of
having seriously violated human rights during the most recent Gaza
War. But the debate hardly addresses the fact that the accusations

are based on hearsay and less on evidence. As in the past, the
Islamic states are blaming Israel as usual. This is disgraceful and

not helpful for peace."


5. (Environment) Climate Change

In an editorial under the headline: "Tough Poker Game in the Glass
House - Without Greater U.S. movement, There Will Be No Agreement in

Copenhagen," Handelsblatt (10/16) opined: "The negotiations about
global moves for a more effective protection of the climate have
gotten bogged down. The greatest emitters of carbon dioxides, the
United States and China, have only submitted non-committal
declarations of intent regarding ecologically sustainable economic
growth. The United States is playing a key role. Washington did
not
join the Kyoto Protocol and only accepts relatively small
commitments
to reduce its emissions. According to current calculations, America

would not make any savings before 2020, based on 1990 levels. This

example of the calculations of wealthy North Americans makes clear
that a tough poker game will take place in Copenhagen. The coming
weeks will reveal dramatic distribution fights. All industrialized

nations must reduce their carbon dioxide emissions and, at the same

time, make financial transfers to the Third World...."


6. (EU-U.S.) Dollar, SWIFT

Sueddeutsche Zeitung carried an editorial under the headline; "Weak

Dollar, Good Dollar," and wondered: "Does the world need a strong
dollar? The answer is: Only as long as China is distorting markets.

Under fair conditions, a weak dollar would even be good for the
markets. It would help bring back a balance to the markets. With a

credit-based consumption craze, America brought on the global
crisis.
Now the Americans must tighten their belts and first earn the money


BERLIN 00001292 006 OF 006


they like to spend. This only works, when they sell more goods
abroad
than they buy abroad. A weak dollar makes this easier because it
gives U.S. companies a stimulus to export. But instead of calling
for
a strong dollar, the head of the European Central Bank, Trichet
should
convince China to give up the bad habit of currency manipulation.
By
pegging their currency to the dollar, the Chinese can enjoy a
booming
export industry. But this poison of cheap money is accumulating in
the
economic system. The result is a speculation bubble and bad loans.

How dangerous this is, Chinese can now observe in America. May the

pictures of deserted suburbs prompt them to give up such
manipulation."

"Opportunity makes the thief," judged Handelsblatt (10/16) and
editorialized: "Europeans and Americans seem to have forgotten this

when discussing the agreement on access to data of the SWIFT banking

network. Instead of restricting the collection of data, Brussels is

now giving the Americans a blank check. As a matter of fact, the
agreement was supposed to create legal security. For more than
seven
years, the United States has tapped SWIFT data...without an
established
legal basis. And those who erroneously get into the crosshairs of
U.S. terror investigators can hardly defend themselves. And there
has
been no cure yet for the illegal transfer of data and its misuse.
The
Europeans have become an object of the U.S. war on terror, whether
they like it or not. But with the new agreement this was supposed
to
change. But what the Swedish EU presidency has now secretly
negotiated under the exclusion of the public and the European
Parliament is a bitter disappointment. The draft confirms the worst

fears of data protection commissioners. But there is also some good

news: the new CDU/CSU/FDP coalition wants to interfere in the SWIFT

talks. The FDP must now prove that it is serious about protecting
civil rights."
MURPHY