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