MEDIA REACTION: MIDEAST, GITMO, BALKANS, SRI LANKA, BURMA,

UNCLAS BERLIN 000589


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"

E.0. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO GM US IS BK CE BM RS
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: MIDEAST, GITMO, BALKANS, SRI LANKA, BURMA,
DISARMAMENT


1. Lead Stories Summary

2. Israeli PM Netanyahu in Washington

3. Guantnamo Prisoners

4. VP Biden in Bosnia and Herzegovina

5. End of Sri Lankan Civil War

6. Burmese Trial against Aung San Suu Kyi

7. U.S.-Russian Disarmament Talks



1. Lead Stories Summary

ZDF-TV's early evening newscast Heute opened with a story on the
strikes in kindergartens, and ARD-TV's early evening newscast
Tagesschau opened with a story on the 2007 German Poverty Report.
Newspapers led with stories on carmaker Porsche, the poverty report,
and the resignation of the head of the West LB state bank. Die Welt
focused on the German health care system. Editorials focused on the
poverty report and the dispute between carmakers Porsche and VW.


2. Israeli PM Netanyahu in Washington

Under the headline "Netanyahu withstands Obama - for the time
being," Berliner Zeitung editorialized: "Israeli and Palestinian
peace activists would be desperate if they did not have a last hope:
Barack Obama, who will tell the conflicting parties how to reach a
two-state solution. This was Obama's intention when he met with
Netanyahu yesterday. Not just during their tte-`-tte but also in
front of cameras, Obama clearly said what is necessary to achieve a
peaceful co-existence of Israelis and Palestinians, namely a stop of
the settlement building in the West Bank and opportunities for the
people in the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu does not share any of these
thoughts. However, he tried to conceal that as best as possible
during his visit to the White House. Netanyahu avoided opposing the
man who can. Both of them know that they will have to work together
a great deal in the future, for instance on Iran. Netanyahu sees
Tehran as a threat, while Obama believes a dialogue with the mullahs
could be a means to resolve the conflict. Despite all the
differences, Obama and Netanyahu avoided an open clash. Their
meeting did not exactly look like the beginning of a great
friendship. However, mutual trust is timidly growing, which is
important if we want to get the Mideast peace process moving
again."


3. Guantnamo Prisoners

Under the headline "George W. Obama," FT Deutschland editorialized
that, "from a tactical point of view, the decision to continue the
military tribunals for detainees in Guantanamo might be right.
However, it is a moral and legal disaster." The paper added:
"There are hundreds of reasons why Americans and the rest of the
world found Barack Obama so fantastic. He is rhetorically brilliant
and looks impressive. Above all, he promised one thing: change....
Obama has now seriously damaged his reputation. He does not want to
prosecute CIA officials who have tortured in the name of Bush
government. Contrary to a court decision, he does not want to
publish photos that show the mistreatment by U.S. soldiers in Iraq
and Afghanistan. And now, Obama wants to resurrect military
tribunals by which the Bush government wanted to try terror suspects
irrespective of western legal principles. The decision is not a
belated realization but a regrettable wavering of a man who faces a
catastrophic heritage.... These detainees must be brought before an
orderly court - with all the rights an accused person has. This is
complicated and takes time.... However, these are the rules and
they are the best the U.S. and other democracies have. This is what
differentiates democracies from dictatorships, authoritarian and
religious regimes. The rule of law is our greatest achievement and
we must not ignore it simply because it is inconvenient. It is even
worse that Obama's caving in is welcomed on our side of the
Atlantic. Unlike supporters of military tribunals claim, there is
an alternative to them."


4. VP Biden in Bosnia

Frankfurter Allgemeine stated in a lengthy report on "U.S. Vice
President Biden's voyage through southeastern Europe" that "his
itinerary alone is a political issue. The fact that he begins his
talks in the Bosnia-Herzegovina capital is seen as contempt of the
Serbian claim to be the key country in the region. The fact that
the guest from the West is also travelling to Kosovo, which Serbia
views as a non-state and a renegade Serbian province, will not make
Biden's talks easier. However, it is right to focus more on Bosnia
since Kosovo's declaration of independence last year got off so
lightly. American and European diplomacy has seriously neglected
the three-nation state in recent years."


5. End of Sri Lankan Civil War

Frankfurter Rundschau argued: "Now the Tamils can not only bury
their dream of their own state, but they are even more defenseless
in their home than before the war. Their fate is now in the hands
of the Singhalese government, which can be described with all kinds
of adjectives, but not with the term trustworthy. But Premier
Mahinda Rajapakse could easily demonstrate greatness in the moment
of triumph and extend his hand to the Tamils. He has the chance to
do so this Tuesday when he will deliver his victory address.... The
most important means of pressure the world now has to help the
Tamils is money. For the time being, the U.S. has blocked a loan
with the IMF. This was good. It must link its 'yes' to forcing the
Sri Lankan government to allow the Tamils a life in dignity. But
this view can succeed only if Japan and China, the two biggest
donors for Sri Lanka, back this policy. Thus far, they do not seem
to care about the fate of the Tamils."

In an editorial Financial Times Deutschland judged: "President
Rajapakse waged this war with partly inhumane cynicism. For this
victory, he sacrificed not only the lives of thousands of Tamil
civilians but partly also the freedom of the entire population. In
Sri Lanka, the freedom of the press and other democratic rights were
ignored. Even in the moment of triumph, the West must name such
human rights violations and strongly condemn them. If the West
wants to be taken seriously in Colombo, this criticism should not
only be noble and naove. Especially a country such as Sri Lanka,
which has a strong democratic tradition, cannot afford a relapse
into barbarism. This war also focuses on values. The problem is
that the island has suffered for a long time from the barbaric
terror of the Tamil rebels, and it now has a partner in China that
is not interested in human rights."

Regional daily Stuttgarter Zeitung opined: "There are almost no
indications for the hope that the state will now integrate the
Tamils. The treatment of the Tamils beyond the former LTTE areas,
especially in the refugee camps...was and continues to be inhumane.
The prime minister, who has always ridden on the ticket of
nationalists, will hardly change his understanding of the state.
The insight from many parts of the world ranging from Northern
Ireland, the Basque Provinces, Kosovo to Aceh and East Timor that
minorities deserve rights instead of bullets in the 21st century
will have wait for quite some time to be realized in Sri Lanka. The
military struggle has now been decided, but the Tamil conflict has
by no means been resolved."

According to die tageszeitung, "the death of rebel leader
Prabhakaran should increase the chances to make peace. But in view
of the inhumane way with which this victory was achieved on the back
of hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilians, that does not allow us
to expect the end of the violence. The leadership of the war and
its political, propagandistic accompaniment again demonstrated that
the Tamils have every reason to revolt against the dominant
Singhalese policy. Thus far the government has not sent any signals
of placing ethnic relations on a new basis. But this would be
necessary to open the Tamils a promising way to achieve autonomy and
equal rights."


6. Burmese Trial against Aung San Suu Kyi

"Burma's Icon, Unbroken," is the headline in Frankfurter Rundschau
which reports: "Despite her 13 years under house arrest, Burma's
Peace Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi is unbroken. According to
opposition sources, the 63-year old woman did not show any trace of
tiredness, weakness or despair at the beginning of her trial on
Monday. Right from the start she put the military regime on the
defensive."

Die Welt carried a report under the headline: "Burma's National Hero
Demonstrates Combative Behavior before Court," and writes: "The
internationally criticized trial against opposition leader Aung San
Suu Kyi has been postponed right after its beginning. At the
beginning of the trial, the 63-year-old woman demonstrated a
combative behavior and she refused to enter the court room because
the prosecutors did not call her by her full name. Foreign Minister
Steinmeier called for an end to the trial and the immediate release
of the Burmese politician. He said: 'The renewed arrest and the
trial against Aung San Suu Kyi is evidence of the continued
disrespect of the most elementary human rights in Myanmar.'"

Frankfurter Rundschau noted: "The wrong play has now begun and the
regime in Burma seems to be determined to play it until the bitter
end. The accusations are as ridiculous as the attempts of the
military to give the macabre trial the disguise of the rule of law.
Maybe the generals like to show to the world how powerless they
really are. Neighboring India, the biggest democracy in the world,
did not express any criticism...and the United States has not come
up with anything else but new sanctions. This looks as helpless as
the attempt by European diplomats to observe the trial in the Insein
prison to 'make a stand.' They were refused entry without turning a
hair."

Die Welt observed: "What the outside world thinks [about Aung San
Suu Kyi's trial] does not matter. A fragile 63-year-old woman is
fighting the power apparatus with no other weapon than her moral
authority, the dignity of suffering and the quiet understanding of
the majority of the oppressed. On the one hand, the powers-that-be
feel safe, because China is supporting them thanks to Burma's oil
and strategic resources. On the other hand, they have transferred
their capital far into the North as if they were fleeing. Give or
take the Nobel Peace prize, these are nothing but insignificant
concerns of the West."


7. U.S.-Russian Disarmament Talks

Frankfurter Allgemeine carried a report headlined: "A New Start
Attempt in Russian-U.S. Relations," and reported: "A success of the
disarmament talks could be considered a confirmation for the success
of a new beginning in U.S.-Russian relations which considerably
cooled down over the past few years. At the moment, both sides at
least seem to agree that a new disarmament treaty must focus to the
same extent on warheads and on carrier systems. Russian statements
before the talks also show that the problems that led to the failure
of previous attempts for a new disarmament agreement are still
virulent. In view of the problems, there is skepticism in Moscow
that the negotiations will succeed."

Handelsblatt argued that "from a formal point of view, the issue is
to save the START Treaty. But when the U.S. and Russian envoys meet
in Moscow this week, then more will be on the table: the treatment
of Iran, the missile defense shield, non-proliferation and far away
on the horizon, a world without nuclear weapons. Six weeks before
the meeting between Barack Obama and Dmitrij Medvedev, at least the
American wants to remove as many obstacles as possible. And this
fits the policy that Vice President Biden announced after the change
of power: a new beginning in relations with Russia. However, the
new Russian security doctrine is heading in a different direction.
It is true that it avoids the doctrine of the Cold War, but the
Russian authors continue to focus on the fact that Moscow is not
negotiating at eye level with Washington. The doctrine gives plenty
of room to the restoration of this former state. Even 20 years
after the fall of the Wall, the Russian cosmos in security policy is
still focusing on the bipolar world between Moscow and Washington.
But the path to cooperation has fewer stumbling blocks than just a
few weeks ago. Basically the chances are good that the disarmament
talks will not exhaust themselves in counting warheads but will
really focus on a new start of U.S.-Russian relations. Making this
happen will depend primarily on one person: Dmitrij Medvedev."

KOENIG