MEDIA REACTION: CLIMATE BILL, OBAMA-MERKEL MEETING,

UNCLAS BERLIN 000777 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 IR RS IZ SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CLIMATE BILL, OBAMA-MERKEL MEETING, NATO-RUSSIA COUNCIL, IRANIAN PROTESTS, WITHDRAWAL FROM IRAQ ¶1. Lead Stories ¶2. U.S. Climate Policy ¶3. Chancellor Merkel In Washington ¶4. NATO-Russia Council ¶5. Iranian Protests ¶5. U.S. Troop Withdrawal from Iraq Lead Stories All major media led with stories on the CDU/CSU election platform. Most weekend media focused on the death of Michael Jackson, the tax debate within the CDU, and Chancellor Merkel's visit to Washington. Editorials focused on the CDU/CSU election platform and U.S. climate policy. U.S. Climate Policy Many German papers carried lengthy reports on the U.S. climate change legislation, noting that President "Obama wants to take the lead in climate protection" (Frankfurter Allgemeine, front-page headline). Sueddeutsche headlined: "U.S. representatives in favor of climate protection." Frankfurter Rundschau carried a report under the headline "Obama's climate change," saying that "the U.S. wants for the first time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." Under the headline "Weak law with enormous effects," Sueddeutsche commented: "The real impact of the climate protection bill will be a turning point concerning the attitude Americans have in regard of climate protection and the consumption of energy-just as civil rights legislation did not abolish racism but increasingly ostracized those who practiced discrimination. America will catch up concerning climate protection." Tagesspiegel's editorial remarked: "In the Senate, there still is not a majority in favor of the climate protection bill-and even less for a legally binding multilateral climate protection treaty. President Obama will need any support he can get to lead his country onto the path towards a future with less carbon dioxide." Berliner Zeitung editorialized: "Compared with the modest goals of the U.S. climate policy, the German contribution to reduce greenhouse gases appears to be enormous indeed. While Obama, Pelosi and co. have difficulties agreeing to cut emissions marginally by 2020 below the level of 1990, the German government promises to cut emissions by 40 percent over the same time-a goal that all parties in the Bundestag support. However, it is in the stars whether this goal can be reached at all." Tageszeitung commented: "The good thing is that after twenty wasted years, the U.S. is bearing responsibility in the fight against global warming. Against the resistance of Republicans and Democrats, the climate legislation of the Obama administration passed the first hurdle in Congress. This is remarkable because in the time of a recession, climate change is not a priority among Americans." Neue Osnabruecker Zeitung noted: "The signs from Washington raise hope for the climate conference in Copenhagen. If the U.S. bears its responsibility, other countries like Canada, Australia, Russia, China, and India will join in. Obama's praise of Europe's and Germany's leading role should not lull them because, unlike the Republicans, he realizes the potentials of renewable energies. They do not destroy but create jobs. The competition is in full swing. The U.S. is on the path to become a lead nation. Given a world with disappearing resources, this can only be good." Chancellor Merkel In Washington All weekend media carried very favorable reports on President Obama's meeting with Chancellor Merkel on Friday, highlighting that "Obama and Merkel said Tehran must renounce violence" (Frankfurter Allgemeine) and that "President Obama sweet-talked the German guest" (ARD-TV's Tagesschau). Focus magazine wrote: "No disgruntlement-Merkel and Obama removed all speculation about personal disruptions during the Chancellor's visit to Washington." Welt am Sonntag highlighted: "Merkel and Obama developed a new German-American style: cordial, focused and liberal. There was not a bit of irritation." Norddeutscher Rundfunk radio remarked: "It seems to make a considerable difference whether leaders speak by phone, meet on the margins of a summit or sit together for a one-to-one conversation. Particularly the fagade is completely different.... Apart from the corresponding analyses on foreign and security policy hotspots, such as Afghanistan, Iran and the Middle East, Angela Merkel wanted to embark on the last stretch in the race to Copenhagen at the end of this year. She urgently called for an ambitious U.S. climate policy and praised Obama for the intermediate results, which she had not thought to be possible a year ago..... On Guantanamo, it was Barack Obama who signaled understanding for the fact that Germany is in a holding pattern, although everybody knows that concrete requests to accept a dozen detainees keep Berlin and several regional ministries busy. Angela Merkel expressed her general readiness to share the burden, but confidently demanded more clarity about the history of potential asylum grantees. It is remarkable that both leaders did not specify anything when they talked about the next opportunity to resolve the financial and economic crises." Sueddeutsche editorialized: "Even if some people in Washington believe the Germans are a bit complicated, as Merkel rightly stated, Obama appreciates them as partners. The new team in Washington is not deeply dissatisfied with Germany.... In principle, Obama's people also understand that their counterparts in Berlin have to consider a domestic audience in foreign policy issues, for instance in the discussion over the German military contribution to the mission in Afghanistan." Tagesspiegel said in a front-page editorial: "Both leaders get on well. This has become obvious after Angela Merkel's visit.... Both speak a common language on Iran and Israel's settlement policy. Both prefer a pragmatic policy style. They appreciate their mutual reliability. This creates a good foundation for their cooperation.... However, sensational success must not be expected. Their leeway is small, at home and abroad. In the case of Iran they expressed their solidarity with the movement protesting against election fraud. However, at the end they regard the disruption of Iranian plans for nuclear weapons as more important than the freedom of Iranians. Regardless of how the power struggle in Tehran will end... Merkel and Obama want to keep the door open to talks on the nuclear program." Frankfurter Rundschau opined: "Concerning the content, the German and U.S. governments are certainly closer today than under George W. Bush. There are differences about the means but not the goals. In this respect, there will be much work to be done after the visit of the Chancellor to Washington." ARD-TV's Washington correspondent Hanni Huesch commented: "This time around, Angela Merkel needed Barack Obama. He gave her the images she needs in the election campaign in Germany. However, Barack Obama also needs her for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. The Germans will have to deliver after [the elections on] September 27 at the latest." Handelsblatt also commented on the impact Merkel's meeting with Obama has on the German elections: "It might sound tough, but Obama has already done his part in the German election campaign before it has really started. Chancellor Merkel has the photos with the charismatic U.S. President, the media reported at length about the meeting with half of Obama's cabinet, the press conference in the prestigious East Room and the rare invitation to speak to Congress. Foreign policy talks on Iran, climate protection, and the economic were important. However, more important was the gain for politics at home. The trip to Washington made clear that the former Bush confidante Merkel has arrived in the Obama times.... Merkel will benefit from the numerous summits coming up over the next months and be Obama's constant interlocutor, while Steinmeier must reconsider whether a visit to Washington makes sense for him. The SPD chancellor candidate must find a different way to raise his profile." NATO-Russia Council Several papers carried reports and editorials on the NATO-Russia Council's decision to fully recommence its cooperation. Under the headline "Priority Russia," Sueddeutsche commented: "The blockade of the generally practical cooperation after the war in Georgia might have been a satisfactory response to the outrage over Moscow. However, it was not in the interest of the transatlantic alliance. Political reason always dictated a different course, namely the one the NATO-Russian Council now embarked on. The fact is that NATO currently needs Russia more than the other way around. It needs secure supply lines for the mission in Afghanistan." Tagesspiegel editorialized: "The change in the White House and a reassessment of who is to blame for the conflict between Russia and Georgia made this possible. At least four topics make the cooperation urgently necessary: creating peace in Afghanistan, the development of the Iranian nuclear program, the fight against international terrorism and piracy off the eastern coast of Africa and the Pacific Ocean. The fact that the meeting is followed by that of the OSCE at the same place makes the dimension of the problem clear." Tageszeitung opined: "Russia's realpolitik paid off. After ten months of silence, the NATO-Russia council resumes its work although the differences of opinion between NATO and Moscow on the status of the Caucasus remain unresolved.... NATO's reconciliatory tones might be seen as weakness, but it is the right decision to resume talks. It is business as usual against for both sides. Before the conflict, relations weren't any warmer." Iranian Protests Tagesspiegel editorialized on the arrest of Iranian staff of the British Embassy: "The regime in Tehran sticks to its tough policy and lashes about. With the arrest of Iranian employees of the British Embassy, the battle with Britain went into a second round-after both countries expelled diplomats earlier last week." The commentary concludes: "The fact is that without Rafsanjani, the revolt is lost. The longer he stays calm, the more likely it is that the opportunists fear an open rebellion. The die would be cast." Die Welt commented: "The Iranian regime represses with utmost brutality and targeted terrorism what is left of the protest movement.... The regime stepped up its aggression by obviously arresting Iranian employees of the British Embassy. This shows that the regime will try to unite the ranks of the divided Iranian elite by ideological propaganda against Western influence." Many weekend media highlighted that President Obama and Chancellor Merkel stood united against the repression of peaceful protesters in Iran. Saturday's Frankfurter Allgemeine led with a story saying that "Germany and the U.S. stepped up their criticism of the Iranian leadership." Sueddeutsche's front page report noted that "the President and the Chancellor condemned 'with one voice,' as Obama emphasized, the repression of peaceful protests in Iran." ZDF-TV's Heute interpreted Obama's statement that the "clock is ticking" as "almost a threat" to the Tehran leadership. U.S. Troop Withdrawal from Iraq Under the headline "Withdrawal to the suburbs," Tagesspiegel carried a lengthy report on the withdrawal of U.S. forces, highlighting that "the Shiites and the Iraqi government leader celebrate the withdrawal of the Americans, while it is coming too early for the Sunnis." Frankfurter Rundschau carried a long feature under the headline "Iraq's Prime Minister believes he has reached the goal," saying in the intro: "It is his great moment. Maliki declared Tuesday to be a holiday and speaks of a 'historic victory.'" KOENIG