(U) Secretary Clinton's November 9, 2009,

C O N F I D E N T I A L PARTO 112705

(Note: the unique message record number (MRN) has been modified. The original MRN was 09 PARTO 000005, which duplicates a previous PARTO telegram number.)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/09/2019
TAGS: OVIP CLINTON HILLARY
SUBJECT: (U) Secretary Clinton's November 9, 2009,
Meeting with German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle


1. (U) Classified by: Kin Moy, Deputy Executive
Secretary, S/ES, Department of State. Reason 1.4.(d).


2. (SBU) November 9, 2009; 12:30 - 14:00; Berlin,
Germany.


3. (SBU) Participants:

U.S.
The Secretary
Ambassador Philip D. Murphy
Assistant Secretary Philip Gordon, EUR
Jeff Hovenier, NSC
Huma Abedin, S
Jake Sullivan
Assistant Secretary P.J. Crowley, PA
LTG Selva, JCS
George Glass (Embassy Notetaker)

Germany
Guido Westerwelle, Foreign Minister
Ambassador Wolf-Ruthart Born, State Secretary
Heiko Thoms, Chief of Staff
Peter Gottwald, Undersecretary for Security Affairs
Eberhard Pohl, Political Director, Acting
Beate Maeder-Metcalf, Director for North American
Affairs

Andreas Peschke, Press Officer
Hildegard Bentele, Desk Officer for North America



4. (C) SUMMARY: During a November 9 meeting in Berlin
to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the
Berlin Wall, new German Foreign Minister Westerwelle
acknowledged persistent problems of economic development
in the eastern parts of Germany. Asked about Turkey in
the EU, Westerwelle emphasized the importance of not
closing the door to Turkish EU membership. He said that
the EU needed to keep membership as an option in order
to give Turkey motivation to modernize and keep facing
the West. Westerwelle welcomed the Secretary's desire
for a concrete outcome from Copenhagen, but he was
concerned about costs, and about getting China and
developing countries on board. The Secretary pressed
Westerwelle on Guantanamo detainees. Westerwelle
acknowledged German agreement to look at individual
cases, but cautioned that acceptance would depend on
foreign policy consequences. He noted that the Interior
Ministry was also critical. The Secretary and A/S
Gordon reviewed recent work on energy security for
Europe. Westerwelle anticipated a vigorous debate this
winter, and noted diversification as a key part of the
new government's energy policy. The Secretary reviewed
recent developments on Middle East peace and
Afghanistan. END SUMMARY.

-------------- --------------
Lack of Eastern German Development
-------------- --------------


5. (C) The Secretary started the meeting by asking
about German views 20 years after the fall of the Berlin
Wall. Westerwelle said the polls were very positive.
However, he noted that unemployment in eastern Germany
was much higher than in the West. In addition, he noted
there was a split between the industrial southern states
of eastern German and the northern states, which were


not very developed at all. He noted there were still
lingering issues of discrimination, such as in the level
of pensions paid in East and West. Westerwelle said the
German government had programs to invest in the East and
in new technologies, such as solar technology. He
admitted there was a long way to go to equality. Most
difficult, he added, was the migration of young
Easterners to the cities or the West. Children were
abandoning their parents, who now considered that they
were losing both their children and the investment
opportunities that went with them. However, MFA State
Secretary Born noted that there were new immigrants to
eastern Germany from Israel, Eastern Europe, and the
former Soviet Union. The Secretary observed that many
New Yorkers had a strong nostalgia for Germany.


6. (C) Westerwelle pointed out that immigration brought
its own new problems. It was a good message if the
Jewish community in Germany was growing. The United
States always attracted the best and most talented from
all over the world. However, the Europeans have been
more restrictive and separated on immigration. The
Netherlands still had immigrant problems and Germany
needed to integrate the Turks. Indeed, he noted that in
one part of Berlin you could take a stroll and not know
you were in Germany. The German integration model, he
said, needed improvement. The Secretary acknowledged
immigration challenges in France, the Netherlands, and
even parts of the UK. She noted that over past decades,
waves of immigrants felt like they were in a different
country and worked to assimilate; now, however, they
didn't always assimilate and were able to maintain
constant contacts with original home countries. She
asked why Germany feared having Turkey in the EU.

--------------
Turkey in the EU
--------------


7. (C) Westerwelle said this was a difficult question
for both the government and the parliament. If Germany
had to decide now on Turkish access to the EU, the
decision would be a clear no. He explained that the EU
could not integrate such a large country. Turkey was
not modern enough to enter the EU. However, Westerwelle
pointed out that his Free Democratic Party (FDP) had
made clear to the Chancellor's Christian Democratic
Union (CDU) that a decision on Turkey was not required
this year, but rather in five or six years. Therefore,
the FDP believed that it was important to keep the door
open until that time, so that Turkey had good reason to
work for better structures. Otherwise, he explained, if
Germany slammed the door shut now, this would affect the
entire internal situation in Turkey. He suggested the
day might come when the EU would actually invite Turkey
in, but Turkey would decline. Westerwelle continued
noting that Turkey at present faced West, but it could
change to face East. This was important, he said, for
both NATO and the EU.

--------------
Climate Change
--------------


8. (C) The Secretary recalled that Chancellor Merkel
had spoken about climate change earlier. She asked
Westerwelle what he thought would happen in Copenhagen


and what the goal should be. Westerwelle said the
Eastern European countries had a different perspective,
since they were poorer. He said it was important to get
a result from Copenhagen. He commented that the G-20
Finance Ministerial a few days prior had found little
success on this issue due to high costs. If we wanted
success in Copenhagen, he said we needed to ask if we
were willing to spend money.


9. (C) The Secretary agreed with trying to get a
result and then asked for Westerwelle's views on the
Danish proposal for Copenhagen.


10. (C) Westerwelle said the EU Council had a common
position, but that many tough iQs had been put aside
until the recent U.S.-EU summit. It was important to
get developing countries to do their part. But in the
end, the question was how much money we were willing to
spend. The Secretary said there had to be some
determination that we would present some proposal. Even
if the proposal was less than ideal, we needed to be as
unified as possible. We needed to find a way to pull in
China and the developing countries, but in a way that we
could also hold them accountable. The Secretary
recounted that the Chinese FM had told her he needed
lots of money from the developed world. She had said
ok, but asked him what he was willing to commit to. He
replied that it was difficult to commit to anything.
The Secretary then shot back that it was also difficult
to obtain money. The Secretary went on to acknowledge
that there were skeptics in the EU that the United
States could not do much at Copenhagen, and that U.S.
legislation would not be completed. However, it was
important to remember the United States just finished
eight years of denial and was now doing a lot.


11. (C) Born said expectations were growing that we
might best focus on a political agreement in Copenhagen.
The Secretary replied that it would need teeth. She
noted that Australia had ideas, and the ROK had some
ideas. However, if everyone eventually arrived at the
Danish political proposal, it couldn't just be
aspirational. There had to be, she said, in every
country some internal mechanism to help meet goals. For
example, if India were to pledge to spend a certain
amount on reforestation, there needed to be some
mechanism to hold them to it. The same held, she said,
with U.S. car emissions; there must be accountability
measures. Westerwelle asked if there was sufficient
support in the United States for such an agreement. He
said that when Merkel spoke to the U.S. Congress, the
Germans noticed the lack of Republican support for
climate change. The Secretary replied that the
Republicans didn't like anything the Administration did.
However, she projected that some Republicans might go
along on climate change. She did not anticipate robust
Congressional opposition. She said that if the
Administration got Congressional approval for Cap and
Trade, it might also possibly consider building more
nuclear power plants to get some Republican support.
This kind of trade off was being discussed by some
Democratic and Republican senators.

--------------
Guantanamo Detainees
--------------



12. (C) The Secretary said that she had been hopeful
that Germany could take some Guantanamo detainees. She
acknowledged that this issue was not raised during the
busy election campaign and formation of a new
government, but she would like to reopen the dialogue in
the hope that Germany could accept one or two detainees.
She explained that the detainees were divided into three
categories: (1) people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,
who were the most difficult of cases; (2) detainees the
USG has evidence against and planned to try; and (3)
those who were safe enough to discharge to other
countries. She noted that some Uighurs had been
discharged to Palau and Bermuda, where they were very
happy. She said the largest remaining group were
Yemenis.


13. (C) Westerwelle said he welcomed the
Administration's decision to close Guantanamo. He said
that some might argue that the United States was
responsible for the problem. It was important, he said,
to fix the problem. He said that at some point Germany
had said it would look at individual cases. Westerwelle
said he believed German acceptance of detainees would
depend on each individual in question. The Secretary
said she was asking him to consider carefully selected
dossiers. She said it was his decision, but the United
States appreciated help trying to close Guantanamo.
Several European countries, she noted, had already
agreed to accept detainees. She said that the USG was
prepared to brief details. She suggested it would be a
good time for Special Envoy Dan Fried to visit.
Westerwelle observed that both MFA and Interior were
involved in any decision. He said he also had to
consider consequences of any decisions with other
countries, such as China. Westerwelle said who Germany
might accept would depend on the foreign policy
consequences.

--------------
Energy Security
--------------


14. (C) The Secretary mentioned energy security,
observing that the EU was trying to get more pipeline
and gas routes so as to reduce sole source reliance.
She noted that Richard Morningstar was the U.S. envoy
working this critical issue.


15. (C) The Secretary said the great tragedy of Ukraine
was that Ukraine had energy supplies. If properly
structured, Ukraine could get close to energy
independence. She noted that every month Ukraine was
presently asking the IMF and United States for energy
assistance. However, Russia did not want Ukraine to
close deals or develop reserves. The Secretary warned
that if we did not provide competition to Russian energy
sources, we would all be at their mercy. She suggested
Germany look seriously into this area.


16. (C) Westerwelle said there was a virulent
discussion in Germany last winter, and this would be
repeated this winter. He projected there would be a new
orientation of German energy policy: First, Germany
would focus on its own production, including nuclear,
wind, etc. Secondly, Germany would look at renewable
sources. Finally, Germany would seek independence


through diversification. He mentioned the NordStream
project as part of this. He acknowledged that Germany
would not achieve energy independence quickly, but he
agreed it was vital.


17. (C) Westerwelle asked about the Middle East road
map and settlements. The Secretary said the United
States was just trying to get negotiations started. She
recalled that since President Obama was inaugurated,
there had been the fallout from the Gaza war, then
Israeli elections, during which time it was hard to get
much dialogue before May.


18. (C) Turning to Israel, the Secretary said that when
one negotiated one normally came in with maximum
positions at the start. When the United States said it
wanted a stop to all settlements, Israel had replied
that under Israeli law it could not stop ongoing
construction that already had permits. However, the
Israelis agreed to stop new activity. She said that the
United States might decide to take that commitment
forward; it would be a big step if Israel stopped new
settlements. It would be the first time Israel would
stop something it considered a legitimate activity. At
a minimum, such a commitment would freeze the situation
on the ground.


19. (C) Westerwelle asked about Afghanistan. The
Secretary said she planned to attend the Karzai
inauguration. She said that foreign ministers would
need to emphasize that Karzai must have new relations
with young people and with the United States. The
centerpiece of the new effort in Afghanistan would be
more training for the army and police. She said
Germany's help monitoring and securing the North would
be important. Stabilizing population centers was
needed, especially for Kandahar. However, stabilization
work was needed in the North and West. The Secretary
said the United States would be ready to announce
changes at the time of the inauguration, but we couldn't
do without Germany's help.


20. (C) Westerwelle said it was his understanding the
inauguration might be the 19th. However, he considered
it important to come back with Afghan commitments. He
said that Afghanistan developments had been
disappointing. He had traveled there. Issues of good
governance, he said, should not just be limited to
speeches. He recalled that we were investing large
military and financial resources in Afghanistan. The
Secretary said we could not allow Karzai to continue as
he has up to now. Too many governments had taken him at
his word. He was very charming. However, a year later
people saw that nothing had changed. The Secretary said
that all our governments had enabled him to get away
with changing nothing. She recalled that President Bush
had spoken every week with Karzai whether something was
happening or not. Afghanistan could not, she
emphasized, be a case of nation-building. There has
been some positive progress. People did not want the
Taliban back. However, she emphasized that the people
felt abandoned and left alone. She concluded that we
could not allow the Taliban to gain momentum.

CLINTON