These are detected changes in cable 10BERLIN180 based on small subset of available CableGate WikiLeak torrents.
WikiLeaks was willing to hide this from you. But cats has found following changes in 10BERLIN180:
Changed on December 04, 2010 12:47 compared to December 03, 2010 15:01
`VZCZCXRO2876
PP RUEHAG RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR
DE RUEHRL #0180/01 0431709
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 121709Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6546
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEFHLC/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHMCSUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHMFISS/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
CID: 248711
O RIGIN: F 10BERLI N180
DATE: 2010-02-12 17:09:00
SOURCE: NEmbassy Berlin
CLASSIFICATION: CONFI DENTIAL
MISC: 10BERL IN128|10BERLIN176
DESECTINATION: VZCZCXRO2876RUEHAG RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSRRUEHRL #0180/01 O0431709CCCCC ZZH121709Z FEB 102AMEMBASSY BERLINRUEHC/SECSTATE 000180WASHDC PRIORITY 6546RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY/NSC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC PRIORITY/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY/FBI WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 000180
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EUR, L, S/CT, EEB, INL
TREASURY FOR TFI
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/11/2020
TAGS: PTER KTFN PGOV PREL PINR ETTC EAIR EFIN KCRM
KJUS, KHLS, GM
SUBJECT: CHANCELLOR MERKEL ANGERED BY LACK OF GERMAN MEP
SUPPORT FOR TFTP
REF: A. BERLIN 176
¶B. BERLIN 128
Classified By: ROBERT A. POLLARD, Minister-Counselor for Economics Affa
irs, for Reasons 1.4 (b and d).
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: Chancellor Merkel is privately angry over the
lack of support German members of the European Parliament
gave the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (TFTP) interim
agreement and is worried that Washington will view the EP's
veto as a sign that Europe does not take the terrorist threat
seriously. Merkel is particularly irritated with German MEPs
from her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and sister
Christian Social Union (CSU) parties, most of whom reportedly
voted against the agreement despite previously indicating
they would support it. Public German reactions to the EP
vote have come exclusively from TFTP detractors who portrayed
the veto as a sign that the European Parliament has won a
victory over an arrogant Commission/Council, as well as
delivering a rebuke to U.S. counterterrorism policies that
undervalue data privacy. These events suggest the need to
intensify our engagement with German government
interlocutors, Bundestag and European parliamentarians, and
opinion makers to demonstrate that the U.S. has strong data
privacy measures in place. END SUMMARY
¶2. (C) Hamburg Mayor Ole von Beust (CDU) told Ambassador
today (2/12) that he had met with Chancellor Merkel last
night and she was "very, very angry - angrier than he had
ever seen her" with the outcome of the vote. Beust said that
the Chancellor had personally lobbied German MEPs from the
CDU/CSU parties to support the agreement, but that most of
these MEPs ended up voting against the agreement anyway.
Merkel expressed concerns to Beust that Washington will view
the EP veto as a sign that Europe does not take the terrorist
threat seriously. Merkel also worried about the
ramifications (presumably within Europe and for transatlantic
relations) that might follow were a terrorist attack to occur
that could have been prevented had SWIFT data been exchanged.
¶3. (C) Federal Justice Minister Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger,
a strong proponent of data privacy rights from the Free
Democratic Party (FDP; see reftels), quickly welcomed the
TFTP veto. She said "the citizens of Europe have won a
victory today that strengthened not just data protection, but
democracy in all of Europe." The Minister has been a vocal
critic of the TFTP and in interviews today stressed that the
EP veto will lead to a change of European policy in which
"data protection is no longer just an appendix of security
policy." She also restated her understanding that German
investigators believe TFTP data has not/not contributed
meaningfully to terrorism investigations. She said the EP
decision paves the way for new negotiations that take into
account European notions of data protection.
¶4. (C) Some German members of the European Parliament
likewise applauded the TFTP veto. Green Party MEP Jan
Philipp Albrecht stated that the vote would not cause a
"transatlantic ice-age" because President Obama has more
important concerns and would not "emphasize this defeat too
much at home." Werner Langen, head of the EP CDU/CSU group,
said that his group did not vote against the United States,
but rather against the European Commission and the Council
who had "negotiated a bad agreement." Martin Schulz, head of
the Social Democratic faction, said that the "negotiating
position of the EU is now better." FDP MEP Alexander Graf
Lambsdorff acknowledged that the decision could be a
temporary irritation in transatlantic relations, but believed
that this would not last long and the time would soon come to
"negotiate a reasonable agreement." Bavarian State Minister
Mueller told Munich CG that the CSU is interested in moving
forward with the negotiation of a new agreement that meets US
and European needs.
¶5. (C) COMMENT: Why did so many German MEPs oppose TFTP?
BERLIN 00000180 002 OF 002
First, the debate was not just about TFTP. Germans across
the political spectrum adamantly support data protection )
whether it has to do with Passenger Name Records, Google,s
supposed &monopoly8 on data searches, or individual credit
ratings. Recent scandals in which major firms such as
Deutsche Telekom and Deutsche Bahn illegally tapped phones or
files of tens of thousands of employees and customers
reinforced Germans, concerns about the misuse of data
technology. Historical memory also plays a part, as stories
about how the Stasi abused information to destroy people,s
lives still regularly circulate in the press. Paranoia runs
deep especially about U.S. intelligence agencies. We were
astonished to learn how quickly rumors about alleged U.S.
economic espionage ) at first associated with the new U.S.
air passenger registration system (ESTA), then with TFTP )
gained currency among German parliamentarians in the run-up
to the February 11 vote in Strasbourg. Moreover, the fact
that the libertarian Free Democratic Party (FDP) made data
privacy a central plank of the pact with its coalition
partners, the CDU/CSU ) and more importantly, captured the
Justice Ministry ) made it very difficult for TFTP advocates
like Interior Minister de Maiziere to speak up. None of this
may excuse the behavior of certain German MEPs, but it says
something about the challenge ahead.
¶6. (C) COMMENT CONT.: The overwhelming rejection of the
interim agreement by German MEPs from all political parties
nonetheless is surprising. Although we anticipated that the
FDP and Greens would come out strongly against the interim
agreement, the broad lack of support it received from the
CDU/CSU and Social Democrats was unexpected. We believe a
number of factors contributed to this including the fact that
MEPs of all stripes saw this as an early opportunity to exert
their new post-Lisbon powers and send a message to the
Commission and Council. Specific to Germany, the almost
complete absence of public statements by German leadership in
support of the agreement resulted in a situation in which
MEPs received no political coverage supporting a positive
vote and saw little political cost for a no vote.
Furthermore, the German public and political class largely
tends to view terrorism abstractly given that it has been
decades since any successful terrorist attack has occurred on
German soil. This week's TFTP vote demonstrates that we need
to intensify our engagement with German government
interlocutors, Bundestag and European parliamentarians and
opinion makers to get our views across. We need to also
demonstrate that the U.S. has strong data privacy measures in
place so that robust data sharing comes with robust data
protections.
Murphy
`