Us-European relatins are now 'pleasing'

I need one of those terrorism color-charts for US-European relations. If I had one, it would be halfway between green and yellow, and sliding toward the green. Yellow would be "enjoyable", green would be "giddy", and some goldish color at the extreme happy end would be "ecstatic".
article 1
article 2
article 3
NY Times article
It looks like the NY Times article is actually from Der Speigel, a major German newspaper. I have seen some beautiful, insightful articles from that, but such articles are not the standard. Similarly, I have seen some journalistic works of art written by NY Times reporters, but those are a (fortunately common) exception.

In short: Canada "welcomes" the nomination; Germany promises not to oppose it.

What is going on here:
Wolfowitz has several qualities that bolster his nomination. First, he is very bright, and will likely be a good administrator. Second, he doesn't have connections to extreme environmental or "go to war with China to save Tibet, but get out of Iraq!" groups – this is good because these groups have a habit of forcing the world bank to consider how to best protect the weevil population near a dam project and other such pointless minutia.

Further, the world bank has decayed into inefficiency over the last several years, and much of its $15-20 billion budget is squandered.

Europe hasn't exactly favored Wolfowitz,

The EU's executive European Commission said people should avoid being biased against Wolfowitz and instead judge him on his actions once in office as World Bank chief.

Rather, they seem to accept his potential, agree with what he may do, want to work closer with the US, and don't think this is worth the political capital that would be spent arguing.
Wolfowitz isn't capable of making the World Bank run worse, but he is capable of changing it's purpose and instilling a neoconservative bias in the institution. Europe may know that, if Wolfowitz changes the Bank enough for Europe to dislike it, the Bank can be replaced. American and European views on economic development seem to have clarified recently, and it turns out that they are quite similar. Wolfowitz will stand against corrupt and dicatatorial governments, which actually makes him more European in his actions, because his only weapons and gifts are financial. Even if Wolfowitz has an American, neoconservative agenda, he can only exercise it in a very European way.
The desire to work closer with the US existed for years, but Europe couldn't publicize it until recently (The US and USSR wanted to work closer together, but that wasn't really possible, just to cite an example of how this can happen); Condi's and Bush's visits to Europe seemed to have helped considerably, as has US moderation on the Iran issue; North Korea has its own special circumstances and both the US and Europe agree it must be approached quite differently than Iran. The US has proposed the World Bank presidents by tradition, so Europe would expend considerable energy and capital just challenging a US nomination. A replacement might not be difficult to find (perhaps Alan Greenspan could fill the job; he'd be a great candidate), but a European replacement would be difficult to put in office and have difficulty making his position seem legitimate.