The Washington Post: Worse than irrelevant

FOR A LOOK AT HYPOCRISY IN ACTION, try the current editorial in The Washington Post on a House resolution censuring Turkey for the genocide of up to one million Armenians during the First World War.

The bill’s chief sponsor, Adam Schiff, represents a district full of people with Armenian heritage. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has important Armenian financial backers, and she intends to bring the resolution to a floor vote.

The Post editorializes:

House Democrats pushing for a declaration on the subject have petty and parochial interests….How many House members can be expected to carefully weigh Mr. Schiff’s one-sided “findings” about long-ago events in Anatolia?

Why is the Post upset?

The problem is that any congressional action will be taken in deadly earnest by Turkey’s powerful nationalist politicians and therefore by its government, which is already struggling to resist a tidal wave of anti-Americanism in the country. Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, called President Bush on Friday to warn against the resolution. Turkish politicians are predicting that responses to passage by the House could include denial of U.S. access to Turkey’s Incirlik air base, a key staging point for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Post admits the Turks may not have been angels.

It’s true that Turkey’s military and political class has been inexcusably slow to come to terms with that history, and virulent nationalism — not Islamism — may be the country’s most dangerous political force.

But that’s OK, because:

Turkish writers and intellectuals are pushing for a change in attitude, and formal and informal talks between Turks and Armenians are making slow progress. A resolution by Congress would probably torpedo rather than help such efforts.

Therefore, the Post concludes:

The Armenian genocide resolution cannot be called frivolous. In fact, its passage would be dangerous and grossly irresponsible.

For people with an interest in Japan and whose political memory stretches beyond the current news cycle, this brings several questions to mind.

Why is the Washington Post concerned about the “petty and parochial interests” of the people pushing this bill when it was unconcerned about the interests of Mike Honda and others backing the comfort woman resolution?

Why does it refer to Mr. Schiff’s “one-sided ‘findings’” (note the dismissive quotation marks) when it swallowed whole the disputed findings of historians in the comfort woman dispute?

Why are they concerned about the 200,000 comfort women (a figure likely inflated) who lived, but unconcerned about an estimated one million Armenians who died?

Why are they willing to give credit to Turkish writers and intellectuals pushing for a change in attitude, but unwilling to give credit to Japanese writers and intellectuals with a similar position?

Why are they glossing over Turkish nationalism after savagely condemning a much milder form of the same in Japan?

The reason is obvious. Many Turks are more than ready to register their anger at the House resolution by taking concrete action that damages U.S. interests in the region.

The conclusions that should be drawn in Tokyo are also obvious. Turkey is not prepared to lie down passively when the Congressional cupcake crusaders cast foreigners as villains in a self-penned morality play presenting themselves as the avatars of righteousness. They fight back. When that happens, the American political establishment wakes up.

Instead of wasting everyone’s time and money with full-page ads that no one reads, Japan should take specific steps to stand up to the United States and let the House poseurs know that copping an attitude has consequences.

As chance would have it, the opportunity has presented itself in negotiations to extend the special agreement for American military bases in the country, which is due to expire in March. The Americans are demanding that the Japanese significantly increase their contribution to pay for utilities, while patting themselves on the back for keeping China and North Korea at bay.

The Japanese Foreign Ministry is already saying this could “cause a crack” in relations between the two countries. Perhaps the Japanese government should take a hint from the Turks and refuse the American demand outright. How would the Americans respond? (Besides sputter about ingratitude)

The only way for a country to gain respect for its sovereignty is to assert it. By its recent dealings with North Korea, the United States has shown that it doesn’t consider Japan to be even a junior partner in the alliance. Moreover, the American attitude will likely grow worse if a Democratic administration takes power 15 months from now.

The Americans want the Japanese to pay more of the water bill? The Japanese should think about the wisdom in the old song, You Don’t Miss Your Water (Till the Well Runs Dry), and apply it to their relationship with the U.S. This might be enough to garner Japan the attention of eight former secretaries of state and The Washington Post (the political establishment’s unofficial house organ).

If it doesn’t, and the Americans choose to snarl back, it will be an eloquent expression of how much importance Americans attach to Japan and the bilateral relationship.

As for the media, well, we already know that much of the media in general, and The Washington Post (and others) in particular are perfectly described by the title of the Post’s editorial:

Worse than Irrelevant.