Khachatourian: Washington Post Blinded by Love Affair with Bryza

The Washington Post’s editorial page editor, Fred Hiatt, took a page out of the Aliyev propaganda manual in his Sunday piece (“When special interests block national interest,” the Washington Post, Dec. 18) about U.S. Ambassador to Azerbaijan Matthew Bryza and how the Armenian lobby (“special interests”) is blocking Bryza’s appointment despite his alleged qualifications for the job.

Fred Hiatt, Editorial Page editor at the Washington Post

In its framing of the Karabagh conflict, Baku has opted to compare the national wealth of Armenia and Azerbaijan as an indication that Baku is a force to be reckoned with, often whitewashing the entrenched Western oil interests that have been lurking in Azerbaijan since its independence 20 year ago.

Calling Armenia “oil-poor,” Hiatt blames it and the Armenian lobby for its current land-locked reality, failing to mention that Turkey and Azerbaijan shut their borders with Armenia in 1993 in protest of the Karabagh War, and continue to hold the resolution of the Karabagh conflict as a precondition for any “good neighborly” relations.

“And one reason peacemaking has failed is the dogmatism of some diaspora groups that can enjoy, from afar, the luxury (and fundraising magic) of sustained grievance. A fervent, at times even counterproductively so, diaspora is not unique—ask Cuba, Israel, or Latvia—but it has been particularly debilitating for minuscule, resource-poor Armenia,” Hiatt points out in his ill-thought out piece to promote Bryza.

The author also singles out the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) for mounting a campaign against Bryza, who he deems highly qualified for the job. He cites a barrage of support Bryza has received from former State Department officials and numerous think-tanks, some of which are notorious in their support of neo-conservative agendas—which ultimately benefit the deep pockets of corporations with interests in countries like Azerbaijan.

The argument that Azerbaijan is rich and Armenia is poor, and thus the Armenian lobby should shut up and let Bryza’s nomination go through, is so circuitous in its logic that one wonders why Hiatt has taken such a keen interest in promoting an ambassador whose actions and statements call his qualifications into question.

This is not the first time the Washington Post has blindly defended Bryza. Under Hiatt’s leadership, the paper’s editorials have reeked of one-sided support for Bryza—and condemnation for those opposing him, especially the ANCA. Hiatt seems to harbor disdain if not outright hatred for the group.

Hiatt treats the arguments against Bryza, as expressed by Senators Barbara Boxer and Robert Menendez last year during his Senate nomination hearings, as not making sense and essentially blames the two Senators for holding Bryza’s fate hostage to what he calls “special interests groups” that are, in his mind, doing a disservice to Armenia by opposing Bryza’s nomination.

Hiatt conveniently brushes over some of the important concerns of the aforementioned Senators and those rightfully highlighted by the folks at the ANCA during Bryza’s nomination process. For example, the Senators extensively questioned Bryza on his failure to act promptly and effectively when Azeri forces began destroying Armenian monuments in Djulfa. As ambassador, Bryza was barred from visiting Djulfa by Azeri authorities and, frankly, never really attempted to make another visit there. Nor did he question the validity of this action during his so-called exemplary service as U.S. ambassador.

Furthermore, Hiatt conveniently discounts Bryza’s entrenchment in Azeri political circles and his often blatant advocacy for the government that, even according to the State Department, continues to torture and stifle opposition forces and silence free expression by dissenting circles. The Washington Post editorial page editor couched the ANCA’s concerns over Bryza’s Turkish wife’s connections with the Aliyev regime as ethnically motivated.

Hiatt also neglects to mention that Bryza’s wife, Zeyno Baran, has served on the editorial board of the Azeri government-funded “Azerbaijan Focus,” a journal published by the “Center for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan.” She was joined on that board by Azerbaijan’s foreign minister, Elmar Mammadyarov, and Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, among other high-level Turkish/Azeri officials.

Hiatt asserts that Bryza is a beacon of democracy and peace building, yet his tepid response to Baku’s continued war-mongering demonstrates that he does not want to ruffle his friends’ feathers, and further contributes to Baku’s combative approach to the peace talks. In fact, during his year-long tenure as ambassador, Bryza has been known to cherry-pick incidents and comment on them, before the bodies tasked to address those issues have had an opportunity to assess the veracity of events. By doing so, he has done more to advance official Baku’s propaganda than protect U.S. interests in the country.

“The biggest losers in all this won’t be Americans or Azerbaijanis (who, by the way, enjoy about twice the per capita income of Armenians), but Armenians—poor, isolated, and once again victims of a power play that has nothing to do with their wellbeing,” Hiatt concludes.

Hiatt’s concern for Armenia’s economic wellbeing is touching. But to equate Bryza’s nomination with the end of Armenia’s economic woes is shortsighted at best, and a cheap and uneducated conclusion for an editor of such a venerable publication.

 

Ara Khachatourian is the English editor of Asbarez.

9 Comments

  1. It is the oil interests which is blinding both the Washington Post and its bias writer Hiatt and pro Turkish Bryza,instead of supporting justice,human rights,and self determination of the Karabakhi people.
    His dismal failure to act promptly and effectively when Azeri forces began destroying Armenian monuments in Djulfa,Nakhichevan.
    His wife Zeyno serves on the editorial board of the Azeri government-funded “Azerbaijan Focus,” a journal published by the “Center for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan.” She was joined on that board by Azerbaijan’s foreign minister, Elmar Mammadyarov, and Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, among other high-level Turkish/Azeri officials.
    No he hasn’t earned any respect,I suggest he retires in Baku or Ankara,as USA doesn’t need such clowns,as for Hiatt he needs to go back to the drawing board as his ability to write an editorial is nothing but a disgrace for the paper.

  2. @MK

    Your premise seems to be that Byrza is simply a bad sheep in Washington and that the Washington Post is merely blinded by oil. Fact is, reptiles such as Byrza run the show in Washington and propaganda outlets such as the Washington Post provide the reptiles in Washington with support. Washington has never been interested in “justice, human rights and self determination” of any peoples, let alone Armenians. What are you basing your presumptions on?

    • What I meant was that Washington Post and Bryza are part and parcel of the establishments oil interests tools.

  3. this just keeps getting more ridiculous. will armenia be a nation that will NOT need state department money to stay afloat as a democracy if the borders open ? look at turkey, how many billions a year to be this so-called shining star for america? how many billions since 1948? just what is washington defending ? tourism? textiles? their notorious solidarity? enough

    • America is looking out for its own interests. the US doesn’t care about Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, or anyone else. Turkey’s location and status as regional power make it an attractive option for the US to use and manipulate for its own benefits. Should the day come when the US no longer needs Turkey, they will stop all of the money flow.

  4. “Washington Post” is NOT defending Bryza blindly. “Washington Post” knows what it is doing. Ambassador Bryza is the one who is aware of 10/27/99. That’s why US President Obama wants Bryza to be Azerbaijani Ambassador to keep 10/27/99 uncovered and have power over both Azerbaijan and Armenia.

  5. For the Anglo-American-Zionist alliance/empire, Armenia is an annoying little nuisance standing in the way of their strategic interests in the Caucasus region. However, in order to manage its relatively large and well organized Armenian subjects, Washington provides us with “Armenia friendly” operatives. They are tasked with keeping Armenians running in circles. Moreover, they have also placed Armenian operatives/traitors in virtually every single Amerikahai organization. These Armenian operatives/traitors become Washington’s mouthpieces in our communities.

    So, in a real sense, our efforts in Washington have always been, current are and will always be wasted. Moreover, like I said, Armenians need to truly understand the nature and character of the beast in Washington. Once that happens, all else will be very clear.

  6. When things work for the benefit of Azerbaijan, which has been the tendency since number of years ago, you attribute this to Azerbaijan’s oil wealth. When Armenia achieves some marginal “victory”, such as getting the “genocide” bill passed by vote of few corrupted french officials, you say those politicians were trying to establish the truth. It is clear to any outside impartial observer, that those “victories” (to the extent they can be considered as victory) is due to huge pressure and lobbying activities of wealth Armenian diaspora, whether in the States, France or elswhere. You forget that Brayza was appointed by Mr. President Obama. Until very recently you were claiming that Mr. Obama was your guy and he likes Armenians. I had no doubt that he heard Armenian stories from American-Armenians more than he did from Turks and Azerbaijanies (if he did at all). Yet I believed that soon or later, when he and his administration really get into this issue, they will realize where the real problem lies – and that is the attitude and nationalism policy of Armenians. Until recently you thought you could hate turks and claim their territories and launch wars against them, and your diaspora will “cover you” and no one will really figure out what you have been doing. But the times they are a-changin’ – now more people realize the real issue behind this conflict, and Mr. Bryza is no exeption.

    I see this article as more of an expression of regret that at times Armenian diaspora fails to “cover up” Armenians and their aggression against other nations. There is absolutely no evidence that Washington post is praising Azerbaijan or its leaders.

    Instead, we all well aware of what Armenian wealthy diaspora had been doing -bribing the foreign officials to enforce their agenda. The “genocide” bill is good example of this. I do not think Sarkozy and his fellows from this party do not care about what happened to Armenians or Turk back in the beginning of the last century. I do not think Sarkozy has ever read anything on this issue. He is just trying to be a political pragmatist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*