Abe-Bashing: A Composition on Japan-US Cooperation
If remarks made by individual Japanese authors and scholars were to incite China to attack the Senkaku Islands (Ishigawa, Okinawa), the Obama administration might not come to Japan's defense in accordance with the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty.
A newspaper article making this kind of boorish argument was published in the American newspaper The Washington Post on Feb. 17. The author is Jackson Diehl, a columnist for the same newspaper. Given that Mr. Diehl is a reporter specializing in Eastern Europe and Central and South America, his commentary on Japan has hitherto been virtually nonexistent.
In his article, titled simply “Japan's provocative moves,” Diehl mentions Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to Yasukuni Shrine, as well as recent comments made by NHK Director-General Katsuto Momii and NHK board members Naoki Hyakuta and Michiko Hasegawa. From these events, he concluded that there has been a “pivot toward [Japan's] hard-line nationalism.” Unsurprisingly, he completely ignored the vow of peace and renunciation of war made by the prime minister at Yasukuni Shrine. He also neglected to mention the fact that individual opinions expressed by authors and scholars do not represent our entire country or our government policy. He spouts, “[Japan] has made an Asian security crisis more likely,” as if all of Japan has set out to establish a new military policy.
He then further implies that, were China to launch a military attack on such an unyielding and provocative Japan, the Obama administration may not try to defend Japan, and the Japan-U.S. alliance would be in danger of collapsing.
There is no basis for claims that Japan is becoming hard-line in foreign matters, or that it has any intention of provoking military action. If it does, then where are your concrete examples of such things being reflected in the political policy or behavior of our country as a whole? The same false image that the Chinese government has painted of us for many years is now being imposed on us. Such a technique is based upon drawing arbitrary lines and connecting unrelated dots
I've also noticed a tone similar to Diehl's being used in other recent articles, all of which come from the Asahi Shimbun. After all, the number one thing they have in common is “Abe-bashing.” Among all the news sources, the Asahi Shimbun was the only one to report the “argument” used in Diehl's column as a particularly big story.
Recently, the Asahi Shimbun has been wholeheartedly playing the “American card,” attacking Prime Minister Abe writing with ammunition like “opposing the U.S.” and “having a negative impact on the Japan-U.S. alliance.” It's not surprising, then, that the Asahi Shimbun immediately pounced on Diehl's column and touted it as an example of the U.S. and Obama administration's opposition to Prime Minister Abe. However, this by-lined article, written by one individual, was printed in The Washington Post as an “editorial.” Surely this is just an authority's attempt to swindle readers in order to increase the effect of Abe-bashing.
What comes to mind here is the anti-Abe forces in Japan and the U.S. It's like these groups are playing a game of catch. They've come together to throw the ball of cooperation, using articles like this to escalate their attacks. Traditionally, this sort of energy was spent playing the “opposition toward China and Korea” card. However, as that began to lose its effect on public opinion, focus shifted toward the U.S. instead.
The Asahi Shimbun went so far as to write that “The Abe administration is itself becoming a risk to Japanese-U.S. relations” (Feb. 20, International Edition). All I see here is a perverse suggestion that, rather than the current political administration in Japan, we should strive for a Japanese-U.S. relationship in which we're subservient to the U.S. In terms of Japan opposing America's wishes with regard to the two countries' security treaty and alliance, the media has been making claims for some time that keep pace with China. Of course, their stance on the supremacy of the Japanese-U.S. relationship has changed due to their company policy of Abe-bashing.
It's childish to say, but once again we're living in an era in which the responsibility of news and media outlets must be called into question. Readers must do their part by using levelheaded skepticism and judgment to assess the information streaming toward them.
The author is a special correspondent in Washington.
A newspaper article making this kind of boorish argument was published in the American newspaper The Washington Post on Feb. 17. The author is Jackson Diehl, a columnist for the same newspaper. Given that Mr. Diehl is a reporter specializing in Eastern Europe and Central and South America, his commentary on Japan has hitherto been virtually nonexistent.
In his article, titled simply “Japan's provocative moves,” Diehl mentions Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to Yasukuni Shrine, as well as recent comments made by NHK Director-General Katsuto Momii and NHK board members Naoki Hyakuta and Michiko Hasegawa. From these events, he concluded that there has been a “pivot toward [Japan's] hard-line nationalism.” Unsurprisingly, he completely ignored the vow of peace and renunciation of war made by the prime minister at Yasukuni Shrine. He also neglected to mention the fact that individual opinions expressed by authors and scholars do not represent our entire country or our government policy. He spouts, “[Japan] has made an Asian security crisis more likely,” as if all of Japan has set out to establish a new military policy.
He then further implies that, were China to launch a military attack on such an unyielding and provocative Japan, the Obama administration may not try to defend Japan, and the Japan-U.S. alliance would be in danger of collapsing.
There is no basis for claims that Japan is becoming hard-line in foreign matters, or that it has any intention of provoking military action. If it does, then where are your concrete examples of such things being reflected in the political policy or behavior of our country as a whole? The same false image that the Chinese government has painted of us for many years is now being imposed on us. Such a technique is based upon drawing arbitrary lines and connecting unrelated dots
I've also noticed a tone similar to Diehl's being used in other recent articles, all of which come from the Asahi Shimbun. After all, the number one thing they have in common is “Abe-bashing.” Among all the news sources, the Asahi Shimbun was the only one to report the “argument” used in Diehl's column as a particularly big story.
Recently, the Asahi Shimbun has been wholeheartedly playing the “American card,” attacking Prime Minister Abe writing with ammunition like “opposing the U.S.” and “having a negative impact on the Japan-U.S. alliance.” It's not surprising, then, that the Asahi Shimbun immediately pounced on Diehl's column and touted it as an example of the U.S. and Obama administration's opposition to Prime Minister Abe. However, this by-lined article, written by one individual, was printed in The Washington Post as an “editorial.” Surely this is just an authority's attempt to swindle readers in order to increase the effect of Abe-bashing.
What comes to mind here is the anti-Abe forces in Japan and the U.S. It's like these groups are playing a game of catch. They've come together to throw the ball of cooperation, using articles like this to escalate their attacks. Traditionally, this sort of energy was spent playing the “opposition toward China and Korea” card. However, as that began to lose its effect on public opinion, focus shifted toward the U.S. instead.
The Asahi Shimbun went so far as to write that “The Abe administration is itself becoming a risk to Japanese-U.S. relations” (Feb. 20, International Edition). All I see here is a perverse suggestion that, rather than the current political administration in Japan, we should strive for a Japanese-U.S. relationship in which we're subservient to the U.S. In terms of Japan opposing America's wishes with regard to the two countries' security treaty and alliance, the media has been making claims for some time that keep pace with China. Of course, their stance on the supremacy of the Japanese-U.S. relationship has changed due to their company policy of Abe-bashing.
It's childish to say, but once again we're living in an era in which the responsibility of news and media outlets must be called into question. Readers must do their part by using levelheaded skepticism and judgment to assess the information streaming toward them.
The author is a special correspondent in Washington.
Next article![]( "The Saffron Factor")
