A28 EZ RE THE WASHINGTON POST.SUNDAY, APRIL 3 , 2022
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR[email protected]MICHAEL DE ADDERABCDE
FREDERICK J. RYAN JR.
Publisher and Chief Executive OfficerNEWS
SALLY BUZBEE....................................Executive Editor
CAMERON BARR.....................Senior Managing Editor
KAT DOWNS MULDER.......Chief Product Officer & ME
STEVEN GINSBERG............................Managing Editor
KRISSAH THOMPSON.........................Managing EditorSHARIF DURHAMS.................Deputy Managing Editor
MONICA NORTON..................Deputy Managing Editor
LIZ SEYMOUR.........................Deputy Managing Editor
MARK W. SMITH.....................Deputy Managing Editor
SCOTT VANCE.........................Deputy Managing Editor
BARBARA VOBEJDA...............Deputy Managing EditorEDITORIAL AND OPINIONS
RUTH MARCUS................Deputy Editorial Page Editor
KAREN TUMULTY.............Deputy Editorial Page Editor
JO-ANN ARMAO............Associate Editorial Page EditorOFFICERS
JAMES W. COLEY JR.........................................Production
L. WAYNE CONNELL............................Human Resources
KATE M. DAVEY.....................................Revenue Strategy
ELIZABETH H. DIAZ...Audience Development & Insights
GREGG J. FERNANDES.........Customer Care & Logistics
SHANI GEORGE......................................Communications
STEPHEN P. GIBSON.....................Finance & Operations
KRISTINE CORATTI KELLY....Communications & Events
JOHN B. KENNEDY...................General Counsel & LaborMIKI TOLIVER KING..................................................Arc XP
SHAILESH PRAKASH..Digital Product Dev./Engineering
MICHAEL A. RIBERO....................................Subscriptions
JOY ROBINS..........................................................RevenueThe Washington Post
1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071
(202) 334-6000ABCDE
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
EDITORIALSR
USSIAN AGGRESSION against
Ukraine violated both morality
and a principle of international
law — the sanctity of sovereign
borders. So stark was the transgression
that neutral or nonaligned nations such
as Switzerland and Sweden have strongly
condemned President Vladimir Putin’s
war and joined international sanctions
against his regime. However, many large
and influential nations, including some
democracies with which the United States
has strong relationships, have equivocat-
ed. It’s a troubling aspect of the crisis and
calls for a deliberate but differentiated
U.S. response.
The fence-sitters take a range of posi-
tions. In a category by itself is China,
which has pursued neutrality while refus-
ing to modify its prewar declaration of
friendship with Moscow. Slightly less in-
defensibly, South Africa and India ab-
stained from a United Nations resolution
deploring Russia’s aggression and refused
to levy any sanctions. Then come coun-
tries, such as Brazil, Mexico, Israel and the
United Arab Emirates (not a democracy,
to be sure), which did vote for the U.N.
resolution but still balk at sanctions.
Each country has its rationalization,often related to an entanglement with
Russia, either current or — in the case of
South Africa, where some still feel a mis-
placed sense of gratitude for the Soviet
Union’s support against apartheid — his-
torical. India still buys most of its weapon-
ry from Russia, despite its recent align-
ment with the United States, Australia
and Japan against China. Brazilian agri-
culture depends on Russian fertilizer. Is-
rael has a deal with Mr. Putin, whose air
force in Syria allows Israeli airstrikes on
Iranian convoys that supply Hezbollah
guerrillas.
Only for Mexico is the problem pure,
misguided ideology rather than conflict
of interest. It has only $2.3 billion in
two-way trade with Russia, but the United
States’ southern neighbor and largest
merchandise trading partner — $614.5
billion in 2019 — nevertheless sticks to
non-interventionist dogma under Presi-
dent Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
Some members of his left-wing political
party — unconscionably — chose this
moment to inaugurate a “friendship com-
mittee” with Russia.
The lesson, unfortunately, is that much
of the world does not share the combina-
tion of moral outrage and geopoliticalself-interest that has forged democracies
in Europe, North America and the Pacific
Rim into a solid coalition arrayed against
Moscow’s war. Mr. Putin has spent years
trying to co-opt countries around the
world, no doubt in anticipation of a long-
planned move against Ukraine. Undeni-
ably, he is reaping some benefits from that
now.
Countries supporting sanctions
against Russia account for the vast major-
ity of world economic activity, so the
refusal of others to cooperate is not deci-
sive. Still, the United States should not
underestimate either the need to counter
Russian influence among nations that are
equivocating or the opportunities to do
so.
The Biden administration’s approach
should vary, depending on its leverage in
each country. There’s not much point
using moral suasion on China, for exam-
ple, though hints to Beijing of the price it
would pay for re-arming Mr. Putin appear
to be having some impact. For the rest,
Washington should aggressively deploy
moral suasion, trade and aid — economic
as well as military. That’s what Russia has
been doing; this country must respond in
kind.Nations are waffling on Ukraine
The U.S. cannot ignore them.
A
DVOCATES FOR public charter
schools breathed easier last
month when Congress approved
$440 million for a program that
helps pay for charter school start-up
expenses. Unfortunately, their relief was
short-lived. The Biden administration the
next day proposed new rules for the
program that discourage charter schools
from applying for grants, a move that
seems designed to squelch charter
growth.
On March 11, a day after the funding
passed, the Education Department issued
13 pages of proposed rules governing the
28-year-old federal Charter Schools Pro-
gram, which funnels funds through state
agencies to help charters with start-up
expenses such as staff and technology.
“Not a charter school fan” was Mr. Biden’s
comment about these independent pub-
lic schools during his 2020 presidential
campaign, and the proposed require-
ments clearly reflect that antipathy.
The Biden administration claims that
the proposed rules would ensure fiscaloversight and encourage collaboration
between traditional public schools and
charter schools. But the overwhelming
view within the diverse charter school
community is that the proposed rules
would add onerous requirements that
would be difficult, if not impossible, to
meet and would scare off would-be appli-
cants. Those most hurt would be single-
site schools and schools led by rural,
Black and Latino educators.
Consider, for example, the requirement
that would-be applicants provide proof of
community demand for charters, which
hinged on whether there is over-enroll-
ment in existing traditional public
schools. Enrollment is down in many big-
city school districts, which would mean
likely rejection for any nonprofit seeking
to open up a charter. “Traditional schools
may be under-enrolled, but parents are
looking for more than just a seat for their
child. They want high-quality seats,” said
Nina Rees, president of the National Alli-
ance for Public Charter Schools. Hence the
long waiting lists for charter school spotsin cities with empty classrooms in tradi-
tional schools. Also problematic is the
requirement that charters get a commit-
ment of collaboration from a traditional
public school. That’s like getting Walmart
to promise to partner with the five-and-
dime down the street.
The Biden administration surprised
the charter school community with what
charter advocates called a sneak attack.
There was no consultation — as is gener-
ally the case with stakeholders when
regulations are being drafted — and the
public comment period before the rules
become final ends April 14. The norm is
generally at least two months.
The proposed changes, according to a
spokesperson for the Education Depart-
ment, are intended to better align the
Charter Schools Program with the Biden-
Harris administration’s priorities. “Not a
charter fan,” Mr. Biden said, and so bu-
reaucratic rulemaking is being used to
sabotage a valuable program that has
helped charters give parents school
choice.A sneak attack on charter schools
Mr. Biden seems determined to squelch their growth.
S
AUDI CROWN Prince Moham-
med bin Salman sent a hit squad
to Istanbul to kill Post contribut-
ing columnist Jamal Khashoggi
by suffocating and then dismembering
him. His body has never been found, nor
has the crown prince, known as MBS,
been held to account. Now, the slim hope
for justice has receded further with
Turkey’s decision to abandon the trial in
absentia of 26 Saudi nationals for the
murder.
On Friday, Turkey’s justice minister,
Bekir Bozdag, said the government will
recommend the Istanbul court transfer
the trial to Saudi Arabia, as the kingdom
requested. That means it will be deliv-
ered to the bloody hands of the perpetra-
tors, and the truth buried even more
deeply than before. What a dishonor to
Khashoggi, a renowned Saudi journalist
who advocated for free expression and
more accountable rule in the Arab
world.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdo-
gan counted Khashoggi as a friend, and
in the days and months after the October
2018 murder, he played a leading role in
implicating Saudi Arabia and MBS by
releasing recordings, surveillance foot-
age and other material that identified
the killers. A team of thugs close to MBS
traveled to Istanbul with a bone saw and
ambushed Khashoggi in the Saudi Con-
sulate. The Turkish disclosures pierced
the flimsy lies told by Saudi officials,
who claimed Khashoggi left the consul-
ate and had not been killed.
The crown prince has denied that he
ordered the murder, including in a
recent interview with the Atlantic. But
the U.S. intelligence community con-
cluded in a 2021 declassified report that
MBS “approved an operation in Istan-
bul, Turkey to capture or kill Saudi
journalist Jamal Khashoggi.” This was
based on his “control of decision-mak-ing,” as well as direct involvement of a
key adviser and members of his protec-
tive detail in the operation.
The trial in Istanbul was only symbol-
ic; the assailants were not present. But
the proceeding had value for being held
in public, with witness testimonies, in
sharp contrast to the travesty of justice
in Saudi Arabia. After a closed trial
there, authorities announced in Decem-
ber 2019 that five people implicated in
the murder had been sentenced to
death, and three more were given prison
sentences. In September 2020, the five
death sentences were commuted to
prison time. None were named. Two
men known to have directed the opera-
tion — former deputy chief of intelli-gence Ahmed al-Assiri and Saud al-
Qahtani, a top aide to MBS — were
exonerated.
Mr. Erdogan, an authoritarian who
has intensified repression in Turkey
since a failed coup attempt against him
in 2016, has badly mismanaged the
nation’s economy, with inflation soaring
above 50 percent. This prompted him to
seek better relations in the region,
including with long-standing rival Saudi
Arabia. Thus the abdication on justice
for Khashoggi, a crude and sad betrayal
of his friend.
President Biden faces similar pres-
sures to repair ties with the kingdom to
cushion possible oil shortages. He must
resist any move to go soft on a killer.Turkey betrays Jamal Khashoggi
Mr. Biden must not.
OSMAN ORSAL/REUTERS
A demonstrator holds a picture of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul on Oct. 25, 2018.Regarding the March 30 front-page
article “Logs show 7-hour gap in Trump’s
Jan. 6 calls,” the March 28 Style article “A
slap interrupts a star-filled night” and
the March 28 Digest item “Democrats
push for recusals from Thomas”:
Wow, it’s a good thing former presi-
dent Donald Trump, actor Will Smith
and Justice Clarence Thomas didn’t use
a marker to write on a gym floor,
because then they would really be in
trouble [“Pickleball player faces felony
for drawing on court,” news, March 29].
Karen Decker, AldieTying it all together
The March 30 front-page article “Logs
show 7-hour gap in Trump’s Jan. 6 calls”
harked back to Rose Mary Woods and the
Watergate tapes. There’s a huge differ-
ence, though, between an 18.5-minute
gap, possibly inadvertently made by then-
President Richard M. Nixon’s secretary,
and an almost-all-working-day gap from a
man who apparently thinks rules don’t
apply to him. How convenient to have
such an extended omission at a time when
rioters were attacking the Capitol, as-
saulting police officers, defacing federal
property and endangering the lives of
lawmakers and staff, including President
Donald Trump’s own beleaguered vice
president.
It is not surprising that Mr. Trump
would have this gap in his phone records
when he was trying to overturn legitimate
election results. Compared with that, non-
compliance with the Presidential Records
Act requirements was, no doubt, viewed
as a relatively minor matter.
Diane B. Norton, FairfaxThe March 30 editorial “The missing
seven hours” was right to call for further
action, but the House select committee is
the wrong entity to investigate.
As with the infamous 18.5-minute gap
in the Nixon Watergate tapes, the missing
phone logs have the smell of obstruction
of justice, or at least breaches of the duty of
all White House officials to preserve all
presidential records. Because there is
much more than a hint of criminality, the
Justice Department is where this investi-
gation must take place so that there are no
mistakes that might enable the guilty to
escape. This is one gap that the Select
Committee must leave for others to fill.
Alan B. Morrison, WashingtonThe phone-records gap
The March 28 front-page article
“Biden’s remark on Putin could further
imperil strained relations” quoted Sam-
uel Charap, a Russia expert at Rand
Corp., warning that President Biden’s
remark about Russian President Vladi-
mir Putin “exacerbates existing threat
perceptions regarding U.S. intentions,”
and “They might just be much more
inclined to do hostile things in response
even more than they already are. That is
the challenge.” But experts were almost
universally wrong when assessing Rus-
sian strengths and Ukrainian weakness-
es and predicting outcomes. In a Janu-
ary Rand Corp. blog, Mr. Charap and a
co-author implored a diplomatic solu-
tion rather than military assistance.
From flawed assumptions, nearly ev-
eryone but Ukrainians predicted catas-
trophe. Yet in a month, the Ukrainians
have nearly stalemated the Russians as
others advocate diplomatic tiptoeing
around Mr. Putin, lest we awaken more
of his demons. Mr. Putin targets inno-
cent civilians and hospitals, launches a
Stalinist starvation campaign, and lies
about it all. The world suffers when
Mr. Putin remains in power.
Jim Leivo, Mount AiryIn his March 28 op-ed, “Biden’s hostil-
ity toward Putin was not a ‘gaffe’, ” Max
Boot argued that President Biden
should be praised for saying Russian
President Vladimir Putin “cannot re-
main in power.” He compared Mr. Biden
with former president Donald Trump,
whose continued indifference to Mr. Pu-
tin’s regime and denial of Russian
influence in the 2016 presidential elec-
tion drew mass condemnation.
However, it is too early to estimate the
limit of Russia’s military power and risk
directly confronting Russia. Russia’s
decision to cut back military aggression
initially suggest that Russia is seriously
considering ending the war. However,
its continued attacks elsewhere and
history of lying — calling the military
buildup at the Russo-Ukrainian border a
“military exercise,” justifying the war by
falsely claiming the infiltration of neo-
Nazis in the Ukrainian government and
even allegedly poisoning Ukrainian ne-
gotiators from the previous round of
peace talks — show that brash com-
ments are dangerous.
Mr. Putin might be planning some-
thing much more nefarious behind the
scenes, especially considering that Rus-
sia’s arsenal contains tactical nuclear
warheads that could be deployed in
Ukraine if the situation escalates. No
matter how incompetent the Russian
military might seem, any action more
escalating than sanctions should be
discouraged for now.
Sungjoon Kim, Falls ChurchUkraine’s defense
ly targeted for unkind mocking.
It’s not too late to turn lemons into
lemonade. Doing so would be an opportu-
nity to convert the incident into a blessing
that could benefit the estimated 7 million
people in the United States and 147 mil-
lion people worldwide with alopecia.
Michael Bazigos, New YorkRegarding the March 30 Style article
“The slap still reverberating in a divided
Hollywood”:
I have no hair on my head or body, an
autoimmune condition called alopecia,
which I share with Jada Pinkett Smith,
the inspiration of an Oscars joke. (Mine
is the more extreme version, alopecia
universalis.)
I recall the initial horror and depression
at my unstoppable hair loss at first, and
considered myself disfigured. By diverting
my attention to educating and helping
others, I benefited when I came to see my
condition as a beautiful, striking look and
a physical asset. Today, it’s my calling card
in business and social affairs. The absence
of graying and stubble gives a younger
appearance than my actual years. Appar-
ently, Ms. Pinkett Smith also educates oth-
ers about alopecia. How wonderful it
would be if Chris Rock and Will Smith
joined her in this endeavor and educated
the world. Adults and children are regular-Let’s make lemonade
Regarding the March 30 Metro article
“Judge: Nonviolent Jan. 6 rioters
shouldn’t get ‘serious jail time’”:
It appears that U.S. District Judge
Trevor N. McFadden has received talk-
ing points from the man who appointed
him to the bench, former president
Donald Trump. I remind him that Barry
Tighe, who entered the Capitol legally
and nonviolently, was arrested for un-
lawfully protesting in the U.S. Senate
gallery. Jenny Cudd invaded the Capitol
with a mob bent on violence and
destruction. Judge McFadden’s compari-
son is a simplistic moral equivalence. I
suggest that the honorable judge look up
the definition of the term sui generis. If a
violent mob breaking into the U.S.
Capitol doesn’t constitute a “class unto
itself,” then I’m not sure what action
would meet that definition.
Cary C. Schwartzbach, AnnandaleGive the deserved sentences