We all knew Jimmy Carter was in for it. Before anyone had read a single paragraph of his book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," well known heavy hitters in the media were taking pot shots at the ex-president. Jennifer Siegel of the Forward got it right in saying that "critics of the former president probably will be most offended by his use of the word 'apartheid.'"(1) In so doing, Carter departed from a particular script that leaders of the pro-Israel community were willing to tolerate from U.S. critics of Israel.
The Israel lobby – Jews and non-Jews -- has devoted enormous resources and political capital to supporting Israel. They've done a great job, strategically speaking, by funding think tanks, newsletters, endowed chairs, academic centers and media activism shops. These resources are deployed in part to secure short-term victories around policy issues. The larger and ultimately more important role is setting the limits of allowable debate.
The terms of debate in the U.S. are: Israeli actions and policy may be criticized, as long as everyone affirms Israel's motives of only wanting peace and security. However, in Israel proper, other motives are debated constantly. These include a racist desire to subjugate Arabs to Western and Jewish control, greed for land, profit from a captive market, the wish to serve U.S. interests in the Middle East, and of course, classic stupidity, of the kind detailed in Barbara Tuchman's "The March of Folly."
In choosing to use the word "apartheid," Carter violates the terms of U.S. debate. True, he does not actually accuse Israel proper of being an apartheid state. Also, he does not consider Israel's motives to be racist. The term does however, connote moral obtuseness, a suggestion that some part of Israeli policy is wrong in the sense of "evil," not just wrong in the sense of "misguided." We should remember that to its dying days, the white South African regime that gave us the word "apartheid" claimed that it was only acting in its role as a bulwark against communism and anarchy, and not on behalf of the white race.
Gandhi famously said, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." When John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt wrote an academic paper about the Israeli Lobby, they were ridiculed for appearing to support the myth of Jewish control of Congress and the media. But they did succeed in getting widespread notice. Carter follows the path they cleared, with the powerful footsteps of an ex-president known for ensuring fair elections and housing the homeless. Where Mearsheimer and Walt evoked learned essays, Carter has provoked hysterical gnashing of teeth. (Just look at poor Alan Dershowitz jumping up and down in Cambridge, virtually screaming, "Listen to me, not Carter!")
Carter has succeeded, because he gave an emotional narrative of particular appeal to this country's Christians – still a large majority . He not only explains the facts, he includes the story of how he learned them, as a former president and elder statesmen with extensive Middle East experience. Carter's view – that Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine, along with its apartheid policies, violation of UN resolutions, and well documented human rights violations, constitute the driving force of the conflict -- support my own conclusions, and those of most Europeans and our own State Department, although they clash with the self image of Jewish supporters of Israel who wish to preserve their own status as peace- and freedom-loving victims, angry at the Arabs because they "force us to kill their sons."(2) End the Occuption with the creation of a viable Palestinian state and the conflict will end. This is Carter's position and one PDA enthusiastically supports.
I grew up in Israel and served in her army(3). I live and work in the Jewish community in New York. And of course, I recognize that Israel faces real dilemmas about how to achieve peace and security. Nonetheless, the occupation (in the West Bank) and imprisonment (in Gaza) of Palestinians cannot be described as primarily "misguided." Occupation is an ongoing and brutalizing evil, carried out by people with limited moral vision and overwhelming military might. It is not in the long-term interests of peace in the region for supporters of Israel gloss over this fact. Nothing can justify what is being done by Israel to the Palestinian people, not even Palestinian terror, extremism and incompetence. The refusal to end the occupation over the last 39 years is most of all a failure of will, not some unfortunate result of Palestinian intransigence.
Carter's book will persuade more Americans to point a finger at Israel, and even consider applying serious, option-closing consequences (sanctions) to Israeli actions. If we care about Israel's survival, we must care enough to apply U.S. political power and will to end the occupation.
----- 1 The Forward, Carter Book Slaps Israel With 'Apartheid' Tag, Provides Ammo to GOP 10/17/06 2 "We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." Golda Meir to Anwar Sadat. 3 I was a refusenik in 1987-1988, preferring to go to prison rather than enter the West Bank as a soldier.
http://www.thankyoukristof.org
Charles Lenchner supports peace and is active with Progressive Democrats of America.
You gave a very fair synopsis of the situation in Palestine and of President Carter's book. I found his letter to the American Jews explaining his book as very helpful. Israel needs to back up to her 1967 borders and kick the living daylights out of anyone who trespasses those borders. It is the job of the Palestinians and Lebanon to control what happens inside their borders. If they cannot or will not control their borders, then Israel needs to do it for them.
If they permit the firing of Rockets into Israel by Hezbollah or Hamas or suicide bombers crossing into Israel then a state of war exists, pure and simple. Israel needs to get out of the West bank and out of Gaza right now, pure and simple. Israel is not responsible for Palestine. It is time for the Saudis, Egyptian, Turks, Pakistanis and the rest of the Arab world to step up to the plate to make Palestine a prosperous, peace loving state right beside Israel.
Phil
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments)
on Thursday, December 28, 2006 at 11:43:29 PM
I want to specifically address how I think he would respond to your last paragraph, specifically:
Nonetheless, the occupation (in the West Bank) and imprisonment (in Gaza) of Palestinians cannot be described as primarily "misguided." Occupation is an ongoing and brutalizing evil, carried out by people with limited moral vision and overwhelming military might. It is not in the long-term interests of peace in the region for supporters of Israel gloss over this fact. Nothing can justify what is being done by Israel to the Palestinian people, not even Palestinian terror, extremism and incompetence.
----------
Gandhi would probably respond:
Yes, that is all true, but it is also true that Palestinian terror and violence cannot be described as primarily "misguided", it is also an ongoing and brutalizing evil, carried out by people with limited moral vision and against the long-term interests of peace in the region. It is also true that nothing can justify the actions of terror by the Palestinian people against the Israelis, not even the occupation of the West Bank and not the arrests in Gaza or other actions.
Invoking Gandhi is a double-edged sword in this instance and, when viewed in the full and fair context of how he would likely see it, perhaps shows more than anything else shows there are no blameless groups in the situation.
I shake my head at my fellow Jews who blindly support Israel just as much as I shake my head at those who refuse to recognize the brutality with which the Palestinians act. It is a mistake to attempt to hold one group up as better than the other or worse than the other.
Gandhi's words and wisdom, the sayings like first they ignore you, then they laugh at you... etc. works for groups that are non-violent. No one ignores or laughs at the violent, thus they never truly win.
by
Steven Leser (228 articles, 49 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 1647 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 12:40:53 AM
It is evil and cannot be justified. I'm not afraid of throwing the word 'evil' around, in part because it's in us all.... Israelis have it, Palestinians have it.... On balance though, public opinion in the US is better at noticing Palestinians behaving badly via suicide bombings, than Israelis behaving badly with bureaucracy.
by
Charles Lenchner (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 3:56:50 PM
Re: "When John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt wrote an academic paper about the Israeli Lobby, they were ridiculed for appearing to support the myth of Jewish control of Congress and the media."
Don't tell me you believe Jews control congress and the media! Please dont tell me this 1930's-esque propaganda is starting to gain a foothold again. I haven't yet built my tolerance up to poison gases.
If people otherwise of seeming sound mind and good intellect are going down this path again, maybe I do need to blindly support Israel. I'm obviously going to need someplace to which to try to flee in the not so distant future.
by
Steven Leser (228 articles, 49 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 1647 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 12:48:03 AM
Jews do not control Congress or the media. But pursuant to effective organizing, they (we) do have a lot of power relative to other groups and causes. Sometimes it's a challenge to discuss this issue without accidentally invoking anti-Semitic stereotpyes. I think W and M's paper was written fairly. Nothing it said hasn't appeared in Israeli papers in the form of praise.
by
Charles Lenchner (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 3:59:19 PM
Your explanation of how unfortunate anti-Semitic sounding statements can be made when trying to explain completely rational and justified observations are very important. While it is true that us Jews do not control Congress or the media per se, we do have enormous influence compared to other minority groups. Organizations such as AIPAC have done a splendid job in brainwashing American Jews into believing that any criticism of the Israeli government is tantamount to anti-Semitism or hating Israel. It is because of their enormous influence that so many of us are overly sensitive towards certain statements, that otherwise might be taken as they were intended. I support Israel, and wish for it to be able to live in peace and prosperity with all its neighbours. I deplore the bombings and attacks by the militant Palestinian groups, but I also abhor Israel's refusal to admit that their occupation of the Palestinians and their very inhumane treatment of them in their own land contributes greatly to the reasons for these attacks.
by
Michael Fein (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 7:32:01 PM
Don't you just wish that people running for office or even those in office today had the simple willingness to speak out on ALL the hard questions and debates as Jimmy Carter?
Reading about Jerry Ford and the outspoken Jimmy Carter reminds us that politicians weren't always like this group of self serving cowards that we truly, universally have representing "us" today.
by
"Hoss" David P. (51 articles, 5 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 338 comments)
on Friday, December 29, 2006 at 6:31:01 AM
7 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
