FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Jimmy Carter and the "A" Word

President Jimmy Carter’s latest book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (Simon and Schuster 2006), released yesterday, has been primed for controversy. Weeks before it hit the bookshelves, election-hungry Democrats were disavowing it because it used the word “apartheid” to describe the discrimination against Palestinians living in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. House Representative and soon-to-be Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi wrote: “It is wrong to suggest that the Jewish people would support a government in Israel or anywhere else that institutionalizes ethnically based oppression, and Democrats reject that allegation vigorously.” But does the President’s book really warrant the swift condemnation leveled against it by his own party?

To put the name “apartheid” to Israeli policies is nothing new. Hendrik Verwoerd, South African Prime Minister and architect of apartheid did so in 1961. Israeli academic Uri Davis made the claim in 1987, as did Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu in 1989 and again in 2002. What makes Jimmy Carter unique is that he is the first U.S. President to make that comparison. Unlike the others, Carter’s description is carefully qualified. He writes: “The driving purpose of the separation of the two peoples is unlike that in South Africa ­ not racism but the acquisition of land” (189-190). What’s more, Carter’s assessment of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians contradicts the observations he catalogues in his own text. He writes that “There has been a determined and remarkably effective effort to isolate settlers from Palestinians, so that a Jewish family can commute from Jerusalem to their highly subsidized home deep in the West Bank on roads from which others are excluded, without ever coming in contact with any facet of Arab life” (190).

In his failed effort not to offend, Carter overlooks several critical aspects of Israeli policy. Since its inception, Israel has striven to establish a strong Jewish majority within the state, treating the ratio of Jews to non-Jews as a national security issue. Numerous Israeli policies ­ from the expulsion of three quarters of a million Palestinians in Israel’s founding years to the route of Israel’s current “security barrier” ­ are designed to preserve Jewish demographic predominance. Palestinians citizens of the state of Israel face a catalogue of over 20 discriminatory laws, based solely on their identity as non-Jewish citizens, including the Law of Return, which grants automatic citizenship rights to Jews from anywhere in the world upon request, but denies that same right to native Palestinians.

Carter’s book eloquently describes the situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and it is here that Israel exhibits its strongest parallels to apartheid. He writes about the extensive road system that crisscrosses the West Bank but which Palestinians are forbidden to use. Palestinians in the West Bank often require permission simply to travel from one village to the next, and pass through numerous Israeli military checkpoints, reminiscent of South Africa’s infamous “pass system” which controlled the movement of blacks. Carter also levels a strong criticism against “the wall,” which secures Israel’s control of confiscated Palestinian lands and separates Palestinian communities from each other. He quotes Father Claudio Ghiraldi, the priest of the Santa Marta Monastery in Bethany: “Countering Israeli arguments that the wall is to keep Palestinian suicide bombers from Israel, Father Claudio adds…’The Wall is not separating Palestinians from Jews; rather Palestinians from Palestinians'” (194).

Faced with such overwhelming evidence, it is difficult to imagine how the label of apartheid has not been used more frequently to describe Israeli policies, and without any qualifications. But Jimmy Carter, though he remains the elder statesman of U.S. diplomacy in the Middle East, writes within the narrow confines of the American policy tradition in the region, a tradition that has, for decades, favored virtually unconditional financial, military, diplomatic and emotional support for Israel.

Carter falls short of a full critique of Israel’s treatment of non-Jews under its rule, but his book challenges Americans to see the conflict with eyes wide open. He places the blame on “Israel’s continued control and colonization of Palestinian land” as “the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land” and he places equal blame on the United States for “the condoning of illegal Israeli actions from a submissive White House and U.S. Congress in recent years.”

Americans can only hope that the newly elected Congress, led by Ms. Pelosi and her fellow Democrats, will read beyond that title page and that one day, they too, will see the writing on the wall.

LENA KHALAF TUFFAHA wrote this commentary for the Institute for Middle East Understanding.

 

 

More articles by:
September 25, 2018
Kenneth Surin
Fact-Finding Labour’s “Anti-Semitism” Crisis
Charles Pierson
Destroying Yemen as Humanely as Possible
James Rothenberg
Why Not Socialism?
Patrick Cockburn
How Putin Came Out on Top in Syria
John Grant
“Awesome Uncontrollable Male Passion” Meets Its Match
Guy Horton
Burma: Complicity With Evil?
Steve Stallone
Jujitsu Comms
William Blum
Bombing Libya: the Origins of Europe’s Immigration Crisis
John Feffer
There’s a New Crash Coming
Martha Pskowski
“The Emergency Isn’t Over”: the Homeless Commemorate a Year Since the Mexico City Earthquake
Fred Baumgarten
Ten Ways of Looking at Civility
Dean Baker
The Great Financial Crisis: Bernanke and the Bubble
Binoy Kampmark
Parasitic and Irrelevant: The University Vice Chancellor
September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will There Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail