Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
Carter's Hamas Hallucination
Cairo--By coincidence I was in Cairo today when former President Jimmy Carter arrived here to meet with a delegation from Hamas over the vociferous objections of Israel and the United States. I had served as Deputy Senior Advisor for Middle East Affairs in Carter's White House, and was on the front line defending him before a hostile Jewish community during his failed 1980 reelection campaign, so I had more than a passing interest in the Cairo encounter.
Despite his success in forging the breakthrough Israel-Egyptian peace treaty between Begin and Sadat in 1978, Carter's perceived one-sided advocacy on behalf of the Palestinian people turned many American Jews against him. It was a particularly perplexing predicament for Carter, who understandably believed he was laying the groundwork for a comprehensive Middle East peace, and I was proud to be associated with him and that effort. Nevertheless, when he left the White House, Carter had so alienated the Jewish community with his holier than thou approach to Middle East peace, that the legacy of that Camp David achievement has become a veritable forsaken heirloom.
Two decades later, in 1996, Carter came to Morocco when I served as U.S. ambassador there, and he and our wives had dinner together in Marrakesh. Carter knew of the role I had played in his reelection campaign before the American Jewish community and evidently felt compelled to ask me the following question: "Marc, can you please explain to me why did our Jewish friends turn against me in 1980 after what we had achieved at Camp David?"
Carter's inquiry caught me off guard. Although I had reflected on my years in the White House in anticipation of his visit to Morocco, I frankly did not expect him to tread into the troubled waters of his relationship with Israel and the Jewish community way back when
Being as diplomatic as I could with my former boss, I explained to him that the American Jewish community was not monolithic in its views. But I reproached him for inducing unnecessary acrimony in Israel and across America's Jewish community by seemingly preoccupying himself with the plight of the Palestinian people as if they were the only victims in a conflict where there was more than enough blame to go around on each side.
I urged Carter then to understand that he could make his peace with America's Jews and Israel by having a deeper appreciation of the resentment he engenders when his advocacy on behalf of the Palestinian people seems to be at Israel's expense and to make more of an effort to take into account the terrorism that Palestinians had inflicted on Israel.
Unfortunately, Carter failed to heed the advice I offered him in Marrakesh that evening.
When he subsequently entitled his book Palestine, Between Peace and Apartheid, he ignited a firestorm of criticism. Here again, Carter had provocatively and, I believe intentionally, reopened an unhealed wound in his troubled relationship with Israel and America's Jews. The book's unwarranted and one-sided attacks on Israel only served to further alienate Carter as a responsible and even-handed peacemaker.
For a man who in recent public appearances seems troubled, if not subconsciously resentful, about the hostility he had garnered from his book, Carter's outreach to Hamas represents yet another unfortunate indulgence in what appears to be an open, hostile campaign by a former president against Israel.
Carter knows and could have done more to prevent this from happening.
Carter could have conditioned his Hamas Cairo and Damascus meetings with a pre-negotiated commitment to receive something tangible in return, such as a ceasefire by Hamas against further missile attacks against Israel, or a release by Hamas of Israeli soldiers it is holding captive.
Instead, as soon as his Cairo meeting was over with, Hamas issued a one-sided statement exclaiming that by his mere meeting with the delegation, Carter validated Hamas as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
It may have been that in 1978 Carter was ahead of his time. In 2008, I am afraid Carter is lost in time. He has failed to face the cold reality of a Middle East that has dramatically changed since his presidency.
Unlike the secular Palestinian Authority that has embraced a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine, Hamas craves legitimacy in support of its goal of destroying the Jewish state of Israel. Treading into the quicksand of negotiating unilaterally with Hamas without something in return may be controversial, but not necessarily productive for the cause of peace.
It is one thing for Americans to expect more from Israel in its dealing with the secular Palestinian Authority, it is entirely another to expect Israel to be mesmerized by Carter's outreach to an organization that even through his powers of persuasion will never alter its stated mission to use "legitimate resistance" (read terrorism) to destroy Israel. Let the Israelis decide for themselves whether or not to negotiate with Hamas, as many in Israel advocate on terms that demand concessions from that group.
In its current incarnation and objectives, Hamas is part of the problem, not part of the solution to Middle East peace. The sooner Carter comes to understand this, the better for all concerned, including the very Palestinians he claims to be trying to help.
Here in Egypt, Hamas is also viewed with increasing trepidation as an organization that threatens regional stability and the very peace treaty that Carter mid-wifed at Camp David between Israel and Egypt.
How tragically ironic, that 30 years since Camp David, Carter's self-indulgent and one-sided embrace of Hamas may inadvertently serve to undermine the very crowning achievement of his lifetime.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Luckily Abbas does not suffer from hallucinations.
Abbas says Carter visit lacked 'positive results':
http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL22548973.html
Good that we do not only have to rely on Jimmy Carter's report from his meeting with Hamas. Luckily Hamas themselves reported about the meeting, too. They made clear that Hamas has offered a 10-year truce, but neither offered peace nor recognition of Israel:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/21/world/main4031872.shtml
So obviously Ambassador Ginsberg got it right with his diagnosis of hallucinations.
for all carter's well-intentioned efforts, hamas refuses to halt rocket attacks, and refuses to recognize israel's right to exist...so much for obama's 'sunshine, lollipops and rainbows' advance man....
There are those that rely on Historical record, and make claim with sound argument and evidence, that "...isreal's right to exist...", is based and founded on a FRAUD.
Enslavement of the body of man, is past accomplishment..; the goal to enslave the soul is now under way....
Read the other side of the story: htp://www.serendipity.li/zionism.htm
Better we become a world of degenerating lunatics, and, maintain our souls.., than, eternal slaves to the dark side....
The post is on the WEB, not on Huffpo.
Perhaps the MOST important move towards peace in the Israeli Palestinian conflict that has occurred recently is the news that was JUST delivered that Former president Carter's talks with Hamas have confirmed that there ARE conditions, and what appear to be VERY reasonable conditions, under which Hamas would recognize Israel and accept peace.
So continually and blindly chanting the mantra that Hamas is sworn to Israel's destruction sounds a little bit like the verbalizations of someone who would prefer to see the fighting, the growth of the settlements and the blowback terror that serves as an excuse to continue the expansion of the settlements continue.
The Ball is now in your court, Ambassador Ginsberg
Thank you, President Carter, for your badly needed leadership. Ginsburg, you are clueless.
The fact is... Carter went to Israel first. He is trying to meet people on both sides of a serious violent struggle where no one else is seeking real solutions.
And yet Israel denies security for an American President after all America has done for them. Carter himself brokered peace between Egypt and Israel.
But Republicans and many Democrats are denouncing Carter??? Calling for his passport to be revoked... Calling for his funding to be completely cut off...
Yet we sit idly by while our current President is continuing to rape our country and it's citizens in almost every way conceivable.
What is wrong with our elected Democrats??? The Republicans are continuing to be as un-patriotic as imaginable... And we let them paint us as such. What is wrong with this picture?
Well said. No one gains when we go along with those who want to silence diversity of expression because we don't agree with their political position. What I am sure of is that former President Carter is trying to keep the communication channels open, on both sides. Many people are suffering in the Middle East because leaders on both side won't talk to each other. If Moses had allowed those afraid of the opposition to shut him up,where would Israel be today?
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem and the salvation of all of the nations of the world!
Thank you, Jimmy Carter for trying to bring peace to that troubled area. When it is all done and said, if your actions eventually save even 1 life it will be worth it versus those who refuse to do anything.
"Mr. Ambassador" I bet your looking forward to that fat nice paycheck from AIPAC amirite?
Let me just remind you that it was the state of Israel that immigrated to Palestine, NOT the other way around. To defend the subjugation of the natural inhabitants of that land in a disgusting apartheid and endless and criminal occupation in their own homeland is bizarre and revolting.
Most Israelis are native born or refugees from Arab countries.
The biblical Palestinians came from Crete and other Greek islands.
The Arabs, who are called Paletinians falsely, are the descendants of Arab invaders. There has never been a Arab-Palestinian state and anytime the Arab had the opportunity to establish a state, they chose violence instead.
You should read your middle east history. The Palestinians and their so-called leaders such as their current support of one of the worst terrorist groups in the world, Hamas, has led to their subjugation.
They were granted plenty of land in the past and present for a homeland,
AdamWykle: Dont you love the replies by Zionists to your post? Lies, historical revisionism and further erasing the Palestinians from human history; the Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in full swing. They're a national treasure these Zionist folks.
Your' comment is accurate and intellectually honest and I agree with you.
Boobale: what revisionism? That plishtim were the "sea people" invaders? That the very word in Hebrew means "invaders"? That Arabs conquered Judea as their first Jihad? That's all just facts.
Your misuse of "Zionist" label is dishonest, and as such you're not in any position to give out the "honesty" medals to anyone.
It is dishonest because "Zionism" is a strange and scary word so you get to twist it as you please, when in fact, in Hebrew it is simply a referense to Jerusalem, and "Zionism" is a Jewish people's movement of "return to Jerusalem". Nothing more, nothing less.
I bet AIPAC's paychecks are nowhere as phat as ones cut by the Saudis to Carter's library for all the great job he's doing for their cause.
American universities are bought up by Saudi money for the last 30 years, and you're the inevitable product of biased education by corrupt professors subservient to their Saudi sponsors.
Carter is one of the few people who is truly trying to broker peace.
What is shameful is the criticism he has received.
In his books, Carter rejects the Arab terrorism because it does not serve their cause, not because terrorism is bad. Therefore Carter cannot claim to be a man of peace.
Why discuss the difference, the Arabs already know that terrorism is "...bad".., or, they wouldn't be using it....
Terrorism cannot be seperated from the underlying "need" or "cause" to use such..; terrorisim is the attention grabber -tool- of the sponsors, or oppressed, and until we pay attention to the underlying concerns.., will there be "peace"....
The underlying concerns, is their "cause", and; terrorism (method), in and of itself, is like a Knocker on the door of "reason and humanity"...Mr. Carter is answering the door...while the rest cower in the dark....
Well gee, why wouldn't it serve their cause? Maybe because it's bad. Does he have to state the obvious?
You don't negotiate with terrorists who have one goal, your elimination! And have stated over and over by words and actions this is non-negotiable!
In the 21st century we had best negotiate with everyone. 9-11 was only the fruits of America's capitalism run a-muck.
Mr. Carter gains my respect because he doesn't speak with a "forked tongue", and takes responsibility for his deeds...be they right or wrong. We need more Statesmen like Mr. Carter...and less.., like those in the bush....
Fools and Heros rush in where wise men, and the corrupt, fear to tread.., Mr. Carter is no Fool.., unless he depends on the majority.., for support....!
So, Mr. Ambassador, you really would rather see killing in the name of Israel then talk to the enemy!
Is it any wonder Israel is always fighting. I would fight for Israel's right to have a safe homeland;
I would NOT fight for people who are too stubborn and blind to see that talking is the best policy.
This unending war is not the fault of just one "side". They are all fighting for a secure place to live.
I hope that they see that the ONLY way to have their dream is to talk to who ever will sit down and discuss the problems. One talk won't do it, keep going. No, I haven't lived there, but I know that I am right in this. President Carter knows it too. THINK PEACE and don't be so full of themselves.
"stubborn" - a Jew-obsession give-away.
"talking is the best policy" - a generalising myth, disconnected from reality.
"[it] is not the fault of just one "side" - another myth, a wishful thinking.
"They are all fighting for a secure place to live." - when Hamas's idea of security is Jew-free land between the River and the Sea. According to their covenant. Which you can't dismiss out of hand without being intellectually dishonest, or self-delusional.
"whoever will sit down" - have you asked Hamas lately? They won't, and said as much, many times.
"I'm know I'm right" - you mean, you "feel" it? Feelings can't stand for knowledge and facts, no matter what postmodernist nonsense you where told in college.
It seems as though everyone besides realitystare forgets that the stated purpose of Hamas is to kill every Jew in Israel and turn it into a Islamic Fundamentalist state.
There is no negotiation with people who cannot compromise on their goal of total annihilation of an entire nation.
And, "don't be so full of themselves." Pinkerman? In your assertion that you "know you are right in this" it is YOU who are obviously too full of yourself. It is you who are too disconnected from reality to form an intelligent opinion on the matter.
You can't even make up your mind long enough to form a coherent post. First you say "I would NOT fight for people who are too stubborn and blind to see that talking is the best policy," in reference to what must be Hamas, since they are the side unwilling to talk. So you wouldn't fight for a side so radical in its demands that it will not negotiate, but then you commend Jimmy Carter for his efforts in fighting for the Palestinians. But Carter somehow "knows it"! What does he really knows that we don't? The problem is what Carter thinks he knows.
Good for Jimmy Carter. Hamas was elected by the Palistinians and should be dealt with if they and the Israelis are to peacefully co-exist. The author implies most American Jews are for rejection of Hamas. I feel most American non-jews support negotiations between the 2 countries. America has a lot at stake and our diplomacy should be determined by what's in the best interests of America. We don't need Israel any more than we need Palistine, but we do need peace around the globe.
If killing Palestinian children brought about security, Israel would be the most secure country on Earth. Maybe the terms "Occupied Territories" and "Palestinian Refugee Camps" have been in the vernacular so long we have forgotten their meaning. The Nazis occupied France for 4 years, Israel has occupied parts of Palestine for over 40 years. Palestinians have been refugees from their homes for 60 years. They wouldn"t have to rely on terrorist extremism if the US gave them enough helicopters, tanks and missiles to wage a proper War.
Anyone making a comparison between Nazi Germany and Israel is beneath the contempt of decent people.
Israel came to occupy the territories because Arab armies massed on the Israeli border, an act of war. And it was the Arabs who fired the first shots when Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran, also an act of war. Israel responded and defeated the invading Arab forces which required the taking of the West Bank, Gaza, and the entire Sinai. And Israel has every legal right to hold on to the acquired territory. It has returned the Sinai to Egypt, including oil fields that supplied much of the oil required by Israel.
When folks demand that Israel return the territories they forget the laand was held by Egypt and Jordan from 1948-1967. If a "Palestinian" homeland was important why did these two nations fail to create one? Does anyone recall the inability of Jews to worship at their holiest sites in Jerusalem? Until 1967 no one of the Jewish faith could pray at the Western Wall. Since 1967 every religion has been welcomed at their sites. UNlike Iraq, where mosques have been attacked and destroyed, the Mount in Jerusalem has been safe and open to Moslems.
If Israel returned to its pre-67 borders folks on HuffPo and most Arabs have said peace will come to the Middle East. If that was true why was Israel attacked in 1967, before it held the territories?
Since you like history. Article 12 of Wilson's 14 points issued in 1918 called for a cessation of control of Arab Lands by outside forces. Britain and France double crossed their Arab allies in the War against the Ottoman Turks and occupied these lands after World War I. Britain caused the partition of Palestine and set the whole mess in motion. If you don't think a comparison of Nazi occupation to Israeli occupation is Kosher then how about British occupation of Palestine from World War I until they were left in 1948. You will remember the events leading up to this decision included the terrorist attack on the King David Hotel in 1946 killing 91 people. This attack being led by Menachem Begin.
The overarching point is that you use historical stories (whether your versions are accurate is often in question) to justify behavior that HAS no acceptable justification, under ANY circumstances.
A violently enforced colonial occupation is ALWAYS wrong. It has nothing to do with defense, and NO set of historical events can justify it, any more than endless historical rationalizations could EVER jsutify what the Nazis did.
Furthermore, it is clear that our complicity in these acts has resulted in the same blowback terror against the US that Israel has suffered for decades, and MANY people here are sick of paying that price for something this country and virtually EVERY OTHER NATION IN THE WORLD condemns.
"if the US gave them enough helicopters, tanks and missiles to wage a proper War, "
...like it does Isreal
Isreal is a militarized theocracy.Why should our government representatives support such a state with our tax dollars,? Isreal's nuclear facilites have NEVER been inspected by the IAE, a demand we frequently level at other other countries to justify our label of "evil".And they have been quite aggressive in their efforts to wipe the palestinians "off the face of the earth",a saying only SPOKEN by the leader of another country who has been deemed a terrorist.
Mordecai Vanunu was recently rearrested after serving 11 out of 18 years in solitary confinement for revealing Isreals nuclear program in 1986, the longest solitary confinement sentence in the world.Read about this courageous hero here, he continued to speak out despite Isreals demand to censor him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu
Ginsberg has only jewish interests in mind--America wants peace in the Mideast--the jews want to suppress the Arabs--watch out for Husein Obama Zionists!!
Ambr. Ginsberg does know , Hamas was duly elected by the Palestinian people. Just because the US declares Hamas a terrorist organization does not make it so. They are resisting one of the most oppressive occupations in history the only way they know how.
Why does this rumour persist on HuffPo and throughout American supposedly "zionist-controlled" media as most of you like to call it??
Hamas was not democratically elected!!! LEARN THE FACTS!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/29/international/middleeast/29mideast.html
1. Read
2. Think
THEN
3. Write
It is Hamas themselves responsible for the oppression of Palestinian people. Without their assaults on Israeli territory, soldiers, and civilians, there would be not roadblocks or embargoes on trade. Unfortunately, Israel needs to do these things to protect its security and sovereignty.
so, the hamas rockets regularly raining down on israel are what? fireworks that failed to explode on time?
If Israelis were really interested in peace they would stop building new settlements on Palestinian land, just for starter..
The Israeli lobby does not want peace, they want 100% of Palestine, all of it. They will not stop as long as the US and Europe finance it.
Between 1941 and 1945 the territory of Germany was shrinking, too. The reason was, that Germany lost a war. The goal of this war was to oppress and exterminate other people. That's exactly what the muslims try do to to Israel. They are loosing this ongoing war and therefore they are loosing territory.
If Israel has to return land to the guys who want to destroy it, then Russia, Poland and France have to return occupied territory to Germany.
Loading comments…
I'm pleased to announce the launch today of two new HuffPost...
Long before $150,000-gate, Sarah Palin seemed to...
The Obamas dropped by the Vatican on Friday, with daughters...
Yesterday evening, Greg Sargent reported on The Plum Line that one of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's key reasons...
I was sorry to watch, live on CNN, Edward R. Murrow and Emmy Award-winning broadcaster and...
The following post...
Jim Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for...
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The former fiance of Gov. Sarah Palin's...
Hermione herself, Emma Watson, charmed David Letterman and...
OH NOES! What happened on Fox and Friends today, people?
I'm liveblogging the latest Iran election fallout. Email me with any news or thoughts, or follow me...
The Daily Show's John Oliver is unhappy with mainstream journalism, and even drearier...
It's summer, the time for weddings! A few of my friends are getting married this summer and fall, so lately...
UPDATED, Jul. 10, 3:00 p.m: After his song made its way across...
SYDNEY — Residents of a rural Australian town hoping to protect the earth and their wallets...
I get many letters like this from readers...
Posted April 18, 2008 | 09:37 AM (EST)