Debate Essential To Arab-Israeli Peace

I sat down with former President Carter last week at the Carter Center in Atlanta. The center was hosting a conference of human-rights defenders, people at the front lines confronting repressive regimes around the globe. After a quarter-century of humanitarian work through the Carter Center, monitoring elections, working to eradicate neglected tropical diseases and focusing on the poor, Jimmy Carter now finds himself at the center of the storm in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

After more than three decades of work on the Middle East, Carter released a book titled “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” The book’s title alone has created a furor. But Carter is undeterred:

“The word ‘apartheid’ is exactly accurate. This is an area that’s occupied by two powers. They are now completely separated. Palestinians can’t even ride on the same roads that the Israelis have created or built in Palestinian territory. The Israelis never see a Palestinian, except the Israeli soldiers. The Palestinians never see an Israeli, except at a distance, except the Israeli soldiers. So within Palestinian territory, they are absolutely and totally separated, much worse than they were in South Africa, by the way. And the other thing is, the other definition of ‘apartheid’ is, one side dominates the other. And the Israelis completely dominate the life of the Palestinian people.”

Carter lays much of the blame for the lack of momentum toward a solution on the absence of debate in the U.S.: “It’s a terrible human-rights persecution that far transcends what any outsider would imagine. And there are powerful political forces in America that prevent any objective analysis of the problem in the Holy Land. I think it’s accurate to say that not a single member of Congress with whom I’m familiar would possibly speak out and call for Israel to withdraw to their legal boundaries or to publicize the plight of the Palestinians or even to call publicly and repeatedly for good faith peace talks.”

As president, Carter brokered the 1978 Camp David Peace Accords, creating a lasting peace between Israel and Egypt. President Clinton, who officiated over the failed 2000 Camp David Summit between Israel and the Palestinians, has been highly critical of Carter’s perspective. Clinton blames the Palestinian leadership for rejecting Israel’s “generous offer.” It’s interesting that Israel’s chief negotiator, former Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, told me in 2006, “If I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well.”

While we were in Atlanta, DePaul University in Chicago reached a settlement with professor Norman Finkelstein. Despite hailing him as a “prolific scholar and an outstanding teacher,” DePaul denied him tenure, many believe because of his outspoken criticism of Israeli policy toward Palestinians. The son of Holocaust survivors himself, Finkelstein has been praised by leading scholars.

Just months before he died, Raul Hilberg, revered founder of the field of Holocaust studies, praised Finkelstein’s work: “That takes a great amount of courage. His place in the whole history of writing history is assured and that those who in the end are proven right triumph, and he will be among those who will have triumphed, albeit, it so seems, at great cost.”

Open debate on Israel-Palestine should not come at such a high cost. It is essential to Middle East peace. The Iraq Study Group, in its bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Report, stated, “The United States will not be able to achieve its goals in the Middle East unless the United States deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

Carter’s book cover has a picture of the “Separation Barrier.” Israel originally designed the wall to run along the internationally recognized 1967 border. Carter noted that Israel decided to “move the wall from the Israeli border to intrude deeply within Palestine to carve out some of that precious land for the Israeli settlers to occupy.” The International Court of Justice has ruled it illegal. It is more than half completed, with plans to snake more than 400 miles, mainly through the West Bank. In places the wall is more than 25 feet high and made of concrete.

Carter describes it as “much worse” than the Berlin Wall. Elder Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery writes:

“When my friends fall prey to despair, I show them a piece of painted concrete, which I bought in Berlin. It is one of the remnants of the Berlin Wall, which are on sale in the city. I tell them that I intend, when the time comes, to apply for a franchise to sell pieces of the Separation Wall.”

That barrier stands in the United States as well — metaphorically — around any kind of rational debate for a fair and just solution in the Middle East. My suggestion: Tear down that wall.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 500 stations in North America.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

43 Comments so far

dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 11:21 am

Thanks Jimmy Carter for your courage to speak out. I wish more of our politicians would. I know most of them are tired of being bullied by AIPAC and its supporters http://tinyurl.com/33oejv .

rtdrury September 13th, 2007 11:29 am

Suppression of Likud extremist despotism is essential for Arab-Israeli peace.

nutsackmcgee September 13th, 2007 11:40 am

if only carter had had the courage not to sell indonesia the weapons that almost killed amy goodman in 1999…

Vern September 13th, 2007 11:49 am

Carter was overly cautious, despite his willingness to tread into taboo territory. He didn’t fault AIPAC, commenting that AIPAC was simply fulfilling it’s purported lobbying agenda. By framing it in such a matter he sidestepped commenting on the agenda. The agenda is the point of the matter. Making the issue about solely lobbying was dishonest.
That has always been the thing with Carter - it is always two steps forward, one back. He is a good man and every little bit counts. At least he isn’t mediocre Democrat, but still not a great one.

whatfools September 13th, 2007 12:18 pm

The only way to bring peace to Palistine is for the US to stop it’s unconditional funding and support of Zionist atrocities. Even UBL said that on 9/11.

Nightwatch September 13th, 2007 12:44 pm

It’s interesting to see that opportunist Bill Clinton is running interference for Hillary by tearing into Jimmy Carter. It is this kind of expediency that has wrecked rational debate of this question in the US, thereby condemning the Palestinians to the appalling fate they suffer today.

sphne September 13th, 2007 12:56 pm

Jimmy Carter can afford to be brave, he isn’t running for anything. It is political suicide to take any side other than the one AIPAC condones.

Vern September 13th, 2007 1:29 pm

“It is political suicide to take any side other than the one AIPAC condones”

What doe that mean then? We bomb Iran? Where does it end? How does it stop?

curmudgeon99 September 13th, 2007 1:31 pm

How rude for these people to criticize the leadership’s support of our 51st state.

Don’t they know how critical to our survival it is?

Maybe they need to remember the USS Liberty.

mikep September 13th, 2007 2:04 pm

Like many Americans, Mr. Carter seeks to divert attention and responsibility for the United States’ own crimes and mistakes by attacking and criticizing other countries. It’s a common tactic that Americans have been using for decades. But if Mr. Carter was really concerned about people building walls and such, why doesn’t he criticize the walls that the Americans are building. Such as the one on the Mexican border, and the ones they’re building in Iraq.

Here’s an article reporting on how upset people throughout Latin America are at the idea of the wall on the Mexican border, “Proposed Wall Divides the Americas.”

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/01/proposed_wall_divides_the_amer.html

The U.S. House of Representatives’s approval to create a 700 mile-long wall running along the more populated parts of the U.S-Mexican border has incensed public opinion in Latin America like no other issue in recent years.

When the House approved the wall as part of get-tough-on-immigration legislation last month, it was seen in Washington as show of strength for anti-immigrant forces in U.S. politics. In Mexico, Central America and even northern South America, the proposal is seen as a slap in the face, an official insult that borders on racist. The Mexico city daily Excelsior (in Spanish) denounced the push for a border wall as a sign of “The New Apartheid.”

The opposition to the proposed wall spans the Latin American political spectrum, from wealthy businessmen to leftist journalists to poor peasants. The Mexicali daily La Cronica (in Spanish) emphasizes that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the wall. El Universal (in Spanish) notes that the Wall Street Journal has condemned it. Along the border, La Cronica had no problem finding migrants who rejected the idea that the wall would stop them from trying to find work in the U.S.

The Catholic Church in the border town of Nuevo Laredo denounced the wall as offensive. So did Guatemalan indigenous leader and Nobel prize winner Rigoberta Menchú.

The foreign secretaries of Mexico and Central American are planning to ask the U.S. government to rescind the measure. The president of El Salvador, usually deferential to Washington, condemned the wall . The vice president of Guatemala said the proposed barrier was “intolerable” and said it’s a sign that North Americans regard Latin Americans as “delinquents.”

The wall, said La Jornada (in Spanish) is “disgraceful and degrading.” (Watching America has an English translation.)

North Americans, said Excelsior, “raise a wall instead of acknowledging that illegal immigrants are a fundamental part of their economy.”

And here’s an article (from today’s Common Dreams) reporting on how upset Iraqis are at the walls the US is building there, “Baghdad Residents Protest at Wall”

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/13/3817/

Residents of the Shula and Ghazaliya districts waved Iraqi fla0913 03gs and chanted slogans rejecting both the proposed separation and the US occupation.

They demanded the government intervene to ensure the barrier is demolished.

The US military said the wall would reduce sectarian violence and stop the movement of weapons and militants.

Many Iraqis reacted angrily in April when US troops began building a barrier around the Baghdad Sunni enclave of Adhamiya to prevent it being attacked by Shia militants.

But you never hear these illegal actions being discussed in the liberal blogosphere. Why is that? I guess it’s just easier to criticize others, especially a very small country thousands of miles away.

And if Mr. Carter is truly concerned about apartheid, then he could look a lot closer at his own territory, the American south, where racism and apartheid are alive and well. Such as the horrendous scandal in Jena, Louisiana.

Americans need to stop criticizing everybody else in the world, and deal with their own problems and human rights violations, which are as bad as anyone else’s, if not worse.

dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 2:16 pm

Like most pro-Israel supporters MikeEp wishes to divert attention and responsibility away from Israel’s own crimes and mistakes by attacking and criticizing the US.

fedupwithpolitics September 13th, 2007 2:37 pm

Like their Israeli trainers, the US military in Iraq is also building a wall around the Baghdad Sunni enclave of Adhamiya. Like their Israeli trainers, the US military has used torture and violated the Geneva conventions. Like their Israeli trainers, the US military has invaded and illegally occupied another people’s land. No wonder the US and Israel are such good friends!

Greg Bacon September 13th, 2007 2:39 pm

Israeli PM vows to “Wipe Iran off the Map”

Tel Aviv, Israel— Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert declared Tuesday that Iran is a “disgraceful blot” that should be “wiped off the map” and banished from the pages of time.

Olmert’s speech to participants at a “World without Islam” conference set a hard-line foreign policy course that continues the saber-rattling of his predecessor, Ariel Sharon.

Olmert pledged to continue on in the hallowed tradition of the Stern Gang who set siege to the Palestinian city of Acre in 1948, going so far as to poison the town’s drinking water to kill off the inhabitants.

“The world should know, thundered Olmert, that Israel will take any steps necessary to bring about our goals, including invoking the Sampson Option.”

Olmert also condemned Iran’s neighbors which seek to break new ground in their relations with Iran. “Anybody who does business with Iran will burn in the fire of Yahweh’s fury,” state-run television quoted him as saying.

The White House issued a press release stating that Israel should use any means at its disposal to keep the land stolen from the indigenous Palestinians.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, (D) California, was unavailable for comment due to her being hospitalized for a reaction to using extreme amounts of Botox.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (D), Las Vegas, was also unavailable for comment due to his month long tour of Israel sponsored and paid for by AIPAC.

MaskedMan September 13th, 2007 3:12 pm

Contributor mikep is arguing for something that I suppose could fairly be called Protest Lockjaw, i.e. a crude rhetorical device whereby one attempts to deligitimize the dissident/protester/voice for justice by suggesting he/she should be concentrating on some different injustice and suggesting same is being hypocritical in not doing so.

I suggest mikep give some regard to his surroundings… I very much suspect the general readership here is little influenced by such cheap tricks.

jonthebaptist September 13th, 2007 3:22 pm

Hey AMy
Why dont you admit that 9/11 was an inside JOB

ezeflyer September 13th, 2007 4:44 pm

Arab-Israeli Peace Essential. That’s why they’re not having a debate.

gandhi September 13th, 2007 4:52 pm

This week marks the twenty fifth anniversary of the 1982 Massacre of Palestinians in Sabra-Shatilla refugee camps. This carnage took place between September 15-18, 1982. According to a witness account: “I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after being lined up against an ally wall; children with their throats slit, a pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide open, her blackened face silently screaming in horror; countless babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had been thrown into garbage piles.”
This massacre was monitored by Sharon, Eytan, Yaron, Elie Hobeika, Fradi Frem and others from a 7-storey Kuwaiti Embassy from where they maintained radio contact and monitored the carnage with a clear view into the camps.

Hitler’s atrocities are still remembered but not the atrocities of these MONSTERS.

uncommondreamer September 13th, 2007 6:38 pm

Granted that the West Bank is under Israeli occupation, and there is complete separation of the Palestinians from the Israelis, and for the sake of argument let us characterize it in Carter’s terms as Apartheid, and allow that the Palestinians are treated harshly. Is there any one who can answer this question: Since there are Palestinians living and voting in Israel as Israeli citizens (electing their own representatives to the Knesset), are they also victims of Apartheid? and in what Arab country are there any Israelis or Jews in government? I did not read Jimmy Carter’s book, and I wonder if he addresses these questions

dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 7:18 pm

Iran, a non-Arab country, has a Jewish man in parliament.
Israel recently pushed out an Arab, Asmi Bishara from its parliament, the Knesset.
——————————————————
A Moroccan Jewish woman, Maggie Cacoun, is to head the women’s list of the Al-Wast Al-Aghtama’i party in the upcoming parliamentary elections in Morocco.

Cacoun, who defines herself as a “nationalist Moroccan,” said that she does not want her religion to be the main issue in her candidacy.

The party’s secretary-general said that Cacoun’s candidacy was “an opening for Jews as a fundamental element among the elements of the Moroccan identity.”

Another Jew, Joseph Levy, is currently the party’s deputy secretary-general.

——————————————————–
see this article referencing Tunisian Jew in Tunisia’s parliament.
http://www.pjvoice.com/v27/27006tunisia.aspx

dlgreen50 September 13th, 2007 8:12 pm

Please see this interview with Jonathan Cook, or read his book “Blood and Religion,” or any of the numerous articles of his that have been posted at counterpunch.org, to be more informed on the “glass wall” between Jewish and Arab Israelis.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-973170929151170880&q=jonathan

Canaan September 13th, 2007 8:12 pm

Human Rights Watch says the following:

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/israel/schools/index.htm

“Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel make up nearly one-quarter of Israel’s schoolchildren. Yet Palestinian Arab children receive an education that is inferior in nearly every respect when compared to Jewish children. Educated in schools run by the Israeli government but separated from Jewish children, Palestinian Arab citizen’s schools are more crowded with fewer teachers per child, and in worse physical condition. Some schools lack libraries, counselors, and recreation facilities. Palestinian Arab school children get fewer enrichment and remedial programs, and special education services, than Jewish children receive. Many communities have no kindergartens for three and four-year-olds.
Palestinian Arabs experience discrimination at every level of the education system. As a result, they are three times as likely to drop out than Jewish children and rarely make it to university.
If that doesen’t sound like de facto apartheid then what is….

Gail September 13th, 2007 8:53 pm

“And there are powerful political forces in America that prevent any objective analysis of the problem in the Holy Land……I think it’s accurate to say that not a single member of Congress with whom I’m familiar would possibly speak out and call for Israel to withdraw to their legal boundaries or to publicize the plight of the Palestinians or even to call publicly and repeatedly for good faith peace talks.”

We all know how powerful AIPAC is in this country, President Carter! And anyone, Jew or otherwise, who criticizes Israeli policy toward Palestinians is placed very neatly into the Zionist’s anti-semetic pigeon-hole.

MaskedMan September 13th, 2007 8:54 pm

uncommondreamer,

Arab (Palestinian) Israelis while not suffering the dreadful conditions of Palestinians in the West Bank and especially Gaza are nonetheless an ill treated underprivileged minority. While a very imperfect analogy I suppose you could say that there are parallels between the 20th Century Civil Rights Movement in the US and the efforts by Arab Israelis for equality and fair treatment.

For the most part the whole issue gets very little international exposure and hence I suppose is seen a “domestic” issue. However the spectre of “transfer” is unfortunately something that hangs in the air as a persistent if not immediate threat, even in official circles it is not uncommon to seem formulations of “peace” plans that call for exchange of land and people, the latter specifically meaning the transfer of Arab Israelis to an Palestinian state. This seems unlikely, certainly Arab Israelis would vigorously resist, but the threat still exists nonetheless.

Here are a few links that can get you started if you’re interested in exploring:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/826530.html
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/dion_nissenbaum/story/15919.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

Mark Kienan September 13th, 2007 8:57 pm

An open, honest discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian war does not take place among american politicians or in the the american news media. It is censored.
I don’t believe this censorship helps the Israelis since it allows them to pursue policies which in the end are self destructive.
I don’t think the policies of apartheid which Israel pursues in order to annex land has brought security or a greater liklihood of long term survival for the Jewish state.
Israeli apartheid has radiculized the Palestinians. Israeli apartheid has made Israel despised around the world.
This is not anti semitism. This is the worlds intuitive dislike for a brutal bully.
Israel will only gain peace through justice.

BlackStacey September 14th, 2007 2:43 am

I feel awful. I am very apathetic to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. To be honest, I just dont care. I do care, however, about the amount of interest, money(tax dollar and military spending), and time that my government, and fellow countymen show on this subject. I don’t get it. But I want to get it. I want to understand. I want to care, but I don’t. I wonder if people in China care about what’s going on in Israel?

BugsBBunny III September 14th, 2007 4:28 am

Speak truth and it strengthens from being heard. When something is never mentioned it is rarely thought about. But speak what some would keep in silence and look out.

I like Jimmy. He should have had a second term. The truth is it’s own strength. Somethings are right and wrong no matter who does them or which side.

I hope that truth tellers like Carter and Amy, Finkelstein and Hilburg speak. The truth is what it is and always remains true even after people’s emotions are removed.

What isn’t discussed is nevertheless a major issue and needs be discussed swiftly. Israel has made the Gaza a punishment lockdown and the West Bank into bitter dregs rather than a new hope and identity as the country known as Palestine.

So shall we accept that we permit the use of collective punishment because extremists want to win at any cost? Not for either side would we see collective punishment of the majority innocent as morally right. How do you punish innocent people? Of what are they guilty?

Extremists know and don’t care. They’d rather these things never be discussed at all. Out of the news out of mind.

Who talks peace in Palestine?

At least Carter will ask the question.

Umlaut September 14th, 2007 6:30 am

“Sampson Option”

Beautiful!!! How much more evidence that Israel has gone from Holocaust survivors to wannabe perpetraitors (misspelling intentional)do we need?

Regarding Iran here’s an FYI.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3448022,00.html

Iranian state produced a show about an Iranian man with Jewish Women during the holocaust.

“A lecturer at Tehran University said anonymously that: “Ahmadinejad more than anything is a big fool. The fact that our regime generously backed the love story between a young Iranian and a Jewess, and the mention of Iran’s aid in helping Jews flee the gas chambers is aimed at showing that there is a different Iran.”

The real person with power in the country is the Ayatollah who also oversees state television that green lit this.

Ahmadinejad’s comments used as a rationale for war seem not to be near the truth of the state’s policy in the matter and just aggressive rationale propaganda against the state of Iran. At minimum not the whole essential truth.

‘The lecturer who followed the soap opera says the message is crystal clear: “Iran has no problems with the Jews or with the Jewish community living amongst it. Its problem is with the ‘little devil’ – the State of Israel and the Zionists.” ‘

Totally different picture of the general opinion in Iran to what we hear here, but very similar in regards to demonizing anyone who criticizes Zionist wrongdoings.

poncho September 14th, 2007 7:51 am

Black inner-city children receive an education that is inferior in nearly every respect when compared to white children. Educated in schools run by the American government but separated from white children, black inner-city citizen’s schools are more crowded with fewer teachers per child, and in worse physical condition. Some schools lack libraries, counselors, and recreation facilities. black inner-city school children get fewer enrichment and remedial programs, and special education services, than white children receive. Many communities have no kindergartens for three and four-year-olds.
Black inner-city youths experience discrimination at every level of the education system. As a result, they are three times as likely to drop out than white children and rarely make it to university.
If that doesen’t sound like de facto apartheid then what is….

1koolkat September 14th, 2007 8:15 am

It all boils down to all members of Congress first concern. That is being reelected. If the first concern were leadership, then perhaps we would get somewhere.

DuraMater September 14th, 2007 8:53 am

Well, poncho, the question then becomes, “What are you doing about it?”

Indeed, what are we all doing about it? Since you’ve identified the American inner city as being as bad as Palestine under Israel occupation and South African apartheid, what are we doing about it?

This is something where the grass roots could truly work its magic. Are we in the land of astroturf, though?

muddmike September 14th, 2007 10:30 am

HEY! Quit picking on Israel!

They have always allowed free debate about Arabs!

They constantly debate whether Arabs are AS evil as Hitler, or if they are MORE evil than Hitler!

dcbeltway September 14th, 2007 10:51 am

Palestine: Democracy not Zionism
A decent two-state solution to the ‘Palestinian problem’ has become impossible.
By John V. Whitbeck
from the September 14, 2007 edition

Jeddah, saudi arabia - With some sort of “meeting” or “conference” to kick start the peace process now being touted by the Bush administration, there is at least the appearance of an understanding in Washington of the importance for the region and the world of solving the “Palestinian problem.”

However, if this problem is ever to be solved, it must be redefined. Those who truly seek justice and peace in the Middle East must dare to speak openly and honestly of the “Zionism problem” – and then to draw the moral, ethical, and practical conclusions that follow.

When South Africa was under a racial-supremacist, settler-colonial regime, the world recognized that the problem was the ideology and political system of the state. Anyone outside the country who referred to the “black problem” or the “native problem” (or, for that matter, to the “white problem”) would instantly have been branded a racist.

The world also recognized that the solution to that problem could not be found either in “separation” (apartheid in Afrikaans) and scattered native reservations (called “independent states” by the South African regime and Bantustans by the rest of the world) or in driving the settler-colonial group in power into the sea. Rather, the solution had to be found – and to almost universal satisfaction was found – in democracy, in white South Africans growing out of their racial-supremacist ideology and political system and accepting that their interests and their children’s futures would be best served in a democratic, non-racist state with equal rights for all who live there.

The solution for the land which, until it was literally wiped off the map in 1948, was called Palestine is the same. It can only be democracy.

The ever-receding “political horizon” for a decent two-state solution, which, on the ground, becomes less practical with each passing year of expanding settlements, bypass roads, and walls, is weighed down by a multitude of excruciatingly difficult “final status” issues. Israeli governments have consistently refused to discuss these final-status issues seriously, preferring to postpone them to the end of a road which is never reached – and which, almost certainly, is intended never to be reached.

Just as marriage is vastly less complicated than divorce, democracy is vastly less complicated than partition. A democratic post-Zionist solution would not require any borders to be agreed, any division of Jerusalem, anyone to move from his current home, or any assets to be evaluated and apportioned. Full rights of citizenship would simply be extended to all the surviving natives still living in the country, as happened in the United States in the early 20th century and in South Africa in the late 20th century. The obstacle to such a simple – and morally unimpeachable – solution is, of course, intellectual and psychological. Traumatized by the Holocaust and perceived insecurity as a Jewish island in an Arab sea, Israelis have immense psychological problems in coming to grips with the practical impossibility of sustaining forever what most of mankind views as a racial-supremacist, settler-colonial regime founded upon the ethnic cleansing of an indigenous population.

Indeed, Israelis have placed themselves in a virtually impossible situation. To taste its bitter essence, Americans might try to imagine what life in their country would be like if the European settlers had not virtually exterminated the indigenous population and if almost half of today’s American population were Indians, without basic human rights, impoverished, smoldering with resentment, and visible every day as the inescapable living evidence of the injustice inflicted on their ancestors.

This would not be a pleasant society in which to live. Both colonizers and colonized would be progressively degraded and dehumanized. The colonizers could, rationally, conclude that they could never be forgiven by those they had dispossessed and that no “solution” was imaginable. So it has been, and continues to be, in the lands under Israeli rule.

Perhaps the coming “meeting” or “conference” will be the last gasp of the fruitless pursuit of a separation-based solution. Perhaps those who care about justice and peace and believe in democracy can then find ways to stimulate Israelis to move beyond Zionist ideology toward a more humane, hopeful, and democratic view of present realities and future possibilities.

No one would suggest that the moral, ethical, and intellectual transformation necessary to achieve a decent one-state solution will be easy. However, more and more people now recognize that a decent two-state solution has become impossible.

It is surely time for concerned people everywhere – and particularly for Americans – to imagine a better way, to encourage Israelis to imagine a better way, and to help both Israelis and Palestinians to achieve it. It is surely time to seriously consider democracy and to give it a chance.

John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel, is author of “The World According to Whitbeck.”

mirf59 September 14th, 2007 11:41 am

The Finkelstein thing turns my stomach. The message to professors across America is “cater to politics, not the Socratic tradition or to the search for knowledge.”

Incredible that Dershowitz is still doing his shtick, with a flair that is “beyond chutzpah,” including wanton lies and distortions and plagiarisms which are violations of the most fundamental rules of academic inquiry.

And, the man who called him on it, exactly in the true spirit of critical thinking, in the rational tradition that supposedly characterizes Western civilization — was fired.

The evidence of a fascistic authoritarianism in America continues to mount. The event that kicked this off was the Supreme Court choosing our President rather than the public in 2000.

dcbeltway September 14th, 2007 12:06 pm

Sorry want to add that the article I posted from John Whitbeck was published in today’s Christian Science Monitor in case any asks for the source.

bellthecat September 14th, 2007 1:36 pm

As the attacks on Jimmy Carter continue it is reasonable to conclude that anyone (even a Nobel Peace Prize winning ex prez) who dares to criticize Israel
will be smeared as antisemitic, and have his life threatened.

People in USA have no idea how much hatred and venom and death the Palestinians face daily by “the chosen
people.”

There is even some kind of memorial that the “settlers” have erected to honor the Jew who
massacred about 30 praying Muslims in their own mosque.
And they pay homage to him once a year on the date
of the massacre.

This situation is every bit as ugly as the troubles in
Ireland were, thank god the truth is beginning to emerge, despite all the corporate non news on the topic

robinea September 14th, 2007 2:35 pm

Greg Bacon, Your post made my day! It was a wonderful parody of the mass media’s campaign against Iran. We need more of this! ‘Nany Pelosi’s overdose on botox…’, even Ariel Sharon, the ‘big cabbage on life-support’ must have been chuckling in his tubes.

massud September 14th, 2007 6:44 pm

whatfools,

OBL saying something does not INCREASE its credibility LOL!

ben September 14th, 2007 7:21 pm

DEBATE ESSENTIAL TO ARAB-ISRAELI PEACE

Sadly, The majority of the commenters here aren’t interested in debate, and are not truely interested in arab-israeli peace. they are interested in taking any opportunity to lambast and demonize israel.

I acknowledge that much of the negative statements made about Israel are true - although some of them are not, I think its counterproductive to nit pick.

Maybe we can all agree that Israeli’s treatment of palestinians is bad, and we’d like to see the situation to improve.

You have to understand that Israel also has legitimate concerns, and only by addressing those concerns can we move out of this stalemate.

Israel’s concerns about the safety of its citizens from aggression is legitimate. There are parties interested in the elimination of all jewish people in israel, and the only thing ensuring that does not happen is Israels military being able to stop that from happening.

How can Israel go back to the 1967 borders and ensure the safety of its population? look at a map, its pretty much militarily indefensible

If it returns the land, will all islamist extremists stop sending rockets into israel? Will the palestinian government stop them? From the west bank, the majority of israels population would be vulnerable.

A nation will not commit suicide to make ‘peace’. Until we find ways to address these issues, there will be no peace.

gde September 14th, 2007 7:41 pm

Massud -

It seems that OBL says what he means, and means what he says. I agree he is no authority, but his grievances are legitimate. Do you believe people like Bush, Blair, and Olmert when they justify killing in large numbers? Why not OBL? Is it because the trio are known liars?

Muslims are primarily ticked off at Israel, the US, and the UK because we killed so many of them. To add insult to the injury, it was always about greed. If it was ideology, they would would have attacked before our killing them ratcheted up. If it was licentious lifestyle, they would have hit Amsterdam.

charles shaw September 14th, 2007 11:13 pm

to ‘Ben’, you write:

“How can Israel go back to the 1967 borders and ensure the safety of its population? look at a map, its pretty much militarily indefensible”

Would you justify a Palestinian military occupation of pre-1967 portions of Israel until Palestinians’ security concerns were eliminated? Law is meaningless unless universally applicable.

Causality is important: Israel is threatened and attacked BECAUSE of its occupation of Palestinian land. The occupation is not a deterrent to Palestinian violence, but the root cause of it. Therefore, the way to begin to limit violent attacks against Israel by Palestinians is to first end the illegal, oppressive and violent occupation. Would it have been legitimate for the Soviet Union to demand some progress towards its security concerns before it withdrew from Afghanistan? I think if they had made such demands the Soviet Union would still be in Afghanistan…

Gail September 14th, 2007 11:22 pm

ben September 14th, 2007 7:21 pm

“Sadly, The majority of the commenters here aren’t interested in debate, and are not truely interested in arab-israeli peace. they are interested in taking any opportunity to lambast and demonize israel.”

Really Ben? Are you another paranoid Jew who thinks everyone is against Jews?? If you are or not, this issue in not about Jews or Arabs, but about Israel and the way they have treated Palestine. Human beings live in Israel and Palestine and ALL should be treated with equal dignity.

“Maybe we can all agree that Israeli’s treatment of palestinians is bad, and we’d like to see the situation to improve.”

There’s no “maybe” about it, Ben; the treatment of Palestinians has been undignified in every respect. And yes, the situation must improve if the Middle East wants to see peace in that region.

“You have to understand that Israel also has legitimate concerns, and only by addressing those concerns can we move out of this stalemate.”

Yes, Israel does have legitimate concerns; but if Israel is not willing to address those concerns in “real” terms, in an effort to negotiate peace in the Middle East, as far as I’m concerned, Israel can fight its own f-king battles. The “so-called” Holy Land, should be available to anyone around the globe who wants to worship their God in that land regardless of what the scriptures tell us or what religion those worshipers belong to.

Show me evidence beyond “reasonable doubt” that the Holy Land belongs to Jews, Muslims or Christians, and I’ll eat my hat.

If there is a God, God’s land belongs to all his children!

milesofmusic September 15th, 2007 10:50 am

norman finklestein debates schlomo ben ami - the topic - the history of the palestinians:

http://www.democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml

read it - learn something

raanan September 18th, 2007 11:39 am

There’s a lot of difference between honest (and needed) criticism of Israeli policy, as done by Carter or Israeli historians like Benny Morris and Tom Segev, and thugs like Finkelstein and Ilian Pappe, who pathologically want to bash Israel at every opportunity and make it seem like the conflict is entirely one-sided and who, at bottom, reject their own Judaism.

Raanan G.

dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 11:21 am

Thanks Jimmy Carter for your courage to speak out. I wish more of our politicians would. I know most of them are tired of being bullied by AIPAC and its supporters http://tinyurl.com/33oejv .
rtdrury September 13th, 2007 11:29 am

Suppression of Likud extremist despotism is essential for Arab-Israeli peace.
nutsackmcgee September 13th, 2007 11:40 am

if only carter had had the courage not to sell indonesia the weapons that almost killed amy goodman in 1999…
Vern September 13th, 2007 11:49 am

Carter was overly cautious, despite his willingness to tread into taboo territory. He didn’t fault AIPAC, commenting that AIPAC was simply fulfilling it’s purported lobbying agenda. By framing it in such a matter he sidestepped commenting on the agenda. The agenda is the point of the matter. Making the issue about solely lobbying was dishonest.
That has always been the thing with Carter - it is always two steps forward, one back. He is a good man and every little bit counts. At least he isn’t mediocre Democrat, but still not a great one.
whatfools September 13th, 2007 12:18 pm

The only way to bring peace to Palistine is for the US to stop it’s unconditional funding and support of Zionist atrocities. Even UBL said that on 9/11.
Nightwatch September 13th, 2007 12:44 pm

It’s interesting to see that opportunist Bill Clinton is running interference for Hillary by tearing into Jimmy Carter. It is this kind of expediency that has wrecked rational debate of this question in the US, thereby condemning the Palestinians to the appalling fate they suffer today.
sphne September 13th, 2007 12:56 pm

Jimmy Carter can afford to be brave, he isn’t running for anything. It is political suicide to take any side other than the one AIPAC condones.
Vern September 13th, 2007 1:29 pm

“It is political suicide to take any side other than the one AIPAC condones”

What doe that mean then? We bomb Iran? Where does it end? How does it stop?
curmudgeon99 September 13th, 2007 1:31 pm

How rude for these people to criticize the leadership’s support of our 51st state.

Don’t they know how critical to our survival it is?

Maybe they need to remember the USS Liberty.
mikep September 13th, 2007 2:04 pm

Like many Americans, Mr. Carter seeks to divert attention and responsibility for the United States’ own crimes and mistakes by attacking and criticizing other countries. It’s a common tactic that Americans have been using for decades. But if Mr. Carter was really concerned about people building walls and such, why doesn’t he criticize the walls that the Americans are building. Such as the one on the Mexican border, and the ones they’re building in Iraq.

Here’s an article reporting on how upset people throughout Latin America are at the idea of the wall on the Mexican border, “Proposed Wall Divides the Americas.”

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/01/proposed_wall_divides_the_amer.html

The U.S. House of Representatives’s approval to create a 700 mile-long wall running along the more populated parts of the U.S-Mexican border has incensed public opinion in Latin America like no other issue in recent years.

When the House approved the wall as part of get-tough-on-immigration legislation last month, it was seen in Washington as show of strength for anti-immigrant forces in U.S. politics. In Mexico, Central America and even northern South America, the proposal is seen as a slap in the face, an official insult that borders on racist. The Mexico city daily Excelsior (in Spanish) denounced the push for a border wall as a sign of “The New Apartheid.”

The opposition to the proposed wall spans the Latin American political spectrum, from wealthy businessmen to leftist journalists to poor peasants. The Mexicali daily La Cronica (in Spanish) emphasizes that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the wall. El Universal (in Spanish) notes that the Wall Street Journal has condemned it. Along the border, La Cronica had no problem finding migrants who rejected the idea that the wall would stop them from trying to find work in the U.S.

The Catholic Church in the border town of Nuevo Laredo denounced the wall as offensive. So did Guatemalan indigenous leader and Nobel prize winner Rigoberta Menchú.

The foreign secretaries of Mexico and Central American are planning to ask the U.S. government to rescind the measure. The president of El Salvador, usually deferential to Washington, condemned the wall . The vice president of Guatemala said the proposed barrier was “intolerable” and said it’s a sign that North Americans regard Latin Americans as “delinquents.”

The wall, said La Jornada (in Spanish) is “disgraceful and degrading.” (Watching America has an English translation.)

North Americans, said Excelsior, “raise a wall instead of acknowledging that illegal immigrants are a fundamental part of their economy.”

And here’s an article (from today’s Common Dreams) reporting on how upset Iraqis are at the walls the US is building there, “Baghdad Residents Protest at Wall”

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/13/3817/

Residents of the Shula and Ghazaliya districts waved Iraqi fla0913 03gs and chanted slogans rejecting both the proposed separation and the US occupation.

They demanded the government intervene to ensure the barrier is demolished.

The US military said the wall would reduce sectarian violence and stop the movement of weapons and militants.

Many Iraqis reacted angrily in April when US troops began building a barrier around the Baghdad Sunni enclave of Adhamiya to prevent it being attacked by Shia militants.

But you never hear these illegal actions being discussed in the liberal blogosphere. Why is that? I guess it’s just easier to criticize others, especially a very small country thousands of miles away.

And if Mr. Carter is truly concerned about apartheid, then he could look a lot closer at his own territory, the American south, where racism and apartheid are alive and well. Such as the horrendous scandal in Jena, Louisiana.

Americans need to stop criticizing everybody else in the world, and deal with their own problems and human rights violations, which are as bad as anyone else’s, if not worse.
dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 2:16 pm

Like most pro-Israel supporters MikeEp wishes to divert attention and responsibility away from Israel’s own crimes and mistakes by attacking and criticizing the US.
fedupwithpolitics September 13th, 2007 2:37 pm

Like their Israeli trainers, the US military in Iraq is also building a wall around the Baghdad Sunni enclave of Adhamiya. Like their Israeli trainers, the US military has used torture and violated the Geneva conventions. Like their Israeli trainers, the US military has invaded and illegally occupied another people’s land. No wonder the US and Israel are such good friends!
Greg Bacon September 13th, 2007 2:39 pm

Israeli PM vows to “Wipe Iran off the Map”

Tel Aviv, Israel— Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert declared Tuesday that Iran is a “disgraceful blot” that should be “wiped off the map” and banished from the pages of time.

Olmert’s speech to participants at a “World without Islam” conference set a hard-line foreign policy course that continues the saber-rattling of his predecessor, Ariel Sharon.

Olmert pledged to continue on in the hallowed tradition of the Stern Gang who set siege to the Palestinian city of Acre in 1948, going so far as to poison the town’s drinking water to kill off the inhabitants.

“The world should know, thundered Olmert, that Israel will take any steps necessary to bring about our goals, including invoking the Sampson Option.”

Olmert also condemned Iran’s neighbors which seek to break new ground in their relations with Iran. “Anybody who does business with Iran will burn in the fire of Yahweh’s fury,” state-run television quoted him as saying.

The White House issued a press release stating that Israel should use any means at its disposal to keep the land stolen from the indigenous Palestinians.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, (D) California, was unavailable for comment due to her being hospitalized for a reaction to using extreme amounts of Botox.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (D), Las Vegas, was also unavailable for comment due to his month long tour of Israel sponsored and paid for by AIPAC.
MaskedMan September 13th, 2007 3:12 pm

Contributor mikep is arguing for something that I suppose could fairly be called Protest Lockjaw, i.e. a crude rhetorical device whereby one attempts to deligitimize the dissident/protester/voice for justice by suggesting he/she should be concentrating on some different injustice and suggesting same is being hypocritical in not doing so.

I suggest mikep give some regard to his surroundings… I very much suspect the general readership here is little influenced by such cheap tricks.
jonthebaptist September 13th, 2007 3:22 pm

Hey AMy
Why dont you admit that 9/11 was an inside JOB
ezeflyer September 13th, 2007 4:44 pm

Arab-Israeli Peace Essential. That’s why they’re not having a debate.
gandhi September 13th, 2007 4:52 pm

This week marks the twenty fifth anniversary of the 1982 Massacre of Palestinians in Sabra-Shatilla refugee camps. This carnage took place between September 15-18, 1982. According to a witness account: “I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after being lined up against an ally wall; children with their throats slit, a pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide open, her blackened face silently screaming in horror; countless babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had been thrown into garbage piles.”
This massacre was monitored by Sharon, Eytan, Yaron, Elie Hobeika, Fradi Frem and others from a 7-storey Kuwaiti Embassy from where they maintained radio contact and monitored the carnage with a clear view into the camps.

Hitler’s atrocities are still remembered but not the atrocities of these MONSTERS.
uncommondreamer September 13th, 2007 6:38 pm

Granted that the West Bank is under Israeli occupation, and there is complete separation of the Palestinians from the Israelis, and for the sake of argument let us characterize it in Carter’s terms as Apartheid, and allow that the Palestinians are treated harshly. Is there any one who can answer this question: Since there are Palestinians living and voting in Israel as Israeli citizens (electing their own representatives to the Knesset), are they also victims of Apartheid? and in what Arab country are there any Israelis or Jews in government? I did not read Jimmy Carter’s book, and I wonder if he addresses these questions
dcbeltway September 13th, 2007 7:18 pm

Iran, a non-Arab country, has a Jewish man in parliament.
Israel recently pushed out an Arab, Asmi Bishara from its parliament, the Knesset.
——————————————————
A Moroccan Jewish woman, Maggie Cacoun, is to head the women’s list of the Al-Wast Al-Aghtama’i party in the upcoming parliamentary elections in Morocco.

Cacoun, who defines herself as a “nationalist Moroccan,” said that she does not want her religion to be the main issue in her candidacy.

The party’s secretary-general said that Cacoun’s candidacy was “an opening for Jews as a fundamental element among the elements of the Moroccan identity.”

Another Jew, Joseph Levy, is currently the party’s deputy secretary-general.

——————————————————–
see this article referencing Tunisian Jew in Tunisia’s parliament.
http://www.pjvoice.com/v27/27006tunisia.aspx
dlgreen50 September 13th, 2007 8:12 pm

Please see this interview with Jonathan Cook, or read his book “Blood and Religion,” or any of the numerous articles of his that have been posted at counterpunch.org, to be more informed on the “glass wall” between Jewish and Arab Israelis.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-973170929151170880&q=jonathan
Canaan September 13th, 2007 8:12 pm

Human Rights Watch says the following:

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/israel/schools/index.htm

“Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel make up nearly one-quarter of Israel’s schoolchildren. Yet Palestinian Arab children receive an education that is inferior in nearly every respect when compared to Jewish children. Educated in schools run by the Israeli government but separated from Jewish children, Palestinian Arab citizen’s schools are more crowded with fewer teachers per child, and in worse physical condition. Some schools lack libraries, counselors, and recreation facilities. Palestinian Arab school children get fewer enrichment and remedial programs, and special education services, than Jewish children receive. Many communities have no kindergartens for three and four-year-olds.
Palestinian Arabs experience discrimination at every level of the education system. As a result, they are three times as likely to drop out than Jewish children and rarely make it to university.
If that doesen’t sound like de facto apartheid then what is….
Gail September 13th, 2007 8:53 pm

“And there are powerful political forces in America that prevent any objective analysis of the problem in the Holy Land……I think it’s accurate to say that not a single member of Congress with whom I’m familiar would possibly speak out and call for Israel to withdraw to their legal boundaries or to publicize the plight of the Palestinians or even to call publicly and repeatedly for good faith peace talks.”

We all know how powerful AIPAC is in this country, President Carter! And anyone, Jew or otherwise, who criticizes Israeli policy toward Palestinians is placed very neatly into the Zionist’s anti-semetic pigeon-hole.
MaskedMan September 13th, 2007 8:54 pm

uncommondreamer,

Arab (Palestinian) Israelis while not suffering the dreadful conditions of Palestinians in the West Bank and especially Gaza are nonetheless an ill treated underprivileged minority. While a very imperfect analogy I suppose you could say that there are parallels between the 20th Century Civil Rights Movement in the US and the efforts by Arab Israelis for equality and fair treatment.

For the most part the whole issue gets very little international exposure and hence I suppose is seen a “domestic” issue. However the spectre of “transfer” is unfortunately something that hangs in the air as a persistent if not immediate threat, even in official circles it is not uncommon to seem formulations of “peace” plans that call for exchange of land and people, the latter specifically meaning the transfer of Arab Israelis to an Palestinian state. This seems unlikely, certainly Arab Israelis would vigorously resist, but the threat still exists nonetheless.

Here are a few links that can get you started if you’re interested in exploring:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/826530.html
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/dion_nissenbaum/story/15919.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
Mark Kienan September 13th, 2007 8:57 pm

An open, honest discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian war does not take place among american politicians or in the the american news media. It is censored.
I don’t believe this censorship helps the Israelis since it allows them to pursue policies which in the end are self destructive.
I don’t think the policies of apartheid which Israel pursues in order to annex land has brought security or a greater liklihood of long term survival for the Jewish state.
Israeli apartheid has radiculized the Palestinians. Israeli apartheid has made Israel despised around the world.
This is not anti semitism. This is the worlds intuitive dislike for a brutal bully.
Israel will only gain peace through justice.
BlackStacey September 14th, 2007 2:43 am

I feel awful. I am very apathetic to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. To be honest, I just dont care. I do care, however, about the amount of interest, money(tax dollar and military spending), and time that my government, and fellow countymen show on this subject. I don’t get it. But I want to get it. I want to understand. I want to care, but I don’t. I wonder if people in China care about what’s going on in Israel?
BugsBBunny III September 14th, 2007 4:28 am

Speak truth and it strengthens from being heard. When something is never mentioned it is rarely thought about. But speak what some would keep in silence and look out.

I like Jimmy. He should have had a second term. The truth is it’s own strength. Somethings are right and wrong no matter who does them or which side.

I hope that truth tellers like Carter and Amy, Finkelstein and Hilburg speak. The truth is what it is and always remains true even after people’s emotions are removed.

What isn’t discussed is nevertheless a major issue and needs be discussed swiftly. Israel has made the Gaza a punishment lockdown and the West Bank into bitter dregs rather than a new hope and identity as the country known as Palestine.

So shall we accept that we permit the use of collective punishment because extremists want to win at any cost? Not for either side would we see collective punishment of the majority innocent as morally right. How do you punish innocent people? Of what are they guilty?

Extremists know and don’t care. They’d rather these things never be discussed at all. Out of the news out of mind.

Who talks peace in Palestine?

At least Carter will ask the question.
Umlaut September 14th, 2007 6:30 am

“Sampson Option”

Beautiful!!! How much more evidence that Israel has gone from Holocaust survivors to wannabe perpetraitors (misspelling intentional)do we need?

Regarding Iran here’s an FYI.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3448022,00.html

Iranian state produced a show about an Iranian man with Jewish Women during the holocaust.

“A lecturer at Tehran University said anonymously that: “Ahmadinejad more than anything is a big fool. The fact that our regime generously backed the love story between a young Iranian and a Jewess, and the mention of Iran’s aid in helping Jews flee the gas chambers is aimed at showing that there is a different Iran.”

The real person with power in the country is the Ayatollah who also oversees state television that green lit this.

Ahmadinejad’s comments used as a rationale for war seem not to be near the truth of the state’s policy in the matter and just aggressive rationale propaganda against the state of Iran. At minimum not the whole essential truth.

‘The lecturer who followed the soap opera says the message is crystal clear: “Iran has no problems with the Jews or with the Jewish community living amongst it. Its problem is with the ‘little devil’ – the State of Israel and the Zionists.” ‘

Totally different picture of the general opinion in Iran to what we hear here, but very similar in regards to demonizing anyone who criticizes Zionist wrongdoings.
poncho September 14th, 2007 7:51 am

Black inner-city children receive an education that is inferior in nearly every respect when compared to white children. Educated in schools run by the American government but separated from white children, black inner-city citizen’s schools are more crowded with fewer teachers per child, and in worse physical condition. Some schools lack libraries, counselors, and recreation facilities. black inner-city school children get fewer enrichment and remedial programs, and special education services, than white children receive. Many communities have no kindergartens for three and four-year-olds.
Black inner-city youths experience discrimination at every level of the education system. As a result, they are three times as likely to drop out than white children and rarely make it to university.
If that doesen’t sound like de facto apartheid then what is….
1koolkat September 14th, 2007 8:15 am

It all boils down to all members of Congress first concern. That is being reelected. If the first concern were leadership, then perhaps we would get somewhere.
DuraMater September 14th, 2007 8:53 am

Well, poncho, the question then becomes, “What are you doing about it?”

Indeed, what are we all doing about it? Since you’ve identified the American inner city as being as bad as Palestine under Israel occupation and South African apartheid, what are we doing about it?

This is something where the grass roots could truly work its magic. Are we in the land of astroturf, though?
muddmike September 14th, 2007 10:30 am

HEY! Quit picking on Israel!

They have always allowed free debate about Arabs!

They constantly debate whether Arabs are AS evil as Hitler, or if they are MORE evil than Hitler!
dcbeltway September 14th, 2007 10:51 am

Palestine: Democracy not Zionism
A decent two-state solution to the ‘Palestinian problem’ has become impossible.
By John V. Whitbeck
from the September 14, 2007 edition

Jeddah, saudi arabia - With some sort of “meeting” or “conference” to kick start the peace process now being touted by the Bush administration, there is at least the appearance of an understanding in Washington of the importance for the region and the world of solving the “Palestinian problem.”

However, if this problem is ever to be solved, it must be redefined. Those who truly seek justice and peace in the Middle East must dare to speak openly and honestly of the “Zionism problem” – and then to draw the moral, ethical, and practical conclusions that follow.

When South Africa was under a racial-supremacist, settler-colonial regime, the world recognized that the problem was the ideology and political system of the state. Anyone outside the country who referred to the “black problem” or the “native problem” (or, for that matter, to the “white problem”) would instantly have been branded a racist.

The world also recognized that the solution to that problem could not be found either in “separation” (apartheid in Afrikaans) and scattered native reservations (called “independent states” by the South African regime and Bantustans by the rest of the world) or in driving the settler-colonial group in power into the sea. Rather, the solution had to be found – and to almost universal satisfaction was found – in democracy, in white South Africans growing out of their racial-supremacist ideology and political system and accepting that their interests and their children’s futures would be best served in a democratic, non-racist state with equal rights for all who live there.

The solution for the land which, until it was literally wiped off the map in 1948, was called Palestine is the same. It can only be democracy.

The ever-receding “political horizon” for a decent two-state solution, which, on the ground, becomes less practical with each passing year of expanding settlements, bypass roads, and walls, is weighed down by a multitude of excruciatingly difficult “final status” issues. Israeli governments have consistently refused to discuss these final-status issues seriously, preferring to postpone them to the end of a road which is never reached – and which, almost certainly, is intended never to be reached.

Just as marriage is vastly less complicated than divorce, democracy is vastly less complicated than partition. A democratic post-Zionist solution would not require any borders to be agreed, any division of Jerusalem, anyone to move from his current home, or any assets to be evaluated and apportioned. Full rights of citizenship would simply be extended to all the surviving natives still living in the country, as happened in the United States in the early 20th century and in South Africa in the late 20th century. The obstacle to such a simple – and morally unimpeachable – solution is, of course, intellectual and psychological. Traumatized by the Holocaust and perceived insecurity as a Jewish island in an Arab sea, Israelis have immense psychological problems in coming to grips with the practical impossibility of sustaining forever what most of mankind views as a racial-supremacist, settler-colonial regime founded upon the ethnic cleansing of an indigenous population.

Indeed, Israelis have placed themselves in a virtually impossible situation. To taste its bitter essence, Americans might try to imagine what life in their country would be like if the European settlers had not virtually exterminated the indigenous population and if almost half of today’s American population were Indians, without basic human rights, impoverished, smoldering with resentment, and visible every day as the inescapable living evidence of the injustice inflicted on their ancestors.

This would not be a pleasant society in which to live. Both colonizers and colonized would be progressively degraded and dehumanized. The colonizers could, rationally, conclude that they could never be forgiven by those they had dispossessed and that no “solution” was imaginable. So it has been, and continues to be, in the lands under Israeli rule.

Perhaps the coming “meeting” or “conference” will be the last gasp of the fruitless pursuit of a separation-based solution. Perhaps those who care about justice and peace and believe in democracy can then find ways to stimulate Israelis to move beyond Zionist ideology toward a more humane, hopeful, and democratic view of present realities and future possibilities.

No one would suggest that the moral, ethical, and intellectual transformation necessary to achieve a decent one-state solution will be easy. However, more and more people now recognize that a decent two-state solution has become impossible.

It is surely time for concerned people everywhere – and particularly for Americans – to imagine a better way, to encourage Israelis to imagine a better way, and to help both Israelis and Palestinians to achieve it. It is surely time to seriously consider democracy and to give it a chance.

John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel, is author of “The World According to Whitbeck.”
mirf59 September 14th, 2007 11:41 am

The Finkelstein thing turns my stomach. The message to professors across America is “cater to politics, not the Socratic tradition or to the search for knowledge.”

Incredible that Dershowitz is still doing his shtick, with a flair that is “beyond chutzpah,” including wanton lies and distortions and plagiarisms which are violations of the most fundamental rules of academic inquiry.

And, the man who called him on it, exactly in the true spirit of critical thinking, in the rational tradition that supposedly characterizes Western civilization — was fired.

The evidence of a fascistic authoritarianism in America continues to mount. The event that kicked this off was the Supreme Court choosing our President rather than the public in 2000.
dcbeltway September 14th, 2007 12:06 pm

Sorry want to add that the article I posted from John Whitbeck was published in today’s Christian Science Monitor in case any asks for the source.
bellthecat September 14th, 2007 1:36 pm

As the attacks on Jimmy Carter continue it is reasonable to conclude that anyone (even a Nobel Peace Prize winning ex prez) who dares to criticize Israel
will be smeared as antisemitic, and have his life threatened.

People in USA have no idea how much hatred and venom and death the Palestinians face daily by “the chosen
people.”

There is even some kind of memorial that the “settlers” have erected to honor the Jew who
massacred about 30 praying Muslims in their own mosque.
And they pay homage to him once a year on the date
of the massacre.

This situation is every bit as ugly as the troubles in
Ireland were, thank god the truth is beginning to emerge, despite all the corporate non news on the topic
robinea September 14th, 2007 2:35 pm

Greg Bacon, Your post made my day! It was a wonderful parody of the mass media’s campaign against Iran. We need more of this! ‘Nany Pelosi’s overdose on botox…’, even Ariel Sharon, the ‘big cabbage on life-support’ must have been chuckling in his tubes.
massud September 14th, 2007 6:44 pm

whatfools,

OBL saying something does not INCREASE its credibility LOL!
ben September 14th, 2007 7:21 pm

DEBATE ESSENTIAL TO ARAB-ISRAELI PEACE

Sadly, The majority of the commenters here aren’t interested in debate, and are not truely interested in arab-israeli peace. they are interested in taking any opportunity to lambast and demonize israel.

I acknowledge that much of the negative statements made about Israel are true - although some of them are not, I think its counterproductive to nit pick.

Maybe we can all agree that Israeli’s treatment of palestinians is bad, and we’d like to see the situation to improve.

You have to understand that Israel also has legitimate concerns, and only by addressing those concerns can we move out of this stalemate.

Israel’s concerns about the safety of its citizens from aggression is legitimate. There are parties interested in the elimination of all jewish people in israel, and the only thing ensuring that does not happen is Israels military being able to stop that from happening.

How can Israel go back to the 1967 borders and ensure the safety of its population? look at a map, its pretty much militarily indefensible

If it returns the land, will all islamist extremists stop sending rockets into israel? Will the palestinian government stop them? From the west bank, the majority of israels population would be vulnerable.

A nation will not commit suicide to make ‘peace’. Until we find ways to address these issues, there will be no peace.
gde September 14th, 2007 7:41 pm

Massud -

It seems that OBL says what he means, and means what he says. I agree he is no authority, but his grievances are legitimate. Do you believe people like Bush, Blair, and Olmert when they justify killing in large numbers? Why not OBL? Is it because the trio are known liars?

Muslims are primarily ticked off at Israel, the US, and the UK because we killed so many of them. To add insult to the injury, it was always about greed. If it was ideology, they would would have attacked before our killing them ratcheted up. If it was licentious lifestyle, they would have hit Amsterdam.
charles shaw September 14th, 2007 11:13 pm

to ‘Ben’, you write:

“How can Israel go back to the 1967 borders and ensure the safety of its population? look at a map, its pretty much militarily indefensible”

Would you justify a Palestinian military occupation of pre-1967 portions of Israel until Palestinians’ security concerns were eliminated? Law is meaningless unless universally applicable.

Causality is important: Israel is threatened and attacked BECAUSE of its occupation of Palestinian land. The occupation is not a deterrent to Palestinian violence, but the root cause of it. Therefore, the way to begin to limit violent attacks against Israel by Palestinians is to first end the illegal, oppressive and violent occupation. Would it have been legitimate for the Soviet Union to demand some progress towards its security concerns before it withdrew from Afghanistan? I think if they had made such demands the Soviet Union would still be in Afghanistan…
Gail September 14th, 2007 11:22 pm

ben September 14th, 2007 7:21 pm

“Sadly, The majority of the commenters here aren’t interested in debate, and are not truely interested in arab-israeli peace. they are interested in taking any opportunity to lambast and demonize israel.”

Really Ben? Are you another paranoid Jew who thinks everyone is against Jews?? If you are or not, this issue in not about Jews or Arabs, but about Israel and the way they have treated Palestine. Human beings live in Israel and Palestine and ALL should be treated with equal dignity.

“Maybe we can all agree that Israeli’s treatment of palestinians is bad, and we’d like to see the situation to improve.”

There’s no “maybe” about it, Ben; the treatment of Palestinians has been undignified in every respect. And yes, the situation must improve if the Middle East wants to see peace in that region.

“You have to understand that Israel also has legitimate concerns, and only by addressing those concerns can we move out of this stalemate.”

Yes, Israel does have legitimate concerns; but if Israel is not willing to address those concerns in “real” terms, in an effort to negotiate peace in the Middle East, as far as I’m concerned, Israel can fight its own f-king battles. The “so-called” Holy Land, should be available to anyone around the globe who wants to worship their God in that land regardless of what the scriptures tell us or what religion those worshipers belong to.

Show me evidence beyond “reasonable doubt” that the Holy Land belongs to Jews, Muslims or Christians, and I’ll eat my hat.

If there is a God, God’s land belongs to all his children!
milesofmusic September 15th, 2007 10:50 am

norman finklestein debates schlomo ben ami - the topic - the history of the palestinians:

http://www.democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml

read it - learn something
raanan September 18th, 2007 11:39 am

There’s a lot of difference between honest (and needed) criticism of Israeli policy, as done by Carter or Israeli historians like Benny Morris and Tom Segev, and thugs like Finkelstein and Ilian Pappe, who pathologically want to bash Israel at every opportunity and make it seem like the conflict is entirely one-sided and who, at bottom, reject their own Judaism.

Raanan G.

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)