我对以色列的看法是错误的。我道歉了。然后卡特总统给我上了一堂关于恩典的课
https://forward.com/opinion/539385/president-jimmy-carter-apology-israel/
卡特不欠我任何东西，但却让我感觉到我们所有人都有无条件的爱的能力
2011 年 9 月 14 日，前总统吉米·卡特在乔治亚州亚特兰大卡特中心接受“总统的守门人”项目采访。
前总统吉米·卡特于 2011 年 9 月 14 日在佐治亚州亚特兰大卡特中心接受“总统的守门人”项目采访。摄影：David Hume Kennerly/Getty Images
史蒂夫·伯曼史蒂夫·伯曼 2023 年 3 月 10 日
2015 年秋天，随着亚特兰大的树叶褪去温暖的金色光芒，我开始每年盘点我需要向谁道歉。快到犹太新年了，不知怎的，我的注意力转移到了卡特总统身上。
十年前，卡特中心联系我加入他们的理事会。卡特总统为非洲公共卫生和培育新生民主国家所做的工作深受感动。
然后在 2006 年，卡特出版了他现在著名的书《巴勒斯坦：和平而不是种族隔离》。我对这个标题以及许多读起来非常不舒服和令人不安的段落感到困扰。虽然我对以色列占领约旦河西岸越来越感到沮丧，但我对总统用他有争议的书搅动外交水域感到愤怒。
我带领15名理事会成员辞职。我对这次公开与总统决裂并不满意，但我觉得甚至我的中左派情感也被背叛了。我听了他的解释：他说，他并不是称以色列为种族隔离国家，而是警告说，以色列持续占领约旦河西岸，正在走向这种状况。当时，我并不相信。
但在接下来的几年里，我意识到他可能是对的。
有关的
奥皮尼奥尼在白宫为吉米·卡特工作。他应该作为犹太人的捍卫者被铭记
记住卡特总统为以色列和美国犹太人做出的积极改变
于是，我给他写了一封信。它谈到了节日，以及我个人的坦白。我写过关于如何用号角号来唤醒我们的精神的文章。我写道，最近，我开始将以色列对巴勒斯坦人的占领视为始于 1967 年的一次意外，但现在正在成为一项具有殖民意图的事业。
我没有抱任何期望地把信寄给卡特。一周后，当我收到总统的回信时，我感到很惊讶。
前总统吉米·卡特对作者来信的手写回复。信中写道：“史蒂夫：你没有理由道歉，但我接受你的精彩来信，因为你显然是这么想的。我同情并理解我许多朋友的感受，他们的反应和你一样。最美好的祝愿，吉米·卡特。附：卡特中心欢迎您回来。 JC”。由史蒂夫·伯曼提供
我与家人和几个朋友分享了这次交流，并将这封信归档，在过去的八年里它一直放在那里。当总统的家人宣布总统进入临终关怀中心时，我感到一阵悲伤。
在为时已晚之前，美国犹太人应该向吉米·卡特道歉，并感谢他为我们和世界所做的一切。
与以色列有着深厚的联系
我与以色列的关系始于 1965 年，当时我 10 岁。我的父母带着我们三个小男孩一家去海法度过这一年，而我的父亲则休假。那一年我在基布兹度过了暑假，参加了大学课程，最终和我的妻子在乡下又待了两年。
我们所有的孩子都与以色列建立了类似的关系。我们的一个女儿在那里生活了 15 年多，并在那里生下了我们的三个孙子。我的家人紧紧地沉浸在犹太复国主义的犹太人救赎梦想中。
我亲眼目睹火箭弹落在我孙子居住的城市特拉维夫，1973 年赎罪日战争爆发时我住在耶路撒冷。我在恐怖袭击中失去了朋友。在过去的 57 年里，我经历了以色列形象出现时的各种情绪：恐惧、愤怒、丧亲、沮丧、悲伤、兴奋、联系和疏远。
辞去卡特中心董事会职务后，我密切关注着以色列。在此期间，我至少去过该国20次。我开始意识到，犹太国家确实是把头埋在沙子里。以色列没有面对人口现实，并且正在迅速成为一个不可能既是民主国家又是犹太国家的国家。
在此期间，随着这个新兴国家加速引擎，以色列左翼似乎更多地被浓缩咖啡和股票期权所消耗，而不是和平。以色列右翼会不诚实地谈论《亚伯拉罕协议》以及与千里之外的国家的“和平协议”，而不是任何有意义的关注
试图解决发生在自家后院的占领事件。
理智的以色列人会提出异议，“这很复杂。”以色列右翼人士会宣称，“没有人可以交谈”。左边的人会说：“服务员，请再来一杯浓缩咖啡！”
与此同时，我一直在思考卡特的预测：如果领导层继续忽视国家的总体方向，种族隔离将成为以色列的未来。
我们最后一次机会
彼得·贝纳特最近写道：“吉米·卡特在死前值得道歉。”当我读到这本书时，我想到了总统在非洲大陆根除两种疾病的成功斗争、他对仁人家园的不懈推动以及他支持民主发展的运动，从而影响了数百万人的生命。
也许卡特最重要的成就是以色列和埃及之间的戴维营和平协议。这项和平条约已经持续了 44 年，挽救了以色列和埃及边境数千人的生命。它还节省了两国本应花费的数千亿美元的军事费用。
卡特总统在 2006 年警告所有人，我们都可以选择和平而不是种族隔离。一些人在以色列占领问题上做出了深思熟虑的选择；有些人茫然地走着，把自己的缺点归咎于对方。其他人仍然将此信息归咎于信使。
在回应我的道歉时，卡特写了一条简单而感人的信息：
“你没有理由道歉，但我接受你的精彩来信，因为你显然是这么想的。我同情并理解我许多朋友的感受，他们的反应和你一样。最美好的祝愿，吉米·卡特。”
我被他的谦逊所震撼和鼓舞。卡特不欠我任何东西，但却让我感觉到我们所有人都有无条件的爱的能力。
要联系作者，请发送电子邮件至opinion@forward.com。
巴勒斯坦：和平而非种族隔离
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/巴勒斯坦:_Peace_Not_Apartheid
美国第 39 任总统吉米·卡特写的书。它由 Simon & Schuster 于 2006 年 11 月出版。
在担任总统期间，卡特主持了以色列梅纳赫姆·贝京和埃及安瓦尔·萨达特之间的会谈，最终达成了埃以和平条约。
卡特在书中指出，以色列对定居点的持续控制和建设是中东全面和平协议的主要障碍。 [3]这种观点，加上标题短语“和平而非种族隔离”中使用的“种族隔离”一词，以及批评者所说的书中的错误和误述，引发了争议。卡特为他的书辩护，并反驳说，“在现实世界中……是非常积极的。”[4]
纪录片《来自平原的人》（Man from Plains，2007）描述了卡特为宣传他的书而进行的读书之旅。
目的、主要论点和要点
“最终目的”
我这本书的最终目的是介绍美国在很大程度上不为人所知的有关中东的事实，促进讨论并帮助重启和平谈判（现已缺席六年），从而为以色列及其邻国带来永久和平。另一个希望是，拥有相同目标的犹太人和其他美国人可能会被激励表达他们的观点，甚至公开表达他们的观点，也许是一致的。我很乐意为这项工作提供帮助。[4]
论文：如何实现“中东永久和平”
卡特指出了“中东永久和平的两个相互关联的障碍”：
[1] 一些以色列人认为他们有权没收巴勒斯坦土地并将其殖民化，并试图为持续征服和迫害日益绝望和愤怒的巴勒斯坦人辩护；和
[2] 一些巴勒斯坦人的反应是将自杀式炸弹袭击者视为烈士，在天堂得到奖励，并将杀害以色列人视为胜利。 [3]
为了结束他所说的“这场持续的悲剧”，卡特在第十七章（“摘要”）中呼吁根据以下三个“关键要求”重振和平进程：
A。以色列的安全必须得到保障......
b.必须解决以色列内部的争论，以确定以色列的永久合法边界......
C。所有中东国家的主权和国际边界的神圣性必须得到尊重......[3]
种族隔离的类比
关于在书名中使用“种族隔离”一词，卡特表示：
这不是以色列。这本书与以色列内部发生的事情无关，以色列是一个美妙的民主国家，你知道，每个人都保证平等权利，并且根据法律，作为以色列人的阿拉伯人和犹太人对以色列享有相同的特权。这是大部分争议的原因，因为人们认为这是关于以色列的。事实并非如此。[5]
我从未声称以色列境内根本存在种族隔离框架，而西岸的存在是基于试图夺取巴勒斯坦土地，而不是种族主义。所以这是一个非常明显的区别。[6]
卡特在广播中发表的讲话中声称，以色列的政策相当于种族隔离，比南非的政策还要糟糕：[7]
当以色列确实占领了西岸深处的这片领土，并用一条道路将大约 200 个定居点相互连接起来，然后禁止巴勒斯坦人使用这条道路，或者在许多情况下甚至禁止他们穿越马路时，这就是犯下的罪行。甚至比我们在南非看到的更糟糕的分离或种族隔离实例。 [7]
「一些要点」
卡特在 2006 年 12 月 20 日发表于《波士顿环球报》的专栏文章“重申和平的关键”中总结了“书中的一些要点”：
双方都发生了多起无辜平民死亡事件，这种暴力和一切恐怖主义必须停止, 39年来，以色列占领巴勒斯坦土地，没收并殖民了数百个精选地点，抗议的巴勒斯坦人经常被排除在他们以前的家园、土地和礼拜场所之外，受到严重的统治和压迫。以色列定居者和巴勒斯坦公民之间强制隔离，阿拉伯人需要复杂的通行证系统才能穿越以色列的多个检查站。
一堵巨大的围墙蜿蜒穿过西岸剩余的人口稠密地区，建在大片被推平的树木和阿拉伯家庭的财产上，显然是为了获得更多领土并保护已经建成的以色列殖民地。 （哈马斯于 2004 年 8 月宣布单方面停火，其候选人寻求地方和国家办事处，他们声称这是减少以色列公民伤亡的原因。）加上这堵墙，以色列对约旦河谷的控制将把巴勒斯坦人完全封闭在其缩小和分裂的领土内。加沙周围也有类似的屏障，只有两个开口，仍由以色列控制。人群
公民无法通过空中、海上或陆地自由进入外部世界
由于在今年的选举中42%的人投票支持哈马斯候选人，以色列和美国对巴勒斯坦人民实施经济限制，导致巴勒斯坦人民的生活必需品被剥夺。教师、护士、警察、消防员和其他雇员无法领取工资，联合国报告称，加沙的粮食供应相当于撒哈拉以南非洲最贫困家庭的粮食供应，其中一半家庭每天只吃一顿饭。
马哈茂德·阿巴斯先是担任总理，现在担任巴勒斯坦民族权力机构主席和巴解组织领导人，近六年来一直寻求与以色列进行谈判，但没有成功。哈马斯领导人支持此类谈判，并承诺如果巴勒斯坦公投获得批准，他们将接受谈判结果。
联合国决议、1978年《戴维营协议》、1993年《奥斯陆协议》、美国官方政策以及国际和平路线图都以以色列从被占领土撤军为前提。此外，巴勒斯坦人必须接受23个阿拉伯国家在2002年做出的同样承诺：承认以色列在其合法边界内和平生活的权利。这是和平的两个关键。
批评反应和评论
主条目：巴勒斯坦评论：和平而非种族隔离
《巴勒斯坦：和平而非种族隔离》出版时，批评者的反应褒贬不一。根据朱莉·博斯曼的说法，对这本书的批评“已经升级为全面的愤怒”，其中大部分集中在卡特在副标题中使用“种族隔离”一词。 [9]一些批评者，包括民主党和美国犹太组织的几位领导人，将副标题解释为对以色列种族隔离的指控，他们认为这是煽动性的且未经证实的。 [10][11][12] TIME.com 高级编辑、非国大前反种族隔离活动家托尼·卡伦 (Tony Karon) 表示：“吉米·卡特之所以必须写这本书，正是因为巴勒斯坦人的生活和历史在美国话语中没有得到同等重视，事实远非如此。”他对种族隔离这个词的使用不仅在道德上是有效的，而且是必要的，因为它动摇了道德上的麻木不仁，而这种麻木不仁使许多自由主义者能够合理化每天对约旦河西岸和加沙地带的巴勒斯坦人造成的恐怖”。 [13]前总统比尔·克林顿给美国犹太委员会主席写了一封简短的信，感谢他批评这本书的文章，并引用了他与丹尼斯·罗斯的观点一致，即试图“理清……”卡特关于克林顿自己的 2000 年夏令营的主张和结论。大卫和平提议。[14][15]
批评者声称卡特越过了反犹太主义的界限。反诽谤联盟全国主任亚伯拉罕·福克斯曼最初在书中指责卡特“从事反犹太主义”；福克斯曼后来告诉詹姆斯·特劳布，他不会称这位前总统本人为“反犹太主义者”或“偏执狂”。 [16][17]伊桑·布朗纳还断言，卡特在书中的“夸大其词”“根本算不上反犹太主义”。 [18]
一些记者和学者赞扬卡特在对以色列政策反对者怀有敌意的媒体环境中诚实地谈论了以色列-巴勒斯坦冲突。[19][20]约西·贝林（Yossi Beilin）和舒拉米特·阿洛尼（Shulamit Aloni）等一些左倾以色列政客认为，卡特对以色列巴勒斯坦领土政策的批评反映了许多以色列人自己的批评。 [21]
卡特对这本书的批评的回应
更多信息：巴勒斯坦评论：和平而非种族隔离§卡特对本书批评的回应
卡特在《洛杉矶时报》发表的一篇专栏文章中对主流新闻媒体的负面评论做出了回应（摘录于《卫报》和其他地方）：
主流媒体的书评大多是由犹太组织的代表撰写的，他们不太可能访问被占领土，他们的主要批评是这本书是反以色列的。两名国会议员公开批评。例如，即将上任的议长南希·佩洛西（Nancy Pelosi）在该书出版之前发表了一份声明，称“他在以色列问题上不代表民主党发言”。亚马逊网站上发布的一些评论称我为“反犹太主义”，其他人则指责这本书“谎言”和“歪曲”。卡特中心的一位前研究员对此提出了异议，艾伦·德肖维茨称这本书的标题“不雅”。
然而，在现实世界中，反响非常积极。我在 5 家商店签过书，每个商店都有 1,000 多名买家。我曾说过一句负面言论——我应该因叛国罪而受到审判——C-SPAN 上的一位来电者说我是一名反犹太分子。我最令人不安的经历是，我曾提出在犹太人入学率很高的大学校园免费演讲这本书，并回答学生和教授的问题，但遭到拒绝。我已经
我受到了著名犹太公民和国会议员的鼓励，他们私下感谢我介绍事实和一些新想法。[4][22]
他还写了一封“致美国犹太公民的信”，解释“他使用‘种族隔离’一词并同情害怕恐怖主义的以色列人。”[23]
在卡特的《致美国犹太公民的信》出版后美联社更新的一份报告中，格雷格·布鲁斯坦指出，卡特对丹尼斯·罗斯、艾伦·德肖维茨、肯尼思·斯坦、西蒙·维森塔尔对该书的错误和不准确之处的投诉进行了总体答复。中心等人指出，卡特中心的工作人员以及一位“未透露姓名的‘杰出’记者”对此进行了事实核查。[23][24]雷切尔·泽尔科维茨（Rachel Zelkowitz）指出，正如各种新闻报道所引用的那样，“
卡特一直在反对斯坦因和其他批评者，捍卫他的书的准确性”；在一份事先准备好的声明中，卡特的新闻秘书迪安娜·康吉利奥 (Deanna Congileo) 回应道，“卡特在整个写作过程中都对他的书进行了准确性审查”，并且“与卡特总统之前的所有书籍一样，任何检测到的错误都将在以后的版本中得到纠正……” ..”[25] 为了回应美联社要求对斯坦因和代表卡特和卡特中心发言的其他 14 名中心理事会成员的辞职发表评论，Congileo 提供了一份来自其执行官的声明据泽尔科维茨称，主任约翰·哈德曼“还对巴勒斯坦进行了事实核查，称该委员会的成员‘没有参与执行该中心的工作。’”[26]
I was wrong about Israel. I apologized. Then President Carter gave me a lesson in grace
https://forward.com/opinion/539385/president-jimmy-carter-apology-israel/
Carter owed me nothing, yet gave me a sense there is a capacity within us all for unconditional love
Former President Jimmy Carter interviewed for “The Presidents’ Gatekeepers” project at the Carter Center, Atlanta, Georgia, Sept. 14, 2011. Photo by David Hume Kennerly/Getty Images
Steve Berman March 10, 2023
In the fall of 2015, with the leaves in Atlanta fading to a warm golden glow, I started doing my annual inventory of who I needed to apologize to. It was nearly Rosh Hashanah, and somehow, my attention drifted to President Carter.
Ten years prior, the Carter Center reached out to me to join their Board of Councilors. I was deeply moved by the work President Carter was doing for public health in Africa and nurturing nascent democracies.
Then in 2006, Carter published his now-famous book Palestine: Peace not Apartheid. I was troubled by the title, and by numerous passages that were very uncomfortable and disturbing to read. While I was increasingly frustrated by Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, I was angry that the president had roiled the diplomatic waters with his controversial book.
I led 15 members of the Board of Councilors to resign. I was not happy about this public break from the president, but I felt that even my left-of-center sensibilities had been betrayed. I listened to his explanations: He wasn’t calling Israel an apartheid state, he said, but warning that Israel was moving toward this state of affairs by its ongoing occupation of the West Bank. At the time, I wasn’t convinced.
But in the intervening years, I realized that he was likely right.
And so, I penned a letter to him. It spoke of the High Holidays, and my own personal admissions. I wrote about how the shofar was sounded as a means of awakening our spirits. I wrote that, as of late, I had started to view Israel’s occupation of the Palestinians as something that started in 1967 as an accident but was now becoming an enterprise with colonial intentions.
I sent my letter to Carter with no expectations. I was surprised when, a week later, I received a note from the president in reply.
Former President Jimmy Carter’s handwritten response to the author’s letter. It reads: “Steve: You have no reason to apologize, but I accept your wonderful letter as you obviously intend it. I sympathize & understand the feelings of my many friends, who reacted as you did. Best wishes, Jimmy Carter. P.S. You would be welcome back at the Carter Center. JC.” Courtesy of Steve Berman
I shared the exchange with my family and a few friends, and filed the letter away, where it sat for the past eight years. When the president’s family announced that the president had entered hospice care, I felt a sadness that accompanies such news.
Before it is too late, American Jews should apologize to Jimmy Carter, and thank him for everything he has done for us and the world.
Deep ties to Israel
My relationship with Israel started in 1965, when I was 10 years old. My parents took our family of three young boys to Haifa to spend the year while my father took a sabbatical leave. That year led to summers on a kibbutz, university year programs, and eventually two more years in the country with my wife.
All of our children created similar relationships with Israel. One daughter lived there for over 15 years and gave birth to three of our grandchildren there. My family is wound up very tightly in the Zionist dream of Jewish redemption.
I have seen rockets fall on my grandchildren’s city of Tel Aviv, and I was living in Jerusalem in 1973 when the Yom Kippur War took place. I have lost friends in terror attacks. In the last 57 years, I have experienced the entire range of emotions when the image of Israel is conjured: fear, anger, bereavement, frustration, sadness, exhilaration, connectedness and alienation.
I watched Israel closely after my resignation from the board of the Carter Center. During that period, I traveled to the country at least 20 times. I came to realize that the Jewish state was indeed burying its head in the sand. Israel was not facing the demographic realities, and was fast becoming a state that could not be both democratic and Jewish.
During this time, as the start-up nation revved its engines, the Israeli left seemed more consumed by espressos and stock options than with peace. The Israeli right would disingenuously speak about Abraham Accords and “peace deals” with nations thousands of miles away instead of any meaningful attempts to address the occupation taking place in its own backyard.
The reasonable Israelis would demur, “It’s complicated.” The right-wing Israelis would proclaim, “there is nobody to talk to.” And the left would say, “Waiter, another espresso please!”
In the meantime, I kept thinking about Carter’s prediction that apartheid was in Israel’s future if leadership kept ignoring the general direction of the country.
Our last chance for teshuvah
Peter Beinart wrote recently that “Jimmy Carter Deserves an Apology Before He Dies.” As I read it, I thought of the millions of lives the president affected through his successful battle to eradicate two diseases on the African continent, his tireless promotion of Habitat For Humanity and his campaign to support the growth of democracy.
Perhaps Carter’s most important achievement was the Camp David Peace Accord between Israel and Egypt. This peace treaty has endured for 44 years, and spared thousands of lives on the Israeli-Egyptian border. It also saved hundreds of billions of dollars in military costs that the two countries would have needlessly spent.
President Carter warned everyone in 2006 that we all had the choice of Peace Not Apartheid. Some have made deliberate choices on the matter of Israeli occupation; some have walked in a stupor, blaming the other for their shortcomings. Others still blame the messenger for the message.
In his response to my apology, Carter wrote a simple and touching message:
“You have no reason to apologize, but I accept your wonderful letter as you obviously intend it. I sympathize and understand the feelings of my many friends, who reacted as you did. Best wishes, Jimmy Carter.”
I was shaken and inspired by his humility. Carter owed me nothing, yet gave me a sense there is a capacity within us all for unconditional love.
To contact the author, email opinion@forward.com.
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine:_Peace_Not_Apartheid
A book written by 39th President of the United States Jimmy Carter. It was published by Simon & Schuster in November 2006.
During his presidency, Carter hosted talks between Menachem Begin of Israel and Anwar Sadat of Egypt that led to the Egypt–Israel peace treaty.
In this book Carter argues that Israel's continued control and construction of settlements have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Middle East.[3] That perspective, coupled with the use of the word Apartheid in the titular phrase Peace Not Apartheid, and what critics said were errors and misstatements in the book, sparked controversy. Carter has defended his book and countered that response to it "in the real world…has been overwhelmingly positive."[4]
The documentary Man from Plains (2007) depicts the book tour Carter undertook to promote his book.
Purpose, main argument, and major points
"The ultimate purpose"
The ultimate purpose of my book is to present facts about the Middle East that are largely unknown in America, to precipitate discussion and to help restart peace talks (now absent for six years) that can lead to permanent peace for Israel and its neighbors. Another hope is that Jews and other Americans who share this same goal might be motivated to express their views, even publicly, and perhaps in concert. I would be glad to help with that effort.[4]
Thesis: How to achieve "permanent peace in the Middle East"
Carter identifies "two interrelated obstacles to permanent peace in the Middle East":
[1] Some Israelis believe they have the right to confiscate and colonize Palestinian land and try to justify the sustained subjugation and persecution of increasingly hopeless and aggravated Palestinians; and
[2] Some Palestinians react by honoring suicide bombers as martyrs to be rewarded in heaven and consider the killing of Israelis as victories.[3]
To bring an end to what he calls "this continuing tragedy", in Chapter 17 ("Summary"), Carter calls for a revitalization of the peace process based on the following three "key requirements":
a. The security of Israel must be guaranteed ...
b. The internal debate within Israel must be resolved in order to define Israel's permanent legal boundary ...
c. The sovereignty of all Middle East nations and sanctity of international borders must be honored ...[3]
The Apartheid analogy
Regarding the use of the word "Apartheid" in the title of his book, Carter has said:
It's not Israel. The book has nothing to do with what's going on inside Israel which is a wonderful democracy, you know, where everyone has guaranteed equal rights and where, under the law, Arabs and Jews who are Israelis have the same privileges about Israel. That's been most of the controversy because people assume it's about Israel. It's not.[5]
I've never alleged that the framework of apartheid existed within Israel at all, and that what does exist in the West Bank is based on trying to take Palestinian land and not on racism. So it was a very clear distinction.[6]
In remarks broadcast over radio, Carter claimed that Israel's policies amounted to an apartheid worse than South Africa's:[7]
When Israel does occupy this territory deep within the West Bank, and connects the 200-or-so settlements with each other, with a road, and then prohibits the Palestinians from using that road, or in many cases even crossing the road, this perpetrates even worse instances of apartness, or apartheid, than we witnessed even in South Africa.[7]
"Some major points"
In his op-ed "Reiterating the Keys to Peace", published in The Boston Globe on 20 December 2006, Carter summarizes "[s]ome major points in the book":
Multiple deaths of innocent civilians have occurred on both sides, and this violence and all terrorism must cease
For 39 years, Israel has occupied Palestinian land, and has confiscated and colonized hundreds of choice sites
Often excluded from their former homes, land, and places of worship, protesting Palestinians have been severely dominated and oppressed. There is forced segregation between Israeli settlers and Palestine's citizens, with a complex pass system required for Arabs to traverse Israel's multiple checkpoints
An enormous wall snakes through populated areas of what is left of the West Bank, constructed on wide swaths of bulldozed trees and property of Arab families, obviously designed to acquire more territory and to protect the Israeli colonies already built. (Hamas declared a unilateral cease-fire in August 2004 as its candidates sought local and then national offices, which they claim is the reason for reductions in casualties to Israeli citizens.)
Combined with this wall, Israeli control of the Jordan River Valley will completely enclose Palestinians in their shrunken and divided territory. Gaza is surrounded by a similar barrier with only two openings, still controlled by Israel. The crowded citizens have no free access to the outside world by air, sea, or land
The Palestinian people are now being deprived of the necessities of life by economic restrictions imposed on them by Israel and the United States because 42 percent voted for Hamas candidates in this year's election. Teachers, nurses, policemen, firemen and other employees cannot be paid, and the UN has reported food supplies in Gaza equivalent to those among the poorest families in sub-Sahara Africa, with half the families surviving on one meal a day
Mahmoud Abbas, first as prime minister and now as president of the Palestinian National Authority and leader of the PLO, has sought to negotiate with Israel for almost six years, without success. Hamas leaders support such negotiations, promising to accept the results if approved by a Palestinian referendum
UN Resolutions, the Camp David Accords of 1978, the Oslo Agreement of 1993, official US Policy, and the International Roadmap for Peace are all based on the premise that Israel withdraw from occupied territories. Also, Palestinians must accept the same commitment made by the 23 Arab nations in 2002: to recognize Israel's right to live in peace within its legal borders. These are the two keys to peace[8]
Critical reaction and commentary
Main article: Commentary on Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
Critical response to Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid at the time of release was mixed. According to Julie Bosman, criticism of the book "has escalated to a full-scale furor," much of which has focused on Carter's use of the word "apartheid" in the subtitle.[9] Some critics, including several leaders of the Democratic Party and of American Jewish organizations, have interpreted the subtitle as an allegation of Israeli apartheid, which they believe to be inflammatory and unsubstantiated.[10][11][12] Tony Karon, Senior Editor at TIME.com and a former anti-Apartheid activist for the ANC, said: "Jimmy Carter had to write this book precisely because Palestinian life and history is not accorded equal value in American discourse, far from it. And his use of the word apartheid is not only morally valid; it is essential, because it shakes the moral stupor that allows many liberals to rationalize away the daily, grinding horror being inflicted on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza".[13] Former President Bill Clinton wrote a brief letter to the chairman of the American Jewish Committee, thanking him for articles criticizing the book and citing his agreement with Dennis Ross's attempts to "straighten ... out" Carter's claims and conclusions about Clinton's own summer 2000 Camp David peace proposal.[14][15]
Critics claim that Carter crossed the line into anti-Semitism. Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, initially accused Carter of "engaging in anti-Semitism" in the book; Foxman told James Traub later that he would not call the former president himself an "anti-Semite" or a "bigot".[16][17] Ethan Bronner also asserted that Carter's "overstatement" in the book "hardly adds up to anti-Semitism."[18]
Some journalists and academics have praised Carter for what they believe to be speaking honestly about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in a media environment described as hostile to opponents of Israel's policies.[19][20] Some left-leaning Israeli politicians such as Yossi Beilin and Shulamit Aloni argued that Carter's critique of Israeli policy in the Palestinian territories reflects that of many Israelis themselves.[21]
Carter's response to criticism of the book
Further information: Commentary on Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid § Carter's response to criticism of the book
Carter has responded to negative reviews in the mainstream news media in an op-ed published in the Los Angeles Times (which was excerpted in The Guardian and elsewhere):
Book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories, and their primary criticism is that the book is anti-Israel. Two members of Congress have been publicly critical. Incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi for instance, issued a statement (before the book was published) saying that "he does not speak for the Democratic Party on Israel." Some reviews posted on Amazon.com call me "anti-Semitic", and others accuse the book of "lies" and "distortions". A former Carter Center fellow has taken issue with it, and Alan Dershowitz called the book's title "indecent."
Out in the real world, however, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. I've signed books in five stores, with more than 1,000 buyers at each site. I've had one negative remark—that I should be tried for treason—and one caller on C-SPAN said that I was an anti-Semite. My most troubling experience has been the rejection of my offers to speak, for free, about the book on university campuses with high Jewish enrollment and to answer questions from students and professors. I have been most encouraged by prominent Jewish citizens and members of Congress who have thanked me privately for presenting the facts and some new ideas.[4][22]
He also wrote a "Letter to Jewish Citizens of America" explaining "his use of the term 'apartheid' and sympathizing with Israelis who fear terrorism."[23]
In a report updated by the Associated Press after the publication of Carter's "Letter to Jewish Citizens of America", Greg Bluestein observes that Carter replied generally to complaints of the book's errors and inaccuracies by Dennis Ross, Alan Dershowitz, Kenneth Stein, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and others by pointing out that the Carter Center staff as well as an "unnamed 'distinguished' reporter" fact-checked it.[23][24] Rachel Zelkowitz points out that, as cited in various news accounts, "Carter has consistently defended his book's accuracy against Stein and other critics"; in a prepared statement, Carter's press secretary Deanna Congileo responds "that Carter had his book reviewed for accuracy throughout the writing process" and that "[a]s with all of President Carter's previous books, any detected errors will be corrected in later editions ..."[25] In response to the Associated Press's request for a comment on the resignations of Stein and 14 other members of the Center's Board of Councilors, speaking on behalf of both Carter and the Carter Center, Congileo provided a statement from its executive director, John Hardman, who, according to Zelkowitz, "also fact checked Palestine, saying that the members of that board 'are not engaged in implementing the work of the Center.'"[26]
