Showing posts with label Carter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carter. Show all posts
Monday, February 22, 2010
Carter on Carter
Jimmy Carter and his former National Security Advisor to W.R Mead's smug and derisory essay on the risk that Obama might follow the path of Carter. Mead is a prolific, if facile historian based at the Council on Foreign Relations. You will want to read his chastened response to Carter.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Who is helping Hamas?
U.S. politicians are running from former President Jimmy Carter as though he was typhoid Mary. However, given the predicitable failure of the U.S. and Israel to successfully marginalize Hamas, not to mention the failure of the Olmert-Abbas negotiations, you can argue that George Bush has done a pretty good job helping Hamas himself.
As for Carter, he deserves credit for his political courage, which is not a quality that Mr. Bush has exemplified in his effort to achieve his oft-declared two-state solution. Many disagree of course, but what's new about that? Matthew Levitt argues that Carter is Legitimizing Hamas by meeting with it, and that no good will come of his meeting with Khalid Mashal. Not be outdone, Israel's UN Ambassador Dan Gillerman calls Jimmy Carter a bigot:
"He said it was "a shame" to see Carter, who had done "good things" as a former president, "turn into what I believe to be a bigot.""
In contrast, Haaretz, the independent Israeli paper, recalls Israel's debt to Carter, and notes that Carter's detractors have usually been a loss to provide alternative routes to peace.
As for Carter, he deserves credit for his political courage, which is not a quality that Mr. Bush has exemplified in his effort to achieve his oft-declared two-state solution. Many disagree of course, but what's new about that? Matthew Levitt argues that Carter is Legitimizing Hamas by meeting with it, and that no good will come of his meeting with Khalid Mashal. Not be outdone, Israel's UN Ambassador Dan Gillerman calls Jimmy Carter a bigot:
"He said it was "a shame" to see Carter, who had done "good things" as a former president, "turn into what I believe to be a bigot.""
In contrast, Haaretz, the independent Israeli paper, recalls Israel's debt to Carter, and notes that Carter's detractors have usually been a loss to provide alternative routes to peace.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Stifling dissent in Atlanta: the Carter book
The writer, a journalist, editorializes that we should listen to 14 people who resigned from the board of the Carter Center and adopt their perspective and his, namely not a "word" of criticism of Israel. Doesn't that make Israel a rather unique human institution? What other political entity can you name that is beyond reproach and that should be supported reflexively? This is the rhetorical tactic now being adopted by people like Mr. Wooten who suggest that when it comes to Israel here should be no public debate or dissent. Mr. Wooten and the 7% of the board that resigned from the board of the Carter Center presume that the issues are black and white, but that is little more than self-satisfying boilerplate.
OUR OPINION: Carter aside, Israel deserves total support ajc.com: "For my part, there can be no 'balance' in U.S. policy in the region. Retreating from Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel did something this country would never have done, sending 25,000 soldiers to haul 8,500 of its citizens from their abodes, sacrificing their homes and land to the prospect of peace. What did they get in return? A rain of missiles.
With that example, with Hezbollah and Hamas, and a frighteningly dangerous leader in Iran who is no more than five years away from nuclear weaponry —- sworn enemies all —- you'll not find a word here that undermines support in this country for Israel. That was surely not Carter's intentions, but I fear it will be a consequence.
We have one permanent friend in the region and that is Israel.
When longtime Carter supporters speak out, as Stein and Konner and board members who resigned last week did, the rest of us should listen."
After you read the cited editorial, take a look at Carter's OPED in the WaPo, and draw your own conclusions.
OUR OPINION: Carter aside, Israel deserves total support ajc.com: "For my part, there can be no 'balance' in U.S. policy in the region. Retreating from Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel did something this country would never have done, sending 25,000 soldiers to haul 8,500 of its citizens from their abodes, sacrificing their homes and land to the prospect of peace. What did they get in return? A rain of missiles.
With that example, with Hezbollah and Hamas, and a frighteningly dangerous leader in Iran who is no more than five years away from nuclear weaponry —- sworn enemies all —- you'll not find a word here that undermines support in this country for Israel. That was surely not Carter's intentions, but I fear it will be a consequence.
We have one permanent friend in the region and that is Israel.
When longtime Carter supporters speak out, as Stein and Konner and board members who resigned last week did, the rest of us should listen."
After you read the cited editorial, take a look at Carter's OPED in the WaPo, and draw your own conclusions.
Friday, January 12, 2007
Carter faces revolt over book on Middle East | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
There is a bit of exaggeration in this story. 14 out of 200 board members have resigned. I hardly think that qualifies as a "revolt."Carter faces revolt over book on Middle East Special reports Guardian Unlimited. Compare this headline in the WaPo.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)