Palestine Peace Not Apartheid

For most Americans, this book will be one of the following: 1) a disappointment because it's not pro-Israel, 2) a good thing because it's not automatically pro-Israel, or 3) a surprise because it's different from accepted American conventional wisdom. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid by Jimmy Carter is a worthwhile read, especially for Americans who are largely ignorant (by design) of the plight of the Palestinians. Except for the USA and Israel, just about every country in the world has some compassion for these displaced people. The truth is, Israel is not completely benevolent and has made (and is making) some atrocious mistakes, especially with regard to its treatment of the previous inhabitants of the land that is now called Israel. This book gives a decent overview and is a good introduction to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but further reading is encouraged if this subject really interests you. Note that this book is a mostly balanced account of the conflict - it's not pro-Israel (nor is it anti-Israel) - and so many Americans are making the standard accusations: it's anti-Semitic; Palestinians don't, and never have, existed; all Muslims/Arabs are terrorists and cannot be trusted; Palestinians have had their chance and passed; and so on. The same accusations are dusted off and re-released every time someone is even remotely critical of or questions Israel and/or its policies. Do yourself a favor and learn another side to the story.

Apartheid: the second definition in my online dictionary is "segregation in other contexts [other than racial] : sexual apartheid." There is no doubt that the word apartheid can be and is correctly used as a segregation between Israelis and Palestinians within the Palestiniean territory (land occuppied and inhabited by Israel) as defined by the United Nations. This apartheid is formally established by a physical wall extending into Palestinian Territory. President Carter is not talking about apartheid within the recognized (UN defined) territory of Israel but rather the apartheid that Israel has established by dividing Palestinian territory (UN defined) which he describes as Palestine into land for Israelis and land for Palestinians divided by a wall of apartheid based on a distiction between Israelis (in settlements)/Palestinians. When discussing language and semantics, one should be objective and actually acknowledge the definition as used by the author rather than interpret a word in a way other than as the author used it. Please read this important book understanding what is actually meant by President Carter rather than the unfair and inaccurate description by those other than the author. (I will add that I spent over 20 years working in fields directly related to the interpretation of language and semantics in the development of international standards within the ISO. However, I've never learned to spell nor use proper sentence construction so please excuse any errors in these areas. Thanks.) READ THIS BOOK! Without addressing this aparheid as described by President Carter, there cannot be peace in the Middle East. U.S. Citezens need to discuss this issue because the discussion has not yet taken place and President Carter is asking us to have this discussion now.

[...] The constant attempts to denigrate Carter's Presidency (as though the long lines at that shrine to American privilege, the gas pump, and our foreign presence preceding the Iranian hostage crisis were of the President's making and, moreover, of greater consequence than the Iraq debacle) are belied once again by this uncommon man's common sense and clarity of vision, which is mirrored by the measured lucidity of his prose. Someone had to write this book, and better it be Carter, with his personal, and largely effective, negotiations with the principal players in the desperate power struggles of the middle East, than anyone else. Carter's staunch opposition to the invasion of Iraq is a matter he no longer talked about once the "mission" became reality. His efforts are directed toward future solutions, not righteous reminders of the past or self-justifications, lest he risk mirroring the very narrow, self-serving interests he seeks to confront and redress through proposals based on negotiated peace, mutual respect, shared rights and, above all, on genuine human and religious (including Judeo-Christian) values. The negative reactions to the book, I'm afraid, prove its importance. Many Americans remained "passively" approving of the Iraq war--despite not just its blatant imperialist aggressiveness but its sheer irrationality and absurdity--because of the perception that somehow America's "holy war," with its pageantry of "shock and awe," was in the interests of Israel. Although Carter's warnings, criticisms, and prescriptions in "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid" require as much of the Palestinians as the Israelis, the criticisms he has received come from narrow, defensive Americans who are incapable of rising to anything resembling an impartial, broad-based understanding of the "human community"--of the "family of man," as it was once called. This is not a particularly hard-hitting account (its author is, after all, an ingenuous man of peace and good will). So the mean-spirited "hits" the book has been taking should in themselves be seen as a wake-up call--not just to Israelis and Palestinians but to Americans of every religion, ethnicity, class, and political stripe. If we "can't get along together," and if we can't model for the world a tradition-blind, color-blind melting pot instead of viewing that metallic vessel as a grenade, we can hardly pretend to be surprised the next time it blows up in our faces.

Even though I never doubted the great moral values of this great American figure, I am truly amazed that a former president would write such a true and direct book criticizing "America's Favorite Ally"... yet, how many other former presidents are working as part time construction workers to help homeless and poor people. An exceptional human being has spoken on one of the most complicated and critical issues of modern times. It is equally amazing to me that some people still think of Israel as a democracy and in no way similar to the now defunct Apartheid regime of South Africa... one reader comments that Israel has 20% Arabs; hmmm! wasn't that % much higher a couple of decades ago... aren't Arabs there treated as 2nd class citizens such as being restricted from high office, etc... wouldn't the Israeli government kick them out tomorrow if they could do it without a universal outcry? The answers to all the above are obvious... but even more importantly, the key attribute of an Apartheid regime is this inherent assumption that one group of people is entitled to more benefits, one group is superior to the other and that a society would be more harmonious if homogenous... and that's the concept of Israel as designed by the Zionist movement... It is about time that some respected voices would address the issue of Palestime and Israel without fear of lobbies or electoral losses. It is America's biggest problem. It is America's biggest obstacle from being the true super power it is entitled and equipped to be. It is America's barrier to universal credibility and moral high standard. We need to push for a final and fair resolution to this problem and scream at the Palestinians when they kill innocent Israeli civilians but also and even more urgently (given our historic neglect) tell the Israelis that racist, inhumane policies such as the wall of shame, random killings (followed by pathetic excuses), mass starvations are no longer tolerated. It is about time for the US to assert itself and stop this madness.