Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid [Hardcover]

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid at San Francisco airport, and zipped through it in a day. It's a good, strong read by the only American president approaching sainthood. Carter lists the outrageous treatment meted out to the Palestinians, the Israeli occupation, the dispossession of Palestinian land by Israel, the brutality visited upon this denuded, subject population, and what he calls "a system of apartheid, with two peoples occupying the same land but completely separated from each other, with Israelis totally dominant and suppressing violence by depriving Palestinians of their basic human rights".

Carter quotes an Israeli as saying he is "afraid that we are moving towards a government like that of South Africa, with a dual society of Jewish rulers and Arabs subjects with few rights of citizenship...". A proposed but unacceptable modification of this choice, Carter adds, "is the taking of substantial portions of the occupied territory, with the remaining Palestinians completely surrounded by walls, fences, and Israeli checkpoints, living as prisoners within the small portion of land left to them".

Needless to say, the American press and television largely ignored the appearance of this eminently sensible book - until the usual Israeli lobbyists began to scream abuse at poor old Jimmy Carter, albeit that he was the architect of the longest lasting peace treaty between Israel and an Arab neighbour - Egypt - secured with the famous 1978 Camp David accords. The New York Times ("All the News That's Fit to Print", ho! ho!) then felt free to tell its readers that Carter had stirred "furore among Jews" with his use of the word "apartheid". The ex-president replied by mildly (and rightly) pointing out that Israeli lobbyists had produced among US editorial boards a "reluctance to criticise the Israeli government".

Typical of the dirt thrown at Carter was the comment by Michael Kinsley in The New York Times (of course) that Carter "is comparing Israel to the former white racist government of South Africa". This was followed by a vicious statement from Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, who said that the reason Carter gave for writing this book "is this shameless, shameful canard that the Jews control the debate in this country, especially when it comes to the media. What makes this serious is that he's not just another pundit, and he's not just another analyst. He is a former president of the United States".

But well, yes, that's the point, isn't it? This is no tract by a Harvard professor on the power of the lobby. It's an honourable, honest account by a friend of Israel as well as the Arabs who just happens to be a fine American ex-statesman. Which is why Carter's book is now a best-seller - and applause here, by the way, for the great American public that bought the book instead of believing Mr Foxman.

But in this context, why, I wonder, didn't The New York Times and the other gutless mainstream newspapers in the United States mention Israel's cosy relationship with that very racist apartheid regime in South Africa which Carter is not supposed to mention in his book? Didn't Israel have a wealthy diamond trade with sanctioned, racist South Africa? Didn't Israel have a fruitful and deep military relationship with that racist regime? Am I dreaming, looking-glass-like, when I recall that in April of 1976, Prime Minister John Vorster of South Africa - one of the architects of this vile Nazi-like system of apartheid - paid a state visit to Israel and was honoured with an official reception from Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin, war hero Moshe Dayan and future Nobel prize-winner Yitzhak Rabin? This of course, certainly did not become part of the great American debate on Carter's book.

The 39th President of the United States has written an even-handed and objective survey of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

He claims that the USA has a vital role to play: "Strong support for peace talks must come from the United States" but, as he admits, "The United States stands almost alone in its undeviating backing of Israel." With this bias for Israel and against Palestine, the US state cannot be an honest broker, nor can its allies, like Blair and the EU.

Israel's settlements and occupation are illegal under international law, under Security Council Resolutions supported by both Israel and the USA, for example Resolution 242, which requires Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories. Israel's Supreme Court acknowledges that Israel holds the West Bank `in belligerent occupation'.

The Palestinians now recognise Israel's right to exist in its 1967 borders. Carter notes, "there was a sustained commitment by Israel's government to avoid full compliance with the Oslo Agreement or with key U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338." As he notes, after making various agreements at the 1998 Wye Conference, "the Israeli cabinet voted to postpone execution of the Wye River Memorandum." Israel still rejects the Oslo Agreement's key provisions and it refuses to recognise the Palestinian National Authority.

After the Taba talks of January 2001, Carter writes, "It was later claimed that the Palestinians rejected a `generous offer' put forward by Prime Minister Barak with Israel keeping only 5 percent of the West Bank. The fact is that no such offers were ever made." The Palestinians accept the Road Map, while Israel rejects it. As Carter sums up, "In order to achieve its goals, Israel has decided to avoid any peace negotiations."

Carter told the Israeli Knesset in 1979, "The people support a settlement. Political leaders are the obstacle to peace." A consistent majority of Israelis back withdrawing from Palestinian territory; similarly a consistent majority of Palestinians back a two-state peace agreement with Israel. 62% of Israelis favour direct talks with Hamas.

Carter writes, "The overriding problem is that, for more than a quarter century, the actions of some Israeli leaders have been in direct conflict with the official policies of the United States, the international community, and their own negotiated agreements. ... Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive agreement in the Holy Land. ... Two other interrelated factors have contributed to the perpetuation of violence and regional upheaval; the condoning of illegal Israeli actions from a submissive White House and U.S. Congress during recent years, and the deference with which other international leaders permit this unofficial U.S policy in the Middle East to prevail."

The US state has abandoned the peace process. Carter concludes, "The United States is squandering international prestige and goodwill and intensifying global anti-American terrorism by unofficially condoning or abetting the Israeli confiscation and colonization of Palestinian territories. It will be a tragedy - for the Israelis, the Palestinians, and the world - if peace is rejected and a system of oppression, apartheid, and sustained violence is permitted to prevail."

I've read many books on the Palestine - Israel problem, and this is the best. Very readable, very informative, and gaining authority(and interest)from the honesty and personal experiences of the author. This is a brave book for a prominent American to write, for it's guarenteed to receive criticism from all those in the USA for whom Israel can do no wrong. The book is not an anti-Israeli or anti-Jewish tract, and fully upholds Israel's right to live securely within internationally accepted borders - it's a sane and balanced presentation of the facts, covering the formation of Israel, the wars, the various peace efforts, the futility and tragedy of Palestinian violence, and the reality of an Israeli (and often American) policy which makes long-term peace impossible. The illegal land-grab, control of vital resources such as water, deliberate sabotage of peace efforts, refusal to abide by U.N. resolutions, daily humiliation heaped upon Palestinian civilians, and devastating effects of the Wall, are all carefully documented, and of course this must annoy those who support Israeli policy no matter what that country does. He shows conclusively (pp. 150-152) that the idea that Arafat rejected a great peace offer from Clinton and Barak is simply an oft-repeated lie, and the few pages (116-127) dealing with Palestinian civilian suffering is the best summary I've come across. He doesn't overplay the title's "apartheid" reference, and makes it clear that this separate development is motivated by land rather than race, but when he points out how " a Jewish family can commute from Jerusalem to their highly subsidised home deep in the West Bank on roads from which others are excluded, without ever coming into contact with any facet of Arab life" I think he makes the point. This book deserves the highest praise. If you're interested in the Middle East, buy it ! And get your friends to read it.