News

‘NYT’ stamps Jimmy Carter ‘radioactive’ and not ‘a force for good’

Jimmy Carter
Jimmy Carter

On April 2, The New York Times published a piece by Washington correspondent Sheryl Gay Stolberg titled, “Carters Return to Capital, Onstage” spotlighting a play about Jimmy Carter’s peace talks: “Camp David” (“They had 13 days to achieve the impossible. Peace”). Carter cooperated in the Arena Stage production, even giving a private diary to the writer Lawrence Wright.

The following paragraphs are the Times at its absolute worst on this subject. Worship of mainstream Washington, allowing courtiers to define the parameters of what is good and bad, letting “many Jews” with a starry-eyed view of Israel define what one is supposed to believe, picking one “expert” (Aaron David Miller) to be the authoritative voice, defining any sympathy for Palestinians and criticism of Israel as “off the highway”, etc…

Acolytes of Mr. Carter hope that “Camp David” — produced by a longtime Carter confidante, Gerald Rafshoon, and written by Lawrence Wright, a Pulitzer Prize winner — will be a powerful reminder of the signature triumph of the Carter presidency and perhaps revive the decades-long effort to rehabilitate him….

But the play, which runs through May 4 at Arena Stage, during another fateful juncture in the bloody road to Middle East peace, may also prompt comparisons to Mr. Carter’s more recent history. He has met with Hamas leaders, criticized Israeli policies in the West Bank and Gaza, and infuriated many Jews with his 2006 book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.”
As the Obama administration struggles with its own peacemaking initiative, Washington does not see Mr. Carter as a force for good in the Middle East.

“There is no doubt in my mind that the most significant achievement in Arab-Israeli peacemaking over the course of the last 50 years was done by Jimmy Carter,” said Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East negotiator. But now, “Carter’s sensibilities on negotiating and the Arab-Israeli peace process have basically run off the highway,” he added. “He has achieved a sort of radioactive status, paradoxically, on the one issue in which he succeeded.”

Jimmy Carter has been exiled from mainstream political life, and the Democratic Party, because of his position on one subject, Palestine. When he said that Israel practices apartheid, back in 2006, he was paddled by Wolf Blitzer, Al Franken and Terry Gross. Now Israeli officials use the word whenever they please. The Times is a full participant in Carter’s shameful and tragic excommunication.

66 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I’ve long complained that there is no authorative book on the subject of the New York Times and Israel/Palestine. I guess I should stop complaining since the recent output of work by Phil and company on the subject is soon no longer just a few mentions, but a regular topic of discussion.

I want the book because the NYT is the shaper of opinion, but it is also a deeply Jewish paper, to this day and the subject of Israel/Palestine goes to the heart of Jewish sociology, especially in the post-67 world.

The topic of why Carter was excommunicated is as much about Jewish sociology as any other subject, I’d argue it is the primary subject, because the Times is run by people like Bronner and Rudoren, who are, as we like to call them, “culturally bound”.

Mearsheimer once compared the Israeli lobby to the mafia; they like to make examples out of people. And he stood unbowed, unlike Carter, who was timid in the face of assault. And Mearsheimer/Walt also compared it to a “loose coalition”, in which not just professional organizations like AIPAC but also individual journalists and, I’d argue, institutions like the NYT, work towards the same broad goals.

As they both made clear: there is no secret planning room. There is not even a shared set of goals. Each group/institution has their own take on the broad goals, but the goals – protect Israel at all costs and attack and smear anyone who fundamentally questions Zionism – are the same.

RE: ‘There is no doubt in my mind that the most significant achievement in Arab-Israeli peacemaking over the course of the last 50 years was done by Jimmy Carter,’ said Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East negotiator.” ~ NYT

AS TO CARTER’S REWARD FOR ENGINEERING “THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ACHIEVEMENT IN ARAB-ISRAELI PERACEMAKING”, SEE:
“The CIA/Likud Sinking of Jimmy Carter”, by Robert Parry, Consortium News , 06/24/11

[EXCERPTS] . . . As the Official Story of the 1980 October Surprise case crumbles – with new revelations that key evidence was hidden from investigators of a congressional task force and that internal doubts were suppressed – history must finally confront the troubling impression that remains: that disgruntled elements of the CIA and Israel’s Likud hardliners teamed up to remove a U.S. president from office. . .
. . . Too many powerful interests do not want the American people to accept even the possibility that U.S. intelligence operatives and a longtime ally could intervene to oust a president who had impinged on what those two groups considered their vital interests. . .
. . . It is far easier to assure the American people that no such thing could occur, that Israel’s Likud – whatever its differences with Washington over Middle East peace policies – would never seek to subvert a U.S. president. . .
. . . But the evidence points in that direction, and there are some points that are not in dispute. For instance, there is no doubt that CIA Old Boys and Likudniks had strong motives for seeking President Jimmy Carter’s defeat in 1980.
Inside the CIA . . .
. . . As for Israel, Likud Prime Minister Menachem Begin was furious over Carter’s high-handed actions at Camp David in 1978 forcing Israel to trade the occupied Sinai to Egypt for a peace deal. Begin feared that Carter would use his second term to bully Israel into accepting a Palestinian state on West Bank lands that Likud considered part of Israel’s divinely granted territory. . .
. . . However, Begin recognized that the scheme required Carter winning a second term in 1980
when, [Former Mossad and Foreign Ministry official David] Kimche wrote, “he would be free to compel Israel to accept a settlement of the Palestinian problem on his and Egyptian terms, without having to fear the backlash of the American Jewish lobby. . .
. . . Yet, while motive is an important element in solving a mystery, it does not constitute proof by itself. What must be examined is whether there is evidence that the motive was acted upon, whether Menachem Begin’s government and disgruntled CIA officers covertly assisted the Reagan-Bush campaign in contacting Iranian officials to thwart Carter’s hostage negotiations.
On that point the evidence is strong though perhaps not ironclad.
Still, a well-supported narrative does exist describing how the October Surprise scheme may have gone down with the help of CIA personnel, Begin’s government, some right-wing intelligence figures in Europe, and a handful of other powerbrokers in the United States. . .

ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://consortiumnews.com/2010/062410.html

Carter was the last president to take the environment seriously. The only one to speak the truth about Israel. The sustainability of the American way of life and the long term viability of Israel are 2 fantasies but nobody wants to know.

The facts that

1. Carter is responsible for the only peace-making achievement in the Middle East.

2. Since then, he achieved “radioactive status”.

Are both true, and logically connected. What it takes for peace-making to be genuine rather than phony became radioactive, so no further genuine peace-making activities are possible — as long as this status quo is unchanged.

The point should be made that the Israeli haters also are not so pristine on the subject of President Carter. I seem to recall during the ‘arab spring’ demonstrations the utter glee at the prospect of potential Egyptian abrogation of the Camp David Accord. I seem to recall the constant scorn at the details of the Camp David Accord which were purported to assist only the security of Israel. Now Jimmy’s a saint? He was the smartest President, the smartest ex-president, he detests Israel, and, more mildly, dislikes Jews. What’s not for the Mondoweiss crowd to love?