Carter replies to Abram’s reply-UPDATES
Jimmy Carter "takes exception" with the "Take Exception" piece Elliott Abrams wrote about Carter's original Washington Post op-ed suggesting that if Israel does not move quickly in the West Bank, it will be facing the unpalatable prospect of a single state with the possibility of a Palestinian majority. (Eric noted the earlier argument here.)
Part of Carter's problem with Abrams' reply is of the "glass half empty/half full" variety: Abrams notes recent dramatic improvements in the lives of Palestinians, Carter does not deny it, but says conditions are nonetheless untenable:
Abrams's main point is about the Palestinians' halcyon life under occupation, with more than 40 percent of their West Bank now controlled by Israel and with only isolated pockets of land available for them. As I stated, there are more than 200 Israeli settlements, connected by a system of roadways on which Palestinians are often forbidden to drive or, in some cases, even to cross. The most recent count by the World Bank is that 605 "check points" on the remaining West Bank roads still obstruct movement among Palestinian communities. This infrastructure, like a spider web, connects the Jordan River valley in the East to Jerusalem and other Israeli cities in the West.
Carter also has a more salient problem of fact with Abrams, who rejected Carter's claim that Israel essentially has a stranglehold on the Gaza Strip by noting that a main entrypoint is controlled by the Egyptians. Carter counters:
Abrams is thoroughly familiar with the binding contract between Israel and Egypt, such that Israel has retained ultimate control over movement of people and goods from Gaza into Egypt.
Left unsaid by both men is that Egypt has its own interests -- having to do with Hamas interactions with Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood -- in maintaining a tight control over the Rafah crossing.
UPDATE: Carter's reply appears, as far as I can make out, online only. He is correcting Abrams on a matter of fact. Abrams says:
Carter states that Gaza is a "walled-in ghetto" and that "Israel prevents any cement, lumber, seeds, fertilizer and hundreds of other needed materials from entering through Gaza's gates." But Gaza is not an enclave surrounded by Israel; it has a border with Egypt. Every commodity that Carter says is needed can be supplied by Egypt, a point he overlooks in his efforts to blame Palestinian problems exclusively on the Jewish state.
But, as Carter points out, Israel has a say in what crosses the border with Egypt. Surely the Washington Post's print edition readers deserve to understand this.
UPDATE II:
Elliott Abrams shoots back a reply to Carter, but once again addressing the standards of living for Palestinians in the West Bank. Nothing about Carter's pointing out that Abrams made an error of fact in implying that Israel had no say in running Gaza's crossing with Egypt.
11 Comments
Share This
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
I will respond to St. Stupid’s, AKA Jimmy Carter, expectorations only this one time. This poorest excuse for a president is an anti-Semite, senile and irrelevant. Accordingly, he deserves to be ignored and relegated to the trash heap of history, certainly not given the honor of an editorial or the recognition of a response. The only reason he can still smile his toothy grin is, that the current occupier of the White House is on track to be worse than him.
‘nough said!
I agree with John Shook’s comments that Carter needs to shut up and let the current US Government deal with Israel and the Palestinians. Carter’s credibility since he took funding from the Arabs is compromised. His language, calling Gaza a “ghetto” ignores that it is the Hamas Government itself that is making things difficult for Palestinians through their own intransigence in not renouncing violence.
Jimmy Carter is the father of the Iranian revolution. A statue of him should stand in front of Evin Prison in Tehran, and the mullahs should bow in gratitude every day to the Carter statue. Someone should ask Carter if he feels any responsibility for nuclear Iran or our servicemen being killed by Iranian EFPs
I find that the comment by Kampeas that Israel instructs Egypt as to what commodities can enter Gaza from Egypt to be in error. Egypt alone decides this based on its security concerns. Jimmy Carter should blame Egypt for denying Gazans proper medical care and for treating them as untouchables.
How about blaming the goddamned Israelis who illegally boarded the ship headed for Gaza with medical supplies?
unbelievable, if anything is said against a jew are it’s-really-hell, then they are anti-semitic, unbelievable. cut out their tongues.
and BTW, the Iranian Revolution happened before Carter was a U.S. President, and had nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear age.
When did the West Bank become “Palestinian land”? The West Bank was part of the original land given to the Jews by the Balfour Declaration during the British Mandate after the end of World War 1, and then codified by the League of Nations in 1922. The land was offered to the Arabs in 1948 but they rejected it, because they preferred to attack Israel in an attempt to “drive the Jews into the sea.” The original mandate giving the land to Israel has never been abrogated or reversed legally. So, when did it automatically become Palestinian land? Answer: it’s not Palestinian land. It’s really Israeli land. If the Palestinians want to live there, they are free to negotiate for an autonomous zone. But let’s understand once and for all the underlying truth of the situation.
Thoroughly digusting is additionally thoroughly ignorant. Under the Palestine Interim Agreement (1995), Israel has control over the seas outside Gaza. If the Hamas goons don’t like it, they can call of their war.
It is just as well that anonymous does not reveal his name, otherwise he would reveal himself as a fool. Carter was president 1977 - 1981 and the Iranian revolution was in 1979, during his no action administration.
As for road blocks, etc they only went up when the Arabs took to the war path in 2000. No terror, no hardship. And yes, it is antisemitic to demand that Arab hardship be eased through the spilling of Jewish blood. When the Arab start to behave like civilised human beings instead of glorying in depravity when they stop regarding the Jew as a second rate dhimmi and they start to keep their undertakings, then there will be peace, road blocks will go and hardships will cease.
Leave a Comment
To comment on this article, you must first be registered with JTA.
Not Registered?
There are real advantages to a FREE registration with JTA.org:
- Make your voice heard through comments on articles
- Receive our e-mailed Daily Briefing, an invaluable quick-read
- Help decide what Jewish news matters most with interactive tools
Register Now
Already a JTA member?
John D. Shook
09/09/09 12:26 PM
Carter needs to shut up. His mother said that he didn’t even know how to raise peanuts on their peanut farm and his alcoholic brother had to do it.