Book & Author
Jimmy Carter: Palestine — Peace Not Apartheid
By Dr Ahmed S. Khan
Chicago, IL
Once again Palestine is engulfed in a bloodbath. Another Holocaust is in progress! High-tech AI-induced genocide has killed more than 35,000 people in Gaza since October 7, 2023. Peace remains elusive! What will it take to bring peace to Palestine! In Palestine — Peace not Apartheid former President Jimmy Carter — a man of peace —examines the Palestine conundrum and offers his assessment and solution for achieving peace for Israel and delivering justice to Palestine.
Jimmy Carter, the thirty-ninth president of the United States, played a key role for the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt. After leaving office, he has continued his public and private diplomacy, and decades of work for peace, human rights and international development. He and his wife, Rosalynn, founded The Carter Center —a nonprofit organization — that prevents and resolves conflicts, enhances freedom and democracy, and improves global health. He has stayed in contact with all parties of Palestine conflict and visited the Holy Land many times and observed Palestinian elections in 2005 and 2006. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his work for peace. He is a prolific author; he has written bestselling books on a wide spectrum of topics — his childhood, his religion, American history, and politics.
The book has sixteen chapters and a summary. It also contains a number of appendices and maps: Appendices include 1: UN Resolution 242, 1967 Appendix 2: UN Resolution 338, 1973, 3: Camp David Accords, 1978, 4. Framework for Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, 1978, 5. UN Resolution 465, 1980, 6. Arab Peace Proposal, 2002, and 7: Israel's Response to the Roadmap, May 25, 2003. And maps include, 1. The Middle East Today 2. UN Partition Plan, 1947 3. Israel, 1949-67, 4. Israel, 1967-82, 5. Israel, 1982-2006, 6. Clinton's Proposal, 2000, 7. Sharon's Plan, 2 002, 8. Geneva Initiative, 2003, and 9. Palestinians Surrounded, 2006.
Reflecting on one of the major goals of his life — establishing peace in the middle east — the author observes: “…One of the major goals of my life, while in political office … has been to help ensure a lasting peace for Israelis and others in the Middle East. Many people share the same dream, and at times my own efforts to achieve this goal have been intertwined with some of theirs. It will be good to consider what has brought us to the present situation, the obstacles before us, and some things that can and must be done to bring peace and justice to the region. No fictional drama could be filled with more excitement, unanticipated happenings, or intriguing characters than this effort to end the ongoing conflict; it is certainly one of the most fascinating and truly important political and military subjects of modern times. The Middle East is perhaps the most volatile region in the world, whose instability is a persistent threat to global peace…”
Describing the complex nature of issues viz a viz modern-day and religious history, the author raises key questions: “What are the prime requisites for peace? What possibilities does the future hold? What common ground already exists on which the contending parties can build a more secure future? Are there better prospects for success from quiescent diplomatic efforts or from bold and public pressure for negotiations? Can there be a stable peace that perpetuates the present circumstances? Must the situation steadily deteriorate until another crisis causes the interested parties to act? Even with full American backing, can Israel's enormous military power prevail over militant Arabs? Most chilling of all, could the festering differences precipitate a military confrontation involving the use of nuclear weapons? It is known that Israel has a major nuclear arsenal and the capability to launch weapons quickly, and some neighboring states are believed to be attempting to acquire their own atomic bombs. Without progress toward peace, desperation or adventurism on either side could precipitate such a confrontation. There are growing schisms in the Middle East region, with hardening Arab animosity toward the Israeli–United States alliance.”
Discussing the expectations of both parties for peace, the author notes: “Israelis have learned that they cannot reconstruct the Kingdom of David, which includes all of the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and parts of Lebanon and Jordan. At the same time, most Palestinians have been forced to accept the fact that the nation of Israel will never be erased from the map. Neither side can predict or impose on others the ultimate outcome of negotiations, and any final agreement has to be both voluntary and acceptable to both sides. Strong support for peace talks must come from the United States, preferably involving representatives of the United Nations, the European Union, and Russia.”
Reflecting on the crucial role of America in negotiating a peace deal in Palestine, the author states: “ Until recently, America's leaders were known and expected to exert maximum influence in an objective, nonbiased way to achieve peace in the Middle East. In order to resume this vital role, the United States must be a trusted participant, evenhanded, consistent, unwavering, and enthusiastic—a partner with both sides and not a judge of either. Although it is inevitable that at times there will be a tilt one way or the other, in the long run the role of honest broker must once again be played by Washington. When a promising negotiation evolves, the United States will have to join other wealthy nations in offering the political and economic incentives necessary to bolster what will be at first a fragile understanding and then be prepared to help the peacemakers fend off the radicals and extremists who will seek to subvert what is being carefully created and nurtured.”
Expounding on his talks with Israeli leaders about possible solutions, the author notes: “General Rabin described the close relationship that Israel had with South Africa in the diamond trade (he had returned from there a day or two early to greet us) but commented that the South African system of apartheid could not long survive. When I asked about his own political future, he said that he would have a place on the Labor Party list but had not yet been assured of a cabinet post. At that time, Foreign Minister Abba Eban was the best-known Israeli, famous for the eloquence of his speeches in the United Nations, and I was excited when he invited us to meet with him. Not surprisingly, he was full of ideas about Israel's future, some of which proved to be remarkably prescient. He said that the occupied territories were a burden and not an asset. Arabs and Jews were inherently incompatible and would ultimately have to be separated. The detention centers and associated punitive and repressive procedures necessary to govern hundreds of thousands of Arabs against their will would torment Israel with a kind of quasi-colonial situation that was being abolished throughout the rest of the world. When questioned, he replied without explanation that the solution to this problem was being evolved. (I knew that some Israeli leaders were contemplating massive immigration from both Russia and the United States plus encouraging Arabs to emigrate to other nations.) Eban explained his extraordinary role in the United Nations by saying, ‘If I were foreign minister of the only Arab nation surrounded by thirty-nine hostile Jewish ones, I would turn to the UN for support.’”
Discussing the requirements, the author further observes: “Also, as a member of the International Quartet that includes Russia, the United Nations, and the European Union, America supports the Roadmap for Peace, which espouses exactly the same requirements. Palestinian leaders unequivocally accepted this proposal, but Israel has officially rejected its key provisions with unacceptable caveats and prerequisites. Despite these recent developments, it is encouraging that Israel has made previous commitments to peace as confirmed by the Camp David Accords, the withdrawal of its forces from the Sinai, the more recent movement of settlements from Gaza, and its official endorsement of pertinent UN resolutions establishing its legal borders…”
Explaining various obstacles to peace, the author states: “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 continuous control and colonization of Palestinian land have been primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement the Holy Land. In order to perpetuate the occupation, Israeli forces have deprived their unwilling subjects of basic human rights. No objective person could personally observe existing conditions in the West Bank and dispute these statements.”
To illustrate the convergence of views and opinions for the resolution of issues for a two-state solution, the author presents an example of two voices — one Palestinian and the other Israeli: “[Jonathan Kuttab, Palestinian human rights lawyer] Everybody knows what it will take to achieve a permanent and lasting peace that addresses the basic interests of both sides: It's a two-state solution. It's withdrawal to 1967 borders. It's the dismantling of the settlements. It's some kind of shared status for a united Jerusalem, the capital of both parties. The West Bank and Gaza would have to be demilitarized to remove any security threats to Israel. Some kind of solution would have to be reached for the refugee problem, some qualified right of return, with compensation. Everyone knows the solution; the question is: Is there political will to implement it?” [Dr Naomi Chazan, professor at Hebrew University, former deputy speaker of the Israeli Knesset]: "I do not…any difference now remains between the majority of Israel and Palestinians in understanding that there has to be some kind of accommodation between both people. There are two possibilities on how to do it. To acknowledge and then to implement the Palestine right to self-determination, and to make sure that the two-state solution is a just and fair solution, allowing for the creation of a viable state alongside Israel on the 1967 boundaries, and if there are any changes, they are by agreement on a swap basis. And on the Israeli side, there is the need to maintain a democratic state with a Jewish majority, which can only be achieved through the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel."
In Palestine — Peace Not Apartheid President Carter shares his understanding of the history of the Middle East and his personal experiences with the key actors and discusses sensitive political issues. President Carter advocates key steps that must be taken for the two states to share the Holy Land without a system of apartheid or constant fear of uncertainty. President Carter believes that there will be no substantive and permanent peace for anyone in the Holy Land as long as Israel keeps on occupying Arab lands, oppressing the Palestinians, and violating key UN resolutions, official American policy, and the international blueprint for peace. Palestine —Peace Not Apartheid is essential reading for all interested in peace!
(Dr Ahmed S. Khan — dr.a.s.khan@ieee.org — is a Fulbright Specialist Scholar)
Back to Pakistanlink Homepage
