I've just finished reading Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and I'm now trying to find out what all the fuss is about. The only "error" I noticed was his sweet but absurd explanation of Meir's denial of the existence of "Palestinians" as "to mean there should be no future racial delineation between Jews and Gentiles." Right, and she never inhaled any of those cigarettes either.
So I was eager to learn what mistakes I had missed. I still am. Your list, at least, doesn't seem to contain any actual "errors." Omissions, maybe, but Carter's aim was not to lay out all the arguments and claims that have ever been made for or against Israel, its wars, its occupation of conquered territories or its relations with Arabs. It was instead, as the title proclaims, to express his view that peace will come to the "Holy Land" only when both Israelis and Palestinians find a two-state solution that is acceptable to both peoples.
It is an abomination that this good man is being attacked for sincerely desiring peace and justice, for all peoples, whatever their religion or ethnic identity. The Geneva Initiative (or something very much like it) which this book was quite obviously written to support, is the last and, I believe, best hope for Israel's continued existence as an independent democracy.
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation