Soccer Dad: Prisoner to outdated ideas

August 1, 2006

Prisoner to outdated ideas

Former President Jimmy Carter has been given op-ed space to air his views on the central problem facing the Middle East, Stop the band-aid treatment. According to Carter

The Middle East is a tinderbox, with some key players on all sides waiting for every opportunity to destroy their enemies with bullets, bombs and missiles. One of the special vulnerabilities of Israel, and a repetitive cause of violence, is the holding of prisoners. Militant Palestinians and Lebanese know that a captured Israeli soldier or civilian is either a cause of conflict or a valuable bargaining chip for prisoner exchange. This assumption is based on a number of such trades, including 1,150 Arabs, mostly Palestinians, for three Israeli soldiers in 1985; 123 Lebanese for the remains of two Israeli soldiers in 1996; and 433 Palestinians and others for an Israeli businessman and the bodies of three soldiers in 2004.

Let's understand something. In the course of Oslo a great bargain was made. The bargain was that the PLO would abandon terror and Israel would recognize it as a partner for negotiations; in return the PLO would accept Israel's right to exist. The former happened; the latter did not.

Still implicitly, by agreeing that the PLO was no longer a terrorist organization Israel said that those involved in political activity alone was no longer worthy of incarceration. Thus prisoner releases followed from this bargain.

However they morphed into something totally different as the Palestinians demanded the release of not just those involved in political activity but also those who had been involved in actualy terror attacks. Israel's fallback position was that it would not release those prisoners "with blood on their hands" but started releasing bombers and saboteurs who had caused damage but not death. (At least one terrorist murderer was released, the so-called "refrigerator bomber". International pressure forced Israel to go beyond the dictates of the Oslo accords and abide the unfounded Palestinian demand.

By now, of course, all the "political" prisoners have been released, so now prisoner releases are about freeing terrorist who failed to kill anyone - but not due to lack of effort.

So the "holding of prisoners" is a major cause of the violence? No it isn't. It is the release of prisoners who committed violent acts and who likely will again. For example

Samir, a man who served 20 months at the Ketziot detention camp in the Negev, said that he was happy to be out but that he and his friends demanded the release of all the estimated 5,800 Palestinian security prisoners.

As a condition of his release, Samir said he had signed a document promising not to engage in terrorism.

However, attacks against Israelis are "fighting occupation," not terrorism, he said.

But Carter's wrong on so many things.

It is inarguable that Israel has a right to defend itself against attacks on its citizens, but it is inhumane and counterproductive to punish civilian populations in the illogical hope that somehow they will blame Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking the devastating response. The result instead has been that broad Arab and worldwide support has been rallied for these groups, while condemnation of both Israel and the United States has intensified.

Mr. Carter, I know that you were President of the United States, but that doesn't mean that you know what you're talking about. Israel's trying to win hearts and minds? No it isn't. Israel's trying to defeat Hezbollah. Israel's trying to secure its northern border. Israel is allowed to do so. Yes condemnation is intesifying, but it is largely by those who seek to legitimize or minimize the evil of terrorist organizations like Hamas or Hezbollah. If agreement with such people is somehow desirable, we have no moral compass at all.

These are ambitious hopes, but even if the U.N. Security Council adopts and implements a resolution that would lead to such an eventual solution, it will provide just another band-aid and temporary relief. Tragically, the current conflict is part of the inevitably repetitive cycle of violence that results from the absence of a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East, exacerbated by the almost unprecedented six-year absence of any real effort to achieve such a goal.

As I noted when I criticized your former assistant secretary of state, Warren Christopher. The current violence didn't result from the absence of a comprehensive settlement. It is the result of legitimizing terror when its goal is deemed noble. It is the result of allowing Hezbollah to arm undisturbed for ten years. It is the result of allowing Hamas (and Fatah before it) to run a territory with no controls to ensure that it wasn't building an infrastructure to attack Israel.

Leaders on both sides ignore strong majorities that crave peace, allowing extremist-led violence to preempt all opportunities for building a political consensus. Traumatized Israelis cling to the false hope that their lives will be made safer by incremental unilateral withdrawals from occupied areas, while Palestinians see their remnant territories reduced to little more than human dumping grounds surrounded by a provocative "security barrier" that embarrasses Israel's friends and that fails to bring safety or stability.

Carter, you're as clueless as Christopher. Let's see if I get this Israel withdrew from Gaza, a year later Hamas uses that platform to launch attack on Israel. Israel withdrew from Lebanon and Hezbollah builds up its army and attacks six years later. It's not the incrementalism that's the problem; it's the withdrawals. (I'd also point out that after Israel withdrew from Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah, Tulkarem, Kalkilya and Bethlehem in late 1995 Israel was struck by terror a few weeks later because it had ceded control of those cities to the PA, which did nothing to prevent the creation of a terrorist infrastructure.)

And of course it's not Israel's friends who are embarrassed by the security barrier, it is its phony friends who profess sadness whenever Israelis are killed but are scandalized the moment Israel does anything to defend its citizens.

The general parameters of a long-term, two-state agreement are well known. There will be no substantive and permanent peace for any peoples in this troubled region as long as Israel is violating key U.N. resolutions, official American policy and the international "road map" for peace by occupying Arab lands and oppressing the Palestinians. Except for mutually agreeable negotiated modifications, Israel's official pre-1967 borders must be honored. As were all previous administrations since the founding of Israel, U.S. government leaders must be in the forefront of achieving this long-delayed goal.

This is rich. Israel violating "key UN resolutions?" What about Hezbollah? Oh no, it was justified repeatedly violating the UN sanctioned border of Lebanon and Israel, and keeping its arms. The Lebanese army too, was in violation the UN resolution requiring it to go into southern Lebanon and secure that border. But that was OK because Israel was holding "prisoners."

Mr. Carter, please go back to building houses. I hear you did that very well. But whether you're pronouncing your outdated ideas on the Middle East or peddling the false notion that Hugo Chavez was elected in a free and fair election when you talk about the world you demonstrate again why as President you were such a failure.

Sister Toldjah relates some interesting but unsurprising information about Jimmy Carter.

Occidentality wonders why I even bothered writing this: Mr.

Carter's ignorance of this fact is alone justification to ignore him.

Blue Crab Boulevard not inappropriately compares the former president to an empty pot, while recounting many of his accomplishments during his time in the highest office in the land.

UPDATE: There has been no shortage of connoisseurs of fine inanities who have commented on this op-ed.

Here are few choice selections - Partisan Times makes a point I kicked myself for missing

Jimmy ignores the fact that the majority of Israelis support their government's righteous battle against terrorism;

Yes, if you presume to speak for people it's usually a good idea to check up how they feel first.

Daled Amos finds it ironic that the ex-President is lecturing Israel on how to rescue its hostages

Jimmy Carter, the former president during whose term in office 52 Americans were held hostage by Iran for 444 days, now writes an op-ed for the Washington Post to lecture Israel on how to deal with her kidnapped soldiers.

And Maryland Conservatarian, who marvels (in the comments below) that we survived for 4 years with op-ed stars Jimmy Carter and Warren Christopher among those running foreign policy, thinks that Carter's legacy would be helped, if he'd only shut up.

Any (remote) chance that Mr. Carter ever has of being considered even a mediocre president probably rests on the historical treatment of his Mid-East work - revisionists can do wonders. But his constant need to highlight his remarkable lack of understanding of what goes on in the area will only make their job more difficult.

Technorati tags: Jimmy Carter, Israel, Washington Post.