KiDMa - The Southwest Community: December 2006

The furor over former President Jimmy Carter’s book "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid" is not abating, and the Jewish community is voicing frustration over the author’s apparent unwillingness (some say "inability") to acknowledge the book’s factual inaccuracies and omissions.
In fact, say those Jews who have met with Carter, his statements have become even more extreme since the publication of the book.
Released in November, Carter’s book has come under intense criticism from Jewish organizations that have blasted everything from its title — which evokes comparisons to apartheid South Africa — to its scholarship, which has been described as shoddy and riddled with errors.
During his recent book tour — on which he was interviewed by 100 media outlets — Carter repeated his assertions. But more troubling, say the book’s many critics, is that he’s gone even further, intensifying his charges against Israel and the American Jewish community.

No meeting of the minds

The Jewish Standard made several attempts to interview the former president but was informed by Deanna Congileo, his press secretary, that he was not available for an interview but asked that we be sent a copy of his public letter "to Jewish citizens of America," dated last Friday. (The Anti-Defamation League responded to that letter on Wednesday. See box.)
Carter wrote that the "high point" of his book tour "was a meeting [Dec. 12] with leaders of the [40-member] Board of Rabbis of Greater Phoenix," in Arizona.
While he apparently felt that meeting was successful and cleared up points of disagreement, the six rabbis from the Greater Phoenix area who were there do not seem to share his view.
According to Rabbi Darren Kleinberg, the religious leader of KiDMa, a modern Orthodox shul in Phoenix, the rabbis had requested a meeting so they could relay their concerns about the book to Carter. They were informed on Dec. 11 by the Carter Center, the former president’s human rights foundation based at Emory University in Atlanta, that he would meet with them in his hotel suite.
Kleinberg had organized a community protest to coincide with the book-signing. The demonstration, expected to attract a few hundred people, drew more than 400 participants, Jews and non-Jews, "including several nuns and other church members," Kleinberg told the Standard. To keep it "dignified and on message," the rabbis provided the signage.
"This was the first organized rally scheduled to protest his book and the first time he sat down to talk to Jewish groups," said Kleinberg. "We sang peace songs, the American and Israeli national anthems, recited prayers for the IDF and U.S forces, and said memorial prayers for those killed in Lebanon," he added.
The rabbis met with Carter for over an hour, Kleinberg said. The board’s executive committee made clear the group’s position that Carter had done great damage through his "lack of balance, choice of language, and on factual issues," Kleinberg reported.
"He was not willing to give any ground," Kleinberg added. "I found it quite troubling." In fact, "when [Carter was] asked for clarification on what he had written, he went even further and drew a moral equivalence between the killing of Palestinian civilians during the course of IDF actions of self-defense, and targeted killing by terrorists." Also, said Kleinberg, Carter continually used the word "colonization" in talking about Israel and the west bank, "with no acknowledgement that the current government was elected on a platform indicating their willingness to pull out" of the area.
According to Carter’s letter, the chairman of the group, Rabbi Andrew Straus, religious leader of Temple Emanuel of Tempe, Ariz., "suggested that I make clear to all American Jews that my use of ‘apartheid’ does not apply to circumstances within Israel, that I acknowledge the deep concern of Israelis about the threat of terrorism and other acts of violence from some Palestinians, and that the majority of Israelis sincerely want a peaceful existence with their neighbors. The purpose of this letter is to reiterate these points."
But Straus did not feel that Carter had gotten the rabbis’ point. He told the Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, "I’d like to think that we opened his mind and gave him something to think about. [But] overall, Carter is not able to see the strategic and self-defense issues that Israel faces. He pays lip service to [them], but he doesn’t understand [them.]"
He also said, "Somehow or another, he has accepted the Palestinian vision and understanding of the Israeli-Arab dialogue, and is not able to be critical of the Palestinian community. You read through the book and there’s almost no criticism of Palestinians, almost no mention of terrorism."
While the former president was "dignified, respectful, and articulate," said Kleinberg, he seemed not so much unwilling to listen as "seemingly incapable of appreciating the depth of our concern and the amount of tension the book has caused," said Kleinberg. "He was blind to the power of his words. When we suggested that by writing this book he could no longer be a power broker on Middle East issues, he said, ‘My words have no power,’ showing serious naïveté."

Carter critiqued

The ADL has been actively challenging the Carter book, sponsoring an ad campaign in major American publications, including this paper, and devoting a section of its Website to criticizing the book.
Addressing his charge that "Mr. Carter doesn’t advance public debate, he diminishes it," Abraham Foxman, ADL national director, asked, "How does it encourage debate to say that Jews control the American media and universities?"
In a conversation with the Standard, Foxman pointed out that Carter said he chose to use the word "apartheid" in his book title to provoke debate. But, said the ADL head, by suggesting that his book was made necessary by a stifled debate on Israel, with its clear implication that "Jews and supporters of Israel control the vehicles of communication," Carter effectively "eliminates the Jewish community as dialogue partners since we’re so ‘biased and bigoted.’"
Foxman said Carter is guilty of "skewing history … and cherry-picking only those facts that support his thesis — that [the Israel-Palestinian conflict] is only Israel’s fault." Even more, by seeming to equate Jewish settlements with terrorist violence, said Foxman, Carter demonstrates "non-recognition, non-acceptance" of Israel.
"Israel’s disengagement from Gaza has no role in the book," he said, and "he sees the wall separating the territories from Israel not [as a vehicle] to save lives but as apartheid, and damaging to Christian sites."
Speculating on Carter’s motivation, Foxman said there are several schools of thought among Christians as regards Israel. Evangelical Christians love and support Israel because the success of Jews in that country is a prerequisite to the second coming of Jesus, he said. Another group of Christians, he suggested, believe that because the Jews rejected the first coming, "they don’t deserve redemption." Carter represents the latter group, he said, offering several quotations from the book itself in support of this thesis.
For example: Describing a conversation with Golda Meir, Carter writes, after noting that Meir asked him if he had any observations he would like to share: "With some hesitation, I said that I had long taught lessons from the Hebrew Scriptures and that a common historical pattern was that Israel was punished whenever the leaders turned away from devout worship of God. I asked if she was concerned about the secular nature of her Labor government."
Foxman suggested that in this passage, Carter is clearly stating his belief that Israel is a country that has turned away from God and, therefore, is deserving of punishment.
In a second passage, Carter writes: "It was especially interesting to visit with some of the few surviving Samaritans, who complained to us that their holy sites and culture were not being respected by Israeli authorities — the same complaint heard by Jesus and his disciples almost two thousand years earlier." ("Which Israeli authorities?" mused Foxman.)
The ADL director cited a third passage, demonstrating, he said, Carter’s belief that "the security fence is a crime against Christianity."
"The wall ravages many places along its devious route that are important to Christians. In addition to enclosing Bethlehem in one of its most notable intrusions, an especially heart-breaking division is on the southern slope of the Mount of Olives, a favorite place for Jesus and his disciples."
Besides being "biased on history and politics, pro-Palestinian, and skewing events," the Carter book presents Israel as "an affront to Christians and Christianity," said Foxman. "When you add in the delegitimizing [word] of apartheid, he’s saying that Israel doesn’t deserve respect."
Foxman said Carter’s book is particularly dangerous because while such canards as Jews’ control of the media might be dismissed by the public when coming from a Pat Buchanan or a David Duke, the former president is accorded great courtesy and is "not challenged." If Jews control the media, said Foxman, "How come Carter is on every show, spewing forth classical anti-Semitism?"
Criticism of Carter has not been restricted to Jewish organizations. Writing in the Washington Post, Michael Kinsley called the apartheid analogy "a foolish and unfair comparison, unworthy of the man who won — and deserved — the Nobel Peace Prize."
The chorus of outrage was heightened by the resignation Dec. 5 of Kenneth Stein from his post as a fellow of the Carter Center.
Pro-Israel protesters gather outside of the plaza where former president Jimmy Carter held a book-signing at the Changing Hands Bookstore on Dec. 12, 2006, in Tempe, Ariz. Deanna Dent
In his letter, which ended a 23-year association with the center, Stein claims the book is "replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments."
Despite the firestorm, Carter has stood his ground, as he did in the Phoenix meeting. In interviews he has said that in some instances, Israeli conduct is "even worse" than South Africa’s. And in a recent opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times, he said there are "severe restraints" imposed on any discussion of the issue.
Many have noted the irony that it was during Carter’s presidency that Israel achieved its most significant breakthrough in relations with its Arab neighbors: the 1979 peace treaty signed by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Carter presided over the negotiations at the presidential retreat at Camp David. But that history only further saddens those who would look to Carter as a peacemaker.
As to where the Jewish community should go from here, Kleinberg, the Phoenix rabbi who organized a protest against Carter’s book, said the community should realize that "protest is a good thing to do."
"We should recognize our power to influence," he said.
In addition, he said it is important that we begin to educate our own community about Israel. The Phoenix rabbi has invited the Israeli shaliach in his community to address his congregation on Israel’s efforts in the quest for peace.
"We need to educate the community not just on Carter’s book but on the number of chances Israel has taken to help bring peace," he said.
Rabbi Neil Winkler agrees that "the Jewish community must respond."
Said the Fort Lee rabbi, who wrote a letter to this newspaper — see box — protesting the inclusion of Carter’s book in a paid "Chanukah gift guide" advertisement: "The printed word, no matter how false, is a powerful tool in the fashioning of public opinion, which, in turn, impacts public policy. We cannot allow these vicious canards to upset serious discussion regarding the best path to peace in the Middle East. Nor can we afford to have our people uninformed and unable to confront those who attack Israel. Our focus at this season should be in educating and informing people of the real facts behind the conflict."
Foxman agrees that "while it would be preferable not to give the book further publicity, we have no choice but to criticize and challenge it." Still, he remains troubled by the fact that when the Jewish community brings new information to Carter’s attention, he appears to disregard the criticism and "stand firm."

by Rabbi Darren Kleinberg

In 2003, I received my Green Card and became a permanent resident of the United States. Last week, a little more than three years after America became my home, a number of fellow Phoenix rabbis and I sat down in very comfortable chairs at the Ritz Carlton Hotel and debated former president Jimmy Carter about his controversial book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.”

Now, there are around 300 million people living in the United States, and there are only five living people who have ever been president. The chances of spending an hour in conversation with one, especially when what you have to say is rather critical, are unlikely to say the least. So how did this come to pass?

In June 2005 I was ordained a rabbi. After a number of years working as a Jewish professional in informal educational organizations such as Hillel, I decided to pursue what I have since come to understand as my calling. In the short time I have spent in the rabbinate, I have come to understand that my responsibilities as a rabbi go beyond teaching and praying.

In an American Jewish reality where the voice of the Jewish community has come to be that of the federations and other organizations similar in nature if not in kind, and where rabbis are ceremonially invited along to make benediction over bread, it is my sincere and heartfelt opinion that rabbis need to again become equal partners in speaking truth to power.

As in past generations — when Rabbi David Einhorn was the Jewish voice of conscience during slavery, when Rabbi Stephen S. Wise gave the clarion call for social injustice in America, when Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel prayed with his feet while marching for civil rights — we must realize our unique power as rabbis and raise our voices.

In Phoenix, a place rarely if ever considered a center of Jewish culture and activity in the American Jewish landscape, one rabbi invited his colleagues to protest the irresponsible and damaging words in Carter’s book. They agreed and, in less than a week, we gathered together — 400 hundred of us, rabbis and laity — to speak, sing and talk of Israel’s wish for peace.

The response? Carter’s first face-to-face meeting since the publication of his book with a group representing the Jewish community.

Why would the former president agree to such a meeting? Maybe he was inspired, as a deeply religious man, that it was a group of rabbis that had chosen to protest. Maybe, as a politician always does, he realized an opportunity to make himself look good. Or maybe he was just stunned that outside a local bookstore in Tempe, Ariz., some rabbis gathered together to speak truth to power.

I don’t know why Carter decided to meet with us — but I do know that we rabbis spoke up for Israel, and for the Jewish people, and we were heard.