Israeli security service refuses to protect Jimmy Carter
Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 11:25:14 AM PDT
As Passover approaches, some of you may hear references to "why is this [ fill in the blank ] different from all other.....? " type questions. It's a (usually humorous) reference to the 4 Questions asked at Passover Seders. Tradition has it the youngest child(ren) at the table have to answer them. It's a way of transmitting the oral tradition. The 4 Questions actually answer the Big Question: "Why is this night different from all other nights?"
This brings me to Jimmy Carter and his recent trip to Israel. Why is this trip different from all other trips? For starters, the only Israeli official who would meet with him was Shimon Peres. But the real corker was the Shin Bet, Israel's General Security Service, refused to protect him. That's a big difference from Bush's recent visit which featured 10,000 police officers deployed across Jerusalem in addition to the usual snipers, etc.
Ironic that the guy who negotiated a treaty which has never been violated is now a pariah while a guy who basically ignored the situation for years has Olmert gushing, "Thank God I can conduct political negotiations with George Bush at my side."
Yeah, I know, Carter doesn't come bearing gifts. Instead he is going to talk to Hamas, so that makes him wicked evil. I know, he wrote a book and had the temerity to say what Israelis have been saying for years. I know, he has this stupid idea that talking is better than shooting. I know there are only two alternatives here... kill all the terrorists or face extinction. But hold on a second. What was it Shimon Peres said?
When you have two alternatives, the first thing you have to do is to look for the third that you didn't think about, that doesn't exist.
No surprise the only Israeli government official that would meet with the "traitor" Carter was Peres. Yeah, I know, it's easy to ding Peres... "where's the peace, old man?"... but seriously, ask yourself did Sharon really increase security and peace with his iron fist?
Bush can drop $30 billion of other people's money on Israel and get praised for "leadership" and "vision" from here til Judgment Day, but that don't make it so. You can agree or disagree with Carter on specific issues, but that doesn't mean his strategy is flawed. The reality is someone needs to provide a bridge, a mechanism, for dialogue because Peace is not simply War by any other means.
No one needs to harbor fanciful romantic notions about Hamas to see the importance of talking. They won an election and then showed they couldn't govern. They have repeatedly shown their willingness to sacrifice the very people they claim to lead. They make no secret of their desire to push all the Jews into the ocean. But they didn't come to power in a vacuum. The only way to suck the oxygen out of that poisoned atmosphere is to isolate them and build support for alternatives around them. That requires someone who can and will talk to all sides.
Shunning the people who have stood by you for decades, who care enough about you to tell you the truth to your face and still stand by your side is not the way to go... it's the hallmark of a self-destructive spiral of a zealot. As Jews approach Passover and reflect over the history of subjugation and liberation, I think it's worth looking at the history of self-inflicted wounds as well. You can argue that Josephus' account is suspect, but one thing is clear. The last time Zealots ran the show in Jerusalem, things ended very badly.
Permalink | 45 comments