Global, Israel, Politics

Carter Stares Down Hamas

While many of us are secretly questioning our own belief in democracy and are wondering if the belief that “Democracies don’t attack democracies” will be proven a fantasy, the former U.S. president–best known for his bold and daring heroism during the Iran hostage crisis in the late 70’s –is pulling an Ariel Sharon. Boldly reversing his past hawkish stands against Islamic Fundamentalism (he never did draft that memo of ultimatum, but that may have been due to the pressing needs of other national security issues that couldn’t be trusted to underlings, such as the tennis court schedule), Jimmy Carter is calling for world economic support for the biggest hippies to take power in the Middle East since the Shah fled Iran like it was an after-hours bar that ran out of coke.
The Jerusalem Post reports,

Carter, who led an 85-member international observer team from around the world organized by the ‘National Democratic Institute’ in partnership with ‘The Carter Center,’ urged the international community to directly or indirectly fund the new Palestinian Government even though it will be led by an internationally-declared foreign terror organization.
“The Palestinian Government is destitute, and in desperate financial straits. I hope that support for the new government will be forthcoming,” Carter said at a Jerusalem press conference.
He added that if international law barred donor countries from directly funding a Hamas-led government than the US and the EU should bypass the Palestinian Authority and provide the “much-needed” money to the Palestinians via non-governmental channels….

No assurances necessary folks. That’s not humanitarian! Just write a check, and circumvent laws if you have to. Hey, the former president may not be a fan of Rule of Law, but at least he’s honest!
Full story

19 thoughts on “Carter Stares Down Hamas

  1. Great article, David. I agree that circumventing the rule of law to support any proscribed group, governmental or otherwise, is counterproductive. I’m curious as to why Carter hasn’t demanded all of the money back which was siphoned off by Arafat and his cronies since Oslo. Perhaps it is the corruption of the PA that has left it largely destitute. But Carter asking us to throw good money after bad just doesn’t make sense.

  2. here are some experpts from a toronto star interview with Carter.

    Carter didn’t rule out modern-day disaster in the 17 minutes and 29 seconds he gave the Star yesterday. But he would like everyone to take a deep breath and consider an opposite scenario. [b]To his way of thinking, any notion of peace was already a political fiction long before Hamas came calling.[/b] Maybe, just maybe, confronted with the reality of responsibility, Hamas will be the one to awaken it…………..
    “Remember, we’re not interrupting a major, successful, promising peace process. There haven’t been any peace talks for the last 3 1/2 years. For almost three years, the elected leader of the Palestinian people (Arafat) was imprisoned in two or three rooms in Ramallah and was not permitted to leave his office,” said Carter.
    “And then once Mahmoud Abbas was elected a year ago, we thought this would open a fairly immediate opportunity for peace talks. But there haven’t been any peace talks. There hasn’t been any real effort to strengthen Abbas’s international stature, or his economic ability to manage his government’s needs or meet his people’s needs. There hasn’t been any willingness on the part of outside forces to equip his security people with the ability to control violence.
    “He’s been put into a holding pattern. So we’re not interrupting a peace process by this election. And it may be that what I consider to be a stalemate could possibly be invigorated. I won’t say reinvigorated because there’s no vigour there now.”………..
    But if a victorious Hamas is to take the Palestinians forward, a discernable voice must arise. Hamas can no longer be a multi-headed hydra, saying both yes and no to negotiations from its many mouths. A cohesive leadership is essential, and it must say what it really wants. That will require some breathing space as the dust over Ramallah settles, and the newly elected work toward forming a new government. [b]But time is of the essence, insofar as the Palestinian Authority is destitute.[/b]……….

  3. ““Democracies don’t attack democracies” will be proven a fantasy,”
    This has already been proven false way before this election.

  4. BTW, unless non governmental channels are illegal, he isn’t circumventing the law.
    The stands of the Israeli and American government are nothing but posturing and asscovering moves anyway.

  5. Whoops, democracy was restored right after that war. My bad. Anyway, my point was simply that there are plenty of wars that most consider to be exceptions to this rule.

  6. Great post, Kelsey.
    I often tell people how great and brilliant the Founding Fathers were, and how excellent the system of government they devised is. If someone expresses doubt, I tell them that the US survived four years of Carter. What better proof could there be?

  7. Josh,
    Carter was certainly an awful president. One of the very worst. In ’84 the American people overwhelmingly voted for an Alzheimers patient rather than elect a man who had been connected in any significant way to the Carter administration. Moderate Democrats began looking at Nixon the Burglar’s foreign policy with longing and respect. Russia read the situation and smirked, and invaded Afghanistan, knowing they had nothing to fear. It was a terrible administration.
    But he was and is no traitor.  And you don’t need to go there.  He was bad enough as it is.

  8. He was done in by the hostage crisis in Iran. He was a horrible campaigner, but he did some important things the present President is incapbable of and that is that he made a peace deal with Sadat an Begin. That is probably why there is such ultra hatred from the Israeli right for him. He certainly isn’t as bad as the present bozo.

  9. Dameocrat,
    You are correct that this is why many on the Israeli right hated him, but this is not why he is held in contempt by so many Americans. The important peace agreement between Israel and Egypt did not compensate for his other lack of accomplishments.
    And he was not done in by the hostage crisis. He did himself in with the hostage crisies. He bungled Iran every which way possible. There was no secret deal with Reagan. They simply feared what “the cowboy” would do. Carter just had to send an ultimatum. This came clear in the New Yorker a couple of years ago with information from a former Iranian bigshot who received asylum. Carter could have done much better, Dameocrat. He could not have done much worse.
    “He sure isn’t as bad as the present bozo.”
    Great. What a choice. You are comparing the worst Democratic president to the worst Republican one since at least prior to the depression. The fact that you have to go there suggests you don’t really disagree with me terribly strongly.

  10. I don’t know about any deal with Reagan, but I do know there was animus toward Carter from the Iranians because of his support for the Shah
    Exiles are creatures I have learned not to trust. Think Chalabi, and the Iraqi National Congress. I would say, Johnson was perhaps more checkered than Carter as Dems go, and personally I don’t think the dropping A bomb was a great thing, so Truman is checkered as well.

  11. Then again, Johnson’s continuing his failed war in Vietnam isn’t exactly easy to understand either. But Truman I understand just fine. What he did was horrible, but I understand it.
    I think we are looking at what consitutes a failed presidency differently. I am not looking at it from a purely moral perspective.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.