Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - 9:56 PM
When Fox News reported today from Gaza that former President Jimmy Carter plans to urge President Barack Obama to take the Palestinian militant group Hamas off the U.S. terrorist list in meetings later this week, Washington Democrats and the Obama administration collectively cringed.
"The president has addressed Hamas questions, including in the Egypt speech," an administraton official said. "[We] won't have more to say about this."
"Just like with President Clinton, Carter is becoming a huge problem and a growing concern for Obama," a Washington Middle East hand said. "They are very pissed with him."
After observing Lebanon's elections, Carter visited Damascus last week and met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, as well as exiled Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal. This week, he met with Israeli settlers in the West Bank and toured Gaza with top Hamas leader Ismail Haniya as his guide. His trip to Damascus came a day ahead of that of Obama Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell.
Carter's objectives in Gaza, a Washington Middle East expert familiar with the matter told The Cable, are "to open up Gaza, and to see what he can do to pave the way to some [sort of] engagement between Hamas and the U.S.," the expert said, on condition of anonymity, cautioning that he didn't think any such engagement would happen anytime soon. "And to see whether Hamas can shift its position, and the U.S. can shift its position. ... I think he is smart enough to realize they aren't going to come off the terror list."
"Don't forget people in Gaza were spreading rumors last week that Carter was bringing Hamas a letter from Obama," the expert added. "It's absurd, but it made the rounds for a day."
Don't overreact to an unconfirmed news report, agreed veteran U.S. Middle East peace negotiator Aaron David Miller. "This is Jimmy Carter being Jimmy Carter," Miller said by email. "I didn't see any confirmation that Carter intends to ask the administration to remove Hamas from the terrorism list; more likely he'll urge Obama at the right time to consider opening up a dialogue with Hamas."
"But that's a key to an empty room right now given everything that Obama is trying to do with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin ] Netanyahu and [Palestinian President Mahmoud] Abbas," Miller continued. "In fact, the way to lose both of them and much of Congress to boot would be to do precisely what the former president recommends."
Seeking to deflect a potential firestorm from the unconfirmed report, the National Jewish Democratic Council's Ira Forman suggested that instead of taking Hamas off the terrorism list, people should put Carter on a list of people one shouldn't pay attention to. "When someone is saying something so outrageous, even if they're a Democrat, we can't take them seriously."
Mitchell didn't directly address Carter's mission at his first State Department news conference Tuesday. But asked about recent statements from Hamas officials urging that the United States to talk to them without preconditions, and asserting that they seek a Palestinian state in land confined to that seized by Israel during the 1967 war, Mitchell said Hamas is welcome to join talks if it agrees to what he called a "democratic dialogue," which he later specified to be the so-called Quartet conditions. "We made our position clear," Mitchell said. "We welcome the participation of any party that meets the requirements of a democratic dialogue."
Like Mitchell, White House officials and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have repeatedly said Hamas members could join a Palestinian unity government if they agree to renounce terror, recognize Israel and abide by past agreements, the conditions set out by the so-called Middle East Quartet made up of the United States, Russia, the United Nations, and the European Union. Hamas's 1988 charter calls explicitly for the destruction of Israel.
Carter himself has reiterated that message to Hamas, according to reports. "I called on Hamas leaders that I met with in Damascus and I told Hamas leaders in Gaza today to accept these conditions," the former president reportedly said after his meeting with Haniya. "They made several statements, and showed readiness to join the peace [process] and move towards establishing a just and independent Palestinian state."
Behind the scenes, there have been some debates in mostly left-leaning Washington and European Middle East circles about whether there should be a softening of conditions to facilitate Hamas members joining a Palestinian unity government. Those who advocate it are concerned that with Fatah only representing the West Bank, and Gaza controlling Hamas, there is not a sufficiently representative Palestinian entity that the United States can push Israel to negotiate with for a two-state solution. One option being floated in the region by independent Palestinians would be to relax conditions in order to achieve a Palestinian technocratic unity government that would mainly prepare for Palestinian elections scheduled for early next year, and then dissolve.
But there's no sign that such ideas have any traction inside the Obama administration.
Indeed, administration officials have indicated that Omar Suleiman, the Egyptian intelligence chief and the lead negotiator on Palestinian unity government talks, has explicitly urged them in meetings not to soften the conditions for Hamas to join a Palestinian unity government. (Some veteran Middle East hands say that neither Egypt, concerned about the Muslim Brotherhood of which Hamas is an affiliate, nor Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, is enthusiastic about including Hamas in a Palestinian power-sharing government and may be happier if one doesn't materialize.)
Mitchell told journalists today that he would plow ahead with comprehensive Middle East peace talks with the parties that show up in the room, and meet the conditions that have been established.
For its part, Hamas has welcomed Carter's attention. "Someone as high-profile as Carter, coming to the region to meet with Hamas and the government of Ismail Haniya but also [Palestinian Authority] President [Mahmoud] Abbas, is very positive," the Christian Science Monitor quoted Hamas advisor Ahmed Yousef. "He can convey messages to President Obama about the situation in Gaza and in the West Bank and the consequences this blockade has had on our lives. Carter is the messenger that we trust - and that the world community trusts."
What's prompting the recent stream of Hamas interviews and requests for dialogue with Washington? "I think they are intrigued by Obama," the Washington Middle East expert familiar with the matter said. "They saw his [Cairo] speech that had both things that they couldn't swallow and things they are extremely intrigued by. For the first time they are a bit curious, even very curious. And in some ways, they don't know how to deal with him and don't know what to do."
But perhaps not yet quite curious enough or convinced they're going to get left behind to find a way to agree to Obama's conditions for dialogue.
Photo by Muhammad Alostaz/Hamas via Getty Images
To believe that the conflict between Israel and the Arabs of former British Palestine is at the core of the terrorism issue is to be quite ignorant of reality. If the Arabs achieve their final goal - the destruction of Israel - the Islamic terrorism problem will continue. Israel is one of their enemies. The other enemies are us - Europeans, North and South Americans, Asians, Australians - that are not Muslim and do not intend to submit to Islam or to become second-class citizens on a worldwide Islamic empire. Jimmy Carter said, commenting on Netanyahu´s speech, that Israel can´t insist on being recognized as a Jewish state since 20% of its population is non-Jewish. To follow this logic, he should tell the United Arab Emirates to stop calling themselves Arab, since the majority of its population is not made up by Arabs. But he, of course, won´t. He prefers to be sitting with and smiling to the Hamas anti-semitical (not merely anti-Zionist) leadership, and (my interpretation of the picture shown above) receiving as a gift a picture of Jerusalem - of a city Arabs are trying right now very hard to deny a historical Jewish presence in. I thought Carter knew his Bible - at least that.
Your language gives away your ideological bend very blatantly: "the Arabs of former British Palestine". I see how fair it is for you to insist that the Arabs recognize Israel as a Jewish state while you don't even recognize that Palestinians ever had any claim whatsoever to the land.
Then you go on to characterize Arabs and Muslims as bloodthirsty Taliban like extremists bent on world domination. If that is the case how do you explain those millions of non-Muslim visitors to Muslim countries every year? Wouldn't the savage Muslims kill them all in your imaginary world?
I'm sorry Yakov but it seems you are the one who is completely ignorant of the situation. Arabs and Muslims have watched the Palestinians be humiliated, displaced and murdered by Israeli occupation for more than 40 years now and it IS in fact the biggest propaganda tool used by radicals in the Middle East. The main reason there is antagonism towards the US is because the weapons used by Israel all say "Made in USA" on them.
If this problem is solved and Palestinians get a state and have some hope of a normal life then we could start to move on to a new era of Arabs accepting the existance of the Jewish state. I'm not saying it would happen overnight. But after ten years it would be hard to keep up the propaganda against Israel if Israel isn't actually killing any Arabs anymore. The extremists would be completely robbed of their favorite grievance. I don't think continuing this conflict just for the sake of keeping the Israeli settlers happy is really worth it anymore.
Wow....lots of fear mongering, distortions and blatant racism in your language.
It appears that Carter is already on the Obama Administration's
Shit list.
This was written in the NY Times Sunday magazine in an article on former President Clinton...
"So far, the former president has avoided causing trouble for the new one. Before Hillary Clinton was picked for secretary of state, some Obama advisers were wary of bringing a freelancing Bill Clinton inside the tent. But to their surprise, Clinton has done nothing to complicate Obama’s life so far. As of early May, Clinton had never been mentioned during the daily White House senior staff meetings as an issue to be dealt with, according to two officials who attend. By contrast, one of them said, Jimmy Carter had come up twice already."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/magazine/31clinton-t.html
Apparently this trip makes three times.
What it all boils down to is that JC continues to stick his nose into business that creates problems for and subsequently ill-will from sitting US Presidents regardless of whether they are Republicans or Democrats.
What this means is that while Jimmy boy may continue to get headlines, access to power, and as such, the means to actually obtain results, is nil.
Which just turns his junkets into a personal ego boost and false promises to his hosts.
Is it even legal for Carter to be doing this?
President Carter: The Naive Diplomat
by Daniel R. DePetris
Casting President Carter’s successes aside, I was absolutely shocked to learn about the former president’s main policy recommendation from his trip overseas. According to sources very-well informed about White House activities, Mr. Carter is prepared to recommend a policy that goes against the very fabric of America’s counterterrorism agenda: remove Hamas from the U.S.-designed terrorism list. While this recommendation may very well be an attempt by Carter to coerce Hamas into recognizing Israel’s legitimacy, it has been historically proven that a “carrots” approach is unlikely to work with the movement’s fundamentalist ideology. With that being said, asking the Obama administration to remove one of the most lethal militant groups from the list is not only dangerous, but potentially devastating to America’s global campaign against terrorism. Imagine what the reactions of other terrorist organizations around the world would be if the U.S. decided to embark on this path. Such a decision would certainly not help America’s image as an unwavering superpower in the face of an asymmetric enemy.
To show how dangerous Hamas fighters are to regional stability, let’s list a few “accomplishments” that they are most known for:
1) In 1988, Hamas publishes its official manifesto, declaring that “Israel will exist until Islam obliterates it…Jihad is the only solution for the Palestinian question.”
2) Hamas sends suicide bombers into Israeli cities to oppose and undermine the highly-acclaimed Oslo Accords.
3) Hamas militants perform a round of shootings and bombings throughout Israel in 1994.
4) Two suicide bombings in Jerusalem claim the lives of 45 people. Hamas admits responsibility for the attacks.
5) Suicide bombers in Jerusalem kill 14 and injure 150 Israelis. Once again, Hamas claims responsibility.
6) 140 people are killed in a Tel-Aviv nightclub bombing n June of 2001
7) Hamas suicide bombers kill 20 innocent civilians on an Israeli bus, including six children.
8) Hamas boycotts the 20005 Palestinian presidential elections due to the success of the pro-western candidate, Mahmoud Abbas.
9) In 2006 and 2007, Hamas wins the Palestinian Parliamentary elections while taking control of the Gaza Strip by force. The movement pledges to continue its campaign of resistance against Israeli occupation.
With such a barbaric list of violent attacks against innocent Israeli civilians, did President Carter sincerely believe that U.S. assurances would turn anti-Jewish zealots away from terrorism? Apparently so.
One day after Carter’s “historic” visit to the Gaza Strip, Hamas officials have already made it publicly known that any recognition of Israel would be labeled as unacceptable and meaningless towards a comprehensive peace. One can only hope that the former president will learn from his mistakes.
Note to self: Negotiating with ideologues is a waste of time.
(6)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE