How to react to a personal apology to the American Jewish community by a distinguished American who has caused great damage to the image of the state of Israel? That was the challenge that I faced when it became known that former President Jimmy Carter had written an open letter to the Jewish community recently.
There were some who took the cynical approach and wanted me simply to criticize and reject Mr. Carter's initiative. They claimed he was only doing this because his grandson was running for a newly-vacated seat in the Georgia State Senate, in a district with a significant Jewish population. They also argued Mr. Carter had not specifically rescinded the damaging accusations he had leveled against Israel.
I did not think such cynicism was fair or smart. When someone reaches out, particularly a former President and Nobel Peace Prize winner, my responsibility, I believed, was twofold: to examine carefully and evaluate the contents of the open letter, and to raise questions about how and whether the former President would translate words into deeds.
In fact, the letter itself is a beautiful expression of support for the State of Israel and a personal apology for the harm he has caused in the past. Mr. Carter struck many of the right chords. He specifically referred to Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. He called for Israel's right to exist within recognized and secure borders. Most relevant, he said that criticism of Israel for "improvement" must not be used "to stigmatize Israel."
Finally, using the Yom Kippur term regarding sins one may have committed, he offered an "Al Het for any words or deeds of mine" that may have stigmatized Israel.
His words must receive a fair hearing.
On the other hand, I can only hope, but am not ready to say, that this is an epiphany for Mr. Carter; that he has come to realize that many years of conflict between him and the State of Israel and American Jews was wrong and destructive.
A lot of water and a lot of stigmatizing have passed under the bridge. Mr. Carter has caused damage to Israel's image in his speaking, writings and travels, using his bully pulpit to bash Israel.
A prime example was his book, Palestine: Peace or Apartheid. Not only did he add significant weight to efforts to delegitimize Israel by applying the term apartheid to its policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians, but he also lent his name to the anti-Semitic notion propagated by Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, that the Israel lobby controls U.S. policy on the Middle East and stifles debate on the issue.
I am pleased by his words and tone hope they will be matched by future words and deeds — that he will no longer employ such explosive terms such as "apartheid" or "Jewish control and power" in discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; that whatever criticism he may have will not overwhelming be directed at Israel; that he recognizes the often-omitted facts that Israel has made generous offers to the Palestinians over the past decade, only to be met with rejection and terrorism.
I deeply wish Jimmy Carter's outreach will be the beginning of a new and positive chapter in the Carter-Jewish relationship. Only time will tell.
