Jack Arbiser: Professors Courageous for Opposing Carter, The Emory Wheel, January 30, 2007

  • 0

A couple of months ago, I walked to a synagogue for a Bar Mitzvah in downtown Nashville. As I walked with my family, I thought about how we live in a wonderful country – I can walk to synagogues in Nashville, Atlanta, Birmingham, Charleston, Savannah and other cities where a generation ago, the Ku Klux Klan held considerable sway.

By contrast, if I wanted to walk to a synagogue in downtown London, where Jews have lived since Oliver Cromwell allowed Jews to enter Britain, or in downtown Paris, where Jews have lived since Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon in Roman Gaul, I would have to be more careful.

In Nashville, or other American cities, synagogues are clearly marked. When I go to a synagogue in Stockholm, my passport is checked before I’m admitted. I then pass through nondescript steel gates and climb up a stairway before I can enter services.

The United States is indisputably a more inviting place for Jews to live than Europe, which is why it’s so disturbing that Jimmy Carter’s book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, has earned so much attention. The book represents a kind of attack on Israel that Jews in the United States aren’t used to and, unfortunately, a kind of attack that is becoming more common.

Carter’s book is written in a kind of code. The title is carefully chosen, and the message this title attempts to convey is that the concept of a Jewish state is apartheid. Apparently, other racial groups are entitled to a state, but not Jews.

Carter also decries the lack of debate in the U.S. media about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But perhaps his real complaint is that the debate in the United States isn’t as biased to the Palestinian side as he would like. In Europe, there is no debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because Israel is seen as the No. 1 threat to world peace, and Jews in Europe are treated accordingly. This lack of debate has created an atmosphere where anti-Semitism is legitimized.

Carter’s criticism of Israel and Jews has not been limited to his book. On Nov. 28 of last year, on “Hardball with Chris Matthews,” Carter stated that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians was worse than the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Carter also trivialized the Rwandan genocide as “ancient history.” Whatever Israel has done to the Palestinians, it has not led to 800,000 dead, like in Rwanda.

But Carter isn’t alone in his criticism of Jews and Israel. In fact, his criticism represents an increasingly hostile environment for Jews. Recently, a Holocaust denial conference was held in Iran. While a few ordinary Iranians participated, other “luminaries” in Holocaust denial also attended, many from Europe and even the United States. Even this Holocaust denial conference is a legacy of Carter, who allowed Iran to be seized by radicals. Without Carter, it is likely that there would be no Ahmadinejad. And without Ahmadinejad, it is likely that there would be no nuclear proliferation or Holocaust denial.

I am, however, proud of how many of my colleagues are handling these attacks. Emory professor Deborah Lipstadt wrote an opinion piece in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week condemning Carter’s use of the word apartheid. And of course, Kenneth Stein has spent the past few months pointing out Carter’s many factual errors.

Both Stein and Lipstadt deserve our kudos for pointing out that Carter’s argument, while appealing to some supporters of Palestine, is factually flawed.

Jack Arbiser is an associate professor in the Emory School of Medicine.

Jack Arbiser: Professors Courageous for Opposing Carter, The Emory Wheel, January 30, 2007

  • 0