The passing of former US president Jimmy Carter has resulted in much praise and critique for his policies and views. While many have praised his post-presidency role in advancing humanitarian causes, others have critiqued him for his role during his presidency when Iran fell to the Islamic Revolution.
Carter’s legacy is worth debating. Even though he was president for only a single term, his legacy continues to reverberate in the Middle East. This was a legacy he cared about. The Middle East was not merely a passing concern for him. The countries in the region were not just one of many countries in the world. He took an intense interest in the Palestinians and Israel. Therefore he should also be judged on his pronouncements and decisions.
One particular trip to the region stands out. Between June 2 and 17, 2009, he visited the Middle East and wrote a report for the Carter Center about the trip. The report can be found online and is titled “Trip Report by Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter to Lebanon, Syria, Israel, West Bank, and Gaza – June 2-17, 2009.”
The trip took place during an important time. It took place after Operation Cast Lead in which the IDF had fought Hamas in Gaza from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009. It also took place as the Lebanese elections were happening on June 7, 2009. Lebanon had gone through momentous changes.
Former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri was murdered in an assassination on February 14, 2005. Hezbollah was behind the assassination. The Syrian regime had withdrawn from Lebanon in the wake of the killing and this led to a major push for changes in Lebanon after years of being occupied by Syria. The Future Movement led by Saad Hariri performed well in the elections alongside its March 14 Movement allies. The March 8 movement, which saw Hezbollah allied with Amal and Aoun, was perceived as suffering a slight defeat.
The Lebanese elections took place in the wake of clashes in 2008 after the government tried to reduce the role of Hezbollah’s independent telecommunications network. Doha had brokered a deal in the wake of these clashes.
What matters for our purposes is that Lebanon was going through a long-term change that would see Hezbollah grow in power. Hamas was also rising in power. Even though it was isolated in the West Bank, there were moves afoot to improve its standing. Those moves would eventually result in the Obama administration supporting the Hamas leaders being hosted in Doha.
This would empower Hamas and help strengthen it on the road to October 7, 2023. Similarly Hezbollah was strengthened over time in Lebanon, leading to its attacks on Israel on October 8, 2023.
At this time in the Middle East, there was a push to end the isolation of the Assad regime. The US had sought to isolate this regime but US politicians and think tanks were pushing to bring Assad in from the cold. An article at Brookings in March 2009 argued “the recent high-level meeting between US and Syrian officials in Damascus effectively ends former US President George W. Bush’s policy of isolating Syria and underscores the plan of his successor, Barack Obama, to start a serious dialogue with Damascus on a range of political and security issues affecting US interests in the Middle East.” Carter had said in April 2009 that the US and Syria were close to restoring ties.
He appeared hopeful on this issue. US Senator John Kerry, who would play a key role in the Obama administration, met Assad in 2006 and again in 2010. Nancy Pelosi, the powerful Democratic leader in the House of Representatives met Assad in 2007.
It was in this context that Carter went to Syria in 2009 and then to the West Bank, Israel and Gaza. The wind was blowing in Assad’s favor, and Carter appeared to want to open the sails. Carter said he “went to Damascus and had a long session with Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid Mouallem and the next morning with President Bashar al Assad.
They were somewhat peeved at US ‘intervention’ in the Lebanese election, eager to have friendly relations with the US, believe recent diplomatic meetings were wasted opportunities, look forward to Senator George Mitchell’s visit this week, want to help with Iraq border crossing security and the overall Mideast peace process.”
Controversial Hamas meeting
Carter didn’t mention human rights abuses or critique the Assad regime. Instead he went and met “Khaled Meshaal and other leaders of Hamas. Our primary goals were to induce them to comply with the Quartet’s ‘3 conditions’ (recognize Israel’s right to exist; forgo violence; and accept previous peace agreements), help form a unity government with elections next January, and exchange the release of Corporal Shalit for a reasonable number of prisoners held by Israel. As in previous meetings, my impression was that they were frank and honest with me, listening carefully, quickly accepting or rejecting my suggestions, and being flexible when possible.”
He didn’t have any negative comments about Hamas, instead he saw them as honest and flexible. However, when Carter next met with Palestinian leaders in the West Bank, he now found time to critique them.
“I then met with [Palestinian Authority] Minister of Interior Sayed Abu Ali and his police commander. The minister seemed to think he should arrest any activist supporting Hamas, including well known NGOs and financial groups, and could name none of the 600 or more prisoners who had been given a civilian trial or legal council. Many of the prisoners, such as the associates of Barghouti, are obviously just political opponents of Fatah. We then met with Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, who promised to investigate police policies and correct abuses.”
Note how Carter’s tone changes here. In Damascus, he is happy to meet with Assad and his officials and Hamas leaders. He doesn’t critique them. He only explains what they want. However, when he meets with the Palestinian Authority, he critiques them for arresting Hamas members and for persecuting political opponents. He cares about police policies and “abuses.”
He never uses the word “abuses” in regard to the Assad regime and its abuse of minorities and political opponents. He doesn’t critique Hamas in Gaza for its illegal coup in 2007 where it took over Gaza and murdered Fatah members. He only critiques the Palestinian Authority.
Carter only mentions “human rights” once in his trip, when meeting people in Jerusalem. “During our time in Jerusalem we also met with Civil Society leaders and key players in the peace and human rights movements.” The agenda is clear. No human rights for Syrians. No human rights when it comes to Hamas abuses. Only human rights when it comes to Israel and the West Bank.
In Gaza, Carter wrote that he “planted a beautiful tree given to us by Speaker Berri in Lebanon. We drove to another building where we had extensive meetings with Prime Minister Haniyeh and other government officials who are pleading for building materials and other supplies to be permitted to enter, either from Egypt or Israel.”
There is an interesting sentence here. Carter notes that the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh wants building materials. We know now where these materials went. They went to build tunnels and rockets. Carter doesn’t critique Hamas. He doesn’t critique it for illegally taking over the Gaza Strip or its abuses of political opponents.
He does say “after meeting with groups of wounded orphans and families of Palestinian prisoners, I delivered a letter from Naom Schalit to be given to his son, and made the same arguments as in Damascus for peace and reconciliation.”
The pattern is clear. This is Carter in his own words. He had ample time to critique Hamas and Assad. He critiqued Israel and the Palestinian Authority. He didn’t critique the Assad regime. Instead, he was part of the cavalcade of voices that appeared to want to give voice to Assad and his regime and bring him in from the cold. We know what Assad did.
We know what Hamas did. Carter had a chance to speak truth to power to these regimes. He was a much more harsh critic of Israel and the Palestinian Authority than of Hamas and Asssad.
