Anwar Sadat, Jimmy Carter, and Menachem Begin at the Camp David Accords Signing Ceremony. Photo: wiki commons.

JNS.org – Forgive me if I don’t join in the rush to canonize Jimmy Carter. He deserves respect for serving as president and for some meritorious accomplishments, but he was also one of, if not the most, anti-Israel president in history. Though hailed as a peacemaker, his actions and statements, particularly after leaving office, show a much darker side steeped in antisemitism.

Carter said in 1977 that his strong stand against the Arab League boycott “was one of the things that led to my election.” His position had been drafted by Rep. Benjamin Rosenthal’s (D-N.Y.) office to attract Jewish voters. The strategy paid off. If only one in nine New York Jews who voted for Carter had gone for Gerald Ford, the president would have been re-elected.

After his election, however, Carter backed away from his campaign commitment to fighting the boycott, undermining the trust Jews placed in him. He was more concerned with America’s dependence on Arab oil and his messianic vision of bringing peace to the Middle East. Anti-boycott legislation was seen as having the potential to upset the Arabs, and thereby endanger U.S. oil supplies and his peace efforts. Still, momentum for legislation had grown since it was introduced in the Ford administration, and the pro-Israel and business lobbies negotiated a compromise that led to its passage. The legislation outlawing cooperation by U.S. companies with the boycott is one of Carter’s enduring contributions to Israel. Still, he didn’t view it as important retrospectively, devoting just one paragraph in his memoir to expressing his outrage towards the boycott and claiming credit for the outcome.

One of his early decisions that drew the ire of Israel was linking aid to the cancellation of Ford’s sale of concussion bombs and his approval of the sale of Israeli-built Kfir jets to Ecuador. Under pressure, he agreed to allow Israel to receive arms needed for its security but refused to reverse his decision on the bombs and jets.

Far more problematic for most Jews was his attitude towards the Palestinians. He saw Palestinians as being in a similar situation to American blacks. He believed the treatment of Palestinians in the disputed territories was contrary to the moral and ethical principles of the United States and Israel.

Carter was the first president to call for a “Palestinian homeland.” He later became determined to leverage Israeli peace with Egypt to force Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin to agree to make concessions to the Palestinians, a strategy like the one unsuccessfully employed by the Biden administration to achieve Saudi normalization with Israel.

The Israel-Egypt peace treaty is rightly lauded as Carter’s greatest foreign-policy accomplishment. What is less remembered is how much he did to impede the negotiations. Carter wasn’t interested in a bilateral agreement; he had a misguided vision of a comprehensive Middle East peace that he believed could be reached at an international conference in Geneva. When Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin came to the White House, Carter told him US support for Israel would be damaged if he refused to accept the Palestine Liberation Organization’s participation and was the first president to call Israeli settlements illegal. Carter insisted that the Jewish states accept only “minor adjustments” to the 1967 borders, causing an uproar because it was inconsistent with Israel’s determination to maintain “defensible borders.” Carter pressured Israel to “accept the situation that we think is fair.” (emphasis added)

He tried to enlist the help of Syrian President Hafez Assad with the PLO. Despite finding Assad “extremely antagonistic” towards Israel, he praised the dictator as a “strong supporter in the search for peace.”

After the election of Menachem Begin, Carter said that his call for a Palestinian homeland didn’t imply the creation of a Palestinian state, which he said would be a threat to peace, but he envisioned an entity associated with Jordan. Whatever goodwill that statement gained was offset by the subsequent revelation that the administration was in contact with the PLO and that it agreed to negotiate with Yasser Arafat if he accepted either Israel’s right to exist or U.N. Security Council Resolution 242. This violated Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s agreement with Israel that the PLO must meet both conditions.

Meanwhile, Israel and Egypt had begun secret talks in Morocco. President Anwar Sadat recognized that Carter’s idea of an international conference would allow his rivals to veto a deal with Israel and took matters into his own hands by making his historic trip to Jerusalem in November 1977. Carter and his advisers were furious that Sadat had undermined their Geneva gambit. Morton Kondracke of The New Republic wrote that Carter’s unwitting “freshman-year ineptitude scared Sadat into dramatic independent action.”

To his credit, Carter reversed course and convened the talks at Camp David. He was hardly the honest broker his supporters claim. After the 1978 congressional election, he said he was willing to sacrifice re-election because of alienating the Jewish community. Still, Carter believed it was necessary to side with Sadat and pressure the Israelis. His effort to leverage the Palestinian issue, however, failed because he recognized Sadat “did not give a damn about the West Bank.”

Carter was desperate for an agreement as his political standing deteriorated. Failure was seen as a potential death knell to his re-election. He realized he had little influence over Israel and consequently accepted an agreement that did not resolve what he considered the major issues.

Carter later used Israel to sell America’s most sophisticated fighter jets to Saudi Arabia. Israel objected because it threatened its qualitative military edge. Carter packaged the sale with jet transfers to Israel and Egypt to win approval, and said it was all or nothing. AIPAC objected: “By placing Israel in the same category as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the administration is obviously trying to make the Arab sales more acceptable to Congress, but the administration is also abandoning America’s traditional special relations with Israel.” As would happen in subsequent arms fights, AIPAC lost. The fight added to the Jewish perception of Carter as an unreliable ally.

As the election approached, Carter was embarrassed by his U.N. ambassador, Andrew Young, who was forced to resign when it was revealed that he had arranged secret meetings with representatives of the PLO. It was the last straw.

In 1980, Jewish voters abandoned Carter—first for Sen. Edward Kennedy in the primaries, and then for Gov. Ronald Reagan and Illinois Rep. John Anderson in the general election. Carter won only 45% of the Jewish vote (compared to 66% this past November for Vice President Kamala Harris); Reagan got 39%. This was the worst showing among Jewish voters for a Democratic presidential candidate since James Cox in 1920. Jews voted against Carter for the same reasons as other Americans, but his policy towards Israel undoubtedly led to the drop in his share of the Jewish vote from 71% in 1976.

Carter’s disdain for Israel’s leaders is a recurring theme in his diary, referring to them as “obstinate and difficult,” “recalcitrant” and “intransigent.” For example, Yitzhak Rabin was “ineffective,” “timid, stubborn and also somewhat ill at ease.” Begin, who he initially believed was “congenial, dedicated, sincere and deeply religious,” became “a small man with a limited vision.” Carter wrote after one meeting at Begin’s home that he had “rarely been so disgusted in all my life.” By contrast, he found Sadat “charming,” “strong and courageous.” After the three men received the Nobel Peace Prize, Carter wrote: “Sadat deserved it; Begin did not.”

Carter partly blamed his electoral defeat on the Jews, and his animus was reflected in his post-presidency statements and writings. His attitude towards Israel was also influenced by his conviction that Begin lied to him (he didn’t) about freezing settlements.

While he is rightly lauded for his humanitarian work, his antisemitism tarnished his legacy. His book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, was filled with falsehoods and the misrepresentation of history. He even contradicts the calumny in the title when he says, “The driving purpose for the forced separation of the two peoples is unlike that in South Africa.”

Even though he helped facilitate Israel’s peace with Egypt, which included the evacuation of Sinai, Carter repeatedly asserts that Israel does not want peace, is stealing Palestinian land, and refuses to trade land for peace.

Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the United States, said when he reviewed the book that he was shocked by Carter’s “not-so-subtle antisemitism.” Oren also noted that Carter was a Hamas apologist.

Professor Deborah Lipstadt criticized his insinuations about Jewish control of media and government. Carter was angry about the negative comments about his book, and even as he was making the rounds promoting the book in the press, he complained about the “tremendous intimidation in our country that has silenced” Israel’s critics.

Sadly, the former president became one more anti-Israel propagandist, demonizing the Jewish state at every opportunity and spouting the one-sided narrative of the antisemites.

As I wrote in a review of the book, few, if any, Jews realized just how nefarious Carter’s views were until he left office. In retrospect, their votes against him may have saved Israel.

The post Jimmy Carter Was No Saint for Jews first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

A Houthi fighter mans a machine gun mounted on a truck during a parade for people who attended Houthi military training as part of a mobilization campaign, in Sanaa, Yemen, Dec. 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Khaled Abdullah

JNS.org – Just days into 2025, Israel is still fighting a war on seven fronts, including Iran, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Iranian proxies in Iraq, volatility in Judea and Samaria, and an extremely unstable and unpredictable Syria.

Israelis living in central Israel have been awoken by Houthi missiles several times this week. This is not simply Israel’s problem, but the world’s. The war from Yemen began in March 2020, when radical Houthis began attacking the shipping lanes in the Red Sea. U.S. and other vessels have to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, affecting the entire global economy and putting at particular risk the economy of Egypt.

The Houthis, who practice a strict form of Shi’ism called Zaydi Islam, seized control of the capital of Sanaa in 2014, demanding their own government and lower fuel prices. Their governmental infrastructure is confined to an extremely conservative Shura Council. More than 80% of the Yemeni population lives below the poverty line; their sophisticated weaponry is provided by Iran.

With Sanaa 2,096 kilometers away from Tel Aviv (1,290 miles), the Israelis might not yet have precise intelligence of where the Houthis have been launching their missiles from, but they are very rapidly gaining it. A ray of hope is that U.S.-backed CENTCOM has begun attacking Houthi bases within the last several nights.

Turning to Gaza, since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, Israelis have been suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder that the current warring situation continues to exacerbate. Without time to recover from that “Black Sabbath,” 15 months later, more than 800 soldiers in the Israeli Defense Force have lost their lives with thousands wounded. Many reservists’ lives have been put on hold for months at a time while they are called away from their jobs and their families to defend their country.

Israel has made significant gains on the battlefield within Gaza, killing Hamas senior leaders, and most recently, eliminating Hassam Shahwan, head of the terror group’s internal security. Ideologies, however, do not suddenly disappear. The tenacity of the relentless propaganda war against the State of Israel is a regnant aspect within the minds of many members of Hamas, and no one knows for sure what they might have in store for Israelis.

The IDF has uncovered more than 240 Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists who had been cynically using the Kamal Adwan Hospital as a command-and-control center, which was replete with weapons found in babies’ incubators, tactical communications equipment and classified Hamas documents.

Predictably, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus of the U.N. World Health Organization condemned Israel, saying “hospitals in Gaza have once again become battlegrounds, and the health system is under severe threat.”

A similar problem awaits Israel in Southern Lebanon, where the halfway point of the 60-day ceasefire has passed. The IDF has collected a massive arsenal of 85,170 weapons from Hezbollah captured from about 300 Southern Lebanese villages.

However, rudderless ships can behave erratically. Hezbollah has just issued an aggressive statement saying that if Israel is not out of Southern Lebanon by the end of the ceasefire, the terrorist group will respond with renewed acts of violence.

Lebanon, a failed state without a real, centralized government is under the tight grip of Hezbollah, and a failing economy with approximately 89,500 Lebanese pounds equal to $1.

It remains to be seen how Middle East envoy Amos Hochstein’s plan is any different from U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, with the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and UNIFIL supposed to once again fill the void. Both have demonstrably colluded with Hezbollah, going so far as giving Hezbollah LAF uniforms. Hezbollah is supposed to again move north of the Litani River. However, they are already returning to homes that have been used to build tunnels to supply weapons and fighters against Israel.

The late Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, eliminated by U.S. forces in 2020, vowed to make “a ring of fire around Israel.” This has now proven to be a failed policy. The Shi’ite crescent running from Tehran through Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and to the Mediterranean Sea has a gaping hole at its core in Syria.

Israel shares a long border with Jordan, which has proven to be a vehicle for smuggling weapons into Judea and Samaria (also known as the West Bank). Despite a slim minority of Palestinian support for the Palestinian Authority, according to the Palestinian Center for Survey and Research, of all the candidates to follow 89-year-old leader Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian choice points to Marwin Barghouti, a convicted terrorist serving multiple life sentences for murder during the first and second intifadas (“uprisings”) against Israel.

Resurrecting the failed P.A. to take control of Gaza indicates nothing less than a supreme failure of imagination among the U.S. State Department and other foreign government officials.

Finally, there is some optimism that Syria no longer provides a direct route from Iran to Hezbollah, yet skepticism remains over the intentions of Abu Mohammed al-Julani, Syrian revolutionary militant and political leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Al-Julani, who had been a member of Jabhat al Nusra, an affiliate of Al-Qaeda and ISIS, has reinvented himself into Ahmed al-Sharaa and disavowed his ties to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. He has promised to unify Syria, yet has also vowed revenge against the Alawites, who have ruled the Sunni majority with a brutal fist. He maintains particular animus against the Kurdish minority, who had always been loyal to the United States and who fought valiantly against ISIS. He has recently said about the Kurds that “the separatist will either bid farewell to their weapons, or you will be buried with your weapons.”

Much of al-Julani’s backing and training of his rebels has come from Turkey. A great deal of northern Syria is now being controlled by Ankara, which aims to resurrect the Ottoman Caliphate of the 15th and 16th centuries, creating a radical Sunni outpost that admires Hamas. It does not auger well that al-Julani has just changed the textbooks to revere Sharia law.

Israel is already fighting a war on seven fronts. An eighth front within Syria might well open up. What happens next well may predict the outcome for the rest of the Middle East.

The post Waiting for the Middle Eastern Storm to Settle first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

A person waves a flag adopted by the new Syrian rulers, as people gather during a celebration called by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) near the Umayyad Mosque, after the ousting of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, in Damascus, Syria, Photo: December 20, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad/File Photo

JNS.org – Ahmed al-Sharaa, head of Syria’s Sunni Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group and the country’s de facto leader, has asked the United States to pressure Israel to withdraw from the Golan buffer zone and the peak of Mount Hermon.

Moreover, al-Sharaa, also known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammad al-Julani, asked the Biden administration for humanitarian aid, Israel’s public broadcaster Kan reported on Friday.

Sources in Israel said that they did not receive any demand from Washington with regard to Syria, adding that the Jewish state will not compromise on its security, according to the report.

Maher Marwan, the new governor of Damascus, spoke to NPR last week on behalf of al-Sharaa, saying that Syria “wants peace, and we cannot be an opponent to Israel or an opponent to anyone.”

Marwan acknowledged that Israel’s concerns following the collapse of Bashar Assad’s regime were understandable, “So it advanced a little [into the buffer zone], bombed [former Assad military assets] a little, etc.”

He added, “We have no fear toward Israel, and our problem is not with Israel. … There are people here who want coexistence and who want peace. They don’t want disputes. And we don’t want to meddle in anything that will threaten Israel’s security or any other country’s security.”

In 2017, the U.S. placed a $10 million bounty on al-Sharaa, as the commander of Al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria.

However, the bounty has been removed after a high-level U.S. delegation met with al-Sharaa in Damascus on Dec. 20.

The meeting was touted as “good” and “very productive” by US officials. “We will judge by the deeds, not just by words,” said Barbara Leaf, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs.

Furthermore, reports in the media suggested that President Joe Biden is weighing the recognition of the new Syrian regime before leaving office on Jan. 20.

The Syrian leader spoke to a group of journalists a few days before the arrival of the U.S. delegation, saying that his regime will continue to uphold the 1974 Disengagement of Forces Agreement that ended the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

Israel’s “excuses have run out, and they have crossed the lines of engagement” for striking the Assad regime’s military infrastructure, as well as for deploying troops to several demilitarized zones in the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, The New York Times quoted al-Sharaa as saying.

“The collapse of the Syrian regime created a vacuum on Israel’s border and in the buffer zone established by the 1974 Separation of Forces Agreement,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office stated on Dec. 12. “Israel will not permit jihadi groups to fill that vacuum and threaten Israeli communities on the Golan Heights with Oct. 7-style attacks. That is why Israeli forces entered the buffer zone and took control of strategic sites near Israel’s border.”

The post Syrian Leader Asks US to Pressure Israel to Retreat first appeared on Algemeiner.com.