THE PEANUT FARMER: Why Jimmy Carter Was – And Is – So Reviled By Jews

As previously reported by Matzav.com, Jimmy Carter, the longest-living former president of the United States, passed away today at the age of 100. In an article published by Benjamin Ivry in The Forward back in September, Ivry delves into the reasons why Carter was deeply disliked by many Jews, as well as some of the anti-Semitic comments he made during his lifetime.

To fully understand the mixed views toward Jimmy Carter within the Jewish community, we can draw a comparison to a figure from far outside the realm of Carter’s influence—a historical precedent. French historians note that Napoleon Bonaparte, while occasionally making disparaging remarks about France’s Jewish population, also took actions to help them in significant ways.

In a somewhat similar fashion, Carter played a role in several pivotal initiatives that benefited Jews and Israel. He was instrumental in the Camp David Accords, helped establish the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., and supported the annual National Menorah lighting ceremony in the nation’s capital. Another notable achievement during Carter’s one-term presidency was the Israel Anti-Arab Boycott Act of 1977, which prohibited American companies from participating in the Arab boycott against Israel. Additionally, Carter made it possible for tens of thousands of Iranian Jews fleeing the Iranian Revolution to come to America, as well as increasing the number of Soviet Jewish émigrés.

However, Carter also authored the highly controversial book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, which placed the blame for the Middle East conflict squarely on Israel and misrepresented key facts. One of the most damaging statements in the book suggested that terrorism should continue until Israel adhered to the “road map” to peace with the Palestinians. Carter later admitted, during a book tour at Brandeis University, that his wording was “completely improper and stupid” and that he would revise the passage in future editions.

Following this, Carter publicly apologized on NPR for a “terribly worded sentence which implied, obviously in a ridiculous way, that I approved terrorism and terrorist acts against Israeli citizens.” Despite this, Carter did not request his publishers to correct factual inaccuracies in the book. This omission led to the resignation of 14 Jewish staff members at the Carter Center, who criticized Carter for presenting a work that was “biased, inaccurate, misleading and missing key historical facts.”

One of those who resigned was historian Kenneth W. Stein, who sharply criticized Carter’s book for being “replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments.” Stein also referenced a previous collaboration with Carter on a book about the Middle East, The Blood of Abraham (1985), where a disagreement over a particular passage led Carter to dismiss his objections by smiling and saying: “Ken, only one of us was president of the United States.”

This brashness was further evidenced by an incident when, according to later revelations, former Holocaust Memorial Council executive director Monroe Freedman compiled a list of potential council members, only for Carter to remark that there were “too many Jews” on it. A Presbyterian scholar specializing in the Holocaust was even excluded because his name “sounded too Jewish.” This raised the question of whether Carter was trying to assemble a diverse, multi-faith body or if his actions were driven by his own brand of born-again Christianity. Freedman, outraged, denied that it was “inappropriate to build a Holocaust council with a significant majority of the board being Jewish.”

In 2007, Neal Sher, a former Justice Department lawyer involved in the deportation of Nazi war criminals, recalled a perplexing incident from two decades earlier. Carter had intervened in the case of Martin Bartesch, a former SS guard at Mauthausen concentration camp, who had murdered a Jewish prisoner during World War II. Despite Bartesch’s war crimes, Carter sent a handwritten note to U.S. officials requesting “special consideration” for him, citing “humanitarian reasons.”

Carter’s involvement in Middle Eastern affairs continued into recent years. In 2015, he told HuffPost Live that French Jews, in light of rising anti-Semitic violence, should not consider moving to Israel for safety, suggesting that “on the average” they were “maybe safer in France than some places in Israel.” He later walked back the comment, adding, “but I’m not trying to make a judgment,” which raised the question of why he would even make such a statement if not to express his own judgment.

Despite these problematic remarks, Carter did offer some optimism, notably commenting on the November 2015 Paris attacks as an opportunity for people to better understand what makes Islam “great.” This was a sentiment that French Jews likely didn’t share, given the rising anti-Semitism in their country. Similarly, Carter’s unwavering belief in the potential for peace talks, even with groups like Hamas, led to criticism of his idealism, especially considering the group’s history of violence.

Carter’s views on Jews also caused controversy in other settings, particularly when teaching Sunday school. In one instance, Carter claimed that Jewish leaders had no choice but to kill Yoshka because he had “directly challenged in a fatal way the existing church.” He also repeated the accusation that Jewish leaders were responsible for Yoshka’s death, a claim that has fueled centuries of anti-Semitic persecution.

Carter’s critics, like the Atlanta Jewish Times, were especially irked by his continued support for Hamas, which they viewed as deeply problematic. The paper even went so far as to label him a “parasite,” which led Carter to refuse interviews with journalists from that publication.

{Matzav.com}