A startling admission
On the one hand, Carter admits that the Israeli influence/lobby will prevent politicians from coming to power in the U.S. if they indiciate a concern for the plight of the Palestinians (what is called "balance" here), yet he goes on to say that such a situation does not preclude said politicians from working for peace and justice in the region.
Can somebody explain the logic here? Does an elite position such as Carter's preclude the ability to address root causes?
AMY GOODMAN: Afterward President Jimmy Carter spoke on Tuesday about his book, Palestine: Apartheid Not Peace [sic], he took questions from the audience. He was asked to outline what a balanced US-Middle East policy would look like. Again, his book is called Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.
JIMMY CARTER: Yeah, the word “balance” is one that's almost unacceptable in our country. If you had a candidate for Congress running either Democratic or Republican and they announced to the general public, “I’m going to take a balanced position between the Israelis and the Palestinians,” they would never be elected. That's an impossibility in our country. But that doesn't preclude an incumbent administration from demonstrating with their own actions and words that they are concerned about Israeli peace, they are also concerned about peace and justice for the Palestinians. And that's what I did. It’s what Richard Nixon did. It’s what Ronald Reagan did after I left office. It’s what George Bush, Sr. did. It’s what Bill Clinton did. But it's not being done now.
more
On the one hand, Carter admits that the Israeli influence/lobby will prevent politicians from coming to power in the U.S. if they indiciate a concern for the plight of the Palestinians (what is called "balance" here), yet he goes on to say that such a situation does not preclude said politicians from working for peace and justice in the region.
Can somebody explain the logic here? Does an elite position such as Carter's preclude the ability to address root causes?