Uma leitura que se torna atual face à História recente do conflito israelo-palestiniano. Palestina: Paz, Sim. Apartheid, Não coloca a tónica narrativa no essencial. O caminho para a Paz tem de ter um rumo e um caminho que não admite a exclusão. A ler por quem procura ter uma opinião fundamentada.

I have background knowledge of the region and its history but I still found the first third of the book very difficult to focus on and understand. The next two-thirds were excellent and gave me a greater understanding of Coates's essay in The Message, though it made his points seem understated to a fault.

immy Carter is a despicable anti-Semite who holds a grudge against the Jewish people who he blames for his losing the 1980 Presidential
Election to Ronald Reagan.
Jimmy Carter is also a pathetic and immoral opportunist who has jumped on the 'hate Israel' bandwagon to get his wizened face back into the limelight.
Is Carter trying to remain in the limelight, at the expense of
Israel's people? And at the expense of peace , justice, and human rights (YES, folks, Israeli Jews have human rights too , it so happens)!
I intend, in this review, to answer some of Carter's repulsive charges against Israel and to show them up as the lies and blood libels which they are.
There are those who will challenge my characterization of Carter as an anti-Semite.
But here is proof that he is.
Singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction out of all proportion of any other Middle East country is anti-Semitic.
Especially coming from a man who connived to topple the enlightened and benevolent reign of Shah Reza Pahlavi, the two thousand year old
Persian Imperial house that gave full equality to women unlike, any other Islamic country at the time, other than perhaps Turkey.
He bares much blame for the repressive, cruel and genocidal Islamic
Fundamentalist regime of the diabolical Ayatollah Khomeini and his evil acolyte Mahmoud 'Haman' Ahmadinejad.
Comparing Israel and her leaders to the Nazis, as Carter does, is anti-semitic!
Anti-semitism is when Israel is held to a different standard than any other country in the world- as Carter does!
Anti-Semitism is when Israel is subjected to a unique double standard of judgement and criticism for it's actions in defending itself against threats to it's existance and population, as Carter does.

As is evident in the title of the book, Carter accuses Israel of being an Apartheid State. This is a vicious blood libel.
Almost 2 million people living in Israel are not Jews.
No laws on statute books prescribing living areas or movements.
Unlike under South African Aparthied laws there is no Israeli ideology, policy or plan to segregate mistreat or persecute the Arab population.
In Israel the State owns 93% of the land, which is leased to all citizens regardless of race. The remaining 7% can be bought by all
Israeli citizens.
There is no official seperate schoolig in Israel;people choose schools for their religious, linguistic or cultural background.
Non-Jews can become citizens if they comply with necessary imigration requirements as anywhere in the world.
Non-Jews can serve in the army as volunteers.
Israeli Arabs are full citizens, enjoy full political rights, can vote and stand for election and political association- hardly
Apartheid, Carter!
As regards the much maligned settlers, has Carter ever visited these communities he so maligns, I have!
They are beautiful and peaceful family orineted communities, half of them children, who are simply exercising the right to live in their ancient homeland. What is racist is the determination of the Arabs and their leftist supporters to get them off the land. since Biblical Times, Jews have lived in the West Bank and Gaza until forced to flee in 1948.
Jews have a biblical, historical and legal right to settle in the West Bank.
Under international law, territories are considered "occupied" only when taken in an act of agression.
These disputed territories were tkane by Israel ina defensive war against
Arab agression.
There are no signed agreements between Israel and the Arabs regarding buliding/expanding settlements.
Predictably Carter atacks the Security Fence built to keep Arab terrorists from getting into Israel and killing Jewish men, women and children.
It is to protect the lives of Israel's people, it is not racist as
Carter charges. It is only temporary and can be removed at any time when terrorist attacks end.
The international law, which Carter continually evokes to villify
Israel, does NOT ban expropriation of land in disputed territory completely. It bans only "extensive destruction and and appropriation of property not justified by millitary necesity.
The route of the fence is defined by security and topographical needs.
The security fence is NOT a wall (as reffered to by Israel-haters as the Apartheid Wall)
Only 5% of it's current length is concrete, near the most vulnerable and threatened Israeli areas.
The fence contains agricultural gates to enable farmers to continue cultivating their lands. Of course Carter does not mention this or any other truths inconvenient to his slander against Israel.
Carter calls for the return of the so-called 'refugees' as a way of destroying Israel and anihilating her people.
Some facts those who read Carter's propaganda pamphlet should remember:
In 1948 the Arabs were encouraged to leave Israel by their leaders, who promised to purge the land of Jews.
About 630 000 Arab refugees left Israel in 1948.
About 800 000 Jews fled Arab lands, where they had lived for centuries, with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. They were absorbed by Israel.
Arab refugees were intentionally not absorbed into Arab lands to which they fled so as tpo breed terrorism and push for the so- called "right of return" pushed by anti-Israeli racists like Jimmy
Carter.
The refugge problem is not soley between Israel and the 'Palestinian' Arabs but between Israel and the Arab States that attacked her in 1948.
Palestinian refugees have no legal right of return to Israel under the general international conventions, nor under major UN resolutions, nor under elevant agreements between parties.
To call for the 'return of "refugees"' as Carter does, is illegal.

Carter even implicitly defends suicide bombings.
Unlike what Carter declares, suicide bombings, it so happens, are not desperate acts.
Thos carrying them out are middle class, educated and brainwashed by evil fanatics.
These suicide bombers (or more correctly homicide bombers) fell themselves to be the ultimate heroic expressions of their communities and the political organizations which have primed them.
They thrive because of the specific political culture that fosters it, and believe in Paradise waiting for them after death.
Carter, also of course condemmns the targeted assasinations of evil mass-murdering terrorists like Ahmed Yassin, Abdulaziz Rantisi and
Mohammed Deif.
Hamas has declared a war of genocide against Israel and all of her
Jews down to the last child. All Hamas leaders are involved in and/or planning terrorist attacks and are therefore combatants.
Millitary and political wings of the terrorist groups Hamas, the
Popular Resistance Committees, Islamic Jihad and Al Qaeda overlap with no distinction.
The aim of Hamas et al is the same as the Nazis, the genocide of
Jews.
Therefore Israel's policy of targeting Hamas leaders for assassination is legal, Carter!
This book by Carter is a racist blood libel against the Israeli people and full of lies.
If you want truth and objectivity stay far away from it.

This book should be required reading for every American. We need to learn why are we allies with Israel and why our media vilifies the Palestinians. It is astonishing how unbiased Jimmy Carter comes off within the book. Its surprising that a former president would write these candid observations.

It is essential to understand that criticizing the Israeli government is not the same as Anti-semitism. Just as criticizing American policies doesn’t make you anti-American.

This was like homework! It was really difficult for me to get through, but it sure makes you think about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Great discussion and in the end, I'm very glad I know a little bit more about that conflict.

Though the subject matter grim, this book was a great read. It maintained a neutral stance throughout its entirety and offered up perspectives from talks with political leaders on both sides. I would not recommend this book to someone who isn't well versed in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict as it is rather moot with details. Carter summarizes a lot of the events or simply references them and gives his own interpretation or account of things that he personally witnessed or heard while participating in the peace process as governor, president, and international proponent of democracy. Explicitly stating throughout the book necessities for a lasting peace, issues that have prevented peace so far, and presenting hopeful prospects for the future, this book has a rather uplifting spirit considering the historical tragedy surrounding this conflict.

Mr. Carter is accused of anti-Semitism? Seriously? That's the opposite of the impression I had when reading his book and especially in the first 3 chapters.

I highly appreciate what he said about Gaza and mistreatments of the Palestinians especially in the last 5 years when the so-called "peace process" stopped.

I thought that he should express a direct blame to the brutal Israeli policies more than he did. I also think the US policies in recent years are contributing to eliminate any REAL peace attempts and that Mr. Carter should have said more about that.

After all these years he still sounds like a polite Politian.

Regardless, I'm so glad he wrote this book. It seems like he was filling a gap in the topic especially for Westerners. To us, Arabs, there is much more in it than this simplified analysis. There is pain and injustice.

My peace be upon you all, not APARTHEID!

zionists tried to take over the current Israeli territories in early 1910s, when was under ottoman control... strategy, move a bunch like minds in, take over politics, turn country democratically (or with as little violence necessary). but given the 100Ks of Arabs in area, and lack of Jews wanting to immigrate there, long shot. then came British, Hitler, UN... Being under seige "from all sides" etc etc...

Now Israel as a country. Thru hook and crook They've acquired new lands and "eliminated" the Jew/Arab demographic issues. Also, Zionists know how a people might turn a country thru political means. Therefore, the political power and land grab door is closed to Palestinians via apartheid like laws and policies...

Several one sided, greatly favoring Jews, "peace" agreements were proffered over the decades. Imagine swiss cheese, you being offered 45% of it, the holes, and heavy restrictions on governing or even traveling to the other holes... The world continues to gaslight that they were rejected out of pure Arab belligerence and hate. While Jews demand a right to exist as a self determinant nation, Zionists deny that right to Palestinians.

Wall... taken land (forceful evictions)... closed off water sources and fertile soil... administrative detentions (no rights, torture, indefinite)... international courts deeming illegal many actions (israel gives zero fuchs, and no one chooses to make them). only Palestinian militant reactions to all this is considered terrorism (nuts!!)

This book gives an overview of how all this came to be... Just enough for anyone to do more research, check the facts, and come to own conclusions. Doesnt look good for Zionists, soooo critical reviews abound for the book and Carter.

Rest in peace, Jimmy Carter. I'm sorry that when you died, you died seeing the world devolving around you.

Firstly, I respect Carter not as a president but as a person, because as a president, he helped contribute to many of America's geopolitical failures, including that of Israel and Palestine.

I appreciated Peace not Apartheid because I think it served as a journey through Carter's evolving perspective from Governor, to President, to citizen. I do think he still failed in recognizing that Israeli safety is not more important than Palestinian safety (we are all of us inherently equal and all deserve to be safe).

That being said, this contained a tremendous amount of empathy for Palestinians that you never see from American politicians. The willingness to go to Palestine and actually speak with Palestinians, to hear their personal stories of abuse, discrimination, and disenfranchisement, is not something you see from western politicians, broadly. I think Carter had a perspective lacking in most politicians, that he actually understood people are people.

Unfortunately, and maybe this was because he was older than sliced bread, he was incapable of envisioning a single Palestinian state where everyone, regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity, could co-exist. Maybe that was because he was too sure of the bigotry he saw exemplified by IDF soldiers and politicians. I don't know, but I think we've well passed any opportunity for two actual separate states, especially in which Palestine is contiguous.

When I told my parents I was going to do solidarity work in Palestine, they - in the midst of yelling and tears - asked me why. I said that I wanted to be able to come back and talk about what I had seen. My father's retort was something along the lines of "What about Jimmy Carter's book? What could you possibly say that a Nobel prize winning well respected ex-president couldn't?"

A year after coming home, I finally read it. There's very little that Carter and I have to say that's the same, as we're coming from very different places. Nonetheless, I was much more impressed than I expected to be. Though my critiques of the occupation would be more bottom-up and scathing, Carter still goes *much* further than any mainstream politician in the US has in years. Due to his fame, respect, and ultimately whiteness and Christianity, this book has quickly become the 101 text on the Israel/Palestine/Middle East conflict. As mainstream 101 texts go, it is surprisingly good.

In large part, the book details various peace talks and the main players in them, a very top-down and at times impersonal view of the conflict. Carter repeatedly chastises both Israeli and Palestinian leaders for their refusal to compromise, but certainly criticizes the Israeli leaders more. He notes that many of the milestones Palestinians have to meet for negotiations to continue are impossible and unfair. For example, the idea that all suicide bombings must be stopped is impossible when 1) Israel is imprisoning many of Palestine's most influential politicians, 2) Israel's much larger military can't even do that and 3) the root cause of the conflict isn't being discussed. Carter repeatedly pegs the occupation (albeit the one beginning in 1967, not the one in 1948) as the source of the conflict and even refers to Israel as a colonial power. He notes that Arafat could not realistically accept any of the offers made to him by Israel, including the "generous offer," because Israel insisted on maintaining control of all borders, air space, ocean access, and elctromagnetic frequencies (radio, TV, etc).

It's not until the last chapter that Carter really talks about the Wall and other ways that Palestinian lives are daily affected by the occupation. It's a strong ending, though it not being discussed earlier might make it difficult for some people to understand the stances Palestinian leaders took in negotiations.

All in all, I was pleasantly surprised. It's not by any means the first book I would recommend to someone already politicized looking to learn about the occupation, but it is much more accessible to someone like my liberal yet Zionist father.

I read this when it first came out, but it seems very timely now to revisit. I had been under the impression that the Clinton administration had tried earnestly to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the book made it clear that there has been no real attempt on the part of the United States to help the Palestinians since the inception of the conflict. I would say that Bush's statement that a Palestinian State was the presumptive goal of any talks was probably the most effective help the Palestinians have ever received from a US President (and I don't like Bush). The book makes the case that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." That if we or the Israelis had simply paved some roads, built some schools, and kept the lights on, Hamas wouldn't have had a chance to rise to power. As it is, asking the Palestinians to control Hamas is like asking your next door neighbor to go stop the Mafia. Death would have been the immediate result.

The Palestinians are flat on their backs, with no power, literally and figuratively. To use a military solution only, when a social solution is what's so obviously needed is just so Middle Eastern.

One of the things Karl Albrecht points out in both of the books I've read recently is that if women have no power in the situation, no innovation, no creativity, and no lasting organization can exist. Israel allows women power if they become very masculine, but they don't allow women who are feminine to have a say, and it amounts to the same thing as if there were no women in power. The Middle East is plagued with this problem, and there will be no sustainable countries there until that changes.

Despite its provocative title, Jimmy Carter’s book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, provides a balanced look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the book, Carter sifts through the pages of history and presents the story of the land of Israel in a concise, accessible account. He describes the many peace efforts in the region, like the Camp David Accords, and analyzes why they ultimately didn’t work from the perspective of someone who has been actively involved in the peace process. After hearing only one-sided, pro-Israel news from Washington, it was refreshing to see a politician try to take a more balanced approach to the conflict. It helped to hear how Israel also shares some responsibility for the past failures of peace efforts instead of only hearing about Palestinian violence. Perhaps Carter is too critical of Israel and doesn’t always paint an accurate picture of the Arab supporters of Palestine, but the book itself is a useful tool in gaining an understanding of this conflict.

The book’s simple style and chronological order help to make this complicated subject a little easier to understand. Also, Carter’s personal stories of his experiences throughout the Middle East offer an interesting perspective on the events in this conflict in a way that is interesting to read. As the book was published in 2006, some of the information has become dated. For example, the section on the wall should have been expanded due to its impact on the conflict and because Carter uses the wall to stir up images of Apartheid. This does not mean the book is any less useful because its historical information and copies of important documents, like the U.N. Resolution 242, still provide useful historical insight into the conflict. This book is a definite must read for anyone who wants an accessible look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.