We on the Left need to be clear as to what is at stake in the on-going, and fairly vicious, controversy surrounding the publication of President Jimmy Carter's Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. The question is not about Carter's policies as President of the United States. The question is not about whether Carter used the right maps. The question is not even about whether Carter sufficiently acknowledged the Jewish Holocaust. The question is whether or not the Palestinians are being destroyed as a nation. Carter, in a manner that will surprise many people, comes down firmly on the side of affirming that this destruction is taking place.

Carter, the former President of the USA, is being vilified for having called into question the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and the manner in which this occupation is being conducted. For this reason, Zionist forces and their allies are in complete attack mode, doing all that they can to dismiss the arguments that Carter raises and to treat him and his book as if it is both irrelevant and anti-Semitic.

What does Carter allege? Simply put, that Israeli intransigence is the principal source of the failure to resolve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He criticizes terrorist attacks by Palestinians that target civilians, but nevertheless lays the main blame for the conflict at the feet of the Israelis. Unfortunately he backs off a bit too much in discussing the conditions faced by Palestinians within Israel. That said, his criticism, which is a criticism that joins with those made by the likes of Nelson Mandela and Bishop Tutu, as well as significant individuals within Israel itself, has hit a raw nerve in the USA.

Neither Carter nor his critics really focus on the fact that Israel is a colonial project. This is one of those untouchable subjects. In response to a commentary I wrote concerning Carter's book, a critic argued that the United Nations brought Israel into existence, therefore this proved that there was an international consensus in favor of the Israeli state. What this critic ignored is that in 1946-7 when this issue was being debated, much of the world existed in colonial status, and the Arab nations that were a party to the United Nations were, themselves, virtual dependencies or semi-colonies of various European powers. Thus, they had nothing approaching legitimate sovereignty and were not particularly well placed to critique the manner in which this entire debate unfolded.

Carter picks up with the 1967 war and simply states that the international community expected the Israelis to withdraw, yet instead of withdrawing, they began a campaign of settlements in the Occupied Territories. This, he correctly notes, became a major obstruction to peace. This has been compounded by Israel's wall of death, or what some people refer to as the "apartheid wall," which is dividing up entire Palestinian communities to the advantage of Israel and its settler population in the Occupied Territories.

We on the Left should celebrate the publication of Carter's book, whether we agree with everything in it or not. The title alone is worth it, and the fact that it has been a bestseller in the USA is a sign that there is a badly needed discussion sought out by hundreds of thousands of people regarding the future of the Israel and the Palestinian people.

We on the Left must take advantage of this moment in order to expand this discussion as a means of influencing, in a progressive direction, US foreign policy. What the USA does or does not do, and what it permits Israel to do or not do, is fundamental to the resolution of the Palestinian demand for national self-determination.

Carter's book is one instrument in that struggle.

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is a long-time international and labor writer and activist. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it