It’s the title of a new book authored by former President Jimmy Carter, and according to this statesman who oversaw the first Middle East peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, the title was meant to provoke a much-needed discussion which rarely ever transpires in US politics and media.
When I was a child whenever I see the headline of Palestine suicide bombers, the way media presented and the analysis always made me think Is Palestinian always terrorist? My perception changed when I pursued my Masters in Peace & Conflict Studies in Austria and where I shared my class and a house with two Palestinian students and an Israeli friend.
I came to know the real suffering of the Palestinian and the fear of the suicide bombing on the Israeli side. Well all of the three friends are now working on their own way finding out the solution to this complex conflict which not only rooted in the religion but I would rather say historic blunders of Nazi Germans and promised land position of the British.
Well whatever it is, but the fact is crystal clear that it is the conflict in which Palestinian are suffering more than Israeli which is what President Carter reflected in this book. He not only showing the suffering of the Palestinians but also mentions the BITTER TRUTH …the Jewish Lobby in American system, you name it, Politics, Economics …and its implication on complicating this conflict further.
Well I have mentioned Jewish lobby so not surprisingly, some US politicians took issue with the book’s title before it was even released, including Michigan Congressman John Conyers, a cherished friend to the Arab-American community. He said that the use of apartheid in the title “does not serve the cause of peace and the use of it against the Jewish people in particular, who have been victims of the worst kind of discrimination, discrimination resulting in death, is offensive and wrong.” Conyers went so far as to call Carter “to express my concerns about the title of the book, and to request that the title be changed.
President Carter does not build upon his career as a proponent of peace in the Middle East with this comparison and I hope he and his publisher will reconsider this decision.” Perhaps he felt that South Africans who lived under a brutal apartheid regime would be offended.
Yet, interestingly, South Africa’s own Bishop Desmond Tutu and others have referred to the Israeli Occupation of Palestinian Christians and Muslims as 'Israeli apartheid.' How are the situations similar? Well, in a 2002 speech in the United States, Tutu said he saw 'the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about.' Back in 1999, former South African statesman Nelson Mandela told the Palestinian Assembly: 'The histories of our two peoples correspond in such painful and poignant ways that I intensely feel myself at home amongst my compatriots.'
South African author Breyten Breytenbach, who spent nine years in prison for resisting apartheid, wrote in 2002, "I recently visited the occupied territories for the first time. And yes, I'm afraid they can reasonably be described as resembling Bantustans , reminiscent of the ghettoes and controlled camps of misery one knew in South Africa ." And consider more examples: More water is given to Jewish citizens than to Palestinians; non-Jewish Israelis cannot buy or lease land in Israel; Israel’s policies have involved planning regulations prohibiting Palestinian building on 40 percent of Gaza, 70 percent of the West Bank and 80 percent of East Jerusalem.
While restricting Palestinian development, Israel builds housing for its people in the occupied territories. Imprisonment without charge is commonplace for Palestinians, whereas this would be forbidden for Jews. There are also Jewish-only highways that cut through the West Bank. A few years ago, the Israeli government was shown to have a 70:30 policy in the City of Jerusalem which to maintain a 70 percent Jewish population over 29 percent Muslim and 1 percent Christian minorities. This has been accomplished through home demolitions, denial of building permits, ID card confiscations, and residency revocations.
This year also saw many Palestinian-Americans denied entry by Israel to the Occupied Territories to visit families, or attend weddings and/or funerals. And then there’s the ugly concrete wall, built far into Palestinian territory under the guise of security, ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice in 2004. Laypeople who’ve seen it nickname it the Apartheid Wall or the Land-Grab Wall. Nobody expects instant miracles to come from Carter’s book, but hopefully, it will spark the sort of robust discussions that even Israeli society and media already engage in – discussions that many are fearful to raise in our own country for fear of being labeled “anti-Semitic.”
The reality is that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict must be resolved if we ever hope to see regional stability in the Middle East. Continuing to ignore the humiliation, indignities, and racism against Palestinians has never served our national interests. Neither has it served Israeli interests. It was Henry Katzew, a former South African journalist now living in Israel, who once stated in South Africa: a Country Without Friends: "What is the difference between the way in which the Jewish people struggles to remain what it is in the midst of a non-Jewish population, and the way the Afrikaners try to stay what they are?" There is no difference. That’s why former President Carter and revered South African figures are willing to call a spade “a spade.”
When I was a child whenever I see the headline of Palestine suicide bombers, the way media presented and the analysis always made me think Is Palestinian always terrorist? My perception changed when I pursued my Masters in Peace & Conflict Studies in Austria and where I shared my class and a house with two Palestinian students and an Israeli friend. 
