Last week, former president Jimmy Carter made headlines with his plans to meet with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in Syria. Carter arrived in the Middle East on Sunday, and Reuters reported yesterday that “Israeli leaders shunned former U.S. President Jimmy Carter during a visit because of his plans to meet Hamas and Israel’s secret service declined to assist U.S. agents guarding him,” which was “unprecedented.” Reuters reports today that Carter was denied a visit to the Gaza Strip, likely because:
Not only have “Israel and the United States…sought to isolate Hamas in the Gaza Strip,” but the State Department was openly against Carter’s meeting with Meshaal. Bloggers agree that Carter is undermining official U.S. foreign policy and should not meet with Meshaal, although they disagree on how to handle Carter and this very bad situation. Michael Kraft at the Counterterrorism Blog writes that while Carter does not technically violate any U.S. law, the meeting is still a bad idea: “For a high profile person like Carter to publicly meet with Hamas leader Mashaal at this stage only encourages Hamas to believe that if it remains steadfast in its ‘resistance’ and rhetoric, the West will try to make deals or concessions without Hamas having to yield on its support for terrorism and opposition to Israel’s existence. And why should Hamas expect anything but ‘understanding’ from a man who writes a book that so blatantly and erroneously tries to pin the ‘Apartheid’ label on Israel?” But at Contentions, Jamie Kirchick makes a case that Carter possibly violated the Logan Act, because “[b]y calling on the United States to include Hamas in peace talks, and by meeting with the leader of said terrorist group in the capital of a country with which the United States does not even maintain diplomatic relations, Carter undermines a crucial plank in America’s Middle East policy.” Nonetheless, we shouldn’t be surprised, as Little Green Footballs points out that Carter has been meeting with Hamas “for years,” in Carter’s words. Conservative bloggers disagree on how to best handle the situation. At Hot Air, Ed Morrissey says that while he understands Israel’s stance, even though “Carter may be the worst ex-president in American history,” he should still be protected since his visit poses huge risk to all Americans on the trip. (Isn’t that reason enough that he shouldn’t be there?) Jules Crittenden, however, is less sympathetic and says that the U.S. “might consider withdrawing his Secret Service protection, and let Hamas protect him.” Meanwhile at the Corner, Andy McCarthy links to further evidence that the meeting with Meshaal should not take place: “A sermon last Friday by a prominent Muslim cleric and Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament openly declared that ‘the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital,’ would soon be conquered by Islam.” At Contentions, Abe Greenwald is confused by Carter’s logic: “So, the Pope visits the United States while simultaneously former U.S. President Jimmy Carter goes to talk righteousness with the gang who wants to unseat the Pope. This must be how Democratic diplomacy is going to restore America’s image abroad.” At least among terrorists.
