Jimmy Carter was the compassionate, honourable, peacemaker America needed

Published

6 months ago

December 30, 2024

admin

In the late 1970s, America was not in a good place; reeling from a war and from Watergate.

Then came a man called Jimmy.

“Jimmy who?” the nation asked.

And so it was that the nation was somewhat dismissive when a peanut farmer called Jimmy Carter announced a run for the White House.

Beyond his home state of Georgia, where he had served as governor, James Earl Carter Jr was not well known.

But it would turn out, Jimmy Carter was just what 1970s America needed.

After the political turmoil of Nixon and Watergate and the quagmire of the Vietnam War, America craved stability, calm and integrity.

The 39th president of the United States did not provide the drama of those who came before him or those who would follow him.

Yet over a remarkably long life, punctuated by a short presidency, Jimmy Carter built a considerable legacy deserving of considerable reflection.

Carter the healer

“Compassionate”, “honourable”, a “peacemaker”, a “healer”.

They are words so often used to describe the American leader who lived a life longer than any other.

Late 1970s America was a nation reeling from the Watergate scandal and the disgraced presidency of Richard Nixon followed by the accidental presidency of Gerald Ford.

The wider backdrop was a long war in Vietnam, ending in a humiliating defeat and a fresh blot in a proud nation’s history.

Enter Jimmy Carter, 52-years-old; five feet seven inches – unassuming and unimposing both physically and in character.

Peanut farmer, turned submariner, turned politician; he was a man of the people whose core instinct was that a government is only as good as its people.

His healing qualities, clearly threaded through his life, were displayed on day one of his presidency.

In a bold move he granted unconditional pardons to hundreds of thousands of men who evaded the Vietnam War draft.

He had said the pardon was needed “to heal our country after the Vietnam War”.

Of the bitter divisions sparked by the war, he said: “We can now agree to respect those differences and to forget them.”

He pioneered a bold vision for compassionate centre-left politics which would, many years later, be emulated by presidents Clinton, Obama and Biden.

Yet Jimmy Carter would survive only one term as president.

In those four years he faced huge challenges – an energy crisis, Soviet aggression and Iran – themes which, it turns out, endure.

A childhood which shaped a presidency

Jimmy Carter was born where he died, in the town of Plains, Georgia on 1 October 1924.

His childhood unquestionably moulded the person and politician he would become.

1930s Georgia was a place of segregation. Two Americas existed side by side, separated by racism.

But Carter’s mother, a nurse, boldly ignored the state’s segregation laws, and so young Jimmy’s upbringing was one of coexistence in a place where there was none.

Decades later Carter would tell American talk show host Oprah Winfrey how every one of his childhood friends was black.

It was an experience which moulded his mind and would allow him to help change history decades later.

Young Jimmy Carter joined the Navy, serving as a submariner – a role that surely takes a particular type of character.

His father’s death in 1953 brought him back to Georgia where he ran the family peanut farm.

But politics beckoned. It was race and racism which lured Carter to activism with the Democratic Party.

By the 1960s it would propel him to the state senate and, by 1970, to the top job in Georgia – governor.

The long-shot president

He was the dark horse for president; a long-shot candidate who made it all the way.

His childhood experiences of coexistence over division were threaded through his term in office and led to significant yet oft-forgotten achievements.

President Carter recognised and valued the power of American leadership in the protection of human rights.

Global achievements

It was his blunt message to the white rulers in South Africa which helped to precipitate the end of Apartheid and a peaceful coexistence many years later.

His influence in the Middle East was profound, but controversial too.

The Camp David accords represented Carter’s greatest foreign policy achievement. He brought together Israel and its greatest enemy of the time, Egypt.

The image of Carter cupping the clasped hands of Egyptian president Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Begin on the north lawn of the White House in September 1978 is iconic. It represented the framework on which coexistence in the Middle East continues to be built.

With the deal he did more for Israeli security than any American president since, and yet he maintained a compassion for the Palestinian cause that no other American president has come close to.

Years later, out of office, he was among the first to accuse Israel of its own apartheid regime against the Palestinians.

A presidency dominated by “events”

Under his presidency, the Cold War got hotter. A wary Carter ditched a key arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union. It would raise tensions but eventually help precipitate the collapse of the USSR.

With Britain, he fostered the so-called “special relationship”; he and British prime minister James Callaghan were close.

But “events” overtook his vision and his presidency unravelled.

In Iran, revolution came and US hostages were taken. American diplomats were held hostage for more than a year. A risky rescue ordered by president Carter went wrong, eight US servicemen were killed and Carter was blamed.

After just one term, Carter was out. The American people, struggling economically, chose the Republican showman Ronald Reagan and an optimism they could no longer find in Carter.

Misjudged by history?

History is so often cruel and distorted. It would hand many achievements built by Carter to Reagan instead.

It was Carter who laid the foundations for Middle East coexistence, and though he would be let down by partners later, and coexistence seems at times to be very far off, his vision remains at the core of the solution. He has arguably done more to fix the Middle East conundrum than any other American president since.

On the Cold War, it was Carter’s decision to ditch the detente with the Soviet Union which would eventually seal its demise. Reagan would not have been able to demand Gorbachev “tear down this wall” without Carter’s leadership in the years before.

The Democrat presidents since have often borrowed Carter’s core principles and yet the party orphaned him.

In November, as the nation chose between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, his spokespeople confirmed that he had cast his vote.

It was not revealed who he had voted for but was widely assumed that his final democratic act was to vote for Kamala Harris.

His son Chip said his father had not voted Republican in his life.

A legacy beyond politics

This “involuntary retirement”, as Carter would later put it, left much undone and it was really only after leaving office that he began to build the legacy he’d want to be remembered for.

With his wife, Rosalynn, he founded The Carter Center, a charity with his principle of healing at its heart.

The charity’s work – conflict resolution, disease prevention and the promotion of democracy – continues to this day. It represents president Carter’s legacy in 80 nations around the world.

In 2002, it was this work which earned him the Nobel Peace Prize.

Since then, under his leadership, its work has helped to nearly eradicate Guinea Worm Disease. As of 2021 there were just 15 cases reported globally. An extraordinary achievement.

At home in America, the charity Habitat for Humanity was a central part of the Carters’ fundraising efforts. Over many years, Jimmy and his wife were seen building and renovating homes for some of the nation’s poorest.

And away from this spotlight at his lifelong home in Plains, Georgia, president Carter was a painter, a furniture maker, a winemaker, and an author of a remarkable 32 books.

The death of his wife Rosalynn last year must have been an enormous blow for Carter.

She had been at his side always, and so often hand in hand. His best friend, his counsel, his “chief advisor”, his wife since 1946.

So often over the years, he’s been asked to reveal the magic of their bond. His answer: “Never go to bed angry.”

“Always make peace,” he said.

In much more than just marriage, that was president Carter’s defining principle.

He’s survived by his four children Jack, James (Chip), Donnel (Jeff) and Amy, 11 grandchildren and 14 great grandchildren.

US

Donald Trump praises Liberian president’s English – the country’s official language

Published

11 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Donald Trump praises Liberian president's English - the country's official language

Donald Trump has praised the Liberian president’s command of English – the West African country’s official language.

The US president reacted with visible surprise to Joseph Boakai’s English-speaking skills during a White House meeting with leaders from the region on Wednesday.

After the Liberian president finished his brief remarks, Mr Trump told him he speaks “such good English” and asked: “Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”

Mr Trump seemed surprised when Mr Boakai laughed and responded he learned in Liberia.

The US president said: “It’s beautiful English.

“I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”

Mr Boakai did not tell Mr Trump that English is the official language of Liberia.

The country was founded in 1822 with the aim of relocating freed African slaves and freeborn black citizens from the US.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

Mr Trump promised the leaders of Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau a pivot from aid to trade at the surprise meeting.

He described the countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, and great oil deposits, and wonderful people”.

Later asked by a reporter if he’ll visit the continent, Mr Trump said, “At some point, I would like to go to Africa.”

But he added that he’d “have to see what the schedule looks like”.

Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, promised to go to Africa in 2023, but only fulfilled the commitment by visiting Angola in December 2024, just weeks before he left office.

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says Israeli government

Published

11 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Gaza permanent ceasefire 'questionable', says Israeli government

The Israeli government believes the chances of achieving a permanent ceasefire in Gaza are “questionable”.

The pessimistic assessment, in a top-level Israeli government briefing given to Sky News, comes as the Israeli Prime Minister prepares to leave Washington DC after a four-day visit which had begun with the expectation of a ceasefire announcement.

Benjamin Netanyahu will leave the US later today with the prospect of even a temporary 60-day ceasefire looking extremely unlikely this week.

Within “a week, two weeks – not a day” is how it was framed in the background briefing late on Wednesday.

Crucially, though, on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the framing from the briefing was even less optimistic: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement. But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Sky News has spoken to several Israeli officials at the top level of the government. None will be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

But I have been given a very clear understanding of Mr Netanyahu’s thinking.

The Israeli position is that a permanent ceasefire (beyond the initial 60 days, which itself is yet to be agreed) is only possible if Hamas lays down its arms. “If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war],” said a source.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.

My briefing of Mr Netanyahu’s position is that he has not shifted in terms of Israel’s central stated war aims. The return of the hostages and eliminating Hamas are the key objectives.

But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, it was clear from my briefing that no permanent ceasefire is possible in the Israeli government’s view without the complete removal of Hamas as a political and military entity.

Hamas is not likely to negotiate its way to oblivion.

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, a senior Israeli official told Sky News: “We would want IDF in every square metre of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone.”

It was clear to me that Mr Netanyahu wants his stated position to be that his government has no territorial ambition for Gaza.

One quote to come from my briefing, which I am only able to attribute to a senior Israeli official, says: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas.”

Another clear indication of Mr Netanyahu’s position – a quote from the briefing, attributable only to a senior Israeli official: “You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, it’s clear from my briefings that Mr Netanyahu continues to rule out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

The Israeli government assessment is that the Palestinians are not going to have a state “as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state”.

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the briefing revealed that Mr Netanyahu’s view is that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave” but that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated.

“It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction,” a senior Israeli official said.

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary”, is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.

Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says senior Israeli official

Published

14 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

A senior Israeli official has issued a less-than-optimistic assessment of the permanency of any ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, the senior official said that a 60-day ceasefire “might” be possible within “a week, two weeks – not a day”.

But on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the official said: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement.

“But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to conclude a four-day visit to Washington later today.

There had been hope that a ceasefire could be announced during the trip. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that it’s close.

Speaking at a briefing for a number of reporters, the Israeli official would not be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

The official repeated Israel’s central stated war aims of getting the hostages back and eliminating Hamas. But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, the official was clear that no permanent ceasefire would be possible without the complete removal of Hamas.

“We will offer them a permanent ceasefire,” he told Sky News. “If they agree. Fine. It’s over.

“They lay down their arms, and we proceed [with the ceasefire]. If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war].”

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, the official said: “We would want IDF in every square meter of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone…”

He added: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas…”

The official said the Israeli government had “no territorial designs for Gaza”.

“But [we] don’t want Hamas there,” he continued. “You have to finish the job… victory over Hamas. You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, the official ruled out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

“They are not going to have a state in the foreseeable future as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state. It doesn’t make a difference if they are the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, it’s just a difference of tactics.”

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the official predicted that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave”.

But he claimed that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated, adding: “It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction.”

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary,” is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.