[Prefatory Note: A recollection of my only meeting with the former president at the Carter Center, a minor event, although in the context of repeated mistakes by the ‘political realists’ who continue to shape American foreign policy, perhaps of some interest. The pessimistic note is that the economic hardships imposed on the Iranian people since the fall of the Shah may have been inevitable so long as imperial geopolitics and predatory capitalism dominate the Washington mindscape, and currently to threaten dangerous regional warfare in the Middle East.]
In 1981 or 1982 I was invited to a small human rights meeting at the Carter Centerin Atlanta. It was in the aftermath of the Iran hostage crisis that is blamed for Carter’s loss, Reagan’s win in 1980. The Carters somehow knew that I had previously supported their daughter, Amy, who was an activist against the Vietnam War. It is solong ago I cannot remember the exact context, whether it was a matter of political support or somehow connected with a legal proceeding associated with civil disobedience. Whatever the past, Rosalynn Carter apparently to show their appreciation seated me next to President Carter at a formal conference dinner despite their being more distinguished guests present.
I sheepishly did what I was told and took the opportunity to talk with the ex-president about the situation in Iran. I had been in Iran accompanying Ramsey Clark, the former American Attorney General who had become a leading progressive voice after leaving government and someone sympathetic with the Iran movement against the Shah. While in Iran in early 1979 in a period dramatized by the Shah’s departure from the country, we were frequently asked about Carter’s New Year’s toast to the Shah in 1977: “An island of stability” surrounded by “the admiration and love which your people give to you.” Ensuing events proved how wrong were these sentiments, but that is a longer different story of mass disenchantment that has been frequently told.
During our visit to Iran, we had met with numerous prominent Iranian officials, Islamic leaders, and ordinary citizens. We also met with the American ambassador in Tehran, William Sullivan, who was a hawkish diplomat during the Vietnam Era. Reacting to the anti-Shah movement, Sullivan was clear about the fact that the Shah’s 1979 abdication a few days before our meeting with Sullivan who felt that the Shah’s departure was an inevitable development given the play of forces in Iran by that time, including the army’s abandonment of the Shah’s government by then. Sullivan hoped that the US Government would accept the outcome, and normalize relations with the new leadership, but reported being blocked by hardline National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was following the pro-Shah diehard diplomacy rather than accommodating approach recommended by the Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, a conservative realist, a somewhat aristocratic acquaintance of mine, yet seemingly free from the compulsions of the geopolitically oriented deep state that guided US foreign policy from its undercover sites during the Cold War, and beyond. We should be aware that the Shah was perceived as a major strategic asset in the Middle East, what Henry Kissinger described “as the rarest of things, and unconditional ally.’
During the hostage crisis that started on November 4, 1979 I had been asked to accompany Andrew Young to negotiate the release of the hostages after Ayatollah Khomeini had let it be known that he would welcome an Afro-American negotiator to arrange a diplomatic solutions. The trip was vetoed by Brzezinski. I recall the somewhat bitter, but likely discerning, comment by the head of the State Department’s Iran Desk at the time: “Brzezinski would rather see all the hostage dead than have Andrew Young get credit for their release.” This senior civil servant favored the Young mission, and Young was willing to go, but only if he received a green light from the White House, which never came, we never went, and the rest is history still in the making.
After some pleasantries at the dinner about the Carter Center and the conference, I gathered my courage and asked Carter why he followed Brzezinski policy advice rather than Vance’s counsel, and he gave a short, yet talked further but it was evident that Carter had no deeper reasons to cling to a lost cause, unsatisfactory answer: “Because he was loyal to me.” Nothing more, nothing less. I reflected at the time that Carter would probably have been hosting a state dinner at the White House and being hailed as a peace minded statesman rather than having this tense chat about the low point of his presidency with a brash stranger at his Center.
The Road Not Taken
We do not know what would have ensued in Iran or the Middle East had the Vance view prevailed, and the US fully respected the exercise of the right of self-determination by the Iranian people. The political sequel to the overthrow of the Pahlavi monarchy was not clearly prescribed in advance. It might have led to a more democratic version of the Islamic Republic had it not been immediately threatened by internal enemies linked to foreign states in the region. With bad memories of the 1953 anti-Mossadegh coup, facilitated by the CIA, it is hardly surprising that Iran theocratic hard liners took command of the government, especially given the internal and regional challenges mounted against Iranian developments of 1978-79.’ What might have been’ could serve, even belatedly, as a signpost to ‘what should have been’ and more hopefully, ‘to what will be in the future.’ More soberly, imperial geopolitics and neoliberal capitalism have displayed a willingness to potentially radical enactments of the right of self-determination, and as Kurt Vonnugut vainly tried to teach us, “and so it goes.”
Global Justice in the 21st Century 
As always, a fascinating rumination/overview by Dr. Falk…truly one of the Great Americans of my time or any time.
As I wrote casually but frustratedly to an email friend this 1-03 PM: “…my empathy was with the Iranian people who had been “colonized and screwed” since Mossadegh’s overthrow in 1953…were I a “hostage taker,” I would have been in his sandals in 1979 with no mind to negotiate except on my terms, number one of which = extradition of the vermin Shah — refused by Carter and Crew. We have no magnanimity, no concept of justice or diplomacy in a macro sense of the word.”
No one is beyond Redemption! September 13, 1976 The Kansas City Times published a lengthy article quoting me describing Jimmy Carter as a “false prophet, liar and deceiver” without printing why I saw it that way.
I have been watching from CanaDa, US Presidential Elections closely since Nixon. Jimmy Carter was the 1st one to wear his Religion on his sleeve as part of his Election campaign.
It’s mandatory for anyone seeking the Presidency to call for more spending on the Pentagon and despite his Christianity, Carter called for increasing the Pentagon Budget.
I took exception to that because of this Bible insight “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, saying: ‘Not by military force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit,’ says the Lord of Hosts.”
It’s only 1 line in the Bible but it’s more relevant than ever before because the US is the BIGGEST Arms Merchant in the History of Nations, making a KILLING off the Ukraine WAR, the Israeli Genocide in Gaza, and many other US WARS of choice since WWII.
Obviously God of President Carter’s Faith was not with him in the failed Operation Eagle Claw in Iran to rescue the US Hostages because of a violent wind-driven sand storm caused the Operation to be aborted along with many other problems.
That failure contributed to his not being re-elected almost as much as the Traitorous Republicans offering the Iranian Mullahs weapons to fight the US-Saudi financed Saddam’s War against Iran in 1980 to nip the 1979 Iranian Revolution in the bud, IF they held on to the US Hostages until Reagan was sworn in. They were released that very Day. All the Republican TRAITORS went scot-free once Republicans had the Presidency and Congress.
I wrote to President Carter twice c/o The Carter Center post his Presidency, explaining the context, saying I no longer saw him the way as published in 1976. No reply.
There is no question President Carter came into his own leaving the Presidency, living by Example, the highest ideals of the Christian Faith.
Although he probably knew it, he could not call Israel an Apartheid State when he was President. He did after leaving the Presidency and I admired him for Publicly speaking the Truth with the platform he had! Israel attacked him for his Freedom of Speech on the divisive issue not resolved to this Day.
Carter’s book on Israeli ‘apartheid’ was called antisemitic – but was it prescient?
The ex-president was pilloried for his characterization of the Palestinians’ plight but some say an apology is in order: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/30/jimmy-carter-israel-apartheid-palestinians
It’s not a boast because I have nothing to boast about. I had nothing to do to influence the bigger World to evolve along the 1976 projection 2-1/2 Years after the Historical Record. I was only a Messenger in the right Place at the right Time in 1976 Kansas City, succeeding in having it recorded for Posterity 49 years ago in the Historical Newspaper record in The Kansas City Times September 13, 1976. It was accompanied with the picture of me wearing my trademark #13 jersey. My part is only a footnote re the 1979 Camp David Accord, cited as the high mark of Carter’s Presidency.
¨There are 30 months before the fate of the world will be sealed with EITHER Destruction OR the Universal Brotherhood of Man,¨ he said. ¨The 30 month figure concerned a Treaty between Israel and Egypt.¨
NOTE: This does not say ARMAGEDDON happens in 30 months from the September 1976 article.
Not 29 or 31, but exactly 30 months later, in March 1979, history shows a Treaty between Israel and Egypt was signed, The Camp David Accord.
History shows talks broke down on the 12th day and no Treaty was to be signed. Begin and Sadat were leaving.
It was on the 13th Day, as in the date of the 1976 Newspaper record and the picture accompanying it, an unexpected window of opportunity appeared and opened the way for the Treaty to be signed.
This signified the Universal Brotherhood part of the quote.
What about the Destruction of the 2 choices in the 1976 Newspaper Record?
The 1979 Iranian Revolution happened the month before the signing of the Camp David Accord.
If you believe what the MSM is projecting these Days, it’s most likely when Trump takes Power supporting Israel without question more than Biden did, that 1976 DESTRUCTION/ARMAGEDDON choice may come in 2025?
https://rayjc.com/2013/09/01/signs-of-the-times/
During his Presidency, it was Jimmy Carter that set the US on the Path to the $Trillion Pentagon Budgets. Maybe his Post Presidency Christian service was to atone for what he set in motion as President?
The Washington Post January 28, 1980
Jimmy Carter certified himself as a big defense spender yesterday, urging Congress to start down a path that would increase Pentagon outlays $100 billion in the next five years.
The same president who came into office three years ago with hopes of reducing defense costs and improving relations with the Soviet Union, unfurled an old banner from the Cold War to justify his new direction. “Our forces must be increased if they are to contain Soviet aggression,” he said.
In the Carter budget, money available to the Pentagon would jump from $139.3 billion in fiscal 1980 to $158.7 billion in fiscal 1981, a 14 percent jump. The Pentagon figures that the “real” increase would be 5.4 percent because of the money eaten up by inflation. Carter proposes to keep raising this budget authority category every year until it hits $248.9 billion in fiscal 1985.
BANKRUPTING AMERICA: President Carter’s Military Budget: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45130910
FAScinating! Thank you!
(“Our forces must be increased if they are to contain Soviet aggression” … straight out of the mouth of Zbig, no?)