Jimmy Carter- How Should He Be Viewed?

To many Americans who are too young to remember when he was president, Jimmy Carter is still a well-known figure. They know him as an activist for human rights (as he was as president), a critic of Israel, defender of the Palestinian cause and lastly, as a critic of President George W Bush despite the traditional protocol that says ex-presidents should not criticize their successors. Since he left office-discredited as a weak, failed president, Carter has remained in the public spotlight, writing books and traveling the world, monitoring foreign elections and making speeches-often controversial in nature. To his admirers, he is a hero. Even though he was not a successful president, he is regarded (by his supporters) as a great former president; to his detractors, he is a naive individual, who has added to his failed presidency by being a thorn in the hide of succeeding presidents and also criticizing his own country. In my view, I side with the latter group.

When Carter burst upon the public scene in the 1970s, I found him initially to be an attractive figure. He had succeeded a true racist, Lester Maddox, as governor of Georgia preaching equality and racial reconciliation. When he began his race for the White House, I hoped that he would win the nomination based on his history as governor. Yet, by the time it was time to vote, I decided to cast my vote for Gerald Ford.

As president, Carter presided over a huge decline in American fortunes. Much of the credit for his election went to the fact that the country had just gone through Watergate and the pardon of Richard Nixon by Ford. Yet, it seemed that nothing improved under Carter. The country remained dispirited; the economy was a mess; gas lines stretched for blocks. At one point, Carter publicly called a conference of various "experts" and public figures (including a composer, Leonard Bernstein) to the White House to give him advice on how to fix the country. His critics accused him of being hopelessy naive in his insistence on human rights in foreign policy. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, he responded by boycotting the Moscow Olympics. Under his administration, the military was gutted.

Part of Carter's problem, according to some observers, was his micro-management style. One story told of how Carter maintained the sign-in book for the White House tennis court in his office due to squabbles over reservations. Thus, if someone wanted to reserve the court, they had to go to Carter.

While Carter worked hard to maintain a public image as "Mr Nice Guy", many insiders regarded him as cold and aloof. When I was a DEA agent and had occasional contact with Secret Service agents, I was given a first-hand story of how one agent had spent a winter evening guarding the outside of Carter's home in Plains, Georgia. When Carter awoke and stepped out to get the morning paper, he wouldn't even say "Good morning" to the agents who had spent the night outside in their car.

Of course, Carter's greatest accomplishment as president was his brokering of the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. The treaty sealed the subsequent death by assassination of Anwar Sadat. Though it still holds as of today, time will tell if it proves permanent in the face of continued tensions in the Middle East.

But it was the Iranian hostage crisis that has, to this day, been the main negative legacy of Carter's presidency. Many charge Carter with having greased the skids for the departure of the Shah (over human rights issues) and the accession of the Ayatollah Khomeini to power. Subsequently, against the advice of his embassy in Teheran, who advised that such a measure could lead to the takeover of said embassy, Carter allowed the ailing Shah to come to America for cancer treatment. The reaction was swift. The American embassy in Teheran was taken over by militants, dozens of Americans were taken hostage, and the crisis lasted well over a year. The Iranian government involved itself in the custody of the hostages, threatened trials for expionage and even threatened to execute our diplomats as spies. During this prolonged period, the hostages were mistreated and subjected to mock executions. And what did our president do? Well, he went to the United Nations to ask for measures, he made "strong" statements and eventually he authorized a "mission impossible" by which a small force of American military was to enter Teheran by stealth and snatch the hostages with a minimal loss of innocent life. Of course, a helicopter collision in the desert ended that mission with loss of rescuers lives, the desecration of their bodies by the Iranians and more American humiliation.

Eventually, the hostages were released through diplomacy via 3rd nations and probably the Iranian realization that Reagan was coming to office. They were released concurrently with the inauguration of Reagan. Unfortunately, it was a humiliation for America. I have seen more than one interview of former hostages who, while acknowledging that Carter got them out alive, also conceded that it was not an honorable agreement for our country.

After Carter left office and to this day, it is difficult to find even many Democrats who would call Carter a successful president. Most of his defenders acknowledge that his was an unsuccessful presidency. It is his post-presidency that has given life to a legion of Carter admirers. In my mind, his largest contribution has been his involvement in Habitat for Humanity. I am not so generous when I consider his meddling in foreign affairs. His Carter Center in Georgia has received millions in contributions from various Middle East sources since Carter is openly pro-Palestinian in his sympathies and critical of Israel. His diplomatic efforts in Haiti were dangerous since he remained in that country beyond a deadline set by President Clinton, after which an invasion was to be launched. His diplomatic venture into N Korea led to an agreement between Secretary of State Madeline Albright and the North Koreans- which was quickly violated by the former. Indeed, once Carter decides to go on a diplomatic mission, he doesn't much care if the incumbent president wants him to go or not. Carter has even gone to foreign soil and criticized his country and government-advising them not to cooperate with the Bush Administration.

In summary, Jimmy Carter may have vindicated his public life in the eyes of his admirers with his activities since leaving office. The legacy of his presidency is pretty much established as a failure. I am pretty sure that history will judge his subsequent years in the same light. I believe that Jimmy Carter will be remembered as our most incompetent president and most troublesome ex-president.