All the Emperor’s Men Part I

When diplomacy fails…go with the Shakedown

        Most Americans would agree that as presidents go, Jimmy Carter dedicated more time and resources, during his presidency, to peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians than any other American President–then or since. In fact, Mr. Carter and his fleet of envoys are credited with brokering the [still standing] peace deal between Egypt and Israel. I shudder to think of what the state of affairs would be in the region had this deal not been struck. A masterful accomplishment, since Egypt was frequently at the helm of Arab efforts to oust Israel from its historic homeland. Mr. Carter uniquely deserves his 2002 Nobel Peace Prize "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts.” As the fruits of Mr. Carter’s labor teeter on the brink of obsolescence so too is Mr. Carter’s reputation as a peace broker and what remained of his legacy—if there ever was one.

After twelve days of secret negotiations at Camp David, the Israeli-Egyptian negotiations were concluded by the signing at the White House of two agreements. The first dealt with the future of the Sinai and peace between Israel and Egypt, to be concluded within three months. The second was a framework agreement establishing a format for the conduct of negotiations for the establishment of an autonomous regime in the West Bank and Gaza. The Israel-Egypt agreement clearly defined the future relations between the two countries, all aspects of withdrawal from the Sinai, military arrangements in the peninsula such as demilitarization and limitations, as well as the supervision mechanism. The framework agreement regarding the future of Judea, Samaria and Gaza was less clear and was later interpreted differently by Israel, Egypt, and the US. President Carter witnessed the accords which were signed by Egyptian President Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Begin.

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs

As evidenced by the books he has written since leaving office, in recent years Mr. Carter’s true feelings about Israel have surfaced. Even a cursory reading of any of his books published since leaving office would reveal that Mr. Carter’s show of impartiality (during his tenure in the White House) might have been just that: a show. While this essay is in no way an outright criticism of Jimmy Carter, his administration or his foreign policy, it is important to ponder his motives especially in view of recent developments, vis-à-vis President Obama’s call for a roll-back of the borders governing the Palestinian territories.

Upon publication of his book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" in 2006, many in the diplomatic community and the friends of Israel everywhere appeared to have been caught off guard by Mr. Carter's accusation that Israel is an apartheid state. Nothing could be further from reality. As South African professor of international law John Dugard pointed out in his review of the book, apartheid and the Israeli system are polar opposites. While apartheid relies on institutionalized racial discrimination as the basis of its power, the Israeli system can be characterized as a process of colonization, predicated on, among other things, border security. While Professor Dugard goes on to condemn Israel, his acknowledgement of the distinction sets a significant precedent, as he breaks with his cohorts in academia, who typically refuse to credit Israel with any measure of civility.

Mr. Carter betrays his own hypocrisy when he criticizes the Bush Administration’s decision to sever diplomatic ties with Syria—in light of that nation’s role in fermenting turmoil in Lebanon. Moreover, Mr. Carter’s failure to deal with Syria’s relationship with Iran, whose sponsorship, support and training of the Lebanese Insurgency threatens to permanently destabilize the region and antagonize Israel. Having gone as far as praising Bashir al Assad for his ability to lead Syria, in what he calls, “one of the most difficult posts in the region,” I suspect there is little hope that Mr. Carter would reverse his contempt for Israel. Compared with his attitude towards Israel, Mr. Carter’s affinity for Syria bears a striking resemblance to the Stockholm syndrome or at least a sad denial of Syria’s true intent [where Israel is concerned]. Surely, Mr. Carter could not have anticipated that Mr. Assad would banish the press from Syria while he slaughters his own countrymen, in order to protect his fiefdom. Worst still, Mr. Carter has bought into the false notion that as a condition for Syrian acceptance of Israel’s right to exist, Israel should return the Golan Heights, which Israel captured (and continues to hold) from Syria in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, in which Egypt and Syria led a coalition of Arab States in a surprise attack on Israel.

So committed to his idea of what is fair, that even in the face of credible evidence to the contrary, Mr. Carter will not modify his views accordingly. In the realm of behavioral psychology, this phenomenon is a classic demonstration of man’s aversion to risk. Mr. Carter would risk total loss of credibility over an admission that he has backed the wrong side. Max Bazerman, Jesse Isidor Straus Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School has demonstrated to power of this sort of irrational decision-making in his famous $20 auction. In the $20 auction, the winner is locked into the idea of not losing, and is compelled to shell out far more than the extrinsic value of the bill. Luke Plumber does a nice job of describing the nomenclature of the auction. This thought process has defeated scholars and laymen for eons; not even US presidents are immune to the pull of irrational thought, and certainly not Mr. Carter.

Mr. Carter’s sincerity and objectivity are in doubt, and beg the question: what role did his anti-Israel views play in his advocacy for one side over the other? Whether Mr. Carter’s ideological stance caused him to compromise the efforts of the Camp David mediators is a critical consideration when evaluating the historical significance of his efforts on behalf of peace. Any prudent skeptic would immediately move to question the legitimacy of Mr. Carter’s stewardship of the Camp David Accords. To do so; however, would, in some small way, soil the relative peace that resulted from these sessions. Furthermore, Mr. Carter was successful in forging a peace deal under conditions far more tenuous than those met by his predecessors. And it is my opinion that Mr. Carter’s achievements stand, to this day, as a benchmark for every American President since.

It would appear, therefore, that Mr. Carter has fallen victim to the psychological phenomenon known as the “attribution bias,” which erroneously ascribes a measure of innocence and victimhood to the Palestinians. While I am certain that Israel has not always acted honorably, the Jewish people are in a fight for their very existence. The Palestinians represent a proxy enemy for neighboring Arab states that lack the courage to take on Israel directly. Viewed as a quest for national survival, it is easy to conclude that neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians are likely to surrender their core ideological positions. On the one hand, for the Jew, Israel represents the final stage of a prophetic wandering–a sort of coming full-circle and acquiescence to the will of God. As such, they are not likely to back down; to do so would mean certain annihilation. The Jew haters in the region would seize upon the opportunity to do what so many others have attempted for millennia: wipe Israel off the map. On the other hand, the Palestinian struggle–as embodied by the Intifada (circa 1987), and other similar uprisings de-cries the morbid reality of Palestinian existence: one predicated on perpetual struggle. To eliminate the conflict with Israel is tantamount to denying the Palestinian a reason for living.

In part II of All the Emperor’s Men, I will discuss recent developments around attempts to broker a permanent peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians, and the role of the current US administration in these efforts. I will also discuss why it is impossible for there to ever be peace between the two sides by delving into the true cause of the rift. Answering, once and for all, why, contrary to decades of media misinformation, the disputed lands truly belong to the Jews.

In Memorium 9-11-2011

        911

By: Tony Lombardi

In going over and getting close

I saw the missing hero’s ghost

Amidst the haze of thick gray air

Surround their neighbors center bare

The king and queen upon the field

Mighty fortress made of steel

Concrete jungle island calm

Morning coffee and the bomb

Full of breathing peace full lives

Terror roared across the skies

Target, forest made of bricks

Home for Yankees and the Knicks

Sleeping soundly in his cave

Civilian soldiers strong and brave

Coward, demon, evil pure

Your day will come rest assure

Armed with life equipped with love

Our nation will rise above

Peace to all and all to peace

That is when the hate will cease

Pray for guidance, faith and hope

Lean on shoulders as we cope

Kiss your children, hug a friend

Treat each day like it's the end.

   

Back in the Saddle Again

Healing in a matter of time, but it is sometimes also  a matter of opportunity.

Hippocrates

As many of you know, I learned last November that I had prostate cancer. After consultations with my family doctor and the experts, I opted for a radical prostatectomy via the da Vinci Method, which utilizes a computer assisted robot [operated by a surgeon] to remove the prostate. I chose the da Vinci method for two reasons: first, it would allow me to recover much faster than I would with traditional surgery; second, Dr. Mutahar Ahmed (my surgeon), —a specialist in Oncology, Larparoscopic/Robotic Surgery, Cryo Surgery and Reconstructive Urological Surgery, and his colleagues— at the New Jersey Center for Prostate Cancer and Urology boast a zero percent mortality rate. With these odds, how could I lose? I underwent treatment In February, and I am happy to report that I recently received a clean bill of health, from my doctors; I am now completely cancer free.

I recall, vividly, the moment I received the call from my Urologist informing me that my biopsy was positive for cancer. It was November 2, 2010, and I was sitting in my car listening to a news report, which predicted a Democrat landslide, solidifying “the Obama Mandate.” In spite of the obvious solemnity of the news from my doctor, my mood was bolstered by the day’s events—it was Election Day 2010, which saw the rise of the Tea Party.
Far more significant than the emergence of a viable “Third Party,” the results of the 2010 Midterm Elections signaled a new beginning for the American Voter, one that has likely changed the American political landscape forever. Average citizens, Democrats and Republicans, Liberals and Conservatives, the politically savvy and the political novice took matters into their own hands, and en mass, sent legions of political lifers packing. The only ones surprised by the day’s “carnage” were those political hacks who would just as well have the political destiny of all Americans decided by the “intellectual elite.” Thankfully, the American Voter is far more sophisticated than the elitists could ever imagine. When the citizens felt they’d had enough, they stood together and took decisive action.

Reminiscent of revolutionary times, legions of do-nothing bureaucrats were replaced by the newest breed of American elected representatives: young, multi-ethnic, somewhat representative of the genders, and with fire in their eyes. So committed is this group, that a number of them has gone as far as publicly setting their own term limits. Surely, any number of this new class of representatives is likely to become tomorrow’s do nothing bureaucrats, but for now, they’ll do just fine.

On the subject of my health scare, my experience with Prostate Cancer has certainly opened my eyes in a number of ways: first, like it or not, I had to come to grips with my own mortality. Had it not been for my belief and faith in GOD, I am not certain that my mental state today would not be as intact as it is. It is in confrontation with death that man’s character is tested —submission to self-pity and depression wins you no points, it only demonstrates your lack of faith in GOD. Furthermore, any such distractions bring on stress, which could complicate treatment and recovery.

Second, this was my first real encounter with the American health care system as an acute care patient, which is significant, in view of my many years of work in the health care industry. My plan is to chronicle my experience as a cancer patient in the context of a discussion of the US Health Care System and the recently enacted Affordable Care Act. Publication of this article would be timed to coincide with the 2012 Presidential Election season.

Besides Dr. Ahmed (mentioned earlier), the true heroes of this story are my Primary Care Physician, Michael Casser, MD and my Urologist, Richard Garden, MD.

An unassuming man, Dr. Michael Casser is credited with identifying the abnormality that would eventually prove to be Prostate Cancer. While this resulted from a rather routine office visit procedure, it is Dr. Casser’s style that sets him [far] apart from his peers. Dr. Casser epitomizes Malcolm Gladwell’s portrayal of the ideal physician in his 2005 best-selling book, Blink. In what I call true “Casserian style,” Dr. Casser first sets the tone for every visit by announcing via his body language that the visit has little to do with him, and everything to do with you —the patient. Through the years, I have worked professionally with more than two hundred physicians across an array of disciplines, and from all walks-of-life; Michael Casser, MD sets a standard that would, at best, be unattainable for most, and in the least, educational for the remainder. Dr. Casser’s clinical competence is evident in his answers to even the most trivial questions —straightforward and reassuring. He creates an atmosphere that mimics a chat with a trusted friend, one whose advice you would seek, and most certainly follow. Dr. Casser is everything that is right with then American health care system.

Then, there is Dr. Richard Garden, Urologist; I can think of no other person more qualified to stand at the vanguard of Prostate Cancer treatment. When politicians ruminate that the American Health Care System is in need of reform, they have obviously not met Richard Garden, MD. The most striking feature on my encounter(s) with Dr. Garden is his empathy. Beginning with my very first encounter, I had the feeling that I was about to embark on a journey with a friend. One whose experience and expertise I would come to rely on. Whether it was the team of nurses who held my hands during my biopsy procedure, which I foolishly opted to undergo without anesthesia —machismo has its price, or Dr. Garden’s calm and reassuring manner, I never doubted for a minute that I was in the very best hands. Not only did Dr. Garden and his team [in the Oradell office] live up to my expectations, they exceeded them.



Prostate Cancer Facts

Prostate cancer is the “second leading cause of cancer death [for] American men.” According to the American Cancer Society, in 2011, 240,890 American men would be diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 33,720 of whom will die as a result of prostate cancer. Similarly, 1 in 39 men ages 40 to 59 and 1 in 14 men ages 60 to 69 would develop prostate cancer. More than 65% of all prostate cancers are diagnosed in men over the age of 65. Roughly 2 million American men currently live with prostate cancer.

In spite of some age and ethnic implications —men over 50 years of age and Black men are at greater risk for developing prostate cancer— prostate cancer remains highly treatable. With early detection and prompt treatment, many men go on to lead normal lives.


Prostate cancer takes an unnecessarily high toll on men. This is why I am urging all men, regardless of age or ethnicity, to discuss prostate cancer with their physician, and discuss testing.