In politics, good intentions are essential. But, as former US president Jimmy Carter learnt, good intentions alone won’t always take you very far.
Carter was born on October 1, 1924, in Plains, Georgia, and had a typical southern small-town upbringing. His father ran a general store and had substantial farmlands, benefitting from the New Deal farming subsidies. He furthered his studies at the US Naval Academy, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Science in 1946 and shortly after married Rosalynn, who was to be by his side for 77 years until she died in 2023.
His work in the navy saw him deployed to both the Pacific and the Atlantic fleets. In 1952, he was assigned to the navy’s nuclear submarine programme, yet, his career was cut short in July 1953 following his father’s death. On his return to Plains, Carter sought to put his scientific knowledge to the test and try to revive his father’s business; he oversaw the technical side and Rosalynn did his accounts.
It was also during this period that Carter found inspiration in his faith. A lifelong practising Christian, a Sunday School preacher and a man who professed his faith openly, Carter was said to have been influenced by a phrase he once heard from a preacher: “If you were arrested for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?”
It was, perhaps, this commitment to an active Christian faith which also prompted him to take an interest in public affairs. In 1961, he began to preach more actively against racial segregation. In 1962, he began campaigning for a seat in Georgia’s senate, with his wife organising his campaign. He lost, only to have the result overturned after significant fraud was discovered.
In 1970, he set his eyes on the governorship of Georgia. After a bitter election, he was successful and was sworn in as governor in January 1971, famously declaring that “the time for racial discrimination is over”. Indeed, civil rights were a priority for him, as was the reorganisation of government structures, the commitment to saving public fund and the introduction of new programmes to benefit the marginalised.
In 1975, he launched his presidential campaign. In the wake of the Watergate scandal, being an ‘outsider’ was seen as an advantage.
He campaigned on a platform prioritising government reorganisation, including a separate cabinet-level Department for Education and a Consumer Protection Agency.
More controversially, during that period, there was a proposal for a reduction in the defence budget, a treaty with the USSR to limit nuclear weapons and a tax hike for those with higher incomes.
Though initially popular in the polls, the final result was much closer than anticipated and his electoral victory was attributed to black voters in states with close margins.
Carter was inaugurated as president on January 20, 1977.
There were some successes as president. In September 1978, he invited Egyptian president Anwar Sadat and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin to Camp David to discuss lasting peace. Both countries were at war with each other. There was one issue the two sides could not agree on: Israel’s presence in the West Bank. Yet, by the end of the meetings, Egypt formally recognised Israel and the West Bank and Gaza were to have an elected government.
Yet, there were also some massive misjudgements on his side. It was during his period that the USSR invaded Afghanistan. It was also on his watch that the Iranian revolution overthrew the Shah. A hostage crisis characterised the last 444 days of his presidency. An attempt to rescue the hostages in April 1980 led to the death of eight US servicemen.
Jimmy Carter was an indefatigable champion of humanitarian causes and a true believer in the role of diplomacy- André DeBattista
On the domestic front, the situation was not much better. Unemployment remained at a high 7.5% throughout most of his tenure. Inflation rose from 5.7% at the start of his term to 13.5% by the end of his term. Fuel prices doubled; an energy shortage crisis emerged and many had to endure long queues to fill their tanks.
In July 1979, he gave his famous ‘Malaise Speech’, where he acknowledged that “for the first time in the history of our country, a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years”. This was hardly a ringing endorsement of his capabilities as president. However, it was a view largely shared by the US electorate.
In the 1980 election, Carter was defeated by a landslide. In his post-presidency, there was a sense that his was an unfulfilled presidency.
In 1982, he founded the Carter Centre to advance human rights, democracy, and public health worldwide.
In the 1991 run-up to the war following Saddam Hussein’s illegal invasion of Kuwait, Carter campaigned vigorously to stave off war, urging peace talks with Hussein instead.
Similarly, in 1994, Carter made a trip to Pyongyang as a private citizen, ostensibly to collect information for the Clinton administration about its nuclear programme.
Carter did the exact opposite; he travelled with a CNN film crew, negotiated the framework of an agreement and announced this on CNN with prior warning to the Clinton administration. Relations with the Clinton administration were not very good from that point onwards.
In both cases, Carter’s good intentions mask his somewhat limited lack of judgement. Hussein turned out to be a genocidal leader who used chemical weapons on his people. Kim bought some time and proceeded to build a nuclear arsenal, which remains a threat to the world.
There were some successes. In terms of healthcare, he was instrumental in supporting several public health initiatives and a global vaccination programme. He was undoubtedly a champion of peace and human rights and a believer in democratic norms. His 2002 Nobel Peace Prize is a testament to this.
At the time of his death, he was perceived more favourably than he had been at his time in office and much of this is also understandable. He was, after all, a man of great integrity. He was also an indefatigable champion of humanitarian causes and a true believer in the role of diplomacy.
Yet, there was also a naivety which left him blind to their – and his own – limitations.
André DeBattista is a political writer and academic.