In death, as in life, former President Jimmy Carter can’t seem to get a fair shake, at least from the national political establishment based in Washington, D.C., and the mainstream mass media.
Carter is being described as personally admirable as a man, and accomplished as a hard-working successful “ex-president,” but not successful in the White House.
That is unfair and a serious distortion of the facts, but nonetheless now deeply rooted in our popular culture and commentary.
Carter indeed suffered important political failures.
However, the facts also provide a strong case for Carter as having significant success in policies as president. These include senior appointments, first and foremost Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Carter assumed office as both inflation and unemployment, so-called “stagflation,” were taking a growing, alarming toll on the economic strength of the United States. An important cause was external, notably the “oil shocks” of dramatic tripling of petroleum prices by OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), led by Arab states.
This was partly in retaliation for important U.S. support for Israel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, but also because supply dynamics gave OPEC crucial price leverage. The 1973 petroleum price hike was followed by another in 1979
Also important in driving inflation were irresponsible fiscal and monetary decisions by Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, an unusually destructive combination. LBJ, aided by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, willfully concealed the true costs of the Vietnam War for political reasons. Nixon literally threatened Federal Reserve Chairman Arthur Burns to force liberal monetary policy despite rising inflation.
Volcker courageously and skillfully brought inflation and unemployment down from a combined peak of nearly 20%.
Impressive Carter nominees also include Bank of America CEO A.W. Clausen to succeed Robert McNamara as president of the World Bank. With considerable fanfare, McNamara greatly increased development aid to very poor countries. With much less publicity, Clausen strengthened the Bank’s challenged balance sheet.
Domestically, Carter successfully championed deregulation, especially of the airline and trucking industries. He also spurred green energy development.
In foreign policy, the truly historic Camp David negotiations resulted in the 1979 peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. This accord has endured and provided the foundation for later regional agreements.
However, the Carter administration was guilty of missteps in foreign policy that reflected both inexperience and a propensity to emphasize moral considerations in a fundamentally immoral world. Cancelling participation in the Olympics to protest the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan hurt innocent athletes, damaged us and did no damage to Moscow. The failed effort to rescue hostages held in Iran also hurt U.S. prestige.
Carter later admitted that decision was a serious mistake.
More broadly, lecturing allies on their perceived ethical along with policy shortcomings was also counterproductive. The U.S. became isolated from our most important friends in an era when our communist rivals appeared strong and effective.
Likewise, President Carter’s propensity for public judgments isolated him politically over time. His major public address blaming the American people for an alleged national “malaise” failed to communicate strength or leadership.
Political leadership requires communication skills that combine inspiration and information.
Jimmy Carter’s post-presidential years provided an opportunity to put his values into practical action. In that context, he and the Carter Center excelled, brilliantly.
Arthur I. Cyr is the author of “After the Cold War – American Foreign Policy, Europe and Asia” (NYU Press and Palgrave/Macmillan).
Contact acyr@carthage.edu
