"Apartheid" sales promotion?

Is the reason for wrongly use of the term “Apartheid”, a sales promotion?
By David Verveer

Jimmy Carter claiming that our attitude to the Palestinians can be compared to the South African Apartheid, is absolutely unfounded and unfair.I do not claim that our attitude to the Palestinians in our midst is faultless and does nor require urgent remediation, but calling it “Apartheid” is simply not true. The former South African regime believed in forcefully separating the black population from the white living areas, while in our case, the local Arab population is not kept apart in any manner or any place.
True, the Arab individual has considerable more problems to get work, or find a place to live in a predominant Jewish neighborhood, but this is not by law, but caused by distrust between the 2 population groups (mostly because by a more than 100 year fight between Jews and Arab countries). Most Israelis do not know their Arab neighbors, even though, they meet daily at the public services, hospitals, post offices, governmental agencies and banks.
Arab families shop in the nearby Jewish towns, and Jews visit Arab restaurants, and buy their vegetables at Arab shops, most of the building is done by Arab contractors, and I could go on with numerous interaction of the 2 groups, which simply emphasizes that there is no Government policy on Apartheid (separatism).
Like I mentioned before, minority groups are treated not equal in many ways, specially in getting Governmental services in their villages and towns. Considerably less money is spend on Arab education and health care, that is wrong, and everyone knows this, but it is difficult to remedy fast in our political system and specially during war time, but still, most certainly it is not apartheid.
Solving these problems can not come from books written by outsiders, but should come from united efforts by the 2 population groups, by trying to reduce the influence of extremists on all sides, by trying to control the prejudice anchored in everybody, by accepting that your neighbor is different and has different habits than those you inherited from your parents.
The integration of the two populations is extremely slow, too slow but funny or not, it exists and succeeds at all levels, without Governmental interference.
But again, all this has nothing to do with Apartheid, nor does the erection of a fence between Palestinian Authority land and Israel, or a fence between Mexico and the United States could be called Apartheid, it is simply a border fence. The precise location of the fence is irrelevant to the Apartheid issue Of course, stealing land from the local tenants is wrong, and in many places, the high court corrected the location accordingly, but stopping trespassing from one legal authority to another, is practiced in many regions of the world, and certainly not called, apartheid.
Could it be, that Mr. Carter used the word “Apartheid” falsely on purpose, n order to get more attention to his book?