...for the week ending March 14, 2008
I. Bills, Resolutions, and Dear Colleagues
II. Rice Testifies at ForOps Subcommittee
III. ALLMEP on the Hill
IV. Ackerman on the Gaza Situation
V. Reps. Lee, Capuano and Kucinich on the Record on H. Res. 951
Congress will be in recess until April 1.
===========================================
I. BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, AND DEAR COLLEAGUES
===========================================
(Venezuela) H. Res. 1049: Introduced 3/13/08 by Mack (R-FL) and 9 cosponsors, "Calling for the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to be designated a state sponsor of terrorism." Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The resolution's whereas clauses include a litany of Venezuelan sins, including alleged moral and material support for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), failure to stop the traffic in illegal narcotics, and failure to cooperate fully with U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. In addition, the resolution includes 9 whereas clauses relating directly or indirectly to Venezuela's relationship with Iran and in particular Venezuela's support for Iran's right
(Misc.) On 3/13/08 Senators Brownback (R-KS) and Leiberman (I-CT) introduced S. Res. 483, "A resolution recognizing the first weekend of May 2008 as 'Ten Commandments Weekend'." Also on 3/13/08, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform voted to report out H. Res. 578, "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that there should be established a National Watermelon Month." [Comment: there are no indications that the resolutions are in any way linked, and it is not clear why the Ten Commandments only get a weekend, but watermelons get a whole month.
===========================================
II. RICE TESTIFIES AT FOROPS SUBCOMMITTEE
===========================================
On 3/12/08 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice testified before the House Appropriations Committee's Foreign Operations Subcommittee regarding the FY09 Foreign Operations budget request. During the Q&A session that followed her testimony, Rice and members touched on a number of issues related to Israel and the Middle East. The following excerpts cover the main points (arranged by issue).
U.S. AID TO THE PALESTINIANS
----------------------------------------------
Lowey (D-NY): [from her opening statement] .As you know, I placed a hold on the $150 million in cash transfer assistance to the PA because of specific process requirements that had not been fulfilled by the State Department and USAID, specifically, receiving a copy of the memorandum of agreement that would govern the disbursement of these funds, and a certification that the conditions included in the ESF section of the fiscal year 2008 bill has been met. I also express concern about President Abbas's commitment to peace in light of his recent comments. I have since received a copy of the draft memorandum of agreement and your assurance that the Palestinian leadership is committed to peace with Israel. While I must say I remain skeptical about the political will of the Palestinian leadership that all too often lapses into inflammatory rhetoric that belies their stated commitment to peace, I want no one to doubt the commitment of the United States to pursue peace when Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas have once again publicly affirmed their commitment to the peace process. Based on these events, I lifted the hold on $100 million in cash transfer assistance. Madame Secretary, I have maintained the hold on the additional $50 million, pending the certification that I understand is forthcoming.
SETTLEMENTS
----------------------
McCollum (D-MN): .This week's announcement of the expanded Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a blow to your mission in that region. This expansion is unacceptable because it violates the road map. Madame Secretary, I'm looking for a clear, ambiguous (sic) position on continued Israeli settlement expansion. I want you to be explicit about this administration's position on the continued settlement expansion on the West Bank. And can you give me assurances that no U.S. funds in this budget will be used to facilitate or enable or secure the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank which violates the road map?
SEC. RICE: [note: the settlements question came in the context of several other questions; Sec. Rice forgot to address the settlement question in her initial response, and then did so after Rep. McCollum reminded her]. .Yes, I'm happy to speak to it, and I have spoken to it publicly -- that the United States considers the expansion of settlement activity to be not consistent with Israeli obligations under the road map, and we've made that very clear. And I've also said that it's certainly not helpful to the peace process. There is a process that we've set up for dealing with road map obligations of both sides, which General Fraser is going to hold that trilateral this week, and I can assure you that we are following very closely to assure that U.S. dollars are not being used to support the settlement activity. I'm sorry. I didn't intend to ignore the question.
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
---------------------------------------------
Wolf (R-VA) . is there much more that you want to tell us a little bit about? .The Middle East peace, about how do you see it going, what's going on and things like that.
Rice: Thank you. As to the Middle East effort in general, as you remember, after Annapolis we really established three tracks plus one. And let me just say that on the negotiating track, which is being run by Foreign Minister Livni and Mr. Abu Ala on the Palestinian side, I think that the encouragement there comes from the fact that they're not talking outside about what they're talking about inside. They've been very clear that they're having very important discussions, very consequential discussions, but that they're going to do it in a way that is serious and that they're not trying to report to the press every day about what they're doing. And that has led to some sense that perhaps nothing is going on there. I've never seen greater commitment. I can't say that they will get there, but I haven't seen greater commitment from the two people than I'm seeing from them, and also from President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert.
And to me, when I was just there, the most important thing was that we had to establish that in a context in which there is going to be upheaval and there is going to be turbulence and there are going to be people, particularly Hamas, that don't want this to work and so they will try to bring about violent incidents to try and keep the talks from going forward, these talks are going forward. And I especially thought it courageous on the part of the Israeli leadership after the terrible events in Jerusalem, which were condemned by Abu Mazen, that the Israelis within hours said that they were going to continue the negotiations. So that track continues and we are trying to support it.
What we're working on, and need to work more aggressively on, is the West Bank improvement, because there improving the lives of ordinary Palestinians will demonstrate that President Abbas can do that, that he can have a contrast between the West Bank and Gaza. And so that work is being -- General Jones is out working as we speak. General Fraser will hold a road map obligations and implementation meeting at the end of this week. And so we're working very hard on these other tracks.
The final piece that I really would like to see come more into relief is we need also the Arab states to be very active in supporting this effort. And some are, but frankly, the Israelis are going to need to know that the outreach of the Arabs to them is coming as a part of this broader effort.
So those are the efforts we're engaged in, Congressman Wolf. I believe we've got still a good chance -- as the president put it, plenty of time -- to get an agreement by the end of this -- this year. It's going to take hard work and there are some very difficult issues, but I have never -- I really have to say that the commitment of these parties is quite remarkable, and we'll try to help them.
[.]
Knollenberg (R-MI): .This will be just a brief question but it's on the international community -- should agree that without Arab nations' support, the peace process between Israel and the Palestinian Authority will fail. And in that regard, this is undermining the peace process. Also what are we demanding from the leaders of, say, the Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to ensure that they continue, continue to support the peace process? And further what is being done to ensure Hamas and Fatah do not enter into a governing agreement? Those two points, if you will.
Rice: Well, Abu Mazen has been very clear about the last of those, that he considers Hamas to have launched and illegal coup. And they would have to undo that before he had any interest in talking with them. In terms of the Saudis and the Egyptians, we want them to give economic support. They've pledged it. We'd like to get it --
Knollenberg: They pledged it but did they -- are they doing anything?
Rice: We'd like to get more of it flowing. Some of it is actually flowing to Salam Fayyad. I think it's important to say that, but more of it needs to, and political support. Because when and if we are fortunate enough that there is actually an agreement, then Abu Mazen is going to need to support of the Arabs to make that agreement, to make the kinds of compromises that he's going to need to make in order to get an agreement.
ABBAS COMMENTS IN JORDANIAN NEWSPAPER
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Weldon (R-FL): .I had some questions for you about the recent statements of Mr. Abbas in that Jordanian newspaper, Ad Dustour. He did that interview. I was particularly troubled -- I just came back from Israel myself. I was there about two or three weeks ago. And some of the concerns have a lot of -- the people that I spoke to. And I hear this as well, domestically, is that a lot of the Palestinians who claim they want peace really don't want peace. They just are temporarily pursuing a peace agenda, but their goal is still the destruction of Israel. But he said, and I'll quote him from that article, "At this time, I am against armed struggle, because we cannot achieve it," unquote, sort of implying that if he could achieve the destruction of Israel, he would do it, if he had the military resources to do it. And then he goes on to say things might be different in the coming stages, which I thought was a really troubling comment.
Now, Saeb Erekat, I guess, tried to do damage control and a couple of days ago sent out a letter saying those quotes were lifted out of context. There was really no attempt, though, in Erekat's letter to explain what Abbas was actually saying. And I wonder if you could comment on this, because in light of all the work you've been doing and the president has been pursuing to try to achieve peace, you can't achieve peace if the people you're working with don't really want it.
Rice: Well, thank you, Dr. Weldon. I am confident that President Abbas is somebody who's -- who is committed to the negotiated solution of this issue and recognizes that only a negotiated solution is going to result in a Palestinian state. We did immediately go to them about the comments. They say they -- he says they were taken out of context. I do know that we've all had the experience of saying things that perhaps we wish we hadn't said. And I just can tell you that this is somebody who for many, many, many years now has rejected the idea of violence as a means to statehood. He is also somebody who is a great -- who has great problems with Hamas. They've -- the military wing tried to assassinate him in Gaza. I just believe that this is somebody who is dedicated to the negotiated process, and I don't think that there's any evidence -- I can't account for the comments. I think they were extremely unfortunate. We made that very clear to them. But I believe he's a partner for peace for the Israelis, and I believe Prime Minister Olmert believes he's a partner for peace.
HUMANITARIAN SITUATION IN GAZA
-------------------------------------------------------
Lee (D-CA): .I wrote to you, I think it was January 10th, about an urgent request to take appropriate action to ensure that the vital humanitarian goods and services are successfully delivered in Gaza. In the letter, I indicated that -- and let me just read you part of this letter -- one of the most important steps necessary to enhance the prospects for success will be to ensure that humanitarian assistance is able to reach those civilians most in need in Gaza. I haven't heard back from you yet in terms of a response, but I wanted to know what has taken place and how you see the humanitarian needs now in Gaza, because it's a deplorable situation. And just basic medicines, food, water -- you know, it's a situation I don't think that anyone would see as tolerable, and I'm still waiting on your response. So maybe you could answer some of those questions here.
Rice: ...As to Gaza, I have personally been involved in working on that issue. First of all, we made additional money available to UNRWA for the Gaza to try -- we've now -- about $148 million this year -- to try and make certain that there is enough funding, because UNRWA made a request for more funding. We have answered that request. But I've also been very engaged with the Israelis to try and make certain that humanitarian convoys can get through Karem Shalom and through Erez into the region. And so, for instance, I was called and told that there were 80 trucks that were lined up that could not get through in the convoy. I intervened directly and those 80 trucks got through. So we work these issues on a -- out in the region on a daily basis. I intervene whenever necessary. We really do not want innocent people in the Gaza to suffer.
The problem, of course, is that Hamas has taken the Gaza hostage and the people of Gaza with it. Abu Mazen is still providing 58 percent of the PA budget to the people of Gaza, but it would be extremely helpful, of course, if Hamas were not firing rockets into Israel. And so we're working with the Egyptians; we're working with the Israelis; we're working with the Palestinian Authority to try to help bring about a better situation in Gaza, but on a day-to-day basis we work to try and alleviate the humanitarian --
[.]
Lee (D-CA): .Following up on my question earlier, just wanted to find out if Congress could do anything to help in terms of the delivery of goods and services to Gaza to address the humanitarian concerns and crisis. You mentioned some of the things you were doing..
Rice: .on what can be done to help, I think you are helping. Providing -- we have been able to get the assistance bumped up when we've needed to. Sometimes it requires reprogramming because we often are dealing with a circumstance in which things change on the humanitarian side, and you've been very amenable to those requests.
IRAN
--------
Schiff (D-CA): .first I wanted to ask about is Iran and the Iran Sanctions Act. There have been a number of occasions where the State Department appears to have failed to issue findings regarding the Sanctions Act where the Sanctions Act would apply. And my question is, have these investigations gone forward? Have they resulted in findings? If they've resulted in findings but there's been a decision not to enforce the Iran Sanctions Act, why hasn't a waiver been issued? So if you could tell us the status of investigations on the Iran Sanctions Act.
Rice: .on Iran, I will get back to you with the state of the investigations. I think it's probably more appropriate in a closed circumstance. But we take very seriously these investigations, and indeed, I believe that, as I've mentioned before, the act is helpful to us, not only in looking at specific cases, but also in helping to get voluntary efforts to isolate Iran through voluntary sanctions. And I think we're having some effect, for instance, on financial institutions around the world. We're having some effect on export credits around the world. We're seeing people, in part because of the sanctions the Treasury has done, the designations the Treasury has done, but also because people recognize that doing business with Iran means that you can't tell who you're doing business with, I think we're having some progress on the voluntary side. But I would not hesitate to sanction and, if necessary, waive if that were appropriate. But I will get you something on the actual status of what is in the pipeline.
[.]
Kirk (R-IL): . I'm very close to Admiral Fox Fallon, and it's sad to see his departure, et cetera. And I think we both agree that there's poor to no good military options with regard to Iran, and therefore the U.N. multilateral diplomacy route which you have been pursuing has been a very good one, and I congratulate you on three U.N. Security Council resolutions on that. My worry is on the other side of the multilateral house, which is just three blocks from the White House is the headquarters of the World Bank. And I think most Americans don't want any conflict with Iran, but we also don't want to subsidize the Iranian government. Now, the U.S. subsidizes 20 percent of the World Bank. I don't think most people know that in 2005, the World Bank cut a $49 million check to the government of Iran. In 2006, they cut a $166 million check to Iran. In 2007, they cut a $220 million. So U.S. taxpayer support for -- through the World Bank to the government of Iran is accelerating.
That's $425 million in U.S. and allied money going directly to the Iranian finance ministry, with some fairly hilarious technical problems that we designated the principal bank that was handling these transfers as a state proliferator. We're on the edge of designating their central bank as a state sponsor of terrorist -- I'm not exactly sure how the World Bank check clears, even. And we have $818 million pending that will go three blocks away from the White House, to the government of President Ahmadinejad. So, has this come up on your radar screen? Because certainly from President Ahmadinejad's viewpoint, he's got three U.N. Security Council resolutions condemning him, and then he gets a check for $435 million signed in Washington D.C.
Rice: Well, I -- it has come on my radar screen, Congressman. We have really opposed non-humanitarian assistance to Iran from the World Bank, and we've lobbied about it. And my understanding is that since 2005, there have been no new commitments to Iran, which is a good stage. Now, some of this play out over time from former commitments or from humanitarian commitments. We've not stood in the way of purely humanitarian commitments, as the U.N. Security Council resolution does not, but I don't think that -- with the exception humanitarian assistance, the World Bank shouldn't be involved with Iran.
JORDAN
------------
Schiff (D-CA): .Jordan, as you know, has been a tremendous ally, but they're incurring enormous costs as a result of the refugee problem. And last week I expressed my belief to Secretary Negroponte -- deputy secretary, that we ought to support additional aid for Jordan in the supplemental. And I want to reiterate that expression to you, but also know why the ESF for Jordan, which totaled 360 million (dollars) in fiscal year 2008, has been pared back to 263 million (dollars) in the administration's request.
Rice: .On Jordan, we have no better ally than Jordan in many ways, in the war on terror, in a modernizing Middle East. And so the request again, we think, is appropriate for Jordan's needs. Jordan has benefited from time to time from supplemental appropriations in addition. And we've worked very hard to get Jordan into the threshold program for MCC. And we're working toward a compact with them. And finally I think the most important thing we've recently done for Jordan is in terms of its debt buyback, which was very highly sought. So we believe that this is an appropriate level, given.
REP. SCHIFF: Are you open to an increase in the supplemental?
SEC. RICE: Well, I think we want to keep the -- we've requested in the supplemental what we think is absolutely necessary. But Jordan is a good ally, and we have -- they've benefited from time to time from supplemental appropriation.
SAUDI ARABIA
----------------------
Israel (D-NY): .I have some questions with respect to Saudi Arabia, particularly the efforts that we have made to encourage the government of Saudi Arabia to facilitate greater religious freedom and tolerance, and to reduce the curricula which often features inciteful behavior. In 2006, State Department came before Congress to report on discussions with the government of Saudi Arabia that had resulted in a Saudi confirmation of a set of policies to promote greater religious freedom and tolerance. The State Department characterized the Saudi position as a significant development. Notwithstanding that characterization, I remain deeply concerned that the Saudis have not made sufficient progress in reducing the violence and the extremism, the intolerance that is often exhibited, particularly in curricula in their schools.
Three questions. Number one, has the State Department created a formal mechanism to monitor the implementation of the July 2006 policies? If it has not, why not, and if it has, what have you found so far? Secondly, the State Department is required to report to Congress, under H.R. 1, Section 2043, implementing recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 on progress by the Saudi government to implement the July 2006 previously identified polices. And third, aside from Saudi Arabia, it seems to me -- and this may be my own perception -- that the Department of State has always been somewhat reluctant to insist on reform of curricula and to set up procedures to monitor curricula and violent expressions. And I'm wondering if you can put my mind at ease on that.
Rice: Yes. Thank you very much, Congressman. Let me start with the last point. I don't think -- I certainly don't feel reluctant in the least to raise this and raise this question quite strongly with the Saudis. And in fact, one of the changes that has taken place is that I do believe the Saudis are beginning to understand that some of the extremist rhetoric and curriculum and whatever else is backfiring inside the kingdom itself. And the rise of extremism in the kingdom aimed at the kingdom has been of considerable concern to them and has -- as has to us some efforts that appear to have exported some of that to neighboring or other countries.
So this is actually a discussion that we have and we have quite forthrightly. The vehicle for doing that is a strategic dialogue that we hold with the Saudis about twice a year, once in Riyadh and once here. It has a working group on the human dimension in which we raise issues of human rights, issues of extremism. And while I would be the last to say that there's been anything like the kind of progress that I think we will need to -- they will need to see, frankly, for their own good, as well as for the good of the world as a whole, they are discussions that are very much ongoing and they do provide a mechanism by which we can monitor and then take what we know to the Saudis for discussion.
And so it is very high priority because I, frankly, believe that in the war on terrorism and in the rise of extremism going to the root of some of these issues is going to be very important.
Israel (D-NY): In addition to the strategic dialogue that we have with the Saudis, are there mechanisms within the State Department, are there funding avenues within the State Department to help other countries modernize, revamp and reform their curricular? Can we be doing more on that?
Rice: Well, one of the most active efforts that we've had has actually been in Pakistan, where some time ago President Musharraf had a very progressive minister of education who wanted to start, for instance, the reform of the madrassa system to make the curriculum not just a religious curriculum, but also one that dealt with science and math and modern skills for children. We have through USAID and other efforts tried to help with that. It's obviously a sensitive matter because the United States can't be seen to be writing the curriculum for another state. But we are trying to provide assistance to these educational efforts, and we think they're very important. And we have similar efforts in a number of other places.
[.]
Wolf (R-VA): .I second what Congressman Israel said. I don't think we have really done enough with the radical Wahabism that the Saudis are funding. All you have to do is read "Looming Tower." Omah Mular (sic) -- Mullah Omar went to a madrassa funded by the Saudis -- thousands up along to Pakistan. So he is absolutely right, and we really need to see the administration do more.
[.]
Lowey (D-NY): .it is very disappointing to me that with the relationship that this president has and his father had with countries such as Saudi Arabia, and I build upon what my colleague, Steve Israel said as well. It's very disappointing, and I know that they're hedging their best and that's why it's even more disappointing that they can't be made to commit now, to build now in the West Bank. Why isn't there some housing providing jobs? Why isn't there some economic development providing jobs? And you and I know and everyone who's been involved in this process understands that unless the Palestinians are supported by Saudi Arabia and the Emirates and all the other countries in the region, it's going to be very difficult for them to take that final step. And when you have the Saudis and the Emirates in the region, the oil-producing countries getting $105 a barrel, the fact that they can show some evidence on the ground and create the jobs is mind-boggling to me. So again, I would just like to urge you and the president to urge our friends, the Saudis, we talk about weapons deals, and I'm not going to get into that issue now. But not to -- make it clear to them that they have responsibility now. It's not good enough for them to make a commitment, for them to think about it. We need to see some action on the ground now, and I know you and I agree.
Rice: Certainly. May I just say just one word on the Middle East peace. There are pledges in hand from Saudi Arabia -- Lowey: Pledges. Rice: That's right -- from Saudi Arabia and others. And so my -- Lowey: While they're closing deals in Nevada and Citigroup. We heard all about them when we were in Jerusalem. Rice: Right. I was just saying, Congresswoman, you know I want everybody to do more, but we are just trying to get people to make sure they pay their pledges. That's -- if they do that -- Lowey: Has anybody done anything on -- have the Saudis done anything on the ground -- built any housing, put people to work? Rice: What we're trying to do is -- through the efforts that Tony Blair has -- is to identify projects that people could contribute to, because it will require some changes in terms of movement and access also on the Israeli side. And so there's a package that has to be put together here. But I'm always for people doing more. You know that. Lowey: Is anything -- maybe I'm not aware of it. Is anything currently happening on the ground? I hear about the pledges, and maybe -- Rice: There are. Yes, there are plans for several major projects that Tony Blair -- Lowey: Plans. Rice: Yes, but they should be starting to come on-line. That's part of what General Jones is helping with. Lowey: When? Rice: I don't know when the first ones will, but we are trying to make sure that there's a -- when you need a roadblock moved or you need a road to be opened, that that piece of it can be, there so that an economic project can be put in place. And -- Lowey: However -- Rice: Yes. Lowey: I'm sure you would agree that there is housing that can be built, there are jobs that can be created in the West Bank without moving a roadblock and without -- I mean, that is all part of the total -- you agree. Rice: I agree. I agree. Lowey: And it seems to me we've been talking about -- many people have been talking about this for the past year, like Dennis Ross. I've been talking about it primarily since the fall. And so it's September, October -- nothing. Rice: Let's -- well, I wouldn't say nothing. Lowey: Commitments. Rice: There are commitments. Lowey: But nothing on the ground. Rice: There are commitments. There are efforts to do the planning. Salam Fayyad has about 150 projects that he's been doing and we've been helping him with. So things are going on. But I've just said I don't think the progress is fast enough, and we're going to redouble those efforts. Lowey: And -- Rice: In terms of the planning, yes. Lowey: Right.
JERUSALEM/INTERFAITH EFFORTS
--------------------------------------------------
Wolf (R-VA): .But what I wanted to ask you -- and I want to congratulate you and thank you for effort with regard to the Middle East. I want to ask you to do something. It's a little unusual, but I would hope that you would do it. In Psalm 122 -- I was in church a couple weeks ago, and at the end the pastor, he prayed for the peace of Jerusalem. And as you know, in the Bible, in Psalm 122, it says, "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. May those who love you be secure. May there be peace within your walls and security within your citadels. For the sake of my brothers and friends, I will say peace be within you. For the sake of the house of the Lord our God, I seek your prosperity."
Now I appreciate you were willing to fund the effort with regard to Congressman Hall and Cardinal McCarrick with regard to their faith effort. I would like to ask you to urge our former colleague Congressman Tony Hall and Cardinal McCarrick and some leading rabbis in our nation to convene -- and I looked up the definition of convene: convene, "to come together or assemble for a public purpose" -- to convene a convocation in Jerusalem sometime this summer or this fall to literally do what Psalm 122 says. I know Congressman Hall would be certainly able to do that and, I think, Cardinal McCarrick. And I mean not just American religious leaders but religious leaders from around the world, including the pope.
But I think what you're doing is so important. And if we miss this opportunity to bring peace to the Middle East, the next president, whoever he or she is, will really be very reluctant, I think, to pick it up for a period of time. We may lose a year or two or three.
So I support everything you're doing, but I would ask you to consider -- and I'm not going to put you on the spot to say yes or no now. But think about asking Tony, Congressman Hall, a former ambassador, somebody that I think you know, the president knows well; Cardinal McCarrick, who I think is highly respected, was on the Religious Human Rights Commission and well thought of, to gather with leading Jewish rabbis in this country, of all political backgrounds, to see about having a convocation sometime this summer or this fall in Jerusalem.
If you're Christian, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre's very important. If you're Jewish, the Western Wall is very important. If you're Muslim, the Dome of the Rock is very important. But in order to have a spiritual aspect to come alongside with your diplomatic efforts -- so what I'd like you to do, is I'm officially asking, that you ask Congressman Hall, former Congressman Hall, Cardinal McCarrick, some of the leading rabbis in this country, in our country, to meet with -- and I appreciate your meeting with the Interfaith Religious Council. You are the only that's ever done that, and I think -- that never got very much coverage here in the United States -- but to work through that interfaith group out there in the region to have a major convocation in Jerusalem to do precisely what it says and asks us to do in Psalm 122.
Will you consider doing that? I know -- I'm not asking the State Department to put this on. I think we're not going to get into that. But I think Congressman Hall and Cardinal McCarrick and some of the leading rabbis could.
Rice: Well, thank you very much, Congressman Wolf. Very interesting idea. And we'll certainly consider it. As you know, I talk frequently to Cardinal McCarrick, and Ambassador Hall is a great man. I want to thank you for suggesting that I do that meeting with the Interfaith Religious Dialogue out there. It was one of the more interesting meetings that I had. I think we had a pretty candid discussion about what it is going to take in terms of people of faith overcoming differences, and I want to thank you for suggesting it. It was really a very good opportunity to do that. And as a minister's daughter, I'm very much aware of the power of prayer. So thank you very much, and I -- we will definitely look at the idea.
Wolf (R-VA): I appreciate it. I met with the council members and they were very, very impressed. And I think they could fill the vacuum that would send a counter-message that we're getting from Hamas of hatred and missiles coming out of Gaza and things like that. I think this would send a message. And I think with the closing eight months left or whatever the case may be, I think it would bolster also -- put great positive pressure, not negative pressure, on the forces in that a region to come together.
TUNISIA
------------
Chandler (D-KY): Now, the second question I have has to do with Tunisia. Tunisia is a ally of ours, a strong supporter. They have made many strides in a lot of different areas, including the area of women's rights and so forth. They're an important ally in a region. All you have to do is look at the map and you can see that it's important for us to have Tunisia on our side. Yet when you look at the 2009 budget request, it calls for something in the neighborhood of a 60-plus percent cut in our aid to Tunisia. We're not talking about much money that goes to Tunisia in the whole scheme of things, relatively speaking. It looks to me like it amounts to a symbolic poke in the eye to the Tunisians. And I would like for you to address that and I would hope that you could revisit that.
Rice: Thank you, Congressman. On Tunisia, we believe that -- what we try to do is we try to assess what the needs are at any particular time and to meet them to the degree that we can. And the programs that we're running in Tunisia are not so much in sort of basic development and programs. We have a lot of programs with them in rule of law and democracy building and it is a good -- in some ways, a good relationship. It's had its ups and downs even since I've been secretary. But I think that what we try to do is to determine what we believe is really needed there and then to meet that need. And we believe that's the case in Tunisia. But if you would like, I'll get you a more --
Chandler: Well, the biggest cut is in FMF spending.
SEC. RICE: Yes.
Chandler: And in my view, it's very symbolic. And the Tunisians are not at all happy with it. And it really is such a relatively small amount of money. And I'm having a hard time understanding --
Rice: I understand. But we assess what we believe they need on the FMF side and what we can do on the FMF side, and we try to meet those needs. We obviously have competing budgetary pressures in other places. But Congressman, I will look again and I'll get back to you.
=======================
III. ALLMEP ON THE HILL
=======================
Dozens of NGO's devoted to Israeli-Palestinian coexistence and engaged in people-to-people programs in Israel and the West Bank/Gaza descended on Washington this week for the annual Alliance for Middle East Peace (ALLMEP) conference. The week-long conference focused on raising awareness about these organizations and their efforts to promote coexistence, cooperation, and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, and between Arabs and Jews within Israel.
The groups held more than 40 meetings, including meetings on Capitol Hill, at the State Department and USAID, with Middle East embassies, and with advocacy groups. The NGOs also urged both private foundations and Congress to increase available resources to help build a grassroots foundation for peace.
ALLMEP capped the week by hosting the first-ever Capitol Hill performance of "the Israeli-Palestinian Comedy Tour" before a crowd of lawmakers, congressional staff, diplomats, and Middle East policy experts and advocates.
Congress has already demonstrated support for ALLMEP's mission, including in the FY08 ForOps bill a U.S. grant program to support coexistence activities (as proposed by ALLMEP). Congressman Joseph Crowley (D-NY) and Jim Moran (D-VA) are currently circulating a Dear Colleague seeking co-signers on a letter to the ForOps Chair Nite Lowey (D-CA) and Ranking Member Frank Wolf (R-VA) urge support for continuation of this funding.
For more details about ALLMEP, see: www.allmep.org
========================================
IV. ACKERMAN ON THE GAZA SITUATION
========================================
On 3/12/08 the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia convened a hearing entitled ""853 Days: From Gaza Disengagement to De Facto Power?" Testifying before the subcommittee was David Welch, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. A webcast of the hearing can be viewed at the Subcommittee's website: http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/sub_mideast.asp
The following is the opening statement of Subcommittee Chairman Gary Ackerman (D-NY):
From the Bible comes the famous aphorism that "For everything there is a season and a time and purpose under the heavens." It would be nice if that were so, if the seasons and times and purposes to which we are bound were, in fact, distinct and clear; so that if there was a time for war, we could expect there would also be a time for peace. And we all might wish that these periods would not be, as reality is, merged and messy, inconclusive and imprecise.
Clearly right now in the Middle East, there is at the same time both a peace process and a dynamic of escalation. There is both negotiation on final status issues and threats to roll back the concepts on which discussions are proceeding. There are shared interests between Israel and the moderate camp of Arab states and there are decisions by some of those same states that boost the fortunes of Hamas, Iran's proxy. There are far more contradictions than there is clarity.
In Jerusalem, Israeli leaders are trying to square a circle that won't come round. On the one hand, they welcome and celebrate moderate Palestinian leaders who are committed to a two-state solution, who are responsible and reasonable, and have rejected violence and accept Israel's right to exist. On the other hand, there's been an increase in the number of checkpoints and roadblocks; there have been several announcements about settlement expansions and new housing in Jerusalem; there have been no illegal outposts dismantled; and from time to time, necessary Israeli security operations have-as an unintended consequence-made a mockery of nascent Palestinian efforts to put just a little authority back in the Palestinian Authority.
In Ramallah, the lack of clarity is even more striking. After ascending to the top of the Palestinian body politic as a negotiator and a peacemaker, as a man who has rejected violence on a moral basis-not a tactical, but a moral basis--Mahmoud Abbas now seems ready to squander all the credibility he's struggled for so long to acquire. Speaking to the editorial staff of al-Dustour, a Jordanian paper, Abbas is alleged to have said, "At this time, I object to the armed struggle, since we are unable to conduct it; however, in future stages things may change." When pressed by our government to clarify these remarks, Abbas's senior advisor, Sa'eb Erakat, explained "that certain comments were reported out of context. We have chosen the path of negotiations and no other path, and we will continue along it until we achieve our goal of an independent Palestinian State." Skeptics would ask "Until statehood? Not after?" During the Nixon presidency, we referred to such statements as a "non-denial denial."
In Washington, I fear things are little better. Speaking Monday at the White House, President Bush was asked what he thought of Israel's plan to build 750 new homes in a settlement near Jerusalem. He responded that "We expect both parties involved in the Middle Eastern peace process to adhere to their obligations in the road map." So far, so good. Then the President went off into that other private world of his where everything seems to be going well. He then said "And those obligations are clear. And to this end, the Secretary of State is dispatching the general that we named to be the coordinator of road map activities to the Middle East, for him to conduct meetings with the relevant parties." In other words, everyone's obligations under Phase I of the Roadmap are so crystal-clear, that we've assigned a three-star general-who reports directly to the Secretary of State-to sit with the Israelis and Palestinians to discuss what is already clear, at least to the President, if not to the relevant parties.
So my questions to you Mr. Secretary are going to be very similar to the ones I've asked before. What are we doing about this mess other than praying? What is our plan for either reviving the Palestinian Authority, or moving on without it? The President has committed to providing the PA with $150 million in cash assistance, a step that should have been taken months, if not years ago. But what is it going to buy now? What reforms come out of it? How will the PA be different, or stronger, or more politically viable as a consequence? Are we building a bridge? Or are we building a dock?
The leadership of the PLO is scheduling, for first time since 1989, a General Conference. This meeting is supposed to be the last best hope for reviving Fatah, and seizing control of the organization from the dead hand of the Old Guard. So who's organizing the meeting? That, of course, would be Ahmed Qurei, known as Abu Ala, leader of the Old Guard. At some point, do we have to look at the dissolute, fragmented, corrupted mess which is Fatah and conclude that that dog won't hunt?
In the mean time, who do we hope will take control of the borders of Gaza? The PA? Really? The leaders of Hamas are going to let that happen why? Because of their humanitarian impulses? Because their Iranian patrons want it? And who and what is going to stop the smuggling of weapons into Gaza? I'm not a military man but I know the difference between Qassams and Grad rockets, the kind that recently fell on Ashkelon. Qassams can be made by Hamas, Grads have to be imported. Other than reoccupation by the IDF, what's going to stop the flow of Grad rockets into Gaza and then, on a high-arc, into Israel? And if the IDF goes in, how do they go out? Who gets the keys this time when they leave? If Abu Mazen gets them, will he be able to keep them, much less use them?
In my view, what is happening in Gaza is pushing the entire peace process right up to the precipice. The idea of "land for peace" is rapidly decaying into a new concept called "land for rockets." Not surprisingly, the Israelis don't seem to like it much. And signals from Jerusalem seem to indicate that they're losing patience and interest in the PA anyway. At Annapolis, we had a meeting that wasn't a conference, and certainly not a summit, that put into motion negotiations on an agreement which was originally a declaration, but is now moving toward becoming an understanding. I see a lot movement but not much forward motion. When do we see real changes, real sacrifices, real political pain? I'm not seeing any of these things from any of the parties and I'm starting to suspect that I'm not going to.
=========================================
V. LEE, CAPUANO, AND KUCINICH ON H.RES. 951
=========================================
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Extensions of Remarks, March 10, 2008
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mr. Speaker, I voted for this resolution because I believe we must condemn the rocket attacks launched from Gaza into Israel. Many innocent persons, both Israeli and Palestinian, have been killed or injured in the violence. In addition to death and injury, the on-going violence has destroyed property, instilled fear, and disrupted the lives of innocent civilians on both sides of the conflict.
"I appreciate that the resolution helps document the toll that rocket attacks have exacted on Israeli civilians. But I very much regret that the resolution misses an important opportunity to acknowledge the complexity of problems and issues which give rise to the conflict. And I am particularly troubled that the resolution fails to recognize the depth and breadth of human suffering, misery, and death that has been visited upon the people of Gaza.
"Mr. Speaker, the humanitarian situation in Gaza has only worsened since the armed takeover by Hamas in June 2007. Basic items such as baby milk, wheat grain, vegetable oil, and dairy products are in short supply. Additionally, the tightening of restrictions on the movement of goods and people by the Israeli government is causing serious hardship according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OCHA.
"The OCHA has found that these restrictions have had the effect of preventing the people of Gaza from receiving desperately needed healthcare treatments like chemotherapy and radiation therapy for cancer patients, pediatric surgery, and neurosurgery. The restrictions on the movement of goods make it difficult for healthcare providers to obtain new diagnostic medical equipment or the parts to service existing equipment that has fallen into disrepair. To make matters worse, it appears that those Palestinians who want to leave Gaza to pursue treatment in Israel or abroad are finding it difficult to do so.
"Mr. Speaker, ensuring that humanitarian assistance is available and accessible to the people of Gaza is one of the most important steps that can be taken to ensure that the peace process succeeds and is not derailed by continued violence. It is for this reason that I recently wrote to Secretary of State Rice urging her to do all she can to make certain that vital humanitarian goods and services are successfully delivered in Gaza. I believe the moral force of the resolution would have been enhanced had it called for similar action.
"Finally, this resolution cites the roles of Iran, Syria, and Egypt in enabling these attacks. I want to be clear that nothing recited in the resolution would justify a preemptive military response against these countries nor should it be used as grounds to build a case for such an action.
"Mr. Speaker, the rocket attacks against Israel condemned by this resolution have caused great suffering to the victims. Acknowledging that suffering in a congressional resolution is a fitting and proper thing to do. But at the end of the day, the peace and justice we all seek will not come from passing a resolution in Congress. Rather, a just and lasting peace will come from the parties resolving in their hearts and minds to rededicate themselves to the active engagement in good faith negotiation to bring the two-state solution into being. I call upon the Administration to redouble its efforts in discharging its indispensable role as honest broker in the peace process.
Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), Extensions of Remarks, March 10, 2008
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Madam Speaker, I rise to explain the reasons and the scruples that led me to vote 'present'' on H. Res. 951. I would note, first, that the resolution as amended and passed is more acceptable to me than the original draft. Most important to me is that the amended resolution recognizes the suffering of innocent victims on both sides of the conflict. However, I continue to believe that resolutions containing language such as some of the language in H. Res. 951 do not advance us towards the most important goal relative to this issue: peaceful co-existence for the region.
The resolution properly states America's support for the people of Israel and their right to defend themselves. It notes the near daily rocket and mortar attacks on southern Israel that have been launched from the Gaza Strip since Israel withdrew from Gaza in the interests of peace in 2005. It fairly condemns Hamas and other terrorist organizations. I have never wavered in my support for Israel's right to defend itself against terrorists. I approved their action against the Iraqi nuclear site. I was bitterly criticized for my defense of the 'targeted assassination' of Sheikh Yassin in 2004. I led the resistance in the city of Somerville to a campaign to divest in Israel. I am a friend of Israel and I do not believe this resolution makes Israel safer. It fails to reconfirm our commitment to peace and to a process that can bring about peace. I believe this failure renders America less able to be an effective broker for peace in the region.
In addition, I question the desirability and wisdom of reiterating the status of Iran and Syria as 'state sponsors of terror''. The Department of State has so listed them and, certainly, there is ample evidence that both countries have actively and passively provided aid and comfort to Hamas and also to Hizbollah. Certainly, the current leaders of Iran have publicly stated their vile opinions about Israel and their determination to eradicate it. No one can deny these facts. Nonetheless, I have always been of the opinion that finding a way to peace is more important than name calling--even if the names seem to be well-deserved. I believe that those who are truly committed to finding a peaceful solution--two democratic states, recognized by other nations and coexisting in peace--must not succumb to the temptation of name-calling. We cannot let terrorists shape our agenda. We must remain determined to pursue peace.
I would ask anyone whether they are more or less likely to open their ears so they can hear their opponent if that opponent constantly calls them names. I would ask anyone whether they are more or less likely to believe that someone who calls them names can truly understand their concerns. We all suffer from the same human weakness that causes us to lash out at those who attack us. This is a natural and understandable emotional reaction. However, it is one that we must resist, especially when engaging in what should be seen as deliberative and thoughtful endeavors such as Congressional resolutions.
That said, I believe every observer agrees that Egypt and Syria must be active participants in resolving this conflict. Many might agree that Iran must participate as well--or at least acquiesce. How then does it encourage them to do so when the Congress states or implies that they are to blame for the problems in the region? This question seems particularly relevant because the resolution, a condemnation of Hamas rocket attacks and an expression of solidarity with the people of Israel does not require us to condemn other regional powers. There is no need to ``poke our finger in the eye'' of governments able to thwart or advance a peaceful solution.
I would point out that the Congress has taken this approach for years. We have passed numerous resolutions--too many, in my view, that are gratuitously confrontational. I ask: Have those resolutions moved us any closer to finding a peaceful solution? The approach has not worked thus far and I see no reason to believe it will start working now.
I voted 'present'' rather than 'no' because I was in sympathy with much of the resolution. I voted as a Member of Congress determined that the United States act responsibly in pursuit of peace.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Extensions of Remarks, March 11, 2008
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mr. Speaker, I am unequivocal in my support for the security of Israel and its citizens. I am committed to the right of all people in the Middle East, and the world, to live peacefully. However, because of H. Res. 951's overt lack of balance and its unreconciliatory approach, I oppose this bill.
The resolution appropriately 'expresses condolences to the families of the innocent victims on both sides of the conflict.' However, H. Res. 951 fails to take a balanced approach to the ongoing violence in Gaza by acknowledging only the rocket and mortar attacks fired on Israel while making no mention of Israel's use of force in the region other than to acknowledge 'the sovereign right of the Government of Israel to defend its territory against attacks.'
The resolution states that the 'rocket and mortar attacks have murdered over a dozen Israelis, inflicted hundreds of casualties, produced thousands of cases of shock and post-traumatic stress, especially among children, and caused severe disruption of daily life.' The resolution fails to take into account the 117 Palestinians killed in Gaza over the last week or to mention that half of these victims were civilians and at least 22 were children. Furthermore, the resolution makes no mention of the ongoing Israeli-imposed blockade on Gaza that has cut off Palestinians from fuel supplies and prevented the delivery of food and medical supplies to the Gaza Strip. According to a recent report by Oxfam and other humanitarian organizations, 'the blockade has effectively dismantled the economy and impoverished the population of Gaza. Israel's policy affects the civilian population of Gaza indiscriminately and constitutes a collective punishment against ordinary men, women and children. The measures taken are illegal under international humanitarian law.'
How can the U.S. be an honest broker for peace if we fail to acknowledge the suffering, as well as the rights, of the people on all sides of this ongoing conflict? To broker a viable peace, we must address the long-standing and structural issues that exacerbate the conflict rather than sweep over them in our condemnation of its symptomatic violence.
The United States must seek to prevent violence and human casualty by setting the stage for productive exchanges which can lead to mutual understanding, security and peace. To achieve this peace it is necessary to integrate an open dialogue with diplomatic negotiations aimed at ending all violence and human suffering. Our involvement in the Middle East should aim to coalesce alienated forces rather than drive them farther apart from one another and from a viable solution. Israelis and Palestinians share a mutual future. Therefore, we should set the stage for productive exchanges which can lead to mutual understanding, security and peace.
For more information, contact Lara Friedman, APN Director of Policy and Government Relations, at 202/728-1893, or at lfriedman@peacenow.org.
Tweet
Email a friend
feed
twitter
facebook
