[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 65 (Monday, May 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                            ARAFAT'S REMARKS

  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I rise today with great sadness over 
remarks made by Chairman Yasser Arafat, the chairman of the Palestinian 
Liberation Movement, in the speech he made May 17 in Johannesburg. Some 
of that speech was apparently not recorded and that which was recorded 
has become extremely controversial and very, very dangerous and 
troubling if in fact it is true.
  I give Arafat the benefit of the doubt that the press may be 
misquoting the chairman, and we in public office know that that happens 
more frequently than we would like and I am sure more frequently than 
the press would like. However, it is of great concern that his 
statement as reported in the press said that the Cairo agreement was 
merely the first step in the peace process and that the liberation of 
Jerusalem is the Moslems' main objective in the peace accords with 
Israel.
  This is quite different than what I understand to be the statement of 
principles and the accord between the PLO and Israel.
  His statements that were made public, and apparently a tape recording 
has been furnished, are that Arafat called for a holy war, a jihad, to 
liberate Jerusalem.
  There may be many interpretations of what that is, and I am far from 
being any kind of expert interpreter, but these words carry great 
strength and power. The interpretation that is perceived is that he is 
not committed to a negotiated settlement which does not include the 
``independence'' of Jerusalem. Yet this is not part of the statement of 
principle or accords signed by Mr. Arafat and, of course, Prime 
Minister Rabin.
  No one wants to see a reversal in this peace process. Prime Minister 
Rabin may be, in my judgment, one of the few individuals in Israel who 
could bring that Nation to a possible peaceful settlement of the 
disputed areas in the Middle East. It took someone with his courage and 
his credibility built during his time as defense minister and the able 
leadership of his present foreign minister, Mr. Peres, who were willing 
to take great political risk.
  Now we are at a juncture where there is an actual physical pullout of 
troops and turning over of autonomy, and the self-governance of Gaza 
and in Jericho. I am well aware that the PLO and others want other 
territories turned over immediately. That is not going to happen.
  And these statements by Mr. Arafat, if they are correct, are going to 
set this peace process in reverse, in my judgment, and rightfully so.
  If I were an Israeli today and I supported Rabin, I would have to 
wake up and say, ``Wait a minute, Mr. Prime Minister. What assurance do 
we have that the PLO is going to live by those statements of 
principles?
  And I was an opponent, like Mr. Netanyahu, who is the head of the 
Likud party, I would say, ``Wait a minute. What a big mistake. Mr. 
Arafat has said openly that he is not going to follow the pledge he 
gave Mr. Rabin to end violence.''
  There are further statements Mr. Arafat reportedly made that of great 
concern.
  Mr. Arafat supposedly said you have to come and to fight and to start 
the jihads to liberate Jerusalem, your first shrine. These statements 
seem to have far greater and stronger meaning than what Mr. Arafat 
later explained he meant by those statement. Mr. Arafat said that what 
he meant by ``Jihad'' was a peaceful liberation.
  It is vital that a strong message be delivered to the PLO and Mr. 
Arafat. I urge our Secretary of State and, if necessary, President 
Clinton to make very clear that the United States is not part of a 
peace accord, a peace process, or a statement of principles that talks 
about liberation of Jerusalem. That is not part of the agreement.
  It is my understanding that under the accords the status of Jerusalem 
would be discussed, but it is not part of the agreement that there 
would be any pullout by the Israelis. I am not sure it ever will be. 
But that is for others to decide, not this Senator.
  The Palestinian negotiator, Jamil Tarifi, whom I had the pleasure of 
meeting, said. ``Oh, don't put too much meaning into Arafat's 
statements. It is not too significant.'' He said today that any delay 
on the part of Israel in discussing the timetable for the next stage of 
the peace process would violate the peace agreement which stipulates 
that talks begin on the next ``early empowerment'' phase of the accord.
  Well, I think it is important to send a strong message to the Arab 
world, particularly those what want to support and have offered support 
to Yasser Arafat and the PLO, and to caution them about the 
ramifications to deal with these types of statements.
  When you use the word jihad, it raises all kinds of images in one's 
mind. We saw in Gaza and in Jericho--in Gaza particularly--the holy 
jihad, the holy war against Israel. We saw the terrorists' activities 
and we realized just how violent a jihad can be.
  We saw on our televisions and in our newspapers how bloody a holy war 
can be.
  The Israelis have an absolute right to ask Arafat for an affirmation 
of his commitment to peace before continuing with the next stages of 
the peace process.
  It was the wars against Israel that brought the Israeli Army to 
occupy the so-called territories. Now they have agreed to leave. Not 
only have they agreed to leave, they have left. They have turned over 
the operation of Gaza and Jericho to the PLO. And the PLO will, I hope, 
under the leadership of Mr. Arafat, respond in a sensible way. But 
these statements by Arafat in South Africa are anything but common 
sense and anything but a good idea.
  Last December, I headed a codel. We were in the Middle East and we 
met with Chairman Arafat. There was concern among the members of the 
delegation after we met with him as to just how committed he was to the 
peace process.
  But we took him at his statements that, yes, it would happen; and if 
the United States and Israel would stop pressing him, he could get 
control of those radical elements within the PLO and move this process 
forward.
  I think Mr. Arafat has attempted to bring about some restraint of 
those terrorists' activities, but I am greatly concerned about his 
unwillingness to denounce acts of terrorisms.
  And Mr. President, I must say to Chairman Arafat if he were here 
today, ``Play it smart. I know you have constituencies out there that 
need to hear that rabble-rousing words like jihad, and other words, 
that will demonstrate that we are going to get everything we want in 
these negotiations.'' But I think it is very clear, and I think Mr. 
Arafat knows, that neither side is going to get everything it wants. 
And such statements jeopardize nothing less than the peace process 
itself.
  So, Mr. President, in closing, I urge the administration to take a 
quick, firm, position, and to make a strong statement on this matter to 
Mr. Arafat. And I urge Mr. Arafat to make not only a clarifying 
statement, but to put it in writing. He has nothing to be lost by doing 
that and everything to gain.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________