[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 87 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ON THE PEACE PROCESS IN THE 
                              MIDDLE EAST

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I want to commend to the attention of my 
colleagues a statement that was recently released by the American 
Jewish Committee on the subject of the Middle East peace process. The 
statement is a strong affirmation of the peace process and I would hope 
that each of my colleagues would have an opportunity to read it.
  Mr. President, the peace process has not been an easy journey for the 
people of Israel, nor has it been without its difficulties for Israel's 
many supporters here in the United States. Israeli citizens continue to 
be the subject of ruthless and wanton terrorist attacks by extremists 
opposed to the accord. Delays and disagreements have continued to 
emerge over the agreement's interpretation and implementation. And with 
few exceptions, Israel's Arab neighbors refuse to recognize Israel and 
have maintained an economic boycott against the Jewish State.
  Mr. President, the statement by the American Jewish Committee 
accurately takes into account the difficulties that have emerged since 
the peace process was begun. But equally important, the statement also 
offers an eloquent reminder of what is ultimately at stake in the 
Middle East peace process: ``a new order in the Middle East in which 
Arab and Jew can coexist, prosper and know peace.'' As Israel and its 
supporters continue to work through the details and the dynamics of 
this agreement, that is an important message to keep in mind.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the statement by the 
American Jewish Committee appear in the Record at this point.
  There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     The Middle East Peace Process


       Statement of the American Jewish Committee--June 20, 1994

       The Declaration of Principles signed by Israel and the 
     Palestine Liberation Organization on September 13, 1993, and 
     the implementation accord concluded by the two parties on May 
     4, 1994, marked critical steps toward the fulfillment of 
     Israel's long-held objective of achieving a secure peace with 
     its Arab neighbors. The Israel-PLO accords and related 
     documents were the first public and tangible agreements to 
     grow out of the Middle East peace process inaugurated at 
     Madrid by the United States and the former Soviet Union in 
     October 1991; the success of these and future agreements in 
     resolving key issues in the Arab-Israeli conflict will 
     measure the ultimate ability of the peace process to change 
     the course of Middle East history and afford Israel the 
     security and regional acceptance it has been denied since its 
     founding.
       Two successive democratic governments of Israel, with 
     differing views of the role of land in safeguarding security, 
     have initiated and maintained Israel's full participation in 
     the Middle East peace process. That they have done so, amidst 
     vigorous domestic debate on the relative risks of compromise 
     and status quo in Israel's relations with its Arab neighbors, 
     reflects the deep yearning of the Israeli public for peace.
       The Israeli Government's present course to peace is not 
     without risks. Even as it negotiates with its neighbors and 
     offers to compromise on vital security matters, Israel is 
     subject to terrorist attacks and bellicose propaganda 
     directed or sanctioned by Arab states; politically and 
     economically, through persistent diplomatic isolation and the 
     continuing Arab economic boycott, too many doors in the 
     region remain closed to Israel. At the same time, the peace 
     process has resulted in significant contacts across that 
     chasm of rejectionism, with a number of Arab states engaging 
     in a preliminary economic and political dialogue with Israel; 
     Egypt, Israel's partner in peace since the Camp David 
     Accords, has helped advance such dialogue, and played a 
     generally constructive role in furthering talks between 
     Israel and the PLO. But the Arab world's overall response to, 
     and support for, the peace process has been disappointingly 
     tentative, contrary to the interests of the region as a 
     whole.
       Although the peace process has only begun to yield 
     agreements between Israel and its negotiating partners--with 
     initial accords with the Palestinians and new understandings 
     on economic relations with Jordan, but little evidence of 
     movement on the Syrian track--Israel has, nevertheless, 
     reaped substantial benefits from the negotiating process. 
     Israel's diplomatic horizons have widened considerably; more 
     than 40 states have established or renewed relations with 
     Israel since the Madrid conference. New economic ties, 
     encouraged by political change and the prospect of greater 
     stability in the Middle East, have yielded mutually 
     beneficial links between Israel and a growing number of 
     states. In the United Nations General Assembly and other UN 
     bodies, the peace process has begun to break down the wall of 
     hostility erected by the Arab states and maintained by 
     decisive majorities in world forums since 1967, opening a 
     new, if belated, era of international acceptance.
       Israel is waging its campaign for peace on many fronts; 
     internally, in disputes over the pace and terms of 
     agreements, as the Government seeks to allay public concerns 
     over the long-term viability of present formulations for 
     peace; in the self-rule areas, where armed Palestinian 
     factions challenge the authority of PLO administrators, and 
     throughout the territories, where Jewish settlers and Israeli 
     troops remain at risk; and internationally, as it pursues 
     negotiations with the Arab states while expanding its circle 
     of political and economic interaction outside the region, 
     both gaining from and contributing to the universal advance 
     of democracy, technology and free markets. As Israel's 
     campaign for peace advances, obstacles and threats persist. 
     Ceaseless terrorist activity continues in southern Lebanon, 
     unchecked by a weak government in Beirut. A cautious monarchy 
     in Jordan makes tentative gestures toward peace, and a 
     recalcitrant leadership in Syria signals a desire for peace 
     while standing back from concessions at the bargaining table 
     and providing a haven for terrorists. Elsewhere in the 
     region, radical Islamic forces bent on Israel's destruction 
     continue to make advances, and the relentless pursuit by 
     Iran, Iraq, Libya and others of non-conventional weapons that 
     would put Israel and the entire region at peril continues 
     unabated.
       The American Jewish Committee, cognizant of the risks in 
     any peace process but convinced of the fundamental merit of 
     the present undertaking, strongly supports Israel is this 
     vital campaign for peace. In our view, there is no viable, 
     long-term alternative to reconciliation with the Arab world 
     in which Israel's security needs are recognized and assured. 
     In that context, we affirm our belief that a settlement to 
     the Arab-Israeli conflict, negotiated under the present 
     framework, must maintain an undivided Jerusalem as the 
     eternal capital of Israel and the capital of no other state.
       The American Jewish Committee applauds the Government of 
     Israel for its bold pursuit of the deepest desire of the 
     Israeli citizenry since the founding of the Jewish state--to 
     live in peace. We know that many of the risks Israel takes in 
     this difficult but essential process can only be offset by 
     the actions of others:
       The PLO, having pledged to renounce terror against Israel, 
     must honor that commitment and enforce the laws of civil 
     society in the self-rule areas it controls in accordance with 
     its agreements with Israel; must establish democratic 
     institutions and practices to strengthen the foundation for 
     political and economic progress; must fulfill its pledge to 
     eliminate language in its charter that calls for the 
     destruction of Israel; and must abide by agreed timetables to 
     defer certain long-term issues--including the rights of 
     Palestinian inhabitants of Jerusalem, the final status of the 
     territories, and refugees--until after the present negotiated 
     period of confidence-building.
       Syria, Jordan and Lebanon must demonstrate their commitment 
     to full peace treaties with Israel, cease support for and 
     halt the activities of terrorists operating openly in their 
     midst, and accelerate their engagement in negotiations.
       The Arab world and Muslim governments in general must cease 
     the costly and counterproductive economic boycott of Israel 
     and enter a new era of normalized relations.
       The international community must reward those who work for 
     peace in the Middle East as it guards against state-sponsored 
     terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction 
     in the hands of unstable regimes often headed by radical 
     elements, and the advance of Islamic extremism and the social 
     and political conditions that fuel it. In that regard, 
     international assistance for Palestinian development in the 
     self-rule areas is needed to build the economic base for 
     political stability. The United Nations has a particular 
     obligation to strike down political resolutions adopted over 
     the years and continually reintroduced that are hostile to 
     Israel and inimical to the cause of peace in the Middle East.
       The United States, Israel's partner in democracy and long-
     term strategic ally, has played the central role in creating 
     the global and regional climate for resolution of the Arab-
     Israeli conflict, and in structuring the framework for 
     bilateral and multilateral talks. American leadership in the 
     pursuit of peace in the Middle East is positive, principled 
     and irreplaceable. American steadfastness in friendship and 
     support buttresses Israel's resolve--and minimizes its 
     risks--as the peace process advances.
       Conceived in Jerusalem and Washington, and nurtured in 
     world capitals from Madrid to Moscow, Oslo to Cairo, the 
     Middle East peace process has altered the landscape of a 
     troubled region and raised the hopes and expectations of its 
     inhabitants. The American Jewish Committee, in strong support 
     of a negotiated settlement that will end the Arab-Israeli 
     conflict and fulfill those hopes, commends the sponsors of 
     the peace process; we share their vision, and that of Israel, 
     for a new order in the Middle East in which Arab and Jew can 
     coexist, prosper and know peace.
       Adopted by the Board of Governors, June 20, 1994.

                          ____________________