[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 17, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E114]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A JUST AND LASTING PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST: WHAT CONGRESS CAN DO
______
HON. NICK J. RAHALL II
of west virginia
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, January 17, 1995
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the leadership of the Churches for Middle
East Peace have co-written a letter to all Members of Congress
concerning steps Congress can take to help build confidence between
Palestinians and Israelis in order to continue making progress toward
lasting peace.
The letter articulates two issues with profound implications for
negotiations in the months ahead and which are also of urgent concern
to the churches: The future of Jerusalem and the protection of human
rights.
Mr. Speaker, the group, Churches for Middle East Peace, are made up
of a broad range of religions and religious beliefs and practices, and
they include: The American Baptist Churches, USA, American Friends
Service Committee, Church of the Brethren, Episcopal Church,
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers,
Mennonite Central Committee, Presbyterian Church [USA], Roman Catholic
Conference of Major Superiors of Men, Unitarian Universalist
Association of Congregations, United Church of Christ, and the United
Methodist Church.
They encourage us, as Members of Congress, to actively support the
Israeli-Palestinian peace process which lies at the core of the broader
Arab-Israeli conflict, because they believe the process is presently at
risk of breaking down. In support of their belief that the process is,
or may become, at risk, they particularly cite the following:
Jerusalem: It is critical that the 104th Congress not hinder these
negotiations by urging President Clinton to implement a policy that
favors Israel's claims to the portion of the city annexed in 1967.
Members of Congress can make an important contribution by encouraging
the President to keep the question of Jerusalem open for the parties to
negotiate and to respect the rights and aspirations of both parties.
The letter goes on to say ``. . . it is crucial that the U.S.
Government vigorously oppose Israeli building of settlements or the
expansion of existing settlements in the territory occupied by Israeli
forces in 1967.''
Human rights: We are concerned that human rights abuses, perpetrated
both by the Israeli authorities and the Palestinian National Authority
continue and that the U.S. Government in its role as a cosponsor of the
peace process is doing little to promote respect for human rights.
Mr. Speaker, I commend to my colleagues this joint letter, and urge
their reading of it in its entirety. The letter is reprinted here with
the blessings and hope of the Churches for Middle East Peace for our
thorough understanding of the issues, and for all necessary action to
further a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
Churches for
Middle East Peace,
Washington, DC, January 3, 1995.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall,
U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Rahall, The members of Churches for Middle
East Peace (CMEP), a coalition of the Washington offices of
Protestant, Roman Catholic Episcopal, and historic peace
churches, encourage your active support for the Israeli-
Palestinian peace process which lies at the core of the
broader Arab-Israeli conflict. We are writing to you now
because we believe that process is at risk and there are
steps the U.S. Congress can take to help build confidence
between Palestinians and Israelis in order to continue making
progress toward lasting peace.
There are a number of problems that may undermine the peace
process. We would like to draw your attention at this time to
two issues with profound implications for negotiations in the
months ahead and which are also of urgent concern to the
churches: the future of Jerusalem and the protection of human
rights.
Jerusalem: The Declaration of Principles, signed by Israel
and the PLO on September 13, 1993, stipulate that the final
status of Jerusalem is to be determined by the Government of
Israel and the representatives of the Palestinian people in
the context of the ``permanent status negotiations'', now
scheduled to begin no later than May, 1996. It is critical
that the 104th Congress not hinder these negotiations by
urging President Clinton to implement a policy that favors
Israel's claims to the portion of the city annexed in 1967.
Members of Congress can make an important contribution by
encouraging the President to keep the question of Jerusalem
open for the parties to negotiate and to respect the rights
and aspirations of both parties.
Israelis and Palestinians must be encouraged to avoid
unilateral actions that would prejudice the permanent status
negotiations on Jerusalem. Most importantly, it is crucial
that the U.S. Government vigorously oppose Israeli building
of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements
in territory
occupied by Israeli forces in 1967. Many observers fear that
the settlement activity is an attempt by Israel to preempt
the negotiations on Jerusalem by creating overwhelming
facts on the ground.
The permanent status of Jerusalem, and the process by which
it is determined, holds the potential for either promoting
reconciliation between Jews, Christians, and Muslims or
fostering conflict between them. We urge the U.S. Government
to advance a vision of Jerusalem, ``city of peace,'' as a
symbol of reconciliation for the three faiths and for
Palestinians and Israelis.
[[Page E113]] Human rights: The protection of human rights
is an essential ingredient in the process of peacemaking. We
are concerned that human rights abuses, perpetrated both by
the Israeli authorities and the Palestinian National
Authority (PNA), continue and that the U.S. Government in its
role as a co-sponsor of the peace process is doing little to
promote respect for human rights.
In mid-September two of our members, Pastor Mark Brown of
the Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs and human rights
attorney Terence Miller of the Maryknoll Justice and Peace
Office, met with leaders of Israeli and Palestinian human
rights organizations and representatives of international
bodies such as the United Nations Secretariat and the
International Committee of the Red Cross to assess the human
rights situation throughout the occupied territories. The
enclosed briefing paper, prepared by Pastor Brown, Mr. Miller
and staff of a number of other U.S. religious and human
rights organizations, asks that particular attention be
focussed on the following four areas:
1. Ensuring the creation of democratically accountable
forms of government in the Palestinian partial self-rule
areas;
2. Providing for the deployment of international human
rights monitors throughout the territories to bolster
protection for human rights and the rule of law for all;
3. Preventing the institutionalization of a dual and
discriminatory justice system as a consequence of continuing
military occupation; and
4. Calling for an end to illegal Israeli settlement
activity.
We want you to know that we share the concerns raised in
this briefing paper and ask that you will carefully consider
the suggestions for U.S. Government action offered in each of
the four areas.
We commend Israel and the Palestinian National Authority
for their determination to press ahead despite horrendous
acts of violence which make the way to peace all the more
painful and arduous. We ask that you honor their commitment
to the achievement of peace by
promoting a U.S. policy which fosters a negotiated solution
for Jerusalem and the protection of human rights.
Sincerely,
Robert Z. Alpern, Director, Washington Office, Unitarian
Universalist Association; Dale L. Bishop, Middle East
Liaison, National Council of Churches of Christ in the
USA; Fr. Robert J. Brooks, The Presiding Bishop's
Director of Government Relations, The Episcopal Church;
Mark B. Brown, Assistant Director, Lutheran Office for
Governmental Affairs, Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America; J. Daryl Byler, Director, Washington Office,
Mennonite Central Committee; Peggy Hutchison, Area
Secretary for the Middle East and North Africa, World
Division, General Board of Global Ministries, The
United Methodist Church; Elenora Giddings Ivory,
Director, Washington Office, Presbyterian Church (USA);
The Rev. Ted Keating, Director for Peace and Justice,
Roman Catholic Conference of Major Superiors of Men's
Institutions.
Jay Lintner, Director, Office for Church in Society,
United Church of Christ; James Matlack, Director,
American Friends Service Committee, Washington Office;
Timothy A. McElwee, Director, Church of the Brethren,
Washington Office; Terence W. Miller, Director,
MaryKnoll Justice & Peace Office; Nancy Nye,
Legislative Secretary, Friends Committee on National
Legislation; Anna Rhee, Executive Secretary for Public
Policy, Women's Division, General Board of Global
Ministries, The United Methodist Church; Robin Ringler,
Peace with Justice Program Director, General Board of
Church and Society, The United Methodist Church; Robert
W. Tiller, Director, Office of Governmental Relations,
American Baptist Churches USA.
____
Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process
(A briefing paper prepared by staff of the Human Rights Program of the
Carter Center, the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights,
the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, the American Friends Service
Committee, the Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs, and the
Maryknoll Justice and Peace Office, Oct. 28, 1994)
The implementation of effective human rights safeguards for
all people of the Middle East is essential to the success of
efforts to create a just and lasting peace in the region.
Respect for human rights in Israel and the occupied
territories is an objective of the peace process and can
contribute much in this interim phase to building the climate
of mutual trust necessary for the achievement of peace.
U.S. policy makers have recognized the crucial importance
to the peace process of promoting improvements in the quality
of life of Israelis and Palestinians. There are broad public
expectations among both communities that if peace is to have
any meaning it will bring with it a marked decrease in
political violence and human rights abuse. These
expectations, which go beyond those that are simply economic,
have yet to be addressed, and initial hopes for improved
human rights protection are giving way to skepticism and
disappointment.
Unfortunately, our government is doing little to ensure
that consideration for human rights is at the forefront of
the peace negotiations. Administration officials assert that
human rights issues are ``something to be discussed between
the parties.'' This is an abandonment of the U.S.
government's duties as a co-sponsor of the peace process. The
administration must take a lead in ensuring that human rights
are not the unintended casualty of the single-minded pursuit
of a political settlement.
Threats to the fundamental human rights of Palestinian
residents of the territories come both from the Israeli
occupation authorities, and from the newly created
Palestinian National Authority. The U.S. government has a
role to play in ensuring that both these powers carry out
their responsibilities in accordance with relevant standards
of international human rights and humanitarian law. Failure
to uphold the rule of law will only fuel mistrust, foster
extremism, and interfere with the process of peacemaking.
Particular attention should be focused on the following
four areas.
(1) Ensuring the creation of democratically accountable
forms of government in the Palestinian partial self-rule
areas.
The Declaration of Principles, signed on the White House
Lawn just over one year ago, provided for the holding of
``direct, free and general'' elections among Palestinians in
the West Bank and Gaza Strip to be held within nine months of
the signing of the agreement. These elections have not yet
been held, and preparations for them are not well advanced.
Meanwhile, Chairman Arafat and the appointed Palestinian
National Authority (PNA) wield broad discretionary powers
over the everyday lives of Palestinians in Gaza and Jericho,
including selection of judges and local government leaders.
The PNA has already threatened basic rights such as freedom
of expression and assembly by banning newspapers, putting
constraints on peaceful political gatherings, and other
measures that have a chilling effect on democratic discourse.
There is a close correlation between the protection of
fundamental human rights and the existence of a
representative governing authority. If the habits of
democratic governance are to take root in the territories,
further delay in the holding of free and fair elections
should be minimized.
The United States can help meet the expectations widely
expressed by the Palestinian public for democratic and
accountable government by actively encouraging both Israel
and the PNA to move forward with negotiations preparatory to
the holding of elections, and by supporting practical
measures conducive to the holding of elections that are free,
fair and open to a broad spectrum of political movements.
Such measures include protection of fundamental civil and
political rights, voter education, support for the
independent role of Palestinian human rights groups, and the
withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian population
centers throughout the occupied territories during the
election campaign and voting.
The United States should also promote the creation of an
accountable form of government in the Palestinian areas after
elections. In this regard, the election of an executive
council alone, not counterbalanced by an elected legislature
nor by an independent judiciary, does not constitute the
basis for a functioning democratic form of government.
(2) Providing for the deployment of international human
rights monitors throughout the territories to bolster
protection for human rights and the rule of law for all.
The human rights situation in the territories remains
highly volatile. There are armed extremist groups on both
sides each
committed to inflicting violence in the hope of derailing
the peace process. The temptation is ever present for the
Israeli government, PNA and opposition groups to exploit
violent incidents for their own political purposes. The
possibility of a cycle of violence taking hold in these
circumstances, both inter-communally and intra-communally,
should not be discounted.
An unarmed international human rights monitoring presence,
under appropriate multilateral auspices, could play a
valuable role in defusing disputes, and acting as an
impartial witness to events. The ability of such a presence
to report publicly on its findings should be established at
the outset because it would be likely to deter potential
human rights violators.
The groundwork for the deployment of such a presence has
already been laid in negotiations between the parties and at
the United Nations. The Cairo Agreement provided for the
deployment of a Temporary International Presence (TIP) in
Gaza and Jericho, although the scope of its duties was left
to be defined by Israelis and Palestinians at a later date.
Security Council Resolution 904, which followed the Hebron
massacre of February 1994, also provided for a ``temporary
international or foreign presence . . . to guarantee the
safety and protection of Palestinian civilians throughout the
occupied territory.''
The U.S. government should intercede with both parties to
permit the deployment of an independent multilateral human
rights monitoring presence throughout the territories
occupied by Israel in 1967. For the human rights protection
function of such a presence to be successfully accomplished,
clear terms of reference need to be drawn up in advance, and
agreed to by all parties, firmly rooting
[[Page E114]] its activities in applicable standards of
international law.
(3) Preventing the institutionalization of a dual and
discriminatory justice system as a consequence of continuing
Israeli military occupation.
The development of democratic norms of governance within
Palestinian areas is also impaired by stark inequalities
between Israelis and Palestinians in many areas, including
the standard of justice available to members of each
community. The Cairo Agreement of May 4, 1994, establishing
partial Palestinian self-rule within the Gaza Strip and
Jericho, provides for the continuation, in many
circumstances, of the Israeli military justice system for
offenses against Israelis or Israeli security, committed by
Palestinians. Palestinian courts have been given no similar
jurisdiction over Israelis who may commit offenses against
Palestinians. Israelis who commit offenses in the territories
are tried in Israeli civilian courts with a high level of
regard for due process protection. In contrast, Palestinians
are subject to the summary proceedings of the Israeli
military courts.
This inequality before the law is deleterious to the
cooperation between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli
government in law and order and security matters specifically
called for in the agreements. Events such as the abduction of
Israeli soldier Nachshon Waxman, and the bomb attack in
central Tel Aviv, underline the absolute need for such
cooperation. However, cooperation cannot flourish on a basis
of institutionalized discrimination.
The U.S. government should urge the Israeli government and
the PNA to eradicate disparities between the rights of
Palestinian and Israeli criminal suspects from the
territories. Members of Congress could contribute positively
to this end by supporting Administration efforts to encourage
the parties to ensure that administration of justice for all
people in the territories guarantees equal protection, due
process and other basic legal safeguards.
(4) Calling for an end to illegal Israeli settlement
activity.
The building of Israeli settlements in the occupied
territories is a violation of international law, and greatly
exacerbates Palestinians' fears that they will be left with
little land over which to exercise political autonomy.
Previous U.S. presidents have stated that the settlements are
illegal and constitute an obstacle to peace. Nevertheless,
even as the negotiations between the Palestinian Authority
and the Israeli government continue, Israeli settlement
activity has not abated. For example, the Israeli government
is currently considering adding another 700 housing units to
the Alfei Menashe settlement near the West Bank city of
Qalqilya.
Expansion of settlements undermines Palestinian confidence
in Israeli intentions. It also violates the spirit of interim
agreements and creates facts on the ground that may prejudice
final status negotiations.
The Congress and the U.S. Administration can avoid
inadvertently signaling support for these actions by
reiterating the importance of halting further Israeli
settlement activity and continuing to require that U.S. aid
to Israel not be used for settlements as stipulated by U.S.
Public Law 102-391, Title VI. By ensuring that no U.S.
foreign assistance is used by Israel to support settlement
activities, they will contribute to building Palestinian
confidence in the agreements.
Vol. 141
WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1995
No. 9
House of Representatives