[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 82 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6792-S6793]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE UNITED STATES EMBASSY IN ISRAEL

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition this afternoon 
to respond to those who have raised an issue about the current efforts 
to have the United States Embassy moved to Jerusalem, the capital of 
Israel, instead of its current location in Tel Aviv.
  There have been some suggestions that we are motivated for political 
purposes in 1995 to raise this issue. The history of these efforts 
conclusively refutes that contention. A bill was introduced on October 
1, 1983, S. 2031, cosponsored at that time by 50 United States 
Senators, which sought to have the United States Embassy and the 
residence of the American Ambassador to Israel hereafter be located in 
the city of Jerusalem.
  That resolution was referred to committee and was not called for a 
vote, but it was later noted that in addition to the 50 U.S. Senators, 
there were 227 Members of the House of Representatives who joined in 
endorsing that transfer of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
  Then on March 26, 1990, Senate Concurrent Resolution 106 was 
introduced, which called for the recognition of Jerusalem as the 
capital of Israel, and that resolution was passed in the Senate by a 
voice vote.
  Then, following those actions, on February 24, 1995, a letter was 
sent to Secretary of State Warren Christopher signed by 92 U.S. 
Senators evidencing strong bipartisan support, again calling for the 
moving of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
  Mr. President, I was an original cosponsor of S. 2031 which was 
introduced back on October 31, 1983; supported Senate Concurrent 
Resolution 106 back in 1990; and joined in the letter of February 24, 
1995, evidencing my consistent support for this program.
  Recently, the Prime Minister of Israel, Yitzhak Rabin, was in 
Washington, and the issue was raised as to whether or not action by the 
Congress of the United States in calling for the removal of the Embassy 
from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem would be an impediment to the peace process 
which is ongoing at the present time because obviously we do not wish 
to interfere with the peace process. At that time, Prime Minister Rabin 
responded that it was a [[Page S6793]] matter for U.S. Congressmen, 
Senators and Representatives, to express themselves as they saw fit. He 
did not appear perturbed that action in this way would be an impediment 
to the peace process in the Mideast.
  The negotiators of Israel and the PLO are scheduled, as I understand 
it, to take up the status of Jerusalem approximately a year from now. I 
think there is no doubt about the Israeli position that Jerusalem is an 
undivided city, and certainly I think there is no doubt in the Congress 
of the United States about Jerusalem being an undivided city and it 
being the judgment of Israel as to where its capital should be. The 
tradition is, the unbroken tradition is that the embassies are located 
in the capital city, and it is a fundamental matter therefore that the 
United States Embassy and the Ambassador's residence ought to be 
located in the capital of Israel just as the Embassy and Ambassador's 
residence are located in the capital city of every nation with the host 
nation determining where its capital should be.
  We have to make decisions on matters of this sort, Mr. President, as 
we see it. There is no doubt about the strong relationship between the 
United States and Israel, but judgments need to be made by Senators and 
Congressmen as to what we think is appropriate. Many of us have joined 
over the years in urging that the Embassy be moved to Jerusalem, and I 
think that the record is consistent over such a long period of time 
that there is no appropriate way someone could make a claim that it is 
a matter for political purposes.
  The distinguished majority leader, Senator Dole, has been singled out 
in a number of newspaper editorials, others of us less prominent than 
the majority leader have not been so identified, but I am confident 
that all of us in exercising our judgment in calling for the location 
of the U.S. Embassy to be in Jerusalem instead of Tel Aviv are doing it 
because we think it is the appropriate course of conduct, and no one, 
no fairminded person, can say that when the record goes back to 1983 in 
the endorsement of this resolution, there could be any political 
motivation. I think that ought to be considered and the record ought to 
be set straight on this issue.

                          ____________________