[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 127 (Thursday, October 12, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10394-S10398]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MIDDLE EAST CRISIS
A Country United
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I want to take 5 minutes at this time to
speak on the events occurring in the world today.
I stand here with the melancholy that any Senator would feel as a
result of the loss of lives of our U.S. military men and women due to a
despicable act of terrorism.
I say to the terrorists: You underestimate the United States. Right
now we are in an orderly constitutional process to begin the transition
of the executive branch to a new leader. Do not think because we are
beginning a transition that we are weak.
I say to the terrorists anywhere in the world: When any American is
under attack, all Americans are under attack. We will check our party
hats at the door. We will be united as one nation. I believe the
Congress and the American people will stand as one behind President
Clinton to aggressively pursue and punish the terrorists who have
engaged in this despicable act. You might have gotten away with this
one, but do not think again about the next hour, the next day, or the
next week. The United States of America is coming after you, and we are
all together on this.
In addition, to our friends in the Middle East: We are deeply
troubled by the violence that is ongoing. A peace agreement was within
reach. Indeed, it was fragile. We say now, please, take a timeout, end
the violence, let's step back to see if we cannot come forward under
the leadership of the United States as an honest broker to move ahead.
We are plunging into chaos. Chaos only means further retreat. It means
that maybe for years violence will continue.
We say: Please, Mr. Arafat, do not work behind the scenes; work on
the front lines; end your violence.
To the people of Israel: We know that the first act is the act of
self-defense. We understand that. It is human. Please, we ask
restraint, and we ask all to come back to the bargaining table. Let's
put down the stones. Let's put down the guns. Let's see if we can move
forward.
I come back to what has occurred on the Senate floor today. I say to
people
[[Page S10395]]
around the world: This is democracy. Good people who have been good
friends differ. We can conduct ourselves with civility. We can have
intellectual arguments. We can quote our lawyers and our National
Academy of Sciences, and so on. Ultimately, the Congress will work its
will. This is democracy. We invite the whole world to participate in
it. War only leads to more war. Violence only leads to more violence.
But democracy leads to more democracy, and democracy means ultimately
peace and prosperity.
We invite the world: Please, constitutional governments, treaties,
rules of law are what this 21st century should be all about.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague for her
very eloquent statement. I know she and others and all of us extend our
deepest sympathies to the families, the loved ones of those sailors who
were killed in the cowardly act in the Gulf of Aden today. The cause of
peace and international security is one that is worth a major effort,
and it is not without sacrifices, as we saw today.
I share the concerns and I share the strong commitment that we shall
do everything in our power to identify the people behind this cowardly
deed and take appropriate responsive action. We do not intend as a
democracy committed to freedom and human rights to be deterred from our
continuing efforts by these acts of terrorism. These do nothing but
bring sorrow and heartache to the families and loved ones left behind,
and they strengthen the will of the rest of us to say that we will not
bow to the terrorists acts. They will not deter us. They only
strengthen us not only in our prayers for those who have given the
ultimate sacrifice but in our commitment to ensure it does not deter
our activities.
A Tragic Act of Terrorism on the U.s.s. Cole
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, we are all now aware of a terrible
tragedy, an act of despicable terrorism has taken place on the U.S.S.
Cole and American lives have been lost.
All of us are appalled. On behalf of all of us, our thoughts and
prayers go out to the family members of those on the U.S.S. Cole. We
hope we can get all the information as quickly as possible.
The United States has the ability to find out who perpetrated this
outrage. We will find those people. There will be a heavy price to pay.
We cannot allow these kinds of acts of terror to take place. I am
confident the President of the United States will ascertain who these
individuals and organizations are, and the heaviest price must be paid
for this outrage. In the meantime, our thoughts, hopes, and prayers go
out to those who were injured, those missing in action, and those
killed in this tragedy.
Terrorism
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, first, let me concur with the remarks of my
colleague, Senator McCain. I join him in expressing concern for those
families who have lost Americans in connection with the terrorist
attack on the U.S.S. Cole.
I call upon my colleagues who are holding up my antiterrorism
legislation to stop holding up this important piece of legislation and
allow us to get it passed this year and sent to the President for his
signature. The National Terrorism Commission made some very important
recommendations about how we should deal with terrorists attacks, and
the only response has been the legislation that Senator Feinstein and I
have proposed. I hope those who are holding this legislation as a
result of this attack will recognize we can't wait for the next
terrorism attack. We need to act now.
Middle East Tensions
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, my heart is so heavy this morning as we
learn of the increasing tensions in the Middle East.
I join my friend from Arizona, Senator Kyl, in expressing our
condolences to those American families who are grieving at the loss of
their children by an unprovoked attack on one of our ships off the
coast of Yemen. We are not exactly sure who did this. We suspect that
it was terrorism.
But, as Senator McCain said on one of the shows this morning as I
listened to him, we will find out, and we will respond. The world
should make no mistake about that.
This morning I also want to call on Yasser Arafat to take control of
the situation in the Middle East. There has been an incident where four
Israeli soldiers were in Ramallah--the Israelis say that they had taken
a wrong turn. They certainly weren't provoking anything. They were
captured, and taken to the Palestinian authorities and to a detention
center. Then a mob overtook the center and killed at least two of them.
The reports vary. One report I heard said there was a lynching. I don't
know that is accurate, but one report said that. You have now no rule
of law. It is very difficult to negotiate a peace agreement when there
is no rule of law on one side of the equation.
I had been closely following this. I was very hopeful yesterday.
Things looked as if they were going in a better direction. The word was
that Yasser Arafat was, in fact, calming his people down. But it is
time for him to do this now publicly. It is one thing to quietly work
behind the scenes; it is another thing to come out publicly and say
enough of mob rule.
As I say, I come here with a very heavy heart, but always hopeful
that the goodness in people will overcome everything else.
My heart is with the American families who will be grieving. My heart
is with all the families in the Middle East who are suffering so much.
I believe Dwight Eisenhower once said--I may stand corrected--that
people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better
get out of the way and let them have it. I think people want peace. The
vast majority of people want peace. How tragic it is that we can't seem
to grasp that.
I praise President Clinton and Vice President Gore for doing
everything they can. I give them my best. I offer myself as someone who
will do what I can. I am on the Foreign Relations Committee. This is an
area that we know is always a tinderbox. Yet we have faith that the
peace process can get back on track.
Breakdown of Camp David Peace Proposals
Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, the news from the Middle East is deeply
painful to all who pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Three months ago at
Camp David the State of Israel offered the Palestine Authority
unprecedented concessions in an effort to end the cycle of violence and
hatred. The rejection of these proposals has tragically led to the loss
of numerous lives and the resumption of the cycle of violence and
hatred. Our Government must tell the Palestinian leadership that the
destruction of holy sites and mob violence have no place in civilized
society.
Events in the Middle East
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise to offer my sincere condolences
to the families of the U.S. Navy personnel killed in what appears to
have been a terrorist attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and to express my
outrage at this cowardly act of murder. This deplorable incident is a
tragic reminder of the risk and sacrifice assumed by all of our men and
women in uniform, and by their families. I know that the administration
will be using all of the resources at its disposal to discern who is
responsible for the attack, and that the U.S. will resolutely take
appropriate action in response to this incident.
My certainty about that last point is based on a simple and
irrefutable truth. No country would stand by while its soldiers and
sailors are targeted and killed. The U.S. will certainly not stand for
it and will not be intimidated in the wake of the cowardly attack on
the Cole. By the same token, it should surprise no one that Israel
retaliated in response to the brutal murder of Israeli soldiers at the
hands of a mob in Ramallah.
But as difficult as it is, as raw as emotions are right now, we
cannot afford to lose sight of one fundamental fact. All of us--we
Americans, the rest of the international community, the Israelis and
the Palestinians--know that there is no military solution to the
terribly difficult issues that have made the Middle East a region of
tension and violence for far too long. In recent days the promise of
peace has been obscured by terrible violence in Jerusalem and
elsewhere. Nearly 100 lives have been lost, including the lives of
children. For the Israeli and Palestinian children who remain, in the
name of providing them a future free from these horrors, I hope that
the Israeli and Palestinian people will find
[[Page S10396]]
the courage and the strength to stop the violence, and that they will
find their way back on a path toward peace.
situation in israel
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, the United States commitment to Israel is
strong. It has stood the test of time, and has only strengthened. It is
strong because it is grounded in our shared principles of freedom and
democracy. It is also strong because we respect and appreciate Israel's
commitment to preserve and protect those religious sites considered by
all people of the world to be holy.
I am very disturbed over recent events in the Middle East. America's
response to Israel must be clear and reflect our total support. What we
are witnessing is not, as it is often called, an ``outbreak of
violence.'' What we are witnessing is a concerted attack against
Israel; and this is occurring on the heels of the Israeli government
taking the most conciliatory stance ever toward the Palestinians.
After the Camp David summit, President Clinton correctly blamed
Palestinian Authority Chairman Yassir Arafat for rejecting the
compromises that Israel was willing to consider. Since Camp David,
Arafat has compounded his rejection of peace proposals with an embrace
of violence. The United States must maintain its pressure on Arafat and
the Palestinian leadership, and avoid retreating into the moral swamp
of ``evenhandedness.'' We must stand with Israel.
I am deeply disappointed in the shameful U.S. abstention on a UN
Security Council resolution that our own ambassador called
``unbalanced, biased, and really a lousy piece of work.''
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Jerusalem Post
editorial of October 10, 2000 be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Jerusalem Post News & Feature Service, Oct. 10, 2000]
Betrayal At The U.N.
(Editorial)
The United States made a grave mistake in failing to veto
what Secretary of State Madeleine Albright called a ``one-
sided'' U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel.
The U.S. abstention was a mistake, despite the three
seemingly cogent arguments used to explain it: that a worse
resolution was blocked, that Israel was consulted all along,
and that ``U.S. interests'' dictated the move.
The U.N. resolution deplored ``the provocation carried out
at al-Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem on 28 September 2000, and
the subsequent violence there and at other holy places, as
well as in other areas throughout the territories occupied by
Israel since 1967, resulting in over 80 Palestinian deaths
and many other casualties.'' The resolution, which passed 14
to 0 with the U.S. abstaining, also condemned ``acts of
violence, especially the excessive use of force against
Palestinians.'' An innocent observer reading the resolution
might reasonably conclude the Palestinians were quietly
minding their own business when, out of the blue, Israeli
forces decided to throw seven years of talks out the window
and attack their negotiating partners. The opposite is the
case.
After weeks of official Palestinian broadcasts encouraging
violence and lionizing martyrs, and after attacks against
Israelis in which both soldiers and civilians were killed,
Yasser Arafat took advantage of Likud leader Ariel Sharon's
visit to the Temple Mount to turn the flames on full burner.
In any case, the twisted nature of the resolution is not at
issue--U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard
Holbrooke called it ``unbalanced, biased, and really a lousy
piece of work.'' This recognition begs the question, which
was leveled at Albright and Holbrooke repeatedly over the
weekend: If the resolution was so lousy, why did the U.S. not
exercise its right to veto?
Standard answer No. 1--that a worse resolution was
blocked--does not wash, because it is a truism. The Arab
lobby at the United Nations always asks for the moon, in the
hopes of passing a slightly less outrageous version after
negotiations. According to Holbrooke, the U.S. would have
vetoed an ``operational'' resolution, but it could oppose
what was watered down to ``just empty rhetoric.'' Far from
``empty,'' the Security Council resolution was exactly what
Arafat needed: an international judgment saddling the blame
for his attack against Israel squarely on Israel's shoulders.
Now the international commission of inquiry that Arafat
fought for in Paris is redundant. The inquiry is over and the
verdict is in: Israel is guilty.
The next line of defense used by Albright and Holbrooke was
that Israel was closely consulted and ``understood'' the U.S.
position. That the Israeli government ``understood'' this
failure of American will and judgment is itself unfortunate,
but in no way excuses U.S. behavior.
Having taken every ``risk for peace'' expected by the U.S.
and more, Israel is now a victim of U.S. weakness, even
betrayal. As a tactical matter, Israel may have had to choose
its battles with the U.S., and therefore decided not to more
openly resist the U.S. position. But an Israel under siege
should not have been forced into giving the U.S. a pass in
the Security Council, one of the few arenas where the U.S.
has a decisive voice.
Albright argues that ``our role in the Middle East is to
try to be the negotiator, the mediator, the honest broker.''
Could Albright mean that the U.S. must be an `honest broker'
in the face of a wholesale attack by the party that has
rejected their peace proposals on the party that accepted
them? An ``honest broker'' that cannot differentiate between
aggressor and victim is not doing the peace process any
favors. An ``honest broker'' role makes sense in the context
of negotiations, not when the negotiating track has been
unilaterally tossed out the window by one party.
Finally, Albright alludes to America's ``larger
responsibilities within the whole region''' in explaining the
U.S. abstention. This is veiled allusion to the risk of riots
against American embassies and relations with the Arab world,
but again the logic is backwards and dangerous.
A U.S. veto would have signaled to Arafat and the Arab
world that this round of blaming the victim is over. Now
Arafat, Hizbullah, Saddam Hussein (who just called again for
Israel's destruction), and anyone else who wants to jump on
the absurd bandwagon that Israel is threatening al-Aksa
Mosque can see that Israel's great ally, the United States,
is unwilling to come to her defense. This can only be bad for
Israel, bad for the United States, and bad for peace.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, we must speak the truth and stand on
principle, so that Arafat cannot continue blaming Israel for the
completely unjustified attack that he initiated. There is a word for a
policy of rewarding violence, and that word is ``appeasement.''
Appeasement is not just wrong; it also does not work. Events of
recent days have led many Israelis to conclude that their government's
generosity toward the Palestinians has--far from being reciprocated--
been taken as weakness and invited the beating of war drums against
Israel throughout the Arab world.
As Israel begins to rethink its course, the United States must not
push Israel towards appeasement. We must help Israel find the strength
to stand up to aggression and continue the principled fight for
justice.
As citizens of a democracy that desperately wants peace, Israelis are
as pained as anyone by the heart-wrenching pictures of Palestinian
children caught in the crossfire. Israel can be counted on to search
its soul as to whether she could have defended herself and claimed
fewer Palestinian casualties. The result of such an inquiry, however,
will not shift the overarching burden of responsibility from the party
that chose to abandon the negotiating table and open a shooting war--
Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the article by Natan
Sharansky in today's Washington Post appear in the Record immediately
following my statement.
Now is the time for us to publicly reaffirm our commitment to the
freedom-seeking people of Israel. During Israel's time of need, we know
that they will make the right choices--take the right actions for peace
with freedom. And we will stand with Israel.
[From the Washington Post, Oct. 12, 2000]
Afraid of the Truth
(By Natan Sharansky)
Jerusalem.--Nearly 20 years ago, confined to an eight-by-
ten cell in a prison on the border of Siberia, I was granted
by my Soviet jailers the ``privilege'' of reading the latest
copy of Pravda, official mouthpiece of the Communist regime.
Splashed across the front page was a condemnation of Ronald
Reagan for having the temerity to call the Soviet Union an
``evil empire.''
Tapping on walls and talking through toilets, prisoners
quickly spread the word of Reagan's ``provocation''
throughout the prison. The dissidents were ecstatic. Finally,
the leader of the free world had spoken the truth--a truth
that burned inside the heart of each and every one of us.
For decades, with few exceptions, the moral authority of
the Soviet Union had rarely been challenged. Some,
particularly those who saw in communism's egalitarian ideals
the antidote to all the ills of capitalism and democracy,
were simply duped by a totalitarian society that could so
easily manipulate the picture it presented to the outside
world.
But sadly, most were not blind to the truth--they were just
frightened by it. They understood what the Soviet Union
represented but, knowing the price of confrontation,
preferred to close their eyes to it.
[[Page S10397]]
Rationalizing their cowardice with morally comforting words
such as ``peace'' and ``co-existence,'' they pursued the path
of appeasement.
Today the nations of the free world also prefer to close
their eyes to the truth in the Middle East in general and the
Arab-Israeli conflict in particular. While in practice the
Arab states do not pose the threat of a belligerent
superpower, the West's attitude toward these authoritarian
regimes is all too familiar. Some, who see Palestinian stone
throwers as David to Israel's Goliath, are again duped by the
manipulations of a brutal dictator who sends children to the
front lines to achieve through tragedy what he cannot achieve
through diplomacy.
But most people are not so easily duped. They simply choose
to blindfold themselves rather than confront a discomforting
truth. Instead of pressuring Arab tyrants to free their own
peoples from the yoke of oppression, the West prefers to view
them as a ``stabilizing'' force.
When the peace process began, Israel and the West had a
remarkable opportunity to use their influence to ensure that
the emerging Palestinian society could evolve into a liberal,
democratic state. Instead they spent the better part of 10
years subsidizing tyranny.
The goal was to strengthen Yasser Arafat and his PLO,
supposedly a force for modernization and compromise. With his
40,000-man armed police force, Arafat was supposed to serve
as Israel's proxy in the war on terror, and would do it, as
the late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin said, ``without a
Supreme Court, without human rights organizations and without
bleeding-heart liberals.''
This policy, support by the West, was not designed to solve
a genuine Palestinian human rights problem but to export it.
In the past two weeks we have seen the consequences of this
folly. The man who promised at Oslo to renounce the violent
struggle against the Jewish state once again uses violence as
an instrument of negotiation. His police have turned their
guns against the state that armed them, while his kangaroo
courts have released dozens of Hamas terrorists drenched with
the blood of his ``partner'' in peace.
Needing an external enemy to justify internal repression,
he continues to incite against Israel. With new textbooks
depicting a map of Palestine that stretches from the
Mediterranean to the Dead Sea but does not include a Jewish
state, he is educating the next generation of Palestinians
that they will soon take up arms in a holy jihad.
In response to all this, the world can summon sufficient
courage only to condemn a democratic Israel for defending
itself against enemies within and without who seek its
destruction. It is assailed for provoking the Palestinians by
visiting our people's holiest site, when the real provocation
is not our sovereignty over a Temple Mount that is the soul
of the Jewish people but our sovereignty, period.
No doubt a government that is prepared to make far-reaching
and dangerous concessions will soon be pressed to make more,
so that the free states can remain safely behind their
blindfolds. The only free state in this vast region to
tyranny will be asked to concede more in the name of
``peace'' and ``coexistence'' to an Arab world that wants
nothing of the sort.
Thirty years ago, Democratic Sen. Henry Jackson of
Washington state courageously stood against the bipartisan
forces of appeasement and issued a moral challenge to an
immoral state. By speaking the same truth a decade later,
Republican President Ronald Reagan helped free hundreds of
millions of people around the world, and sparked a democratic
flame that continues to engulf and threaten tyrannies. Who
will speak the truth today and allow freedom to reach this
region where only one nation carries its torch?
The writer, a former Soviet dissident, is a member of the
Israeli parliament and formerly served as interior minister
in the Barak government.
current situation in israel
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, over the past two weeks, the Middle East
has been in a state of grave turmoil and violence. With almost 100
people reported dead, Israel is dangerously close to internal war
between the Jews and Palestinians. Even this morning, two Israeli
soldiers were brutally murdered in Ramallah in connection with this
ongoing violence. Although there are some reports of a decrease in
violence, this conflict demonstrates how complex and difficult it will
be to have real peace for the people of the Middle East.
Throughout the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and even Arab towns inside
Israel proper, Palestinians have taken to the streets. They are
demanding Israeli capitulation and withdrawal of Israel troops from
Arab regions. Although the Palestinian Authority has claimed that the
flashpoint for the violence was a visit to the Temple Mount by Israeli
political leader Ariel Sharon, the violence's widespread and intense
nature of the violence, along with Palestinian reaction, indicates that
the violence may not be a simple and uncoordinated reaction.
Since the initial incident, the violence has rapidly spread with
incredible fervor. According to published reports, ``The internal riots
stunned Israeli police officials by their size and intensity.'' A
simple incident was radically and almost instantaneously transformed
into a dire situation that threatens the entire Middle East peace
process. Although this outrageous reaction may appear isolated, Mr.
Arafat has threatened over the years to cross out the peace accords and
unleash a new uprising against Israel. He has often described the peace
accords as simply a temporary truce.
Mr. Arafat's response to the recent situation raises many concerns.
It appears he has done little to nothing to quell the violence. The
Palestinian Authority's official media arm, the Palestinian
Broadcasting Corporation, has consistently broadcast incitement against
Israel, including a children's program where martyrdom as ``suicide
warriors'' is glorified. Palestinian television is also running a story
about an alleged brutal killing of a Palestinian by Jewish settlers.
The audience is told that the 40-year-old man's skull was crushed, his
bones broken and his body burned by the settlers. Pictures of a charred
and mutilated body are being used continually to incite already
combative protesters and mourners. Although Israeli officials have
stated that the man, Isam Hamad, 36, died in a car crash north of
Ramallah and that the Palestinians chose to exploit the terrible
condition of his body, Palestinian officials have refused to
investigate the real cause of death and instead some have stated that
the killing justifies an ``open season on settlers.''
Hassan Asfour, a Palestinian cabinet minister, told the Reuters News
Service that, ``The settlers must now be a target by every Palestinian
in order to stop their terrorism and they must be uprooted from our
Palestinian occupied lands.'' These are not the words of a leadership
that wants peace.
Mr. President, we must continually remember that Israel is in one of
the most dangerous and unstable regions of the world. Since the
beginning of the Oslo process in 1993, Israel has lost more than 280 of
its citizens to terrorist violence (a portion of the Israeli population
comparable to 15,000 Americans) in over 1,000 terrorist attacks. That
death toll is worse than in the 15 years prior to Oslo. Rather than
eradicate terrorist infrastructure in Palestinian territory, the
Palestinian Authority apparently has maintained its revolving door
policy in detaining terrorists. Over 20 prominent terrorists have been
released since President Clinton's visit to Gaza in December 1998.
Israeli reaction to violence must be seen in this context.
During this current situation, President Clinton has failed to stand
firm with our long-time friend and ally, Israel. Although I appreciate
the President's interest in bringing about peace in the Middle East,
his desire to play the role of the ``honest broker'' is sadly
misguided. Until Mr. Arafat begins to demonstrate otherwise, it appears
clear that the Palestinian Authority is simply not an ``honest
player''.
Mr. President, it is time to stand with Israel in the effort to find
real and lasting peace. We must continue to work with our friends and
allies around the world, including moderate Arab countries, to bring
the Palestinian Authority into line with appropriate international
behavior that will contribute to the process of peace, not to war. I
call on Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat to honestly work
towards an end to this latest violence and come back to the negotiating
table with the goal of reaching a workable and lasting peace.
middle east tragedy
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, there is a tragedy ongoing in the
Middle East, and the first thing I want to do is express heartfelt
sorrow for the families of those who have lost their lives.
The events of the last two weeks are deeply disturbing, and the clear
first step is to find a way to calm the violence. The onus is on Yasser
Arafat and the Palestinian Authority to call a cease fire. If the
Palestinian leadership and the Palestinian people are in the midst of a
quest for a state, and are trying to prove they have the maturity to
lead more than a terrorist organization, the moment of truth has come
[[Page S10398]]
and gone. What many have long suspected about the Palestinian
leadership is being confirmed: They are not committed to peace, they
are committed to victory.
Unfortunately, the reaction of the international community to the
violence in the Middle East has only emboldened Yasser Arafat. For
proof we need look no further than the one-sided, dishonest U.N.
Security Council resolution that passed last weekend. The resolution
ignores the role of the Palestinians in the violence now taking place.
It unfairly blames Israel for sparking the violence, forgetting that it
is the right of any person of any religion to visit the Temple Mount.
The United States' failure to veto this resolution is an
embarrassment--a sell-out of our friends, a sell-out of the peace
process.
Arfat insists on an international inquiry into the violence before he
will call for its cessation. But is it any wonder that Prime Minister
Barak is reluctant to accept such an inquiry when the international
community has ranged itself so clearly on one side. Condemn first and
ask questions later.
The actions of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority on the question
of treatment of holy sites are equally troubling. First, the use of
Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount and the use of that holy site
to incite violence: How can we believe any commitment to allow access
to all people of all faiths when the Palestinians believe it is their
right to sow mayhem after one visit?
Second, the sacking of Joseph's Tomb. Palestinian police stood by as
a mob of Palestinians destroyed Joseph's tomb in Nablus--a location
from which Israeli forces had retreated in an attempt to calm the
situation. They ripped apart Torah scrolls and desecrated a holy place.
I have heard it said that the authenticity of the site has been
questioned. I can just picture the mob looking for that certificate of
authenticity before they went ahead and destroyed a holy book of the
Jews.
There is no excuse--no excuse--for the behavior of the Palestinians
or their leadership. Prime Minister Barak has offered concessions
previously through taboo by most Israelis. Chairman Arafat has
responded by demanding yet more and using violence to get it when
negotiations failed. He has broken every agreement made in the past
months and years, and has released dozens of notorious Hamas and
Islamic Jihad terrorists in recent days. Perhaps Israel's intensified
reaction following the mob killing of three Israeli soldiers will
convince Arafat that he cannot win with violence. But I wonder.
And for the United States, being an honest broker does not necesitate
our staying neutral. It should mean embracing a policy of honesty and
telling one side when enough is enough. Instead, the Clinton-Gore
Administration has shied away from the kind of frankness needed from
our nation, and has stood aside in the face of an international
political assault on our most important friend in the Middle East.
That lack of resolve is noticed. It has been noticed by those who
defy sanctions on Iraq. It has been noticed by the Palestinians. And it
was surely noticed by those who attacked the U.S.S.Cole and murdered
six, maybe more American servicemen. When will this nation show the
resolve needed to crush the cowards and criminals who threaten us and
our allies?
I hope that the diplomatic efforts underway can lead to a calming of
the situation and that the future will see a lasting peace between
Israel and the Palestinians. However, for this peace to be truly
lasting--and truly be peace--it must come when the parties are ready,
on a timetable agreed by them. More important, it can only come when
the Palestinians are ready to take upon themselves the mantle of
nationhood and abandon their legacy of terrorism. And finally, peace
will come when those who stand with the United States know that they
have a forthright and loyal ally and those who stand against us fear
our resolve.
____________________