[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 37 (Tuesday, April 9, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H1139-H1145]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     RESPONSE TO MIDDLE EAST CRISIS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simmons). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, the topic we are going to speak about this 
evening is, in a sense, a response to what is going on in the Middle 
East today; and specifically a response in terms of being not just 
sensitive, but supportive of what the Israelis are trying to do 
regarding terrorist acts in their country.
  The reason I put this chart up first is just to try to lay out a 
perspective of what has happened in Israel over the last several 
months. Israel is about 5 million people. The United States is about 
300 million people. We are about 60 times larger than Israel. As all 
Americans know, on September 11, about 3,000 Americans died in an 
instant. The equivalent number in Israel would be about 50.
  Last month in Israel, the Israeli people sustained the equivalent of 
three September 11's, in the month of March. Since this calendar year, 
the Israeli people have sustained the equivalent of approximately eight 
September 11's. I think all of us understand what the United States' 
response, God forbid, would be, in that type of situation. We 
understand what the United States' response has been in response to 
September 11 itself. In fact, I have been very supportive of the 
President, and I do not think any Member of Congress has not been 
supportive of the President and America's efforts to eradicate weapons 
of mass destruction that have a direct effect on the United States. 
There has been no daylight at all between any of us for those efforts.
  I think the President gets it completely about the threat of 
international terrorism from countries like Iraq, Syria, and North 
Korea. But unfortunately, the President does not get it in terms of 
some of his response to the State of Israel, his specific responses 
that effectively demand that the Israelis withdraw their troops and 
their activities in terms of cities like Ramalah, Jenin, and Nablut.
  From an American perspective, to put it in some light, which is a 
very appropriate analogy, the United States of America does not have to 
have our men and women in Afghanistan. We are in Afghanistan because we 
have no choice but to be in Afghanistan to literally protect ourself at 
a national security level. We do not want to be there. I think everyone 
in the world or at least everyone in America understands, we have no 
national interest. We have no desire, zero, and I think Americans 
understand that we do not want to conquer Afghanistan, to colonize 
Afghanistan.
  At the same exact level, the Israelis have no desire to be in 
Ramalah, Jenin, and Nablut. And just as we are concerned about our sons 
and daughters,

[[Page H1140]]

husbands and wives who are stationed in Afghanistan today, and in fact 
we have sustained the ultimate sacrifice in our troops, and the 
Israelis are doing the same today, and again our societies are very 
similar. As democratic societies, this is not forced military service. 
It is military service that an elected democratic body had to vote to 
send out the reserves.
  In the Israeli Knesset, an elected Prime Minister called up the 
reserves. An elected Prime Minister is sending people into combat, 
risking lives, and in fact sustaining losses. If we think again, we 
have seen what is happening. We read about it. And, unfortunately, 
there are people being killed on both sides. The Israelis are making an 
extraordinary effort to avoid any type of civilian casualties, and 
there have been some. The extraordinary effort is something that we 
need to be aware of. Unfortunately, Israeli defense forces, troops, 
their lives have been put at risk, and there is no question that 
additional Israelis have died because of the sensitivity of avoiding 
civilian casualties has occurred.
  I think all of us understand what would be happening in a different 
situation. And America joins that category, the extraordinary efforts 
that we did in the campaign, and we are still doing today, in the 
campaign in Afghanistan to avoid collateral damage. We all know that 
there was some, in fact, some significant collateral damage. We killed 
civilians in Afghanistan, and it is a tragedy that we did, but we made 
extraordinary efforts to prevent it, and at risk to our men and women 
as well.
  That is what is happening in a sense on the ground. But at the same 
time this is going on today, literally today, this evening, in both the 
United States and in Israel. The President has asked indirectly, even 
tried to order the Israelis out. If we think about what that message 
is, if we think about what had occurred, what brought the Israelis to 
this attempt, for their own survival, it was a series of suicide 
attacks that do threaten the day-to-day existence of the State of 
Israel.
  Mr. Speaker, can we conceive of any country in the world, and if we 
put ourselves in that kind of situation, can we conceive of the United 
States of America attempting not to try to protect itself? That is 
exactly what is going on. From a historical perspective, there were two 
incidents which were watershed incidents. One was the Karine A 
incident, which was the ship with over $20 million of weapons that came 
from Iraq that Israeli commandoes commandeered.

  Both the Israelis and the Americans had direct evidence of Chairman 
Arafat's personal involvement in the purchase and operation to bring 
those weapons into the Palestinian Authority area. And in fact the only 
plausible excuse Arafat had was he was not on the ship.
  As has been reported in the press, Colin Powell called Chairman 
Arafat after that incident and said, ``Why did you do this? It is a 
clear violation of Oswald bringing in weapons that raise the level of 
the conflict.''
  His response was, ``Why did I do what? Why did I do what?''
  Colin Powell on the other end of the phone said we have direct 
evidence of your involvement and that evidence was then shown to 
Chairman Arafat, and Colin Powell calls him back and says, ``Now that 
you have seen the evidence, what is your response?'' Chairman Arafat's 
response was, ``What are you talking about?''
  If we think for a second what that means, who are we dealing with? 
Who are the Israelis dealing with? But more importantly, who are the 
Israelis dealing with. I would ask everyone to think about that type of 
response. How could any of us ever have any type of relationship, 
whether a business relationship or a personal relationship, with 
someone who literally, absolutely, totally lies? How can one have a 
relationship to try to do anything? What is that person's word worth?
  The second incident that occurred 10 weeks ago was a sniper attack on 
an Israeli checkpoint where six Israeli soldiers were killed. There was 
no attempt by anyone on the Palestinian side to prevent that type of 
attack. These sniper rifles can shoot several miles, an analogy of the 
distance from this building to the White House. Literally from a line 
of sight, someone could shoot with a sniper rifle from the top of this 
building, the Capitol, to the White House.
  Once that attack occurred and there was no attempt to stop it, and 
many people are aware of the geography of the State of Israel, 
effectively Prime Minister Sharon made a decision that the Israelis had 
to protect themselves. Not until that occurred did the Israelis enter 
any refugee camp. At that point the decision was made to effectively go 
door to door or wall through wall, house to house to confiscate every 
weapon, every suicide belt bomb, every rocket; and literally hundreds 
and thousands have been confiscated and have been taken. That is in 
fact a continuation. It is not by choice.
  I am joined today by a number of my colleagues. On the other side of 
the aisle, a Member who has been a leader in terms of things happening 
in the Middle East and is as concerned as anyone in the Congress, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership 
on this issue. I apologize for being late. I have a number of comments 
that I want to make initially.
  Mr. Speaker, Rudy Giuliani said after September 11 that he felt like 
Winston Churchill felt when London was under attack. Today the folks 
all over Israel, not just in any particular city or pocket, must have 
that same feeling. They have now suffered over 18 months of terrorist 
attacks that have killed over 400 of their citizens, injured thousands, 
and distressed millions.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) knows that a couple of years 
ago I had an opportunity to go to Israel, and one of the things at the 
time was Mr. Barak told us that the people there are tired of suffering 
and they are tired of seeing their children being killed.
  As a father of four, it is hard for me to say good-bye to my children 
on a Friday or Saturday night when they leave the house at 7:30 at 
night, and I am worried about them driving on the road with accidents. 
I cannot imagine what an Israeli parent or counterpart feels when 
saying good-bye to their children who are going to go to a discotec or 
some other public place, and can just imagine living in a country where 
so many people have died in such a short period of time.
  Since the September 11 attacks, the American people have understood 
the terrorist menace. Israel has been living under this for nearly 50 
years off and on. As the leadership of Israel has often said, we are 
living in a dangerous neighborhood, and it is getting more and more 
dangerous every single day.
  One of the questions that seems to become popular and seems to be in 
vogue is should Israel be able to retaliate. If America can retaliate, 
why can Israel not retaliate? I think that is certainly the central 
question right now. The United States of America is rightfully pursuing 
its own national interests. We are not just in Central Asia, but 
looking very closely at the situation in Iraq and any other country, 
the axis of evil, and trying to figure out what rogue governments are 
harboring terrorism.
  Just as we in America are doing that, surely it is in Israel's 
national interest to do everything that they can to neutralize the 
Palestinian terrorism. I do not believe that Washington can justify our 
actions and condemn their actions.

                              {time}  2145

  I believe that Israel is moving in the interest of their own national 
security, as a nation should be. In many respects, their war is our 
war. Their enemies are our enemies. Aside from Great Britain, Israel is 
our greatest ally in the U.N. Year after year, conflict after conflict, 
Israel has stood by America. You cannot make that statement about any 
other country except for Great Britain.
  I think that in terms of some of the issues that we are dealing with, 
I am very pleased that Colin Powell is over there. I hope he is 
successful in his mission. I hope he can calm the waters. But I do not 
think Sharon should back down until the Palestinians guarantee a cease-
fire and some sort of a way to assure them that Arafat can, if he still 
has control, neutralize his followers. I do not know that he has that 
anymore. When Colin Powell testified before our Foreign Operations 
Committee about a month or 5 weeks ago, I asked, are we ready to move 
into the post-Arafat era

[[Page H1141]]

of the Middle East? At that time people said, ``It's probably too early 
to talk about that.'' I think there is fear, well, could it get worse 
if Arafat is gone? No one knows the answer to that, but we know under 
the current course it is getting worse and worse. So I do not think we 
should be afraid to talk about a post-Arafat era at all.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Crowley) who has worked from the first day he was in the United States 
Congress to try to bring peace to the Middle East.
  Mr. CROWLEY. I thank my colleague from Florida for calling this 
special order this evening. I would start off by saying that the 
initial numbers that you had on your chart were staggering. I think 
more of that information needs to be told to the American people. I 
think they need to understand exactly what the size of the state of 
Israel is and the type of pressure that they have been under for the 
past 18 months. I think more of the news agencies need to focus not 
only on single events but on the multiple events that have taken place 
over the last 18 months. If they could show not just one incident but 
how over the last few weeks there have been multiple incidents 
throughout Israel, I think people would begin to get a better 
understanding exactly what type of threat the Israeli people are really 
facing.
  I regret the fact that there is a need for me to even be on the floor 
this evening to address this important issue, but the events of the 
last 18 months require a response. Last summer, Chairman Arafat, Prime 
Minister Barak, and President Clinton were ever so close to reaching an 
accord to bring peace to the Middle East after decades of violence. 
Unfortunately, all the progress and the sacrifices made on the part of 
the Palestinians and Israelis in Madrid, in Oslo, Camp David, and Wye 
were shattered the moment the first stone was hurled into the air in 
September of 2000. Since then, the atmosphere on the ground has 
degenerated, resulting in the death of hundreds of people on all sides 
of the conflict.
  As Palestinian suicide bombers attack innocent Israeli civilians and 
the IDF responds by eliminating the sources of that Palestinian terror, 
both sides look to the United States to deliver a solution. Although I 
believe that it is in our national interest to resolve this conflict, I 
am increasingly concerned by the destructive role our regional allies 
have been playing in the current climate. The official Egyptian press 
cultivates anti-Israeli sentiment through skewed disclosures of the 
facts and spin campaigns that do nothing to improve the status quo.
  Jordan, who has played such a key role in past years, has thought it 
best to remain on the sidelines. I would suggest that the Palestinians 
view the Jordanian silence as a tacit approval for the continuation of 
this campaign of terror.
  The activities of Saudi Arabia are perhaps the most troubling of all. 
One should note that there are two countries that provide compensation 
to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers: Saudi Arabia and Iraq. 
One is considered a friend and the other a foe. If this is the case, 
why are both behaving in the same despicable manner? These nations are 
crucial to a resolution to this conflict and must assume a profile 
commensurate with their standing and influence in this region.
  I am encouraged by Secretary Powell's visit to the region, but he 
cannot secure peace on his own. A lasting peace can only be secured in 
a regional context in which all parties contribute to a cessation of 
hostilities on the ground. Until that occurs, I fully support the steps 
that Prime Minister Sharon is taking to ensure the safety of his 
people, the Israeli people. If President Bush had not acted decisively 
against those who perpetrated the acts and attack of terror on New York 
and on the United States on September 11, the people of this country 
would be calling for his resignation. Now this administration is being 
critical of Sharon for taking similar action in his own country. The 
hypocrisy, in my opinion, is staggering.

  This is not a question of being either pro-Israeli or pro-
Palestinian. It is a question of being against terrorism, no matter 
where it is found and no matter who may be the victims. While the 
violence rages on, there are children that hope to go back to school 
and people that hope to go back to work and hope to do that in an 
environment free of terrorism. It is essential that we take the 
necessary action to turn all those hopes into reality.
  As a New Yorker, as someone who has experienced firsthand a family 
member who was lost on September 11, my first cousin, I feel personally 
drawn into what is happening in the Middle East. I have had many, many 
discussions with people throughout my district. I am heartened to hear, 
and I am not just talking about those who have had longstanding 
sympathies with the people of Israel, but those who in my opinion have 
had questionable support in the past for the people of Israel, are now 
I think fully behind the Israeli Government and fully understand 
exactly what they are going through.
  We lost 3,000 people in one attack. When we looked at the numbers 
that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) had put up before, they 
have lost, I believe, is it six times that figure?
  Mr. DEUTSCH. It would be more than that. Six or seven times.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Six or seven times. It is staggering. I think we in New 
York have nothing but sympathy for what the people in Israel are going 
through, and we believe only the people of Israel can make the 
decisions about their own safety and the personal safety of their 
families. That is why I stand here today in support of your discussion 
this evening.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Cantor) who is an outstanding new Member that again, from the day he 
arrived, has thrust himself and been involved in foreign policy issues, 
particularly in the Middle East, and has worked as hard as any Member 
to try to gain peace in the region.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Florida for 
yielding and I appreciate his willingness to share time in this debate 
and for his work on behalf of the U.S.-Israel relationship and also 
would like to recognize my colleague from Georgia and his leadership on 
this issue as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a very solemn occasion. Today is Yom 
Hashoah, the Day of Remembrance. This is the day that we recognize and 
remember those 6-million-plus individuals, innocent men, women and 
children who lost their lives in the unspeakable horror of the 
Holocaust, an evil associated with that era the likes of which the 
world had never seen.

  But, Mr. Speaker, we are here tonight once again, this evil has 
reared its ugly head. On 9-11, as my colleague from New York just 
indicated, this evil and the individuals behind the terrorist attack 
stopped at nothing to kill innocent men, women and children on the 
streets of New York, in the World Trade Center, and here in the 
Washington area at the Pentagon. Mr. Speaker, it is that same evil, 
that same hatred that is perpetrating the violence and committing the 
terrorist attacks in Israel throughout that tiny country.
  I applaud President Bush and his administration for drawing the 
appropriate moral structure and guidelines that we must follow as this 
country now engages in the fight for our freedom abroad.
  As we know, President Bush has outlined this as a case of good 
against evil. Very simply, it is time for the nations of the world to 
choose, to choose whether they are with us and the civilized world or 
whether they are with the terrorists. Just last week, President Bush 
addressed the Nation from the White House and said yes, it is time for 
the nations of the Middle East to make that choice as well.
  I applaud President Bush in his statements that the situation that 
Yasser Arafat finds himself in and the situation the Palestinian people 
are in are due to his own making. He has failed to do everything he 
can. He has failed to renounce terror as a tool to achieve his 
political gains. I think that the President ought to be applauded for 
making that bold step in the face of very harsh criticism that he is 
experiencing from all corners of the world.
  Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield, I want to really 
underscore that point, that over a year ago, at Camp David, when 
President Clinton had Arafat and Barak in, Arafat turned down the deal 
that he is now pretending to be behind, or at least the

[[Page H1142]]

Saudi prince's proposal, give up land and we will recognize you. And 
there is absolutely no assurance that once the Palestinians have the 
land, that they will turn around and recognize the state of Israel. The 
gentleman makes a great point, and I really wanted to underscore that.
  Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman for that. And as my colleague from 
Florida stated earlier, there have been a series of opportunities for 
Mr. Arafat to rise to the occasion and to demonstrate his commitment to 
peace. But instead, we face now calls from all corners of the world for 
the United States to engage in the process, to somehow produce a peace. 
In my mind, that means to pressure Israel. But the United States and 
the Bush administration has been engaged in the process. It has been 
engaged in the process by standing up for the principled position laid 
out by the President that there is good and there is evil, there are 
terrorists and there are those law-abiding citizens. And this country 
will not tolerate, negotiate, or support terrorist activity. And how 
can we, when we see Yasser Arafat and his counterparts in Israel going 
in, targeting women and children, innocent individuals for death? Going 
into family occasions like bar mitzvahs and weddings and an individual 
strapping explosives to themselves, blowing themselves up and killing 
these family members at such sacred times in their lives?
  And we also see the sponsorship of the Palestinian Authority and 
other Arab regimes sponsoring and giving money to the so-called 
martyrs' families, providing an incentive for young men, and now we see 
women, to blow themselves up and in the process kill tens, if not more, 
of innocent Israelis at a time. And now we see that Israel has gained 
the momentum, has demonstrated that it has the resolve, both the 
spiritual resolve and the material resources to do what it must do, 
just as the United States has demonstrated that we will do what we must 
do in light of the al Qaeda attacks on 9-11 against the Taliban and al 
Qaeda forces in Afghanistan.
  Israel is manning a counteraction to the terrorist attacks that has 
been inflicted upon its innocent citizens, and it must be allowed to 
root out the terrorists, because that is the only way that we will 
achieve peace is to get rid of the terrorists.
  Mr. Speaker, I would posit that the equation is very clear. We ought 
not be insisting or pressuring Israel when it is doing what we do, and, 
that is, defending its innocent citizens. We must instead demand that 
the Arab leaders of this world step up to the plate, renounce 
terrorism, and contribute what they must toward the peace in the Middle 
East.
  The bottom line, Mr. Speaker: First, we must have the cessation of 
terror, and then talk. First, the recognition, both in deed and in 
word, of Israel's right to exist, then diplomacy.

                              {time}  2200

  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Weiner), who also is active and has traveled in this region many times 
and is personally involved with many of the leaders in the region as 
well.
  Mr. WEINER. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for organizing 
this special order, the gentleman from Georgia for his great 
leadership, and the previous speaker, and I want to pick up on 
something that the gentleman from Virginia mentioned.
  Some have spoken about the necessity that there be a process towards 
peace, and I do not think there is anyone who disagrees with that. But 
we also have to recognize that the process in and of itself is not an 
end; it is to be a means to peaceful coexistence.
  If you look at the history of the Jewish State, there have really 
been two things going on simultaneously. One has been her Arab 
neighbors and the Palestinians trying to wipe her from the globe; 
while, at the same time, time after time after time, efforts at peace 
have been embraced by Israel, only to have her pay the price in human 
lives.
  You can really look at it in two ways. Since 1993, there has kind of 
been the three yards and a cloud-of-dust strategy towards peace in the 
Oslo Accords; concession, concession, concession given by Israel, with 
the hope that it will be led into, by recognition by the Palestinians, 
ultimately peace for her citizens.
  When that did not work, when that broke down, Israel went for what 
was essentially the ``Hail Mary'' pass at Camp David, and gave the 
Palestinians, offered virtually everything; 90 percent of the 
territories that are now in contention, a divided Jerusalem, even 
concessions to try to work out questions of the refugees.
  And how is that met with? It was met with by a string of violence 
that goes on to this day. Seventy-three separate terrorist attacks have 
gone on, taking the equivalent, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Deutsch) mentioned, of 20,000 lives, if they were here in the United 
States.
  Some have asked, why does Israel go into house by house searches of a 
town like Ramallah? Of those 73 attacks, 40 of them came from people 
who lived in Ramallah. How do we know that with such certitude? Because 
it is no secret. They leave a videotape saying why they did it, and 
quickly they are given money. They are given a bounty by the 
Palestinian Authority for the great thing they have done. They have 
given up their young life for the cause of taking away the lives of 
Israelis.
  We have to recognize, and this is an unsettling thing for anyone to 
say, but certainly for us in a peace-loving democracy, sometimes the 
only way to stop someone from killing you is to go get them and stop 
them by force. We did not want to have to send people to go cave by 
cave in Afghanistan seeking out the terrorists, but that was the only 
option that we were faced with. It was not a subject that, if we could 
have negotiated, we would not have done it. Frankly, that is the 
position that Israel is in today.
  Some have paid a great deal of attention and given a great deal of 
credibility to the plan proposed by the Saudi prince that in exchange 
for Israel withdrawing to its 1967 borders, the Arab nations would 
offer normal relations, although Libya has said they do not want to go 
along and Iran said they do not want to go along and Iraq said they do 
not want to go along.
  But nowhere in this discussion has anyone really thought through, 
well, why is it that Israel's borders are not what they were in 1967? 
Is it because she is acquisitive? Is it because she is colonialistic? 
Is it because she is expansionist?
  Her borders are different than they were in 1967, because on two 
separate occasions she was attacked by her neighbors, who do not even 
believe she has a right to exist. And to a large degree, she has 
already made concessions to Egypt and Jordan. She has shown more than a 
willingness to give up land if it meant true peace.
  That is true, Mr. Speaker, today. You look at poll after poll of the 
Israeli people, even after the horrific events of the past month. You 
put down on paper a proposal that gets true peace for Israel to live 
with her neighbors, she would accept it. She would give up land, gladly 
do it.
  But sometimes there is no deterrent to violence. The only way to stop 
violence is to confront it directly. That is the unfortunate and 
untenable position that Israel is in. Let me just say, if there was 
ever a practice, if there was ever an example of the Bush doctrine, it 
is tonight in Nablus. It is tonight in Ramallah. It is tonight in the 
West Bank.
  When President Bush unified our country and arguably unified the 
world around the principle that terrorism needs to be stopped, he said 
very clearly, it is not a matter for negotiations. He says it may take 
a while, and he says we will not rest until every terrorist is rooted 
out, pulled out by its roots, and, if necessary, killed in battle. That 
is what is going on tonight. That is what 18-, 19- and 20-year-old 
Israelis are giving their lives for tonight.
  And what is going on on the other side? Today on Palestinian 
television there were commercials running during the cartoon hour 
telling young children, put down your toys, take up your arms. That is 
the message that the Palestinians are sending to their side.
  What we are saying here tonight is that Israel is in an untenable 
position. She chooses not violence; she never has. She chooses not to 
settle these matters by force; she never has. She chooses instead to 
defend her people, and we should stand four-square with her in her 
desire to do that.

[[Page H1143]]

  I yield back to the gentleman from Florida, with my great thanks.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. I would like to yield to the gentleman from New Jersey, 
Mr. Rothman, who is viewed by his colleagues as an expert in this area 
and has been very influential.
  Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield, before the gentleman from 
New York Mr. Weiner leaves, I wanted to make a point that as long ago 
as July 15, 2001, the Jerusalem Post reported that there were four 
summer camps currently training 8- to 12-year-olds for suicide bombings 
going on. That is exactly what you are saying, just calling the kids to 
arms right now against Israel. Summer camps training 8- to 12-year-olds 
for suicide bombing visions.
  Mr. WEINER. If the gentleman will yield further briefly, also one has 
to wonder why it is when there are these stages of violence put on by 
the Palestinians, why there are always children at the front lines? It 
is because, simply put, children are being used as the stones of war. 
In a very cynical campaign to persuade us that children are being put 
in harm's way, they are. They are being put in harm's way by mothers 
and fathers who are being told by their leaders that is the pathway to 
peace.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for allowing me to 
participate in this presentation tonight. Particularly I would like to 
thank my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), for his 
leadership on this issue over a number of years, and as well my 
colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch), for his 
leadership, in making sure that America's number one ally in the Middle 
East, our number one strategic ally, Israel, is safeguarded.
  But you know, my friends, I think it is time for a little history, 
and in 5 minutes I would like to give a little history lesson. I think 
it is important to know what the facts are.
  A lot of people think that the State of Israel is somehow a stranger 
to the Middle East, is brand new, a brand new country in the Middle 
East, amidst, people think, Arab countries in particular that have been 
there for centuries. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
  Let us take a look at the map. First of all, you see the map of the 
Middle East, a rather large area. As you can tell, this tiny little 
speck here, this sliver of land, that is the State of Israel. Here is 
Egypt, Syria, Lebanon; Iraq is here, Iran is here, Saudi Arabia is 
here, Oman here, Yemen here, Kuwait is here. Look at this entire huge 
land mass, and look at tiny little Israel. That is number one.
  Number two, when did these Arab States come into existence? Have they 
been around for centuries? Let us take them one at a time. Iran, 
established in 1935; Iraq, established in 1932; Syria, 1946; Lebanon, 
1943; Egypt, 1952; Saudi Arabia, 1932; Jordan, 1946; and Israel, about 
the same time, 1948. So virtually all of these states, including the 
State of Israel, established at about the same time, in the middle of 
the 20th century.
  Well, where is Palestine? Well, there never was a country called 
Palestine, ever. Never. Never a country, never a kingdom, never a 
country called Palestine. Never rulers who called themselves the rulers 
of the Palestinian people, never in the history of the world.
  But what happened in the middle of the 20th century when all of these 
states were established by the United Nations or recognized by the 
United Nations, what happened to the Palestinians? I will tell you what 
happened.
  In 1947, the year before the United Nations recognized Israel, this 
was the map that was proposed for what is now Israel. In 1947 the U.N. 
proposed two states, an Arab Palestinian state, marked here in the 
gray, with contiguous outline all the way from the top to the bottom of 
what is now Israel. Jerusalem was not then to be the capital of Israel. 
Jerusalem, according to the 1947 U.N. two-state plan, was to be an 
international city. The areas in yellow were to be the State of Israel, 
alongside this Palestinian state offered in 1947 by the U.N.
  What did the Palestinians do when they were presented this offer of 
their own state in 1947? They rejected it totally. They rejected it 
totally. They said we do not want to live next to a Jewish state. We 
want the entire entity, all of this, or none. So the U.N. said, you 
know, England, who owned this land after World War I, after they got 
that land as part of the spoils from the Ottoman Empire when the 
Ottoman Empire, Turkey, was defeated in World War I, they were allies 
of Germany, England got the land. The United Nations said okay, if the 
Palestinians do not want to live and share this land with the Jewish 
state as neighbors, in 1948 the United Nations declared this whole area 
the State of Israel, recognized by the United Nations in 1948.
  What happened in 1948? All of the armies of the Arab nations 
surrounding invaded Israel in 1948. They said, we will drive the Jews 
into the sea, fellow Palestinians, and then you can have that one 
state. You will not have to live next door to the Jews, the Jewish 
state. Something miraculous happened. The Jewish State of Israel 
survived, even though they were out numbered more than 30 to 1, the 
Jewish State of Israel survived in 1948.
  What did the Palestinians do who fled? They went to refugee camps. 
What did their Arab brothers and sisters do when they fled Israel? They 
kept them in refugee camps all over the Middle East, their Arab 
brothers and sisters. What else did they do? 1956, they attacked Israel 
again and they lost. Israel survived. 1967, they all surrounded Israel 
again, attacked Israel again, said we will drive the Jews into the sea, 
destroy Israel. The Jews survived again in 1967. The same in 1973. The 
Yom Kippur War when they attacked Israel again, Israel survived.
  Just as recently as 2 years ago, as was mentioned by my colleagues, 
when President Clinton brought Prime Minister Barak from Israel to Camp 
David along with Yasser Arafat, Israel offered some 97 percent of the 
land that the Palestinians wanted to the Palestinians; said you can 
have your own state, Palestinians, you can even have a portion of 
Jerusalem as your capital. You can have your own state and live in 
peace with us.
  What did Yasser Arafat do when presented that 97 percent of what he 
wanted? By the way, the first time in history that a losing power or 
losing entity, the Palestinians, who had lost every war when they tried 
to drive Israel into the sea, was offered 97 percent of what it had 
originally been offered. What did Arafat do 2 years ago when offered 97 
percent? Did he come back and bring a counteroffer? He left the 
negotiating table and started the suicide bombings 2 years ago, 
figuring, as he has for the last 50 years, we will terrorize the 
Israelis, force them to give up strategic sites, more than 100 percent, 
and then eventually we will take those sites and we will drive them 
entirely out of the region. That is what Arafat has been doing.
  Now, people always ask me, Steve, what possibly could be the 
conditions for peace? I tell them three things. There are three 
conditions for peace between the Arabs and the Israelis.
  Number one, every nation in the world, especially the Arab nations 
and the Palestinian people, must recognize that the United States of 
America will never abandon its 50-year-old friend, the State of Israel. 
Not just because Israel is America's most important strategic partner 
in the entire Middle East. Israel, the only dependable, the only 
democracy in that sea of dictatorships and totalitarians; Israel, 
America's forward battleship of military intelligence and co-
development of missile defense systems.

                              {time}  2215

  Israel, on the front lines of democracy in a world of terror. But 
America does not give up its friends when confronted by terrorism or 
threats or blackmail. So that America will never abandon Israel is the 
first condition, and the world has got to know that.
  Number two, America has to convince the world, and the world has got 
to understand, just as the United Nations in 1948 and the United States 
and the Soviet Union and all the countries of the world agreed, this 
shall be a Jewish State, the State of Israel, surrounded by states 
ruled by other religions, but this shall be a Jewish state. So today 
Israel will be and shall always be a Jewish state, albeit tiny, almost 
infinitesimal in the Middle East.
  Finally, the third condition of the United States never abandoning 
Israel, Israel always being regarded as a Jewish state, but the third 
element, to paraphrase former Israeli Prime Minister

[[Page H1144]]

Golda Meir, the Palestinians have to accept responsibility for their 
own statelessness. The Palestinians have to love their children and 
love the idea that they can have their own country more than the 
Palestinians hate the thought of living next to a Jewish state in an 
otherwise Arabian Middle East.
  Once those three conditions are met, the parties can go to the 
negotiating table. The Israelis have already over the years, with 
whoever has agreed to sit down with them, generally, for peace, Israel 
makes trades, land for peace. They did it with Egypt in wars of 
defense. Israel conquered the Sinai when Egypt kept attacking year 
after year. In exchange for peace, Israel gave up the Sinai, all of it, 
back to Egypt. The same with Jordan. They made peace with Jordan and 
established mutually agreed-upon borders. And they have made other 
concessions as well. Even in Lebanon when they had to invade Lebanon 
because they were being rocketed by Lebanon, they withdrew to 
internationally accepted borders in Lebanon.
  So is Israel prepared to make concessions, land for peace, even with 
armies and peoples who despise them and try to drive them into the sea 
and put their children to death for 50 years? They are ready to make 
that decision. But what is missing? What is missing is a Palestinian 
leadership that is ready to live in peace next to a Jewish state, the 
only Jewish state in the world, the one established by the U.N. in 
1948, the State of Israel. If the Palestinian leadership continues to 
demand that Israel be obliterated, even though it was established in 
1948 at the same time as all of these other countries, the middle of 
the 20th century. Israel is no stranger to statehood. When we compare 
to it Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, they all came 
about the same time. When the Palestinians elect a leadership ready to 
make peace with Israel, Israel will make that peace.
  But finally, what do we ask of the Israelis now, when Yasar Arafat 
encourages in Arabic and in English his people to be martyrs, to blow 
themselves up in restaurants and religious observances? We say, do what 
America will do and is doing now. Fight for your lives. Fight for your 
children. Do not care what the world has to say. You defend yourself, 
protect your people. People say to get the Israelis to withdraw now 
before they finish rooting out terrorists from the areas controlled by 
the Palestinian Authority, that would be like someone saying to us in 
America, leave Afghanistan right now. After all, you have substantially 
done much of what you wanted to do. Leave it now. And also, America, by 
the way, even though there are al Qaeda terrorist cells in 60 countries 
around the world, terrorist cells plotting to overthrow the United 
States or cause additional terrorist attacks on innocent American 
civilians, they say, America, leave those 60 countries. Do not pursue 
these terrorists. You have already made too many waves. What would we 
Americans say to that? Tell them to go jump in a lake, or perhaps in 
stronger language, we would tell them, we are going to get these people 
who killed our innocent men, women, and children.
  By the way, these people do not ask us for anything, just like the 
Palestinians do not want to negotiate. They want the end of Israel, 
this present Palestinian leadership. Al Qaeda does not want to 
negotiate with America; they want to destroy America. When the 
Palestinian people understand that America will never bend on Israel, 
that Israel will always be a Jewish state, and that they are ready to 
live in peace next to the Jewish State of Israel, albeit in a sea of 
Arab nations, then the Palestinian people will get what all of Israel's 
neighbors have gotten: peace with Israel. Until then, America must 
stand up for Israel, its number one ally in the Middle East.
  If we look at the U.N.'s voting record, of all of the nations in the 
Middle East, Israel is at the very top supporting the United States of 
America. If we were to abandon Israel now or tell Israel not to finish 
rooting out the terrorists, it would be as if we were saying, it is 
possible for terrorists and suicide bombers to blackmail people of 
goodwill, people who live in democracies. It is possible for them to 
stop us from defending ourselves and our own families. We will not do 
that as Americans. We would not let anyone do it to us, so we shall not 
and will not let anyone do it to our number one ally in the Middle 
East, the State of Israel, the region's only democracy, our best friend 
in the region for 50 years, our strategic military and cultural partner 
for 50 years, this tiny little courageous democracy, the State of 
Israel.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey.
  We have had a great deal of discussion about Chairman Arafat 
specifically and the interest to try to resolve the conflict. One of 
the things which has been pointed out by several of my colleagues is 
the Camp David agreement, where literally, Israel put on the table an 
offer which was far beyond any of the so-called red lines that Israel 
had ever talked about before, giving up the vast sections of Jerusalem, 
an independent state, giving up 98 percent of the area in the West Bank 
and Gaza and, in fact, equalizing the area, the other 2 percent, far 
beyond, actually the Temple Mount itself, the holiest place to Jews in 
the entire world. Literally, an offer on the table that was far beyond 
anything that any Israeli leader had ever talked about; in fact, 
something which, for those who follow Israeli politics understand could 
never have been approved by the Israeli Knesset. And Prime Minister 
Barak had actually said this and was ready to bring that proposal to 
the Israeli people, effectively a plebiscite, and it was unclear 
whether it would have passed, but it probably would have passed. When 
that offer was made and even enhanced at the Taba discussions, it was 
rejected by Chairman Arafat and the Palestinians.
  In any negotiation, and I ask people to think about their own lives 
and their own interactions with people, in any negotiation, if someone 
made what you know is your bottom, bottom, bottom line, you know that 
you cannot possibly, under any circumstances go further, and the person 
on the other side of the table rejects that, can you actually believe 
that there is any possibility for an agreement with that person?
  When Prime Minister Sharon has talked about this war as a war of 
Israel's survival and Israel's war of independence, I think there are 
some real points that lead to that; and that has also been a theme for 
most, in fact probably all, of the speakers at some level this evening, 
that there is still to this day not an acceptance by Chairman Arafat 
and by many Palestinians of Israel's, literally, their right to exist.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a minute?
  Mr. DEUTSCH. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. There are some of my dear friends and people I have 
never met who have asked me, Steve, how long is this going to take? It 
is so disturbing to see people being killed, the cameras recording 
warfare. And I say this: America fought the Soviet Union for decades. 
We had thousands of nuclear missiles pointed at us for decades. We did 
not give up. We should not give up on our war against al Qaeda until we 
are certain that we have them on the run, until we are protected. We 
should not give up on Israel. We should allow Israel to take the time 
Israel needs to make its people safe. Because do we know what will 
happen? Once the world understands that America will not give up 
Israel, that Israel will always be around as a Jewish state, and that 
it is the Palestinian people's own interest to live in peace and 
freedom next to Israel, then we can give the Palestinian people what we 
want for all people: peace and a good life. But they must have leaders 
who will say in English and in Arabic to themselves and the world, we 
are ready to live next to the Jewish State of Israel in peace. When 
that happens, as history has pointed out, they will sit at the 
negotiating table directly with Israel, and they will get a peace that 
they can live with, that Israel can live with, and we will have a new 
era. But until they are ready to have that kind of Palestinian 
leadership, Israel must do everything it needs to do to keep its people 
safe, as we expect our government to keep us safe from al Qaeda.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Let me again mention a follow-up to that point directly. 
The modern State of Israel, as the gentleman pointed out on his chart, 
is 54 years old, and there are still many in

[[Page H1145]]

the Palestinian community who again do not accept Israel's right 
literally to exist, want Israel to be destroyed, and for many in the 
Palestinian community, Israel is viewed no differently than the 
crusaders who took 150 years for the crusaders to leave. It is only a 
third of the way to that time frame.
  But I think for those of us who understand the history of the State 
of Israel, it is not crusaders. I think part of what is going on now, 
and we can see it ourselves on TV or read about it, is that the Jews 
that are there are not leaving. This is a permanent home. This is not a 
temporary home. This is not a way station for the Jewish people; this 
is a permanent residence. I think when the Palestinians understand 
that, and I think that they will understand it, maybe they will not 
understand it this week or this month or maybe even this year or maybe 
even this decade, but when they understand that, the peace that the 
gentleman talked about that was on the table at Camp David will be an 
accepted peace.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, if I could make one final comment, I know 
the gentleman from Georgia wanted to make additional comments as well. 
What the American people should be doing and the American Government is 
saying to the Palestinian people and all of the other Arab nations is 
the following: get a new leadership in the Palestinian Authority who 
will be ready to accept living in their own state next to the Jewish 
State of Israel. When the Arab world forces that upon the Palestinian 
leadership, then we can have what we want for the Jews and the 
Palestinians together, to live together in peace. Until then, it breaks 
my heart that the Palestinians are suffering at the hands of their own 
misguided leaders who, even after 54 years, will not accept the 
existence of the State of Israel.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield the last moments of 
my time and, hopefully, he will be able to claim some of his own time, 
to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, let me yield to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Weiner), because I know he wanted to make a comment.
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just 
wanted to comment on the points made by my colleagues about the expanse 
of time. We frequently get into the misguided notion that everything 
has to run on a 24-hour news cycle, that sometimes we see something 
unsettling and we think instantly it is going to change.

                              {time}  2230

  I would remind my colleagues and remind those viewing at home that 
the first several weeks of the campaign against terror, against al-
Qaeda in Afghanistan, we were all commenting, oh, my goodness, this 
does not seem to be working, this does not seem to be working; the 
terrorists seem to be surviving. Then suddenly, almost overnight, there 
was a collapse of the terrorist infrastructure that has made us today a 
much safer country.
  The same strategy is being pursued, although it was not their first 
choice, by the Israeli government. I think we make a mistake when we 
say, well, as unsettling as this is, it has to end tomorrow or the next 
day. It may take a while.
  It is estimated that for every suicide bombing, it takes 40 
individuals to make that bombing happen. There is the person that puts 
the bomb together, that figures out the lock, that locates the person 
who is going to do it, that makes the harness that goes around.
  Destroying that infrastructure may take a little while. But the only 
way to do it is not to look at what is going to be on tomorrow's 
television, but to think about how we do it in the context of a 
military operation against a very difficult foe to catch.
  When we watch those images, and they are unsettling, there is nobody 
in Israel, I can say almost to a person, who thinks this is a desirable 
way to go, but it is the only way to catch them where they are. I thank 
the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. To build on that last point, by the way, it is important 
to remember that while we were at war, the Cold War, but nonetheless a 
very dangerous war with the Soviet Union for 50 years, we are now 
friends with Russia. We had a terrible world war against the Germans 
and Japanese, terrible losses of life, lasting years. Now we are best 
friends. We had a revolution against the British and now we are best 
friends.
  There is no reason, once this effort to rout out terrorists 
concludes, that the Israelis and Palestinians cannot be friends.

                          ____________________