[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 56 (Tuesday, May 7, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E728]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EXPRESSING SOLIDARITY WITH ISRAEL IN ITS FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. JESSE L. JACKSON, JR.

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 2, 2002

  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 
once said, ``quiet is the absence of noise, but peace requires the 
presence of justice.''
  As Americans, that is our charge and our challenge in the Middle 
East. We seek not only to establish quiet from bombs and bullets, but 
also to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. Even at this 
dark hour of death and destruction, peace is still possible in the 
Middle East.
  Although involving Arabs and Jews, the crisis in the region is not an 
ethnic problem. While it invokes Judaism and Islam, it is not a 
religious problem. Though engulfing an ancient land, it is not an 
archaic problem. At its root, the crisis between the Israelis and the 
Palestinians is a political problem requiring a political solution, not 
a military one. It is intractable, but not impossible. And, it demands 
American engagement and American leadership to solve.
  Our proper and necessary role in the region must be that of an honest 
and balanced broker, a mediator between the two sides, and a 
facilitator of peace. A broker understands and honors the needs, fears 
and aspirations of each and must maintain the trust and confidence of 
both. A mediator talks and listens to both sides, steps in the gaps of 
distrust and enmity, and reconciles differences and disputes. A 
facilitator recognizes and holds both sides accountable for the 
obligations and compromises each side must make for progress and peace.
  Undoubtedly, just as it takes more than one party to make war, it 
takes more than one party to make peace. While we have no closer friend 
and ally than Israel, it is not our only friend and ally. Our interests 
are broad and should not be restricted to just one country in the 
entire region.
  To do so, would compromise our own long-term national interests, 
diminish our standing and influence in the world, and abdicate our role 
and responsibility as the sole Superpower. Such a move would be tragic 
for us and for them, leaving both sides with no final arbiter, no place 
to turn other than violence.
  It's time to break that vicious cycle. It's time to end the bloodshed 
and the heartbreak. It's time to do everything in our power to 
encourage both sides to make the hard choices and to take the daring 
steps toward peace.
  Yet, instead of leadership and vision, this Congress has offered an 
unbalanced, untimely and counterproductive resolution. Because of what 
is in it and what is not, H. Res. 392 is not what is needed now. It is 
not constructive. It will not advance peace. I cannot support it.
  This resolution rightly demonstrates support for the security of 
Israel. We recognize Israel's vulnerable position amidst a hostile 
neighborhood and unequivocally support and defend its right to exist 
within secure and internationally recognized boundaries.
  However, this resolution wrongly omits statements of support for 
Palestinian self-determination and national rights. We should reaffirm 
our support for the right of the Palestinians to have their own state 
with secure and internationally recognized boundaries.
  This resolution correctly condemns and opposes the use of terrorism 
and suicide bombings that intentionally targets and kills innocent 
Israeli civilians. We uphold Israel's right to combat legitimate 
targets and prevent such savage and brutal attacks.
  Yet, this measure unfairly ignores the Israeli occupation and 
settlements on Palestinian territory. In a recent editorial, The New 
York Times stated, ``Just as terror is the greatest Palestinian threat 
to Middle East peace, so are settlements on territory captured in the 
1967 war the greatest Israeli obstacle to peace. They deprive the 
Palestinians of prime land and water, break up Palestinian geographic 
continuity, are hard to defend against Palestinian attack and 
complicate the establishment of a clear, secure Israeli border.''
  H. Res. 392 properly cites the mounting death toll and carnage caused 
by Palestinian attackers on Israelis. We mourn their deaths and share 
their grief. Yet, the measure makes only passing reference to 
Palestinian casualties and no mention at all of Israel's controversial 
incursion into Jenin, where the debris, devastation and death warrant 
an impartial investigation and an international humanitarian response.
  Perhaps most unsettling is the imperfect analogy within which this 
resolution is framed. The measure equates America's war on terrorism 
with Israel's campaign in the West Bank. But, such a clear and 
convenient comparison is not so easy to make and, as The Washington 
Post observed, ``overlooks this contest for territory and sovereignty 
underlying the Israeli-Palestinian bloodshed.''
  Surely, Israel is justified in protecting itself and uprooting 
terrorism. While war is disastrous and often messy, it does not justify 
deliberately raiding and wrecking banks, schools, streets, and 
municipal buildings. Yet, the Israeli offensive in the West Bank not 
only dismantled the terrorist infrastructure, but also systematically 
destroyed the civil infrastructure and institutions of Palestinian 
self-government. They are not one in the same. Yet, both lay in ruin. 
If only for their own sake and standing, Israel must adopt a policy 
that differentiates between the two. And, the world should know that we 
know the difference as well.
  In this bloody stalemate, one side is not entirely at fault and the 
other completely free of it. Both sides know fear. Both know hardship. 
Both know suffering and tragedy. But, instead of comparing and 
measuring wounds, we should aid in healing them. Rather than 
concentrating on the failures of war, we should focus on the 
possibilities of peace.
  Peace should be the crux and motive of this measure. But, it is not, 
and so the Administration asked the House not to consider it. Yet, 
despite the objections, Congress does so anyway.
  In lieu of H. Res. 392, Congress should offer its imprimatur, its 
influence, and its ideas to animate and encourage efforts to pave a 
pathway to peace. We know that the framework already exists in U.N. 
Resolution 242, 338, 1397, 1402, Oslo, and most recently, the Saudi 
Peace Initiative. We know that the basic formula is land for peace. We 
know that an economic recovery plan is necessary to rebuild and 
revitalize the region. We know that an international presence is 
required to sustain a final negotiated settlement. Now, we, the United 
States, must help to figure out how to forge it and flesh it out.
  Undoubtedly, it will be hard. At the very least, it will require the 
commitment of the Israelis and the Palestinians. Both sides must meet 
the challenge and give to the other what it wants for itself--dignity, 
security and peace.
  Ultimately, there will and must be two nations--Israel and a 
Palestinian state--living as neighbors, both sovereign, secure, stable, 
free and democratic. Only then, after such a long and tumultuous 
nightmare, Israelis and Palestinians will wake up in the Holy Land to a 
new morning. And, to peace.

                          ____________________