[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 175 (Monday, December 8, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H12882]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A WORTHWHILE PROPOSAL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, much has been written lately about several
attempts to craft an alternative peace plan in the decades-old Israeli-
Palestinian dispute. The best-known of these recent plans, the Geneva
Initiative, was conceived and written by representatives of both sides
of the conflict but without the involvement of governments or
politicians. As such, it is a fresh approach that should provide a
lesson to those who continue to believe that peace is something that
can only be crafted by government officials or bribed or bullied by the
international community.
We do know this: After decades of conflict and tens of billions of
U.S. tax dollars spent, U.S. Government involvement in the Israeli-
Palestinian peace process has led nowhere. The latest U.S. Government-
initiated plan for peace, the road map, appears to be a map to nowhere.
This does not surprise me much. With a seemingly endless amount of
money to bribe the two leaders of the two opposing sides to remain
engaged in the process, is it any wonder why the two parties never
arrive at peace?
But people on both sides are becoming more and more frustrated at the
endless impasse and endless government and bureaucrat-written peace
agreements that go nowhere.
{time} 1815
That is why plans like this should be of such interest. Initially
conceived by an obscure Swiss professor, the project was joined by
former Israeli Justice Minister, Yossi Beilin, former Palestinian
Authority Information Minister, Yasser Abed Rabbo, and by other
prominent officials like former President Jimmy Carter. The
negotiations led to the creation of a 50-page detailed accord.
I do not know whether the product is perfect. I have not studied the
minute details of the proposal. But what I do know is that politicians,
governments, and special interests promote war at the expense of those
who have to fight them. Wars end when the victims finally demand peace,
and that is what we are beginning to see. According to one recent
survey, a majority among both the Israeli and Palestinian populations
support this new initiative. That is encouraging. To his credit,
President Bush has demonstrated an open mind toward this alternative
approach. He declared the Geneva Initiative ``productive'' and added
that the United States ``appreciates people discussing peace.''
Secretary of State Colin Powell echoed the President when he resisted
hard-line pressure to ignore the proposed accord stating, ``I have an
obligation to listen to individuals who have interesting ideas.'' This
is also encouraging.
Predictably, though, this new approach is not as welcomed by those
governments, politicians, and special interests who have a stake in
dragging out the process indefinitely. Palestinian Authority President
Yasser Arafat has been lukewarm at best. Extremist Arab organizations
who have a special interest in continuing the violence have also
rejected the Geneva Initiative. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has
rejected the initiative out of hand. Said Mr. Sharon, ``Geneva is an
attempt to do something only a government can do.''
But the point is that governments have little incentive to finally
end conflicts such as these. The United States is in places like Kosovo
and Bosnia indefinitely in the name of peacekeeping and peace
processes. The same will be true of our involvement in Afghanistan and
Iraq. It is not until foreign involvement ceases, that means our
continued meddling in the Middle East, and the people directly involved
demand peace, do real working solutions begin to emerge. The Geneva
Initiative is therefore a positive step toward peace in the Middle
East. Let us step back and get out of the way.
____________________