[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 58 (Tuesday, April 21, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E909]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   WE MUST PREVENT ANOTHER HOLOCAUST

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. ADAM B. SCHIFF

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 21, 2009

  Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Speaker, at ten o'clock this morning, the nation of 
Israel observed two minutes of silence in observance of Yom Hashoah, 
Holocaust Remembrance Day. For those two minutes, all activity in the 
country ceased to honor of the six million Jews who were murdered by 
the Nazis during the madness of the Final Solution. For Israelis, the 
Holocaust remains the crucible that produced their state and its impact 
is felt daily across Israeli society--from politics to the arts.
  Here in the United States, the Holocaust is more remote. The GIs who 
helped to liberate the Nazi death camps more than six decades ago are 
fading into history and the grainy black and white footage of the 
victims images that stunned the world in the 1940s--now seem distant to 
many Americans.
  For Israelis, though, the Holocaust serves as an omnipresent reminder 
of the historical insecurity of the Jewish people for whom persecution 
and exile have characterized two millennia of wandering from their 
ancient homeland. Coupled with Israel's mainly hostile and 
fundamentally unstable neighbors, the memory of Hitler's attempt to 
exterminate European Jewry has served to make Israelis extraordinarily 
vigilant in the face of constant security threats.
  Israeli security analysts have focused their concern in recent years 
on Iran, which they see as the most critical existential threat to the 
Jewish state.
  Through its support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza and 
the West Bank, Tehran has taken up positions along Israel's borders and 
its proxies have repaid their Iranian masters handsomely by provoking 
large-scale military actions by Israel in 2006 and December of last 
year.
  Through its relentless pursuit of the nuclear fuel cycle, Iran's 
radical regime seeks to dominate the region and to erect a permanent 
threat to Israel's security and the Israeli people.
  Through its statements and the virulence of state-controlled media, 
Iranian leaders, particularly President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are clearly 
fixated on the demonization and destruction of Israel. Just yesterday, 
the Iranian president sparked a walkout at a United Nations racism 
conference in Geneva when he launched into a rambling rant against 
Israel and Jews. The prospect of Ahmadinejad with nuclear weapons is 
one that keeps many Israelis up at night and should be keeping many of 
us awake as well.
  Given the potential consequences, the United States must make the 
prevention of Iran developing the bomb a cornerstone of both its 
strategy for the Middle East and its nonproliferation agenda. To do 
otherwise would place Israel in Iran's nuclear crosshairs and likely 
spur a regional arms race as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab 
Emirates could seek to match any Iranian nuclear weapons capability.
  I support President Obama's decision to reach out to Tehran and I 
believe that tough, concerted diplomacy can be effective in getting the 
Iranian government to reassess its nuclear policy. But to be effective, 
that diplomacy must include a wide range of both inducements and 
disincentives. And it must take into account the character and nature 
of the current Iranian regime. And, finally, those charged with 
executing the policy must be willing to consider other alternatives 
should diplomacy fail.
  Tehran's current declared enrichment activities at its Natanz 
facility are subject to regular inspections by the International Atomic 
Energy Agency, which should be able to spot diversion or any attempt to 
produce weapons grade material before it can be turned into a weapon. 
As long as the IAEA can maintain its surveillance of the Natanz 
facility, any Iranian intention to produce weapons-grade material there 
is likely to be frustrated.

  What concerns many senior officials in Israel, here in the United 
States and in Europe, is the possibility that Iran, which continues to 
withhold a lot of information about its nuclear program, may have a 
parallel, secret nuclear program that is beyond the reach of the IAEA 
and western intelligence monitoring. As David Albright, the President 
of the Institute for Science and International Security, told the 
Financial Times last week, aside from Natanz ``we don't know anything 
about what they are doing, how many centrifuges they have made, or 
whether they are ready to go with a duplicate facility that would allow 
them to produce fissile material.''
  The juxtaposition of renewed diplomatic overtures and the unease over 
the extent of what we do not know about Iran's capabilities or its 
intentions, may strengthen our hand with the other permanent members of 
the UN Security Council plus Germany, who are working to produce a 
collective response to the Iranian nuclear challenge. If our 
international partners perceive a new American willingness to explore 
seriously the prospect for a negotiated resolution to the Iran problem, 
they may also be ready to consider the more robust coercive measures 
that may become necessary if Iran is shown to be pursuing a nuclear 
weapons capability.
  International cohesion will be absolutely vital if we are to resolve 
this standoff without resorting to force. Tehran has been adroit at 
exploiting differences between the United States and its international 
partners, some of whom have been unwilling to consider the possibility 
that President Ahmadinejad's vitriol is not merely intended for 
domestic consumption but is a real reflection of his murderous 
intentions. This could prove a tragic mistake.
  Seventy-five years ago, Europeans, Americans and even many German 
Jews dismissed Hitler's threats against the Jews as political 
posturing. How could Germany, a nation with a rich and distinguished 
culture, whose cities embodied the best of cosmopolitan Europe, follow 
a depraved Austrian corporal into the depths of hatred? Humanity paid 
an enormous price for its passivity and the world pledged ``never 
again.''
  We may now be faced with a similar threat from another society with a 
rich culture going back thousands of years and a sophisticated 
citizenry. Do we dismiss Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a hate-filled 
demagogue, or do we take his threats seriously? All of us--Americans, 
Israelis, Europeans and Russians--would be well advised to remember the 
past, even as we work towards what we hope will be a safer tomorrow.

                          ____________________