[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 143 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5931-S5932]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ISRAEL AND THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, this week President Obama
stood beside Israel and the cause of peace when he addressed the United
Nations General Assembly. I rise today to also stand beside our ally
and friend, Israel, and the goal of its two-state solution. I firmly
believe that only a two-state solution can lead to a lasting peace
between Israel and the Palestinian people.
Unfortunately, we are heading down a path that will not lead to a
lasting peace. Involvement by the U.N. General Assembly will not lead
to a solution but will act as a disruptive force. I urge the parties to
use the time in New York to begin a constructive dialog toward
agreement on final status issues. If peace is to be achievable, then we
must break through the cycle of failure that has too often plagued
negotiations. U.N. action will not resolve the issues acting as a
roadblock to peace.
It is important also to note, as the President stated, that peace
will not come until each side ``learns to stand in each other's
shoes.'' Each party must realize the other's aspirations, because their
futures are intricately intertwined. No action at the United Nations
can remove or change what is an essential fact. For Israel, the two-
state solution will enable its people to enjoy a secure and peaceful
future. For the Palestinians, the goal of nationhood can only occur
through negotiations with Israel.
I believe the President is making a good-faith attempt to realize and
understand the aspirations of each party, while standing firm with our
friends. The central reality is this: We will only recognize a
Palestinian state as part of an agreement that leads to a lasting
peace. This is in the best interests of Israel, the Palestinian people,
the United States, and the international community.
There is no time like the present to restart the hard work needed to
achieve a lasting peace. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
recently pressed on the urgent need to return to negotiations in an op-
ed in the New York Times. I ask unanimous consent that this op-ed be
printed in the Record at the end of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. While I don't agree with everything the
Prime Minister wrote, I do believe he was especially correct about one
point:
I truly believe that a two-state solution is the only way
to ensure a more stable Middle East and to grant Israel the
security and well-being it desires. As tensions grow, I
cannot but feel that we in the region are on the verge of
missing an opportunity--one that we cannot afford to miss.
He concludes in his piece:
Now is the time. There will be no better one. I hope that
Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas will meet the challenge.
I also hope that today both parties sit down in New York and avoid
the disruption that will be caused by a vote in the United Nations.
Exhibit 1
Peace Now, or Never
(By Ehud Olmert)
Jerusalem.--As the United Nations General Assembly opens
this year, I feel uneasy. An unnecessary diplomatic clash
between Israel and the Palestinians is taking shape in New
York, and it will be harmful to Israel and to the future of
the Middle East.
I know that things could and should have been different.
I truly believe that a two-state solution is the only way
to ensure a more stable Middle Est and to grant Israel the
security and well-being it desires. As tensions grow, I
cannot but feel that we in the region are on the verge of
missing an opportunity--one that we cannot afford to miss.
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, plans to make a
unilateral bid for recognition of a Palestinian state at the
United Nations on Friday. He has the right to do so, and the
vast majority of countries in the General Assembly support
his move. But this is not the wisest step Mr. Abbas can take.
The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has
declared publicly that he believes in the two-state solution,
but he is expending all of his political effort to block Mr.
Abbas's bid for statehood by rallying domestic support and
appealing to other countries. This is not the wisest step Mr.
Netanyahu can take.
In the worst-case scenario, chaos and violence could erupt,
making the possibility of an agreement even more distant, if
not impossible. If that happens, peace will definitely not be
the outcome.
The parameters of a peace deal are well known and they have
already been put on the table. I put them there in September
2008 when I presented a far-reaching offer to Mr. Abbas.
According to my offer, the territorial dispute would be
solved by establishing a Palestinian state on territory
equivalent in size to the pre-1967 West Bank and Gaza Strip
with mutually agreed-upon land swaps that take into account
the new realities on the ground.
The city of Jerusalem would be shared. Its Jewish areas
would be the capital of Israel and its Arab neighborhoods
would become the Palestinian capital. Neither side would
declare sovereignty over the city's holy places; they
wouldn't be administered jointly with the United States.
The Palestinian refugee problem would be addressed within
the frame-work of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. The new
Palestinian state would become the home of all the
Palestinian refugees just as the state of Israel is the
homeland of the Jewish people. Israel would, however, be
prepared to absorb a small number of refugees on
humanitarian grounds.
Because ensuring Israel's security is vital to the
implementation of any agreement, the Palestinian state would
be de-militarized and it would not form military alliances
with other nations. Both states would cooperate to fight
terrorism and violence.
These parameters were never formally rejected by Mr. Abbas,
and they should be put on the table again today. Both Mr.
Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu must then make brave and difficult
decisions.
We Israelis simply do not have the luxury of spending more
time postponing a solution. A further delay will only help
extremists on both sides who seek to sabotage any prospect of
a peaceful, negotiated two-state solution.
Moreover, the Arab Spring has changed the Middle East, and
unpredictable developments in the region, such as the recent
attack on Israel's embassy in Cairo, could easily explode
into wide-spread chaos. It is therefore in Israel's strategic
interest to cement existing peace agreements with its
neighbors, Egypt and Jordan.
In addition, Israel must make every effort to defuse
tensions with Turkey as soon as possible. Turkey is not an
enemy of Israel. I have worked closely with the Turkish prime
minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In spite of his recent
statements and actions, I believe that he understands the
importance of relations with Israel. Mr. Erdogan and Mr.
Netanyahu must work to end this crisis immediately for the
benefit of both countries and the stability of the region.
In Israel, we are sorry for the loss of life of Turkish
citizens in May 2010, when Israel confronted a provocative
flotilla of ships bound for Gaza. I am sure that the proper
way to express these sentiments to the Turkish government and
the Turkish people can be found.
The time for true leadership has come. Leadership is tested
not by one's capacity to survive politically but by the
ability to make tough decisions in trying times.
When I addressed international forums as prime minister,
the Israeli people expected me to present bold political
initiatives that would bring peace--not arguments outlining
why achieving peace now is not possible. Today, such an
initiative is more necessary than ever to prove to the world
that Israel is a peace-seeking country.
The window of opportunity is limited. Israel will not
always find itself sitting across the table from Palestinian
leaders like Mr. Abbas and the prime minister, Salam Fayyad,
who object to terrorism and want peace. Indeed, future
Palestinian leaders might abandon the idea of two states and
seek a one-state solution, making reconciliation impossible.
Now is the time. There will be no better one. I hope that
Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas will meet the challenge.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. With that, I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
[[Page S5932]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to
speak as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________