[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 172 (Thursday, December 1, 2016)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1557]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





 REAFFIRMING LONGSTANDING UNITED STATES POLICY IN SUPPORT OF A DIRECT 
 BILATERALLY NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. GWEN MOORE

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, November 29, 2016

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member and chairman for 
their hard work in crafting this resolution. It reiterates a number of 
points consistent with longstanding U.S. policy on the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict, including the current Administration, that I 
support. It is still to be seen what this policy will look like under 
the new Administration.
  No one disputes the need for the parties to directly work out the 
issues. I articulated that position in a letter I sent to President 
Obama when he took office in 2009. I reaffirmed that position again in 
a letter to the President about a year ago. I continue to support that 
position.
  Additionally, no one disputes the need to oppose unilateral actions 
by either party that undermines the process. As Vice President Biden 
noted earlier this year, ``Actions on either side to undermine trust 
only take us further away from the path of peace. Actions like at the 
U.N. to undermine Israel, or . . . settlement activities.'' Such 
actions clearly erode the prospect of a two-state solution, the stated 
goal for U.S. policy and efforts for a number of years now.
  However, I believe that this resolution we are debating is 
incomplete.
  For example, this resolution should not be mischaracterized or 
misrepresented as opposing constructive steps by the United States, 
either unilaterally or with the international community, to help 
preserve and further a negotiated two-state solution between the 
Israelis and Palestinians.
  While no effort can replace the parties themselves reaching 
agreement, there are a host of ways in which the U.S. and other 
stakeholders in the international communities, like Arab countries in 
the region, with a vital interest in peace can support steps to rebuild 
trust and good will, both of which are sorely lacking and will be 
needed. It must be made clear that Congress is not discouraging such 
efforts through this or any other resolution.
  The framework for a resolution to the conflict has long been clear 
for a number of years and formulated a number of times, including 
President Clinton and President George W. Bush. No U.N. resolution is 
needed for that.
  The issue isn't whether we know where the major issues of 
disagreement lie, but how to create an environment that encourages the 
parties to move forward. The U.S. and international support can be 
helpful and useful to building that environment. It would be foolhardy 
to hope that somehow the Israelis and Palestinians spontaneously decide 
to stop pointing fingers and come together and find solutions to some 
very tough and challenging issues.
  The challenges to peace at the moment are tremendous which is why it 
is important that we should encourage all interested in peace to 
continue to work for it.
  Even Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu recently expressed appreciation 
for and a willingness to build on multilateral and regional efforts 
regarding the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, such as 
the Arab Peace Initiative.
  At the end of his Administration, President George W. Bush held a 
conference at Annapolis where he hosted the leaders of Israel and the 
Palestinian Authority, but also other ``nations that support a two-
state solution, reject violence, recognize Israel's right to exist, and 
commit to all previous agreements between the parties.'' President Bush 
also noted that ``the world can do more to build the conditions for 
peace'' between the two parties. The U.S. invited 49 countries and 
international organizations to participate including Members of the 
Arab League, Permanent Members of the U.N. Security Council, and the 
International Quartet for Middle East Peace.
  In 2007, President George W. Bush argued for the international 
community to ``rise to the moment, and provide decisive support to 
responsible Palestinian leaders working for peace'' and laid out one 
role for the international community--helping create viable Palestinian 
institutions necessary for a state.
  Former Senator and head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 
Richard Lugar repeatedly noted that ``Both Israel and the Palestinians 
urgently need international support to fortify their ability and 
willingness to embrace the difficult choices that will be necessary'' 
to reach a peace deal.
  While the world has changed much since that time, the need for the 
international community to do more to ``build conditions for peace'' 
between the two parties has not diminished.
  Yet, I am concerned that some may read H. Con. Res. 165 as dismissing 
all efforts by the U.S. to engage the international community to 
galvanize broad support for meaningful efforts to move the parties 
towards peace.
  I also want to emphasize that no one should read this resolution as 
preventing the U.S. from supporting non-binding efforts through the 
U.N. Security Council to further progress toward a negotiated, 
conflict-ending agreement. This has long been a part of the U.S. Middle 
East Peace toolbox.
  The U.S. was instrumental in drafting and passing UNSC Resolutions 
242 (in 1967) and 338 (in 1973) outlining the international community's 
desire for a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict through 
territorial compromise. Democratic and Republican Presidents alike have 
previously worked through the U.N. Security Council to promote peace.
  Under President Reagan, the United States did not veto U.N. Security 
Council Resolutions criticizing Israel's annexation of the Golan 
Heights and its activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.
  I believe that such efforts remain a viable tool today.
  That doesn't mean the U.S. has to support efforts it believes are 
contrary to peace. It has long been U.S. policy to denounce actions by 
any party--Israel, the Palestinians, or international actors--that are 
unwelcomed. This includes opposition to actions by the United Nations--
or any other entity--to pass resolutions that are one-sided or anti-
Israel. And the Obama Administration has done so when needed.
  Additionally, I believe the resolution would have been strengthened 
by strongly emphasizing that there is no workable alternative to the 
two-state solution which has been the focus of U.S. peacemaking efforts 
for years now.
  Lastly, I continue to support the current Administration's push for 
peace between our allies and to urge it to continue to do so even in 
its waning days. I also urge the incoming Administration to work 
constructively towards a two-state solution. In a recent poll, 69 
percent of American Jewish voters expressed support for President 
Barack Obama delivering a major speech before leaving office outlining 
a vision for what Israelis and Palestinians must do to reach a peace 
agreement.
  There is plenty of blame to apportion for why the status quo of 
violence, instability, and conflict continues unabated.
  We owe it to every Israeli and Palestinian who share a vision of two 
peoples living side by side in peace and security to never quit on 
working toward a meaningful peace and that should include pursuing 
every tool and leveraging every ally in that pursuit.

                          ____________________