[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Page 13817]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            VOTE EXPLANATION

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I voted against the Frist-Daschle resolution 
on the Middle East. My constituents are entitled to an explanation. I 
opposed the resolution, and I know the leaders, and indeed all of the 
Members of this body, are genuinely committed to advancing the cause of 
peace in the Middle East, but no one should be naive enough to think 
this resolution will move the process forward one centimeter. If 
anything, the lopsided pro-Israel slant of this resolution will serve 
only to strengthen the growing distrust of moderate Arab States toward 
the United States.
  This resolution is a blatantly unfair reading of the current status 
of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It claims that the President's 
roadmap for peace is still relevant, even though it has been completely 
stalled for more than a year. The resolution wholeheartedly endorses 
Prime Minister Sharon's view of the barrier wall being built in West 
Bank, without so much as a mention of the wide opposition to its 
construction from moderate Arab countries, such as Jordan.
  The resolution contains language that could easily be construed to be 
in support of the controversial, and some claim illegal, practice of 
the targeted assassinations carried out by the Israeli Armed Forces. 
The United States is completely right to condemn the violence carried 
out by Palestinian terrorists, but we cannot turn a blind eye to the 
unwarranted excesses of the Israeli Government under Mr. Sharon. If our 
country truly wants to push both sides toward the negotiating table, we 
should condemn all violence arising from the Israeli-Palestinian 
conflict, including that which has claimed the lives of innocent 
Palestinians. There is blame to be shouldered by both sides. If we are 
to regain our credibility--let me say that again. If we are to regain 
our credibility as honest brokers in the Middle East, we need to 
acknowledge that fact. Progress will only be made in resolving the 
Middle East violence when the United States weighs in with a fair, 
evenhanded position that points out the wrongdoings of both sides.
  Resolutions such as this one are a far cry from being fair, 
objective, or even-handed.
  Besides the specific provisions of this resolution, I oppose the 
thrust of the resolution, which is intended to express ``the Sense of 
the Congress in Support of United States Policy for a Middle East Peace 
Process.'' The United States has been completely disengaged from the 
Israeli-Palestinian peace process for far too long, and the number of 
victims on both sides is growing far too fast. I cannot support a 
policy that boils down to a benign neglect of the violence in the 
Middle East.
  Resolutions such as the one the Senate has taken up today may serve 
as a useful platform for a press release or a stump speech, but they do 
nothing to advance the cause of peace in the Middle East. I would jump 
at the chance to vote for a meaningful resolution that articulated the 
Senate's support of a viable policy to resolve the conflict between the 
Palestinians and the Israelis. But this administration has abandoned 
any pretense of promoting such a policy. To voice the Senate's support 
for what amounts to a set of empty promises and incendiary rhetoric is 
a foolish exercise of which I want no part.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.

                          ____________________