[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16569-16570]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    MIDDLE EAST--A REGION IN CRISIS

  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, the Middle East today is a region in 
crisis. After 3 weeks of escalating and continuing violence, the 
potential for wider regional conflict becomes more real each day. The 
hatred in the Middle East is being driven deeper and deeper into the 
fabric of the region, which will make any lasting and sustained peace 
effort very difficult to achieve.
  How do we realistically believe that a continuation of the systematic 
destruction of an American friend, the country and people of Lebanon, 
is going to enhance America's image and give us the trust and 
credibility to lead a lasting and sustained peace effort in the Middle 
East?
  The sickening slaughter on both sides must end, and it must end now. 
President Bush must call for an immediate cease-fire. This madness must 
stop. The Middle East today is more combustible and complex than it has 
ever been. Uncertain popular support for regime legitimacy continues to 
weaken governments in the Middle East. Economic stagnation, persistent 
unemployment, deepening despair, and wider unrest enhance the ability 
of terrorists to recruit and succeed.
  An Iran with nuclear weapons raises the specter of broader 
proliferation and a fundamental strategic realignment in the region, 
creating more regional instability. America's approach to the Middle 
East must be consistent and sustained, and it must understand the 
history, the interests, and the perspectives of our regional friends 
and allies.
  The United States will remain committed to defending Israel. Our 
relationship with Israel is a special and historic one. But it need not 
and cannot be at the expense of our Arab and Muslim relationships. That 
is an irresponsible and dangerous false choice.
  Achieving a lasting resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict is as 
much in Israel's interest as any other country in the world. Unending 
war will continually drain Israel of its human capital, resources, and 
energy as it continually fights for its survival.
  The United States and Israel must understand that it is not in their 
long-term interests to allow themselves to become isolated in the 
Middle East and the world. Neither can allow themselves to drift into 
an ``us against the world'' global optic or zero-sum game. That would 
marginalize America's global leadership, our trust and influence, 
further isolating Israel, and it would prove disastrous for both 
countries, as well as the region. It is in Israel's interest, as much 
as ours, that the United States be seen by all states in the Middle 
East as fair. This is the currency of trust.
  The world has rightly condemned the despicable actions of Hezbollah 
and Hamas terrorists who attacked Israel and kidnapped Israeli 
soldiers. Israel has the undeniable right to defend itself against 
aggression. This is the right of all nations.
  Hezbollah is a threat to Israel, to Lebanon, and to all who strive 
for lasting peace in the Middle East. However, military action alone 
will not destroy Hezbollah or Hamas. Extended military action is 
tearing Lebanon apart, killing innocent civilians, devastating its 
economy and infrastructure, and creating a humanitarian disaster, 
further weakening Lebanon's fragile democratic government, 
strengthening popular Muslim and Arab support for Hezbollah, and 
deepening hatred of Israel's position across the Middle East. The 
pursuit of tactical military victories at the expense of the core 
strategic objective of Arab-Israeli peace is a hollow victory. The war 
against Hezbollah and Hamas will not be won on the battlefield.
  To achieve a strategic shift in the conditions for Middle East peace, 
the United States must use the global condemnation of terrorist acts as 
the basis for substantive change. For a lasting and popularly supported 
resolution, only a strong Lebanese Government and a strong Lebanese 
Army, backed by the international community, can rid Lebanon of these 
corrosive militias and terrorist organizations.
  President Bush and Secretary Rice must become and remain deeply 
engaged in the Middle East. Only U.S. leadership can build a consensus 
of purpose among our regional and international partners. To lead and 
sustain U.S. engagement, the President should appoint a statesman of 
global stature, experience, and ability to serve as his personal envoy 
to the region. This individual would report directly to the President 
and be empowered with the authority to speak and act for the President. 
Former Secretaries of State Baker and Powell fit this profile.

[[Page 16570]]

  The President must publicly decry the slaughter today and work toward 
an immediate cease-fire in the Middle East. The U.N. Security Council 
must urgently adopt a new binding resolution that provides a 
comprehensive political, security, and economic framework for Lebanon, 
Israel, and the region--a framework that begins with the immediate 
cessation of violence.
  I strongly support the deployment of a robust international force 
along the Israel-Lebanon border to facilitate a steady deployment of a 
strengthened Lebanese Army into southern Lebanon to eventually assume 
responsibility for security and the rule of law.
  America must listen carefully to its friends, its partners in the 
region. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and others--countries that 
understand the Middle East far better than we do--must commit to help 
resolve today's crisis, and they must be active partners in helping 
realize the already-agreed-upon two-state solution.
  The core of all challenges in the Middle East remains the underlying 
Arab-Israeli conflict. The failure to address this root cause will 
allow Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorists to continue to sustain 
popular Muslim and Arab support--a dynamic that continues to undermine 
America's standing in the region and the Governments of Egypt, Jordan, 
Saudi Arabia, and others, whose support is critical for any Middle East 
resolution.
  The United States should engage our Middle East and international 
partners to revive the Beirut Declaration, or some version of that 
declaration, proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and adopted 
unanimously by the Arab League in March of 2002. In this historic 
initiative, the Arab world recognized Israel's right to exist and 
sought to establish a path toward a two-state solution and broader 
Arab-Israeli peace. Even though Israel could not accept it as it was 
written, it represented a very significant starting point--starting 
point--document initiated by Arab countries. Today, we need a new 
Beirut Declaration-type initiative. We squandered the last one.
  The concept and intent of the 2002 Beirut Declaration is as relevant 
today as it was in 2002. An Arab-initiated, Beirut-type declaration 
would reinvest regional Arab States with a stake in achieving progress 
toward Israeli-Palestinian peace. This type of initiative would offer a 
positive alternative--a positive alternative--vision for Arab 
populations to the ideology and goals of Islamic extremists. The United 
States must explore this approach as part of its diplomatic engagement 
in the Middle East.
  Lasting peace in the Middle East, and stability and security for 
Israel, will come only from a regionally oriented political settlement. 
Former American Middle East Envoy Dennis Ross once observed that in the 
Middle East a process is necessary because a process absorbs events. 
Without a process, events become crises. He was right. Look at where we 
are today in the Middle East with no process. Crisis diplomacy is no 
substitute for sustained, day-to-day engagement.
  America's approach to Syria and Iran is inextricably tied to Middle 
East peace. Whether or not they were directly involved in the latest 
Hezbollah and Hamas aggression in Israel, both countries exert 
influence in the region in ways that undermine stability and security. 
As we work with our friends and allies to deny Syria and Iran any 
opportunity to further corrode the situation in Lebanon and the 
Palestinian territories, both Damascus and Tehran must hear from 
America directly.
  As John McLaughlin, the former Deputy Director of the Central 
Intelligence Agency, recently wrote in the Washington Post--and I quote 
Mr. McLaughlin--

       Even superpowers have to talk to bad guys. The absence of a 
     diplomatic relationship with Iran and the deterioration of 
     the one with Syria--two countries that bear enormous 
     responsibility for the current crisis [in the Middle East]--
     leave the United States with fewer options and levers than 
     might otherwise have been the case.
       Distasteful as it might have been to have or to maintain 
     open and normal relations with such states, the absence of 
     such relations ensures that we will have more blind spots 
     than we can afford and that we will have to deal through 
     surrogates on issues of vital importance to the United 
     States.''
       Ultimately, the United States will need to engage Iran and 
     Syria with an agenda open to all areas of agreement and 
     disagreement. For this dialog to have any meaning or possible 
     lasting relevance, it should encompass the full agenda of 
     issues.
       There is very little good news coming out of Iraq today. 
     Increasingly vicious sectarian violence continues to propel 
     Iraq toward civil war.
       The U.S. announcement last week to send additional U.S. 
     troops and military police back into Baghdad reverses last 
     month's decision to have Iraqi forces take the lead in 
     Baghdad and represents a dramatic setback for the U.S. and 
     the Iraqi Government.
       The Iraqi Government has limited ability to enforce the 
     rule of law in Iraq, especially in Baghdad. Green zone 
     politics appear to have little bearing or relation to the 
     realities of the rest of Iraq. The Iraqis will continue to 
     face difficult choices over the future of their country.
       The day-to-day responsibilities of governing and security 
     will soon have to be assumed by Iraqis. This is not about 
     setting a timeline. This is about understanding the 
     implications of the forces of reality. This reality is being 
     determined by Iraqis, not Americans.
       America is bogged down in Iraq and this is limiting our 
     diplomatic and military options. The longer America remains 
     in Iraq in its current capacity, the deeper the damage to our 
     force structure--particularly the U.S. Army.
       And it will continue to place more limitations on an 
     already dangerously overextended force structure that will 
     further limit our options and public support.
       The Middle East crisis represents a moment of great danger, 
     but it is also an opportunity.
       Crisis focuses the minds of leaders and the attention of 
     nations. The Middle East need not be a region forever captive 
     to the fire of war and historical hatred. It can avoid this 
     fate if the United States pursues sustained and engaged 
     leadership worthy of our history, purpose, and power. America 
     cannot fix every problem in the world; nor should it try. But 
     we must get the big issues and important relationships right 
     and concentrate on those.
       We know that without engaged and active American 
     leadership, the world is more dangerous. The United States 
     must focus all of its leadership and resources on ending this 
     madness in the Middle East now.

  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. JOHNSON. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The minority has no remaining time in morning business.
  Mr. JOHNSON. I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes as 
in morning business.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________