[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 1855-1863]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the 
Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 79) expressing the sense of 
Congress that no United States assistance should be provided directly 
to the Palestinian Authority if any representative political party 
holding a majority of parliamentary seats within the Palestinian 
Authority maintains a position calling for the destruction of Israel.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            S. Con. Res. 79

       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that no United 
     States assistance should be provided directly to the 
     Palestinian Authority if any representative political party 
     holding a majority of parliamentary seats within the 
     Palestinian Authority maintains a position calling for the 
     destruction of Israel.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.


                             General Leave

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and 
I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 79.
  This resolution was sponsored in the other body by our former 
colleague Senator Thune of South Dakota and was cosponsored by Senators 
Brownback, Chambliss, Johnson, Lieberman, Talent and Voinovich. It 
passed the Senate by unanimous consent on February 1, 2006.
  On January 25, 2006, Palestinians turned out in large numbers from 
all walks of life to forge a new government that can respond to their 
various needs. The Palestinian people voted for change and improvement 
in their livelihoods. They were largely frustrated by the growing 
occupation in the West Bank, the inability of the Fatah-backed 
Palestinian Liberation Organization to deliver on the expectations of 
the peace process, and internal strife and rampant corruption. The 
Palestinian citizens used the power of democracy to send a loud and a 
clear message to their leadership.
  Speaking in a press conference shortly after the elections, President 
Bush noted the power of democracy, saying, ``When you give people the 
vote, you give people the chance to express themselves at the polls, 
and if you're unhappy with the status quo, they will let you know. 
Obviously, the people were not happy with the status quo. The people 
are demanding honest government. The people want services.''
  The Bush administration's pursuit of freedom and democracy in the 
Arab world has strengthened the weight and role of ``people power'' in 
the region's political development. Representative democracy may result 
in the coming to power of groups in the Middle East or, for that 
matter, in Spain, that are critical of the United States or our 
policies in the Middle East. Certainly the recent Palestinian 
parliamentary elections pose a unique challenge. Over 50 percent of the 
seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council will be filled from a list 
chosen by an armed group that believes in the destruction of Israel, a 
United Nations member state, and is recognized as a terrorist 
organization by the international community.
  This result demonstrates the serious contradiction we see in 
Palestinian territories between the ideal of a democratic government 
characterized by the rule of law and the reality of a political process 
in which armed rejectionist groups participate. Should the United 
States at this point abandon all means to remain constructively engaged 
with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian Authority under 
President Mahmoud Abbas? Tying the hands of the administration is not 
in the interest of United States national security. We need to react 
with some care. Hurting the Palestinian people will reward terrorist 
regimes like Syria and Iran which seek to exploit the suffering of the 
Palestinians for their own selfish reasons.
  S. Con. Res. 79 is direct and to the point. It sends a strong message 
about the expectations of the United States and the international 
community toward Hamas when it comes to Hamas' attitude toward Israel. 
We declare that the United States will not provide direct assistance to 
a government that believes in the destruction of Israel.
  The election of the Change and Reform Party, Hamas' alter ego, has 
raised questions about other forms of assistance to a future 
Palestinian government. The Quartet, in which the United States is a 
core member, concluded that ``it was inevitable that future assistance 
to any new government would be reviewed by donors against that 
government's commitment to the principles of nonviolence, recognition 
of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, 
including the Roadmap.''
  Many might be surprised to know that the United States does not 
provide ongoing, direct financial assistance to the Palestinian 
Authority. The majority of funds are channeled through the United 
States Agency for International Development to nongovernmental 
organizations under a strict vetting process. The United States has 
provided direct assistance only four times, three of which have been 
under this administration, with the funds being closely regulated and 
monitored.
  United States and other assistance to the Palestinian people is vital 
to meeting basic needs and avoiding a humanitarian disaster. According 
to the World Bank, unemployment in the West Bank and Gaza is 23 
percent. Forty-three percent of the population is living below the 
poverty line. United States assistance to nonprofit organizations is 
also critical to achieving our objective of a two-state solution. 
Closing the door on moderates in Palestinian civil society will 
contribute to the growth of warlordism and chaos.

                              {time}  1030

  The United States has a vital national security interest in a Middle 
East in which two states, Israel and Palestine, will live side by side 
in peace and security, based on the terms of United Nations Security 
Council Resolutions 242 and 338. A viable, contiguous, and prosperous 
Palestinian state is necessary to achieve the security that Israel 
longs for.
  I believe the administration is responding appropriately to the 
situation at hand. Currently, the U.S. is reviewing all forms of 
assistance to the Palestinian people. However, neither the 
administration nor the Congress should make final decisions in advance 
of the formation of the new Palestinian cabinet, which is likely to 
occur in the coming weeks. If it is necessary to address this issue by 
legislation, we can do so at the appropriate time and will not 
prejudice their consideration by agreeing to this resolution at this 
time.
  As disappointed as we are by the results, I congratulate the 
Palestinian people for conducting what were arguably the freest and 
fairest democratic elections in the Arab world. I hope their leaders 
will be wise and represent the true interests of the Palestinians

[[Page 1856]]

as the process moves forward. As Secretary Rice stated in Davos this 
month, ``The Palestinian people have apparently voted for change, but 
we believe that their aspirations for peace and a peaceful life remain 
unchanged.''
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution.
  First, let me thank Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member Lantos for 
bringing this matter to the floor.
  Yesterday, I read a news article quoting a Hamas representative who 
thanked the United States for providing Hamas with ``the weapon of 
democracy.'' The weapon of democracy. Like other Hamas spokesmen, this 
man was being completely frank. In my experience, people who think they 
are on a mission from God generally do not dissemble about their 
intentions. The decision by the Bush administration to press for 
elections that did not exclude Hamas, as the Oslo agreements required, 
is seen by Hamas, quite literally, as a gift from heaven. Indeed, it is 
a fact of surpassing strangeness that the same President who would not 
deal with Yasser Arafat because he was tainted by terrorism is in large 
measure responsible for insisting on the elections that brought Hamas 
to power.
  Allowing Hamas to compete was substantially our grave mistake. 
Electing Hamas, however, was the Palestinian people's own free choice. 
No one questions the mechanics of the election itself, only the nature 
of the elected. Let us recall that Hitler's National Socialists, the 
Nazi party, also came to power in free elections. References of this 
type are usually inappropriate. The Holocaust was a unique, horrible 
event, and nothing should ever be done to diminish it or turn it into 
another rhetorical cheap shot. But in this case the comparison of how 
coming to power was the same is very apt.
  What is Hamas? Hamas is declared to be, by our government and the 
European Union, a terrorist organization. It is an ally and an aid 
recipient of Iran. It is an organization of religious zealots who put 
bombs in stores and clubs and restaurants, hotels and discos and buses 
and proclaim their work to be the will of God. It is an organization 
that insistently proclaims its intention to exterminate the State of 
Israel and to replace it with an Islamic state under Sharia law. It is 
an organization that proudly declares its beliefs that Jews are the 
descendants of ``pigs and monkeys.'' Hamas is responsible not only for 
the cold-blooded murder of hundreds of Israeli citizens but also dozens 
of Americans.
  And while they may be crazy, they are not stupid. They are watching 
us very closely, and they are looking for any sign of weakness, any 
departure from principle, any signal of grudging acceptance. It is 
absolutely vital that they see nothing of the sort. When Hamas looks at 
America, at the administration, at the Congress, they must see nothing 
but fierce, unrelenting, and implacable rejection.
  There can be no political absolution for this pack of killers; and 
the very idea of giving our taxpayers' money to these bloody-handed 
fanatics, people who have slaughtered our own citizens, is offensive. 
Suggesting that we do it indirectly, that we merely subsidize rather 
than fund their rule, is no less unacceptable.
  People in the executive branch trying to figure out how to square 
this circle should pay close attention to this debate. I would say to 
them: Before you urge the President to ask the Congress to provide 
assistance to the Palestinians, you had better start counting votes. 
This Congress is more likely to restore British sovereignty over the 
United States than it is to appropriate even $1 for the West Bank or 
Gaza.
  Hamas is a terrorist organization, and the United States has clear 
policy for dealing with terrorists: We do not do it. We do not 
legitimize them, and we do not acknowledge phony distinctions between 
their political and their terrorist ``wings.'' We do not forgive them 
for the hundreds they have murdered in exchange for a handful of 
promises. And we certainly do not pay them. Not in cash, not in 
coupons, not in vouchers, not in green stamps, not in airline miles. 
Americans do not give money to terrorists, to terrorist governments, 
and to people who elect terrorists. We have better things to do with 
our money.
  When President Abbas was first elected, I was among those who were 
strongly encouraging the administration to boost his prestige and help 
build him up with assistance and projects. But he never demanded that 
Hamas and other terrorist groups disarm and disband. Now we see that 
after a year of trying things the way Abu Mazen wanted and not feeling 
they got any real benefits, Palestinians have voted to go in a 
different direction. That is their right. But it is absolutely critical 
that our policies adjust to reflect their decisions.
  Just as I believed that the Palestinian choice of Abu Mazen's vision 
of nonviolence and peace deserved our support and assistance, I think 
the election of Hamas, with its dogmatic adherence to terror and its 
insistence on Israel's extermination, deserves our strongest 
condemnation and is an unmistakable change in how we do business.
  Elected terrorists are still terrorists. We should not give them 
legitimacy. We should not deal with them diplomatically. And, most 
obviously, we should not give them hundreds of millions of dollars from 
our taxpayers. U.S. foreign assistance is a gift, not a right. The 
Palestinian Authority, as long as it is led by Hamas, is a terrorist 
organization responsible for the deaths of dozens of Americans and 
obviously disqualified from this kind of aid.
  Not doing business as usual means, by definition, that things have to 
change across the board. Only a comprehensive rejection of Hamas's 
leadership can satisfy the requirements of continued U.S. leadership in 
the war on terror. The message and the methods of Hamas must not only 
fail but they must be seen to fail throughout the world and especially 
in the Middle East.
  Compromising with Hamas and doing a little bit of business here, a 
little bit of business there, accepting phony commitments and using 
back-door intermediaries will prove to Islamic radicalists that there 
is no price they pay for terrorism as long as you succeed in taking the 
reins of power. We cannot afford to send that message to the 
Palestinians or to anybody else.
  I strongly encourage the adoption of this resolution and prompt 
consideration by the House of additional legislation to respond to the 
challenge to America and our interests that are posed by Hamas.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Very briefly in response, I would like to say that I am taken by the 
arguments of Mr. Ackerman. I think he has a message, a point of view, 
that is legitimate and worthy of attention.
  I do not agree with him. I think that having Hamas, with all its 
flaws, participate in the democratic process, something alien to their 
spirit, is a sign of strength on our part, not weakness. And I think 
the effort, a legitimate effort, to help bring into the democratic 
process all of the dissident elements is worth it because, unless this 
situation gets solved, staring at each other with muscles flexed and 
weapons cocked gets us nowhere. But we shall see.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me 
this time.
  I rise in support of the resolution before us, S. Con. Res. 79, 
because this resolution is a reinforcement and a restatement of 
longstanding U.S. policy to prohibit direct assistance to the 
Palestinian Authority except under such strict and specific 
circumstances in furtherance of U.S. foreign policy and our security 
objectives.
  It has long been U.S. policy to bring both sides of the Israeli-
Palestinian

[[Page 1857]]

conflict to the negotiation tables and to work out a peaceful 
compromise. For years, we supported Abu Mazen economically and 
politically, hoping and praying and wishing that it would strengthen 
the moderate constituency that does exist in the Palestinian 
territories. Yet time and again we have repeatedly asked the 
Palestinian leadership to dismantle the Islamist terrorist 
infrastructure in its midst, to disarm these jihadists, to promote 
tolerance and to accept Israel. But this was not to be.
  The U.S. has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on programs to 
address the needs of the Palestinian people. Those include work 
programs, infrastructure projects, in addition to humanitarian aid, 
aimed at providing food, sanitation services, and medicine to the 
Palestinian people. We have done all of this, Mr. Speaker, in an effort 
to foster the conditions that would bring about peace and security for 
both the Israeli and the Palestinian people.
  Last summer, Israel underwent a sacrifice of historic proportions by 
withdrawing from Gaza. Why did Israel do this? Israel withdrew from 
Gaza in hopes of making progress toward a peaceful solution to this 
conflict. Yet, despite all of these efforts, Hamas, an Islamist 
extremist jihadist entity, was allowed to participate in the recent 
Palestinian elections and, as all of us know, won control of the 
Palestinian government. U.S. monetary and political investment has 
produced little, if anything, in return.
  In fact, soon after these Palestinian elections in January, Hamas 
placed disturbing videos on its Web site, videos which glorified 
bloodshed and terror. One of the clips included a farewell scene 
between a mother and her Palestinian terrorist son as she helps him 
dress for his suicide mission against Israel. Another clip is of two 
Hamas terrorists expressing their message to the Jews. And the first 
terrorist says: ``My message to the loathed Jews is that there is no 
God but Allah. We will chase you everywhere. We are a nation that 
drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood 
of the Jews. We will not leave you alone until we have quenched our 
thirst with your blood and our children's thirst with your blood. We 
will not leave until you leave the Muslim countries.''
  The second Hamas terrorist made the following statement: ``In the 
name of Allah, we will destroy you, blow you up, take revenge against 
you, and purify the land of you, pigs that have defiled our country. 
This operation is revenge against the sons of monkeys and pigs.''
  These horrific clips, again, were posted on an official Web site of 
the entity that now controls the Palestinian Authority.

                              {time}  1045

  Hamas' victory in the parliamentary elections poses a direct threat 
to U.S. strategies for regional stability. We must not and cannot allow 
taxpayer funds to directly or indirectly assist or support in any way 
Hamas or any other Palestinian terrorist groups that glorify blood, 
bloodshed and terror and use violence as a political tool. We must take 
immediate steps to prevent any further manipulation of U.S. assistance 
to the Palestinians.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, just in brief response to my good friend, the chairman, 
Mr. Hyde, who always stands up and fights so well and eloquently for 
democracy, my concern about allowing Hamas to participate in the 
election is not just my opinion. This was part of the Oslo Accords, to 
which the Israelis and Palestinians both agreed and signed. It is a 
governing document that no group that participates in violence and 
commits themselves to the destruction of the other will be allowed to 
participate in the election. That is the law. That is the doctrine.
  I just express my dismay that our President, with his great 
leadership against terror, would take a pass and lean on the Israelis 
to allow this election to take place with Hamas.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution is an unequivocal statement of 
principle, a statement of our continuing support for our ally, the 
democratic State of Israel, as well as an explicit rejection of the 
hateful ideology that seeks her destruction. And I hope every Member 
will support it.
  The resolution states quite simply that the United States should not 
provide direct assistance to the Palestinian Authority ``if any 
representative political party holding a majority of parliamentary 
seats within the Palestinian Authority maintains a position calling for 
the destruction of Israel,'' or, in fact, the destruction of another 
free country.
  The resolution, of course, is necessitated by the electoral victory 
of Hamas, an internationally recognized terrorist organization that is 
publicly committed to the destruction of Israel. Anyone who questions 
this need only read the Charter of Allah, the platform of the Islamic 
Resistance Movement, otherwise known as Hamas.
  Consider just one passage. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen has referred to some 
other statements incorporated in other documents, but this is their 
basic charter: ``In order to face the usurpation of Palestine by the 
Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner of jihad.'' Destruction 
of a people. Destruction of children, families, of a nation.
  Mr. Speaker, the Palestinian people voted in January in what appears 
to be a free and fair election, and the democratic expression of the 
people will and should always be encouraged. It is clear, however, that 
this victory by Hamas is, in significant part, a reaction by 
Palestinian voters to the rampant corruption in the Fatah movement that 
began and continued under Yaser Arafat. However, the Palestinian side 
must recognize that the election of Hamas to a parliamentary majority 
will not change or alter the absolute, irrevocable precondition for 
peace, the dismantlement of the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure. 
In fact, I believe that the international community must now exert its 
collective will upon Hamas and insist that it renounce the tactics of 
terror and proactively dismantle that terrorist infrastructure.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say to our friends in Israel that the 
United States-Israel relationship today is stronger than ever and we 
are fully committed to our ally's security, sovereignty, and success.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), a member of the committee.
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, it seems that every time the Palestinian 
people take one step forward, they take two steps back. When Abu Mazen 
was elected, he pledged to root out terrorism and end corruption within 
the Palestinian Authority. Unfortunately, he has done nothing to help 
his people. He has continued the corruption that is rampant in the 
Palestinian Authority, and he has refused to disarm and dismantle the 
terrorists and their terrorist organizations.
  We all know that Yaser Arafat did a tremendous disservice to the 
Palestinian people. He was a disgrace to humanity. Abu Mazen and the 
Fatah Party have done, sadly, no better. They had a historic 
opportunity to make peace. Instead, they chose a path of continued 
corruption, terror, and violence.
  This resolution sends a strong and unambiguous message: if you choose 
terrorism, the United States will not support you. Road map to peace is 
also unambiguous. The Palestinian Authority must denounce terrorism, 
disarm and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and shut down the 
terrorist organizations before, before, there can be a two-state 
solution.
  Hamas has never accepted Israel's right to exist, and it has never 
accepted the peace process. It continues to support terrorism and 
violence. In fact, Hamas not only supports it, it is it. Since 1989, 
Hamas has killed more than 500 people, including more than two dozen 
American citizens.
  Just last week, and this is after the election, so if anybody thinks 
being

[[Page 1858]]

elected to the Palestinian Authority is going to moderate Hamas, just 
last week the leader of Hamas reiterated their commitment to destroy 
the Zionist state. Hamas also promised that the armed struggle will not 
end.
  Hamas' control of the new Palestinian government further undercuts 
the ability of its government to engage in true reforms and further 
strengthens the enemies of Israel and those who oppose peace.
  Hamas must disavow its stated goal of destroying Israel and change 
its charter to recognize Israel's right to exist as a free and 
independent Jewish state. Until the Palestinian government recognizes 
Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, renounces its demand for 
right of return, which will create two Palestinian states, not a Jewish 
state and a Palestinian state, ceases all forms of incitement and 
violence, condemns terrorism, dismantles its terrorist infrastructure, 
and, most important, removes terrorist organizations from the 
government, Congress must end all U.S. aid.
  If negotiating with terrorists is not an option for this country, and 
it is not, then funneling Americans' hard-earned tax dollars to 
terrorists certainly is not an option either.
  I argued unsuccessfully while I was standing in this very spot that 
the United States Congress should not give additional aid to the 
Palestinian Authority until they demonstrated with deeds, not rhetoric, 
with deeds that they were serious about making peace with Israel and 
took concrete steps to show us that they were indeed serious. 
Unfortunately, my colleagues did not agree with me, and we continued to 
fund Abu Mazen and the Palestinian Authority, although they did nothing 
to earn our trust and they certainly did nothing to earn taxpayers' 
hard-earned dollars.
  I urge in this resolution that my colleagues stand with me in 
supporting the resolution that will end all U.S. aid to the Palestinian 
Authority until Hamas recognizes Israel's right to exist and, indeed, 
does it with deeds, not words.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. Con. Res. 
79.
  The United States exercising the option of cutting off assistance to 
the Palestinian Authority because of the participation of Hamas in the 
Palestinian Government should not be a surprise to the Palestinian 
people.
  This House spoke out strongly with the passage of H. Res. 575, which 
clearly stated before the elections that we did not approve of 
terrorist organizations participating in the Palestinian elections.
  Today's resolution should bring home that the United States will not 
provide aid to a government run by terrorists.
  The Hamas victory is unacceptable because it provides a group of 
murderers with a seat at the table. I can not understand how the most 
secular Palestinian people would support an organization whose goal is 
to take their rights away.
  The United States must stand by our friend and ally Israel in this 
relationship as should the rest of the world. The United States should 
refuse to lend legitimacy to an organization whose primary goals 
include the elimination of the State of Israel and the use of violent 
measures to attack the Israeli people.
  The United States cannot support any government that continues to 
approve of and utilize terrorism. Terrorism takes many forms, dressing 
up a political party in the trappings of an election does not negate 
the underlying mission of what Hamas seeks to achieve, the abolition of 
the Jewish State.
  We must make it clear to the Palestinian people that the United 
States does not approve of terrorist actions and will not provide 
financial assistance to any group or organization that condones, plans, 
or enacts violent activities.
  The United States has designated Hamas as a terrorist organization, 
and as such should not provide any funding to them.
  The victory of Hamas indicates the Palestinians are not interested in 
achieving peace with Israel and does not move the Palestinian people 
towards their goal of statehood.
  The United States should not supply any government aid to the 
Palestinian authority until Hamas renounces all terrorist activities, 
recognizes the right of the State of Israel's right to exist, and fully 
disarms its terrorist organization.
  The United States has worked for years to find a peaceful solution to 
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  But a solution will not come about with the current leadership of 
Hamas involved in any form of Palestinian Government.
  In order to help facilitate the development of a true and lasting 
peace between the Israeli people and the Palestinian Authority, the 
United States, European Union and other countries must speak with a 
united voice that the activities of Hamas in any sort of elected 
Palestinian Government is anathema.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution.
  A few weeks ago, the Palestinian people stunned the world by giving 
majority control of the Palestinian Legislative Council to Hamas, an 
entity determined to be a foreign terrorist organizations by both the 
United States and the Europe Union. Some may point out that the Fatah 
party's fragmentation combined with the nature of the electoral system 
chosen by the Palestinian Authority led to this strong Hamas majority.
  We will be discussing these and other explanations for Hamas's 
victory over the coming weeks and months. But they do not change the 
reality that 74 out of 132 seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council 
were won by an organization that not only preaches the destruction of 
Israel, but has sent suicide bomber after suicide bomber to kill 
innocent civilians, including young children, and that has been 
implicated in the deaths of Americans. Mr. Speaker, the resolution we 
are considering today is simple and to the point: There should be no 
money for the Palestinian Authority as long as its legislature is 
controlled by a party that is both a terrorist organization and 
advocates the destruction of Israel.
  This is not some plot to effect regime change--this is merely to send 
a message that the civilized world does not tolerate and will not 
support terrorists. This resolution means no American funding for the 
Palestinian Authority as long as Hamas controls the legislature, since 
there is absolutely no credible sign that Hamas intends to change its 
ugly charter or do anything else to demonstrate that it now accepts 
Israel's right to exist. Mr. Speaker, our action on this resolution 
today will not be the final word of the Congress on this issue. We will 
return to it again and again.
  Last week, our colleague from Florida, Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, 
and I--with over 50 of our colleagues--introduced H.R. 4681, the 
Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006, and I am confident that it will 
soon be brought to the floor. H.R. 4681 puts legislative teeth into the 
resolution we are considering today. It would, among other things, 
prohibit by law the funding of a Palestinian Authority controlled by a 
terrorist organization.
  Mr. Speaker, the basic thrust of American foreign policy is to fight 
terrorism globally, and it is self-evident that the United States will 
not fund an organization such as Hamas that continues to advocate and 
carry out terrorist acts in the Middle East. Nor will we fund a 
government which is controlled by a terrorist organization or in which 
major institutions, such as the legislature, are controlled by a 
terrorist organization. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. 
In December, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly adopted House 
Resolution 575 by a vote of 397-17 which warned that there would be 
serious consequences--including financial consequences--for U.S.-
Palestinian relations if Hamas were to take over the Palestinian 
Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, not one thin dime of American taxpayer money should be 
devoted to supporting a terrorist organization. Nor should one thin 
dime be devoted to making a terrorist organization look good. Our 
desire to support strictly humanitarian assistance for the Palestinian 
people, of course, will continue unabated. But we should not fund major 
projects, whatever their purpose. Such projects would only make a Hamas 
government look like a success story. They would be taken as evidence 
that Hamas can defy the international community and continue to receive 
financial support, while supporting terrorism, rejecting Israel's right 
to exist, and spitting on pre-existing Israeli-Palestinian agreements.
  Mr. Speaker, that is why the Ros-Lehtinen-Lantos legislation will put 
severe restrictions on all Palestinian assistance that is not strictly 
for humanitarian purposes. The notion that an organization hell-bent on 
destroying the sole democratic state in the Middle East should be 
receiving or exploiting U.S.-taxpayer funds is simply unacceptable. We 
will be relentless in isolating and fighting terrorists. Hamas 
officials and their representatives will not be given visas to visit 
the United States. American officials will not deal with Hamas 
representatives unless--and this is a major unless--unless they 
publicly and without reservation recognize the right of the democratic 
State of Israel to exist, renounce terrorism as a means of

[[Page 1859]]

achieving their goals and objectives, and accept all previous Israeli-
Palestinian agreements. And we will fight direct assistance to a 
terrorist-controlled Palestinian Authority through any international 
institution. Hamas must understand that their ability to deal with the 
United States and to be accepted in the community of civilized nations 
rests on a thorough repudiation of their hateful policies.
  Governments have made such changes in the past. Organizations and 
movements have made such changes in the past. And certainly, Hamas has 
that opportunity. But if Hamas does not clearly take full advantage of 
this opportunity, our legislation will soon come into effect and we 
will prohibit American funds. If Hamas does take advantage of this 
opportunity and definitively and unequivocally meets these 
requirements, then our government would be willing to deal with it, 
continue assistance, and work to see that the long-suffering 
Palestinian people have a better life in the future. Otherwise, I fear 
the Palestinians and prospects for Middle East peace will face a long, 
difficult winter that could be measured in years not months.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this resolution, and I urge all my colleagues 
to do likewise.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 79, which 
expresses the sense of Congress that no U.S. assistance should be 
provided directly to the Palestinian Authority if any representative 
political party holding a majority of parliamentary seats within the 
Palestinian Authority maintains a position calling for the destruction 
of Israel.
  On January 25, Hamas won a majority of the seats in the Palestinian 
Authority parliamentary elections. Their charter calls for the 
``obliteration'' of Israel and states that they can achieve their 
objectives only through violence. They have rejected the ``two-state'' 
solution and Road Map peace process. They continue to call for a 
Palestinian State which includes and ultimately subsumes the sovereign 
territory of Israel.
  Mr. Speaker, this House has already gone on record on the issue of 
assistance to the Palestinian Government should Hamas become part of 
the government. On December 14, 2005, the House passed H. Res. 575, 
which I cosponsored, which in part calls upon the United States to 
reassess its financial assistance to, and its diplomatic relations 
with, the Palestinians should Hamas join the government.
  I am pleased that the Quartet issued a statement on January 30, 2006, 
which ``concluded that it was inevitable that future assistance to any 
new government would be reviewed by donors against that government's 
commitment to the principles of nonviolence, recognition of Israel, and 
acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the 
Roadmap.''
  I also agree with the Quartet that the Palestinian Authority must 
move quickly to ensure law and order, prevent terrorist attacks, and 
dismantle the infrastructure of terror. Finally, the new government 
must also take concrete steps to establish the rule of law, tolerance, 
reform and sound fiscal management in the Palestinian territories.
  The foundation of the Road Map peace process hinges on Palestinian 
recognition of the right of Israel to exist and a pledge by the 
Palestinians to end violence and terrorism. Just as the United States 
will not negotiate with terrorists, neither will Israel. We cannot 
allow American taxpayer dollars to fall into the hands of terrorists 
who have no intention of renouncing violence.
  I therefore urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, a top Hamas leader was recently quoted as 
saying the U.S. would ``get used to Hamas in a year or two.''
  I'm afraid he's sadly mistaken. America will never accept a 
Palestinian Authority controlled by a terrorist organization--1 year, 5 
years, 10 years or 50 years from now.
  Hamas must face reality. Either they meet the conditions of the 
international community--recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish 
state, renounce terrorism and disarm--or face a massive reduction of 
assistance and isolation.
  The civilized world should not bend to Hamas; they must bend to us.
  This resolution--to be followed soon by binding legislation--sends an 
unambiguous signal to Hamas and the rest of the world that Congress 
will not bankroll a terrorist government responsible for the deaths of 
thousands of innocent civilians and committed to the destruction of 
Israel.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this simple 
resolution and of its central underlying premise--that this Nation will 
not support a Palestinian Government that is not unambiguous in its 
recognition of Israel's right to exist and unequivocal in its support 
for a two-state solution to the decades-long conflict between Israel 
and the Palestinians. I also commend the distinguished chairman and the 
ranking member of our committee who have dedicated themselves to 
working for true peace in the Middle East.
  The Hamas victory in last month's Palestinian Legislative Council 
election is a major setback to the prospects for peace. Last year's 
withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank by Israel was a 
positive step after several years of bitter fighting between the two 
communities.
  While much of the world was taken by surprise by the Hamas victory, 
we really should not have been shocked. Last summer, even as Israeli 
soldiers physically removed settlers from their homes, the Israeli 
Government, the United States Government, the European Union and others 
were emphatic in telling the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian 
people that they now bore the burden of centralizing authority in Gaza 
and maintaining security there. This country and our allies sought to 
strengthen the P.A. with aid and diplomatic support. Unfortunately, the 
Palestinian Authority was unable to seize the opportunity to show the 
Palestinian people the true benefits of peace.
  Polling before the election and exit polling done on election day 
shows clearly that Palestinian voters chose Hamas because they were fed 
up with the corruption of Fatah and its inability to deliver a wide 
range of basic social and economic benefits. Hamas may be best known to 
Americans as a violent terrorist organization, but within the P.A. it 
has also run schools, medical clinics and day care centers.
  The same polling that showed Palestinian disgust with Fatah also 
showed that a large majority of Palestinians favor a two-state solution 
and peace with Israel. The problem now is how do we, the United States, 
Israel and the rest of the international community, convince Hamas that 
the only way forward is to abandon its dream of driving Israel into the 
sea and replacing it with an Islamist Palestine.
  Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I do not know if this is possible, but I have 
become convinced after multiple refusals by Hamas spokesmen to 
repudiate its call for Israel's destruction, that the only way forward 
is to ratchet up the pressure. This resolution is, I believe, a good 
first step. It does not mandate specific action by the administration, 
but reiterates the message that this country will not support a Hamas 
government that will not recognize Israel.
  Those who cling to the dream of Israel's destruction must realize 
that this resolution is a warning and that continued intransigence will 
be met with sterner countermeasures.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 79 and am 
pleased that the House leadership has decided to pursue this thoughtful 
and constructive response to the success of Hamas in the recent 
Palestinian Legislative Council elections.
  With passage of this resolution, the Congress will be on record in 
opposition of any direct U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority if the 
majority party in parliament maintains a position calling for the 
destruction of Israel.
  This reflects longstanding U.S. policy. And it is clearly the right 
policy. Hamas is a ruthless terrorist organization with the blood of 
innocents on its hands. When Hamas assumes control of the Palestinian 
parliament, it must recognize Israel's right to exist and renounce 
terror. If not, the Palestinian Authority should receive no direct U.S. 
aid. It's as simple as that.
  But I would like to use this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to point out 
that the outcome of the Palestinian election does not lend itself to 
simple analysis. And the U.S. response to this development must not be 
knee-jerk and simplistic.
  Let us first remember that the Palestinian people went to the polls 
and conducted an election that was remarkably democratic, free, fair, 
and devoid of violence. We may not like the results, but we should take 
note of what is among the most democratic elections the Arab world has 
ever seen.
  And while Hamas attracted the most votes, there is little evidence 
that Palestinian voters were in fact endorsing Hamas's call for 
Israel's destruction. Exit polls show that three-quarters of all 
Palestinian voters support reconciliation between Israel and the 
Palestinians based on a two-state solution. Armed with the ballot, 
Palestinians gave political voice to their anger and anguish over two 
related problems--the rampant corruption and cronyism within the Fatah 
establishment, and the lack of any tangible improvement of the quality 
of life under Israeli occupation.
  So what should the United States do in response to this election? One 
thing we cannot do is simply throw up our hands and refuse to engage in 
efforts to help Israel and the Palestinians achieve peace. We cannot 
turn back the clock. Every week that goes by without

[[Page 1860]]

any progress to achieve a solution to this conflict increases the 
threat to U.S. national interests. This was true before Hamas came to 
power and it is just as true today.
  Yesterday, I received a letter from the Assistant Secretary of State 
for Legislative Affairs assuring me that the administration ``remain(s) 
committed to working toward the peaceful resolution of the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict . . .'' This is a positive statement, and Congress 
should play a positive role in partnership with the President to 
advance our interests in the region.
  For this reason, I am concerned about some legislative proposals that 
have been introduced in the House which would, in my view, sharply 
curtail our ability to engage constructively in the Israeli-Palestinian 
conflict.
  Future legislation should include a mix of sticks and carrots--not 
just sticks. Clearly, direct aid to a Hamas-led Palestinian Authority 
must be stopped right now, but we should keep the door open for future 
aid if the P.A. undertakes the changes and reforms we are demanding of 
them. Permanently restricting our assistance provides little incentive 
and dramatically limits the President's options. Similarly, we must 
distinguish between the Hamas elements of the Palestinian Government 
and members of the PLO with whom the U.S. and Israel have negotiated 
for many years. Terminating diplomatic contact with the entire 
Palestinian leadership will do nothing but undermine the very moderates 
who oppose violence and support dialogue with Israel.
  In addition, I am concerned about legislative efforts that would 
restrict the delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance to the 
Palestinian people through credible and transparent non-governmental 
organizations. I am pleased that the recent report in the New York 
Times about a coordinated American-Israeli effort to ``starve'' the 
Palestinian people has been strongly denied by both countries. The 
average Palestinian on the West Bank and Gaza leads a very difficult 
life and the further deterioration of economic conditions will not only 
be devastating for the Palestinians, but will also weaken Israel's 
security.
  Mr. Speaker, today the House is taking an important step by stating 
unequivocally that U.S. assistance will not flow to a government 
dominated by a terrorist group bent on Israel's destruction. I hope, in 
the weeks and months ahead, as the situation in Israel and Palestine 
evolves, we can come back to this floor and enact thoughtful 
legislation that helps the Palestinian people, secures the State of 
Israel, and advances our own important interests in the Middle East.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I proudly pledge my support 
for S. Con. Res 79, which expresses Congress's disapproval of any 
foreign aid distributed to the Palestinian Authority if a group holding 
the majority of seats supports the destruction of one of America's 
closest allies, Israel.
  The recent election by the Palestinian people that put Hamas in 
control of their governing body should be troubling to all. This 
organization, with a foundation of hate and a track record of evil, has 
as its platform, one goal--the annihilation of the Jewish State of 
Israel.
  It is quite troublesome that a people, desperate to prove to the 
world that they are deserving of recognition, peaceful, would with 
overwhelming support put in power a group solely motivated by the ruin 
of the peaceful and freedom-loving Nation of Israel.
  Hamas is responsible for the tragic deaths of thousands of innocent 
Israelis and Americans, including women and children. They have refused 
to take part in any peace talks, including the Oslo Accords. They have 
refused to participate in previous, formal governmental operations that 
have worked with Israel. And they actively recruit children to 
accomplish their malevolent and homicidal agenda.
  For generations, we have been working towards a plan that will 
finally bring peace to the most unstable region in the world--the 
Middle East. In recent years, peace looked as close as it ever has, 
held together by fragile promises of Arab leaders to end their over 
half-century assault on the nonviolent and democratic State of Israel. 
The control of the Palestinian Authority by Hamas could very well tip 
the scales away from a peaceful resolution.
  Congress, who holds the purse strings of the peoples' money, should 
never provide any aid to any organization set on such destructive 
results. As a Member of Congress representing a district whose 
sightline used to include the Twin Towers, I know all too well the 
devastating effects of vengefulness and abhorrence.
  I am proud of Congress's actions today and commend those who have 
worked to bring this resolution to the floor. I was similarly proud to 
stand with my colleagues in December when with strong bipartisan 
support, we passed H. Res. 575, warning against the very inclusion of 
Hamas and other terrorist groups in the Palestinian elections. I am 
also a proud original cosponsor of H.R. 4668, a House bill denying aid 
to a Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority.
  As our only ally in a region filled with unrest and American hatred, 
I vow to continue to stand firm with the State of Israel. The rise to 
power by the terrorist establishment Hamas only spells trouble for 
Israel and the United States, as well as for all our collaborative 
efforts to reverse the trend of a region that has been a breeding 
ground for terrorists sought on eliminating freedom and liberty from 
this world.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support S. Con. Res. 79, a 
resolution expressing the sense of Congress that no United States 
assistance should be provided directly to the Palestinian Authority so 
long as the Hamas-led government maintains a position calling for the 
destruction of Israel.
  In fact, I will go further and say that the United States should 
freeze all aid to the Palestinian Government until Hamas denounces 
violence, renounces terrorism, and recognizes the State of Israel's 
right to exist within secure borders. Hamas's mission is the 
destruction of the State of Israel, and its methods include wholesale 
violence against civilians. To fund that regime is to legitimize 
terrorism against innocent people.
  Hamas has been responsible for more than 425 terrorist attacks since 
the start of the second Intifada in the fall of 2000. These attacks 
have resulted in the deaths of 377 people, including approximately 27 
Americans since 1993.
  With Hamas in the majority--an organization designated as a terrorist 
group by the United States and the European Union--the Palestinian 
Authority is now led by a regime whose actions and covenant directly 
reject a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian 
conflict. Hamas must publicly acknowledge Israel's right to exist as a 
free, Jewish state, denounce terrorism and dismantle its terrorist 
infrastructure, halt anti-Israel incitement, and commit itself to the 
peace process. The logical consequence of Hamas's failure to follow 
these civilized principles must be a freeze on foreign aid from the 
international community.
  Today, the Palestinian Authority receives approximately $1.1 billion 
a year in foreign aid. According to a report prepared by the 
Congressional Research Service, the Palestinian Authority receives 
about $320 million a year in direct foreign aid, and about double that 
amount in indirect aid.
  I am concerned that the international community may not be united in 
its opposition to Hamas. There is already disagreement within the 
Quartet, with President Putin declaring that Russia will not stop 
foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority. I have already written 
President Putin to urge him not to fund Hamas, and I hope he will 
reconsider his decision. But the problem goes beyond Russia.
  Arab nations, many of them purported friends of the United States, 
have openly declared that they will step in and fund the Hamas-led 
government. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have already pledged $33 million. 
Several countries in Latin America, including Argentina, Brazil, 
Venezuela, and Bolivia, have invited Hamas officials to visit with 
their governments. The international community must neither fund, nor 
legitimize Hamas.
  Therefore, I am circulating a letter to President Bush urging him to 
build an international consensus to withhold foreign aid as a way to 
isolate the Hamas-led government until Hamas denounces violence, 
renounces terrorism, and recognizes the State of Israel's right to 
exist within secure borders. Many Members of Congress have joined me in 
this effort, and I hope with this action by Congress today, more 
Members will join our efforts.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, the Palestinian elections last month provided 
the Palestinian Authority an incredible opportunity to take the 
necessary step in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. However, Hamas 
continues to incite violence and advocate for the destruction of 
Israel.
  The resolution before us today states that the United States will not 
support sending tax dollars in the form of aid to a terrorist 
government. This resolution sends the message that America does not do 
business with a government that calls for the total destruction of one 
of our allies.
  Hamas, for its part, continues to support the killing of Israeli 
civilians and denies the legitimacy of the state of Israel. Hamas has a 
choice, they can renounce violence, govern and work towards peace, or 
they can choose violence and the consequences that follow.
  Last fall, I sent a letter to President Abbas calling on him to 
institute clear criteria for participation in Palestinian elections. 
Groups or

[[Page 1861]]

individuals such as Hamas who support violence, racism, intolerance and 
hatred should have no right to participate in democratic elections.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not see President Abbas working towards peace. This 
resolution reiterates that America does not deal with terrorists. I 
urge Members to support this resolution.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote in favor of this legislation 
because I support any statement by Congress indicating hesitation to 
send U.S. taxpayer money abroad.
  Unfortunately this legislation is motivated by politics rather than a 
genuine desire to limit unconstitutional foreign aid programs. The 
wording of the resolution itself does not close the door to providing 
U.S. aid to the Palestinians even if Hamas, the political party that 
won recent parliamentary elections, takes its seats in parliament 
without altering its stated policies toward Israel. Indeed, the 
legislation states that ``no United States assistance should be 
provided directly to the Palestinian Authority'' if Hamas occupies a 
majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament. This obviously 
suggests that the money can be spent ``indirectly'' in any case.
  So this is hardly a strong statement opposing any and all aid to the 
Palestinians, which is the position that I hold.
  I find it interesting that the same proponents of the United States 
government exporting democracy overseas are now demanding that 
something be done when people overseas do not vote the way the U.S. 
Government thinks they should. It seems that being for democracy means 
respecting that people overseas may not always vote the way Washington 
wants them to vote. If our aim is to ensure that only certain parties 
or individuals are allowed to lead foreign nations, why not just admit 
that democracy is the last thing we want? That attitude is evident in 
the fact that the U.S. Government spent more than $2 million trying to 
manipulate the Palestinian vote in favor of parties supported by 
Washington. You cannot have it both ways. Although it is always a good 
idea to eliminate foreign aid, we should be careful about calling the 
manipulation of elections overseas an exercise in ``democracy 
promotion.''
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I have been occupied with the Ways and 
Means Committee all day and have not been able to participate in floor 
debate. I wish I had been able to participate in the discussion of S. 
Con. Res. 79 which was on the floor this morning because I have a 
question about the resolution.
  My question is: How does this resolution further the cause of peace 
in the Middle East or make Israel more secure?
  The resolution states that it is the sense of Congress that the U.S. 
should not directly aid the Palestinian Authority ``if any 
representative political party holding a majority of parliamentary 
seats within the Palestinian Authority maintains a position calling for 
the destruction of Israel.''
  Of course there is a party with that sentiment, Hamas, and--as we all 
know--that U.S. law prohibits aid to Hamas. As far as I know, neither 
President Bush nor Secretary Rice nor anyone else in our Government has 
proposed trying to find a loophole through which the U.S. can bankroll 
Hamas.
  So we have a resolution opposing an action which is already 
prohibited in existing law. We are bravely opposing doing something 
illegal that no one at all in the administration or Congress has 
proposed to do.
  Why? Why did we come to the floor and vote on this? Who does it help?
  I am submitting two articles for the Record along with this 
statement. The first, ``The Right Way to Pressure Hamas,'' is an 
editorial from this morning's New York Times.
  It discusses the rumors that the U.S. and Israel are trying to create 
conditions that would lead to new elections to oust Hamas, presumably 
in favor of Fatah.
  The editorial notes that ``in the long, sorry history of the Israeli-
Palestinian dispute, there is not a shred of evidence to support the 
notion that pushing the Palestinian population into more economic 
desperation would somehow cause them to moderate their political views. 
In fact, experience teaches the exact opposite.''
  The Times goes on to say that a wise course ``would be to step back 
and desist from deliberately provoking the Palestinians, and give Hamas 
a chance to reconsider its own options.''
  The second article, ``Talking with the Guys from Hamas,'' appeared 
last Saturday in the Daily Star, a well-respected, moderate Beirut 
daily. I urge every member to take time to read it.
  Its author, Rami Khouri, notes that a ``Hamas-Ied Palestinian 
government and the new Israeli government to be elected next month face 
a historic opportunity.''
  He predicts that Hamas ``will surely continue its 3-year slow shift 
toward more pragmatism and realism because it is now politically 
accountable to the entire Palestinian population, and to world public 
opinion.''
  However, Khouri warns: ``It is not very helpful--as so may pro-Israel 
American apologists do--to focus mainly on Hamas' theology or its 1987 
founding charter, any more than one should deal with Israeli parties 
that base their claim to all of Palestine--Eretz Israel on the book of 
Genesis account of God's land patrimony to the Jewish people.''
  So, what was the point of today's vote? To spell out for Hamas that 
Congress is going to stand in the way if Secretary Rice suddenly 
decides to try to send them a big aid package? To tell the President 
that he'd better not be trying to exploit some loophole to subsidize 
Hamas?
  To clarify for Israel that the position that Harry Truman took isn't 
being abandoned after 58 years?
  Mr. Speaker, time and time again, my Republican colleagues have come 
to the floor with resolutions opining on various issues.
  Regrettably, they often serve to worsen the problems under 
consideration and to boil complex issues down to radio talk show-sized 
sound bites. This is a sensitive, dynamic time in Arab-Israeli 
relations, and I hope members can restrain themselves from show-
boating.
  As Rami Khouri suggests: ``Political theologians and collectors of 
historical ideologies, please go home for a while.''

                  [From the Daily Star, Feb. 11, 2006]

                    Talking With the Guys From Hamas

                          (By Rami G. Khouri)

       I had the opportunity Thursday to explore first-hand the 
     implications of the victory of Hamas in last month's 
     Palestinian parliamentary elections. I went to talk to Hamas 
     leaders at the Palestinian refugee camp of Burj al-Barajneh 
     in Beirut, where poor, disenfranchised Palestinian refugees 
     live in rather atrocious material conditions.
       After two-and-a-half hours of discussions among Hamas, 
     other Palestinian parties and an Anglo-American visiting 
     delegation, I now know better why Hamas swept the Palestinian 
     elections. The human contact also reveals what the news does 
     not convey: this exiled, marginalized, downtrodden and 
     vulnerable refugee community walks today with its head held 
     higher than any other group of people in the entire Middle 
     East, because of its unique combination of self-confidence, 
     perseverance, success and legitimacy. Hamas is the only Arab 
     party that enjoys an authentic mandate from its people, 
     genuinely manifested through victory in two free elections at 
     the municipal and national levels.
       What does one learn from such encounters? The two most 
     significant themes that emerge from discussions with Hamas 
     officials--and from their many statements--are a commitment 
     to national principles and a clear dose of political 
     pragmatism. Both dimensions are important, and cannot be 
     separated.
       It is not very helpful--as so many pro-Israeli American 
     apologists do--to focus mainly on Hamas' theology or its 1987 
     founding charter, any more than one should deal with Israeli 
     parties that base their claim to all of Palestine-Eretz 
     Yisrael on the Book of Genesis account of God's land 
     patrimony to the Jewish people. Political theologians and 
     collectors' of historical ideologies, please go home for a 
     while.
       Now that Hamas will share or hold power, they are likely to 
     persist in both their principled and pragmatic ways. They 
     will assert rather than drop their existing principles 
     related to domestic governance, resisting Israel and 
     liberating the Israeli-occupied territories, and potentially 
     coexisting with an Israeli state under certain conditions. It 
     is foolhardy to expect Hamas to reverse its principles at the 
     moment when it has achieved a historic victory precisely 
     because it has adhered to them. At the same time, it will 
     surely continue its three-year-old slow shift toward more 
     pragmatism and realism, because it is now politically 
     accountable to the entire Palestinian population, and to 
     world public opinion. Incumbency means responsibility and 
     accountability, which inevitably nurture practicality and 
     reasonable compromises.
       Here is where Hamas' experience is instructive, and why it 
     is so important to speak with them to understand how they are 
     likely to behave. My sense from such discussions, along with 
     35 years of watching Islamists at work, is that they do make 
     compromises and practical concessions. But they only do so on 
     four conditions: they talk and compromise in a political 
     context of negotiations between two equal parties; they give 
     only when they get something of equal value in return; they 
     respond emphatically to the consensus position of their 
     national constituency; and they do not compromise on what 
     they identify as core national rights of equality, dignity, 
     liberty and sovereignty.
       One more vital point to remember: Hamas and Hizbullah are 
     the only two Arab groups that have ever forced Israel's 
     fabled military to withdraw involuntarily from occupied Arab 
     land (South Lebanon and Gaza). American presidents and other 
     purveyors of fantasy are free to call this sort of 
     unilateralism a ``courageous initiative for

[[Page 1862]]

     peace,'' as George W. Bush said of Ariel Sharon. The rest of 
     the rational world calls this what it is: a retreat, and a 
     tacit admission of defeat. Hamas will build on the policies 
     that achieved this, not repudiate them.
       Hamas lives in the real world, not in fantasyland. It and 
     its supporters are not so impressed with having tea in the 
     White House. They are much more focused on bringing back a 
     degree of personal dignity, communal self-respect, and 
     national integrity to Palestinian life. They also know that 
     the majority of Palestinians, other Arabs and world nations 
     wish to coexist in negotiated peace with the state of Israel, 
     if Israel in turn reciprocates the sentiment to the 
     Palestinians and other Arabs whose lands it has occupied. How 
     to reconcile these realities is a priority issue for them in 
     the coming months.
       I expect that Hamas will combine its legacy of both 
     principles and pragmatism in slowly making important 
     decisions on key issues in coming months. These will include 
     sharing power in Palestine, reforming corrupt and mediocre 
     national institutions, galvanizing an effective national 
     Palestinian leadership representing all Palestinians in the 
     world, negotiating peace with Israel while resisting its 
     occupation, and fostering the development of a society that 
     is not necessarily ruled by Islamic law.
       A Hamas-led Palestinian government and the new Israeli 
     government to be elected next month face a historic 
     opportunity, if they are prepared to see each other as 
     representing peoples and nations with equal rights. Hamas has 
     reached this triumphant moment precisely because it has 
     insisted on such equality, rather than pandering to Israeli-
     American promises as other Palestinian leaders did without 
     success.
       Hamas can be pragmatic only because its resistance and 
     consistent principles have brought it success. Understanding 
     the dynamic relationship between these factors is the key to 
     movement forward to a win-win situation for all, including 
     Palestinians, Israelis and the slightly dazed denizens of 
     fantasylands far away.
                                  ____


                [From the New York Times, Feb. 15, 2006]

                    The Right Way To Pressure Hamas

       America and Israel have to walk a very narrow line in 
     defining their relations with a democratically elected 
     Palestinian government built around Hamas, a party that not 
     only endorses terrorism but also commits it. They cannot 
     possibly give political recognition or financial aid to such 
     a government. Neither can any country that claims to oppose 
     terrorism. That defines the right side of the line.
       On the wrong side lies the kind of deliberate 
     destabilization that, according to a report by our Times 
     colleague Steven Erlanger, Washington and Jerusalem are now 
     discussing. That would involve a joint American-Israeli 
     campaign to undermine a Hamas government by putting 
     impossible demands on it, starving it of money and putting 
     even greater restrictions on the Palestinians with an eye 
     toward forcing new elections that might propel the defeated 
     and discredited Fatah Party back to power.
       Set aside the hypocrisy such a course would represent on 
     the part of the two countries that have shouted the loudest 
     about the need for Arab democracy, and consider the probable 
     impact of such an approach on the Palestinians. They are 
     already driven to distraction by fury, frustration and 
     poverty. Is it really possible to expect that more punishment 
     from the Israelis and the Americans, this time for not voting 
     the way we wanted them to, would lead them to abandon Hamas?
       In the long, sorry history of the Israeli-Palestinian 
     dispute, there is not a shred of evidence to support the 
     notion that pushing the Palestinian population into more 
     economic desperation would somehow cause them to moderate 
     their political views. In fact, experience teaches the exact 
     opposite.
       Fatah lost last month's election because its incompetence 
     and corruption drove Palestinian voters into the arms of the 
     more austere, social-services-oriented Hamas. If the new 
     government fails to deliver because it puts continued 
     terrorism over the well-being of the Palestinian people, it 
     may indeed be booted out of office. But a Hamas that could 
     explain continued Palestinian misery by a deliberate 
     American-Israeli plan to reverse the democratic verdict of 
     the polls would be likely to become only stronger.
       Washington publicly asserts that no such plan is being 
     discussed. A far wiser course for the United States to pursue 
     would be to step back and desist from deliberately provoking 
     the Palestinians, and give Hamas a chance to reconsider its 
     own options. Some hints about its intentions may emerge from 
     the way its leaders respond to overtures by the Russian 
     president, Vladimir Putin. Last week, Mr. Putin indicated 
     that he intended to invite them to Moscow for a visit.
       Mr. Putin's move was controversial in the West, and perhaps 
     he should have provided more warning. But that would be a 
     minor snub indeed if he prods Hamas toward renouncing 
     terrorism, accepting Israel's right to exist and reviving the 
     peace process.

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker and my fellow Representatives, 
we have before us a resolution that, in its brevity, expresses the 
apprehension, concern, and resoluteness of our country in response to 
the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections 3 weeks ago.
  I stand here to support the sense of Congress that an organization 
that does not recognize the right of another sovereign state to exist 
should not be the recipient of our aid. I have grave reservations about 
this resolution, however. Rather than pressure Hamas to recognize 
Israel, we may instead add more fire to the hostilities and prematurely 
halt the peace process by asserting this punitive resolution.
  I hope that the Palestinian Authority will engage in diplomatic 
relations and come to an understanding that is satisfactory to all 
involved. The violence and suicide bombings are still present in our 
minds, and our objective is to never have to witness events such as 
these again.
  But I also know that the Palestinian people need our help 
desperately. They are vulnerable. They need food, shelter, warmth, 
sanitation, medicine, schools. But they also need safety, protection, 
confidence, and a reason to believe that they may someday witness and 
achieve stability and peace. By joining in the sense of Congress today 
and refusing aid to a government that does not recognize Israel, we 
cannot forget the Palestinian people, who still urgently need our 
humanitarian aid.
  Some may say that the majority voted for a historically terrorist 
political party. But the picture is never as simple as it seems on the 
surface--Palestinians had a choice between corruption and terrorism. 
They have seen the wasted resources and the ineffectiveness. They 
voiced their disgust in their leadership by democratically voting them 
out of office. The elections were a success in that regard--campaigning 
was energetic and nonviolent, and the election turnout was beyond 
expectations. They chose to replace the party in power with an 
alternative that promised more solidity, more leadership, and more hope 
for the future.
  I do, however, implore that Hamas recognize the state of Israel and 
renounce violence. We can help them achieve many great things, 
including their own sovereign state. I hope that they will take us up 
on our offer.
  Israel has found a way to exist as both a religious state and as an 
international diplomatic partner while protecting its own interests. 
Many Arab states have also tried this with varying degrees of success. 
Hamas needs to understand that you can run your country holding 
religious values close, while participating in a secular process that 
will give you what you seek. Daily, we see reports that Hamas refuses 
to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Although we understand the 
anger, we've been shocked and dismayed at the violence in the Islamic 
community as a result of the publication of offensive cartoons. 
Unfortunately these images are present in our minds as we consider our 
relationship with the Middle East. I strongly urge Hamas to reassess 
its tactics and its position in relation to its goals, as well as 
reassess how best it can serve its people in its new position of 
government leadership. I know that your religion values human life. 
Prove it by protecting your people, and assuming the authority you have 
democratically earned by recognizing Israel's right to exist, just as 
you assert your right to exist.
  The Israeli national anthem is entitled ``The Hope,'' and it 
expresses an optimistic, yet sober understanding of what is needed to 
attain peace. Today, as a Member of Congress, I will join my colleagues 
in telling the Palestinian Authority that it must step onto the 
international diplomatic arena with honesty, openness, and a 
willingness to compromise. I still believe that a State of Palestine 
and a State of Israel will someday be able to coexist in peace, but in 
order for that to happen, both must acknowledge one another.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support 
of this resolution as a first step toward helping our close ally, 
Israel, from an increasing threat. This resolution responds to the 
troubling results of the Palestinian Legislative Council, PLC, 
elections last month, in which Hamas--the radical Islamic Palestinian 
organization that has sought to expel Jews and destroy the state of 
Israel to establish an Islamic Palestinian state based on Islamic law--
won a majority of the seats.
  Hamas has been recognized by the United States and the European Union 
as a terrorist organization, and has committed hundreds of acts of 
terrorism against Israeli citizens since its creation in 1987.
  The group has employed car bombings, suicide bombings, mortar 
attacks, Qassam rocket attacks, and assassinations to achieve its 
stated goal of destroying Israel, and in doing so has killed thousands 
of innocent Israelis, as well as several Americans, including 5 during 
a series of bombings in 1996.

[[Page 1863]]

  In FY 2005, $275 million was appropriated to the West Bank and Gaza, 
with $50 million of that funding going directly to the Palestinian 
Authority. We can never allow U.S. taxpayer dollars to get in the hands 
of a Hamas-controlled government to be used against Israel.
  The Palestinian people voted and selected Hamas, but that does not 
mean we must support an organization that is counter to real peace in 
the Middle East. Elections are serious business, and I am disappointed 
the Palestinian people selected a group who does not want peace.
  Passing this resolution is just a first step to notify a Hamas led 
government; the US and its allies can not support a government in Gaza 
and the West Bank that does not recognize Israel's right to exist.
  Mr. Speaker, these election results are extremely troubling and this 
resolution shows solidarity and concern for the security of Israel and 
its people. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
resolution to send a strong message to Hamas that we will not recognize 
them as a legitimate government so long as they promote terrorism.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 79, 
a resolution urging that no U.S. assistance should be provided directly 
to the Palestinian Authority if any representative political party 
holding a majority of parliamentary seats within the Palestinian 
Authority maintains a position calling for the destruction of Israel.
  With Hamas's victory in the Palestinian elections and the continued 
nuclear aggression of Iran, it is now more important than ever for the 
U.S. to reaffirm its support for Israel.
  With Hamas's new power comes new responsibility. It is time for Hamas 
to recognize Israel's right to exist. It is time for Hamas to lay down 
its arms and realize the road to peace lies through direct negotiations 
with Israel.
  We must call on Hamas to put an end to violence and terror. They must 
cease their rhetoric of hate. The U.S. and the international community 
must strongly urge Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist.
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, Hamas maintains and asserts a radical, violent 
ideology within its charter--the destruction of Israel. I believe that 
S. Con. Res. 79, which reaffirms that no U.S. funds should go to the 
Palestinian Authority if the majority party maintains a position 
calling for the destruction of Israel, is a good first step in creating 
a more peaceful region. Voting in support of this Resolution is not a 
hard choice.
  But harder choices and questions lay ahead. Should we choose a knee-
jerk reaction that cuts off all communication, as well as all 
assistance to the Palestinian people? The alternative is taking a deep 
breath and reflecting on more constructive ways to bring about a long-
term, sustainable peace within the region, while maintaining our 
opposition to a political party that supports the idea of the 
destruction of another nation.
  The reasons behind Hamas's victory are complicated. Polling data 
continues to show that the majority of Palestinians want peace and 
believe in a two-state solution. Palestinians are tired of a corrupt 
government and are exhausted by living in poverty. The U.S. 
Government's actions should not feed these root causes of Palestinian 
discontent. In fact, we should be supportive of efforts to mitigate 
these problems, including continued support for NGO-run humanitarian 
assistance. This path of moderation, I believe, will help bring more 
security to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, and some day a Palestinian 
State.
  Silence does not create peace and we shouldn't turn our backs on the 
Middle East and push all Palestinians down a path of isolation and 
extremism. The U.S. and Israel must remain engaged and push for a peace 
process that supports moderate Palestinian voices and peaceful leaders 
and urge Hamas to conduct itself as a legitimate political authority by 
renouncing the ideology of the destruction of Israel.
  I urge Hamas to change its charter and urge the U.S. State Department 
to choose peace.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this resolution being brought to 
the floor so quickly and urge its passage.
  The Hamas victory in Palestinian parliamentary elections is of great 
concern to me and many others and presents a major challenge to the 
peace process. There is simply no way our government can meet with or 
provide assistance to a government led by a terrorist organization.
  Hamas ran a campaign based on cleaning out the corruption of the 
Fatah party. The Palestinian people responded to this pledge, but sadly 
in the process elected a terrorist government. Unless Hamas recognizes 
the State of Israel's right to exist, ceases incitement and permanently 
disarms and dismantles their terrorist infrastructure, the United 
States will not work with this government, nor can we expect Israel to.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to express my 
support of S. Con. Res. 79. This resolution reaffirms the long-standing 
policy of the United States against dealing with terrorists by 
expressing the sense of Congress that no aid should be given to the 
Palestinian Authority should any political party holding a majority of 
Parliamentary seats advocate for the destruction of the state of 
Israel. In the past years, the United States has given aid to the 
Palestinian Authority in the hopes of meeting the humanitarian needs of 
the Palestinian people. It is my hope that we will be able to provide 
for Palestinians who are in need of our help, but it is imperative that 
our assistance contribute to peace in the region.
  As a nation committed to peace, assisting a Palestinian Authority 
with a political party holding a majority of the seats that actively 
calls for the destruction of the state of Israel is a step backwards on 
the path to peace. The internationally backed Roadmap requires that the 
Palestinian Authority launch ``sustained, targeted, and effective 
operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror.'' The 
Palestinian Authority cannot call for the destruction of Israel if it 
is to be a serious partner for peace. The members of the Palestinian 
Authority must assure us that they are interested in a better future 
for the Palestinian people and to do so, they must take steps to 
recognize Israel and its right to exist.
  It is up to the United States and the international community to 
ensure that we do not directly aid the Palestinian Authority should the 
majority party maintain a position calling for the destruction of 
Israel. This resolution clarifies our commitment to peace, real peace, 
by sending a clear, swift signal to those persons in the Palestinian 
Authority who refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist.
  While the Palestinian Authority was democratically elected, true 
democracy requires a willingness to negotiate with other states. I urge 
the Palestinian Authority to acknowledge the existence of the state of 
Israel and to announce a willingness to negotiate with Israel and; in 
doing so, make a declaration to the world that it is committed to true 
democracy and peace.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kolbe). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House 
suspend the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution, S. 
Con. Res. 79.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________