[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 7172]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     JEWISH AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, this month marks Jewish American Heritage 
Month. So now seems a fitting time to look back on the history of the 
State of Israel and remember it accurately. In recent weeks there has 
been much attention paid to the announcement of new construction in 
East Jerusalem. Lost in the debate were some basic facts about 
settlements and the historical context that must be remembered.
  Today I want to set the record straight and outline six key facts 
about settlements. No. 1, the construction under debate is not in Arab 
East Jerusalem, but in a Jewish neighborhood in northern Jerusalem. Not 
only has this area never been governed under Palestinian authority, but 
there has never been a question of to whom the land belongs. Under 
every possible two-state plan, including the plan produced by President 
Clinton at Camp David in 2000 and the scenario and the letter from 
President Bush to Prime Minister Sharon in 2004, this area would be 
part of Israel.
  No. 2, Jerusalem is not a settlement. Jerusalem has been a Jewish 
majority since 1870. And every Israeli Government since 1967 has 
recognized Jerusalem as the sovereign capital of Israel, not part of 
the West Bank. To reduce Jerusalem to anything less undermines the very 
foundation of Israel.
  No. 3, settlements are not an obstacle to peace. This is where 
remembering history is especially important. Twice Israel has given up 
land and removed settlers in an effort to make peace, and each time 
peace was rejected. In 1980, after its peace accord with Egypt, Israel 
removed settlements from the Sinai Peninsula, but peace was rejected. 
Again in 2005, settlers were forcibly removed from Gaza, but peace was 
rejected. Settlements can be dealt with in any future negotiations 
through land swaps and border adjustments. But the issue of settlements 
should never prevent the two sides from sitting down to negotiate.
  No. 4. The 10-month moratorium on new construction in the West Bank 
issued by Prime Minister Netanyahu is unprecedented. Despite staunch 
domestic criticism and incredible political risk, Prime Minister 
Netanyahu announced a 10-month moratorium on new construction in the 
West Bank. The move was praised by the Obama administration. U.S. 
Middle East envoy George Mitchell called the move significant, stating 
that ``for the first time ever an Israeli Government will stop all new 
construction in West Bank settlements.'' Yet the Palestinian Authority 
continues to refuse to resume peace negotiations.
  In the past, settlement construction did not prevent negotiations. In 
fact, both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas negotiated with Israel even 
while building in settlements continued.
  No. 5, only Israelis and Palestinians together can create a lasting 
peace agreement. The U.S. must continue to play a central role in peace 
negotiations, but ultimately the conflict must be resolved through 
direct talks between the two parties. Requiring preconditions for 
negotiations simply allows the parties to avoid direct dialogue and 
ultimately a resolution. Any rhetoric that prevents the parties from 
resuming negotiations must be tempered.
  No. 6, this constant focus on settlements distracts us from the 
greater threat, a nuclear Iran. The most significant threat to Middle 
East security is Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran's acquisition of 
nuclear weapons would surely spur nuclear proliferation throughout the 
Middle East, and even result in terrorist groups obtaining nuclear 
weapons. Our focus now must be on preventing Iran from becoming a 
nuclear power, not on debates about Jerusalem's construction policies.
  Yes, settlements must be addressed, and they will be addressed in any 
peace process negotiations. We know this because over the years 
numerous proposals to solve the settlement issue have been floated, and 
Israel has twice shown it's willing to take action, pulling its 
citizens out of Sinai and Gaza. But settlements cannot be an excuse not 
to negotiate. Settlements cannot be considered an impediment to peace. 
And settlements cannot distract us from the looming threat of a nuclear 
Iran.

                          ____________________