[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 8]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 11088]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              H. RES. 268

                                  _____
                                 

                            HON. GWEN MOORE

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 13, 2011

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I emphatically agree that a negotiated 
settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the only viable path 
forward for the parties and for those in the international community 
and region who seek peace and stability in this contentious area of our 
world.
  I want to be clear: unilateral actions by the Palestinians or 
Israelis, including seeking recognition at the U.N., are not helpful to 
the peace process. It seems to me that there have not been many 
successful unilateral acts undertaken in this region that have resulted 
in more peace and less violence. Why would anyone want to go down that 
road again?
  Limiting this resolution to the sentiment expressed in bullet number 
one of the resolution that reaffirms Congress' ``strong support for a 
negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in 
two states, a democratic, Jewish state of Israel and a viable, 
democratic Palestinian state, living side-by-side in peace, security, 
and mutual recognition'' would have won my enthusiastic and full-
hearted support.
  It was the presence of this language that kept me from voting no on 
this resolution. I again reiterate my condemnation of this House 
continuing to bring resolutions that only seem to relitigate every 
wrong committed by one party to this conflict. Whatever happened to the 
grandiose ideal that the United States of America would be an ``honest 
broker'' in this process?
  The fact is that both Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli 
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have tough choices ahead of them that 
will affect the pursuit of peace in the Middle East. As I stated in a 
letter to President Obama last year in support of strong U.S. 
engagement in renewed Middle East Peace talks, allowing actions by 
either party that undermine the process to go unchallenged serves to 
fan animosity and mistrust, which feeds a cycle of conflict and 
violence. This neither serves the interests of the U.S., our ally 
Israel, nor the Palestinians.
  We must avoid ending up in a situation like Canada reportedly faced 
last year when it cut funding for activities of the U.N. Relief and 
Works Agency for Palestine Refugees only to have the government of 
Israel, among others, push for a reversal of that decision. It's an 
example of an action that looks ``pro-Israel'' on the politics, but 
failed the more important test of whether it actually advanced or 
hindered the interests of our allies in the region.
  The Palestinian people don't want symbolic statehood, they want an 
actual state with borders and the ability to enjoy a livelihood in 
peace and security. The same for the Israeli people. They want real 
security and real peace. Both peoples would gladly trade resolutions 
from the U.S. Congress for real progress on the ground.

                          ____________________