Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols and traditions of Christmas should be protected for use by those who celebrate Christmas.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

(Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I rise in strong support of House Resolution 34, recognizing Israel's right to defend herself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel.

Madam Speaker, the conflict between Israel and violent Palestinian extremist groups is not, to paraphrase Chamberlain, a quarrel in a faraway country between people of which we know nothing. This conflict is one part of a broader struggle that we're all engaged in, a struggle between liberty and tyranny, between democracy and violent Islamic extremism, between those who love life and those who preach death.

It is a struggle Israel did not seek but one which she must, nonetheless, fight and win. For 8 years, while Israel has sought just and lasting peace and security, Hamas and other Islamic militants have launched thousands of rockets from Gaza against innocents in southern Israel. Israel, a democratic state, chose to exercise remarkable restraint.

Finally, on December 19, Hamas unilaterally broke the calm, the so- called calm, and began launching scores of rockets against Israel. Israel chose to protect itself and her people. Israel has made every effort to prevent civilian casualties and has provided significant humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians. Meanwhile, Hamas has again committed war crimes by placing its militants and its weapons in or at schools, in hospitals, in private homes, and in other civilian buildings.

How has much of the world reacted? Too many states and too many officials in the United Nations have responded by blaming Israel and only Israel. The U.N. swung into action, holding four Security Council meetings in less than 2 weeks, including last night, when it passed a resolution that did not even mention rocket attacks against innocent Israeli civilians, that did not even mention Hamas and its war crimes, and it called for an immediate cease-fire, not a sustainable cease- fire.

Sadly, these officials do not recognize that only Israel would consider itself bound by such an agreement. Hamas would continue to pursue Israel's destruction, and such a devil's bargain without holding Hamas and its state sponsors of terror accountable will only embolden these Islamic extremists to intensify their destructive agenda.

The desire to stop all violence now is understandable. We all desire peace. We all regret the loss of innocent lives on both sides of the conflict, but as the ancient rabbis have stated, those who are merciful to the cruel, as the U.N. has been, will end up being cruel to the merciful, in this case, Israel.

The right way forward is not easy; it is not pleasant, but upon it rests the security of the Israelis, of the Palestinians, of the Americans, and of all freedom-loving people.

The following is my full statement for the Record: Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 34, recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States's strong support for Israel.

Madam Speaker, the conflict between Israel and violent Palestinian extremist groups is not, to paraphrase former British leader Neville Chamberlain, a quarrel in a faraway country, between people of which we know nothing.

On the contrary, this conflict is one part of a broader struggle that we are all engaged in--a struggle between liberty and tyranny; between democracy and violent Islamist extremism; between those who love life and those who preach death.

It is a struggle which the United States and Israel did not seek, but which we must, nonetheless, fight and win.

On the outcome, rests our freedom, our security, and our very existence.

Today, this House sends a strong and unequivocal signal that America stands with Israel in its fight to exist.

To some of the ``high-minded'' who feel comfortably removed from this struggle, such language is old-fashioned, or out of style, or undiplomatic.

In the United States, Madam Speaker, we prefer to call it the truth.

For 8 years, while Israel has sought just and lasting peace and security, Hamas and other Islamist militants have launched over 8,000 rockets from Gaza against innocents in southern Israel.

Even after Israel took the risk of withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, Hamas rejected peace and chose to use its new sanctuary to plan and carry out more attacks against the Jewish state and its people.

Six months ago, Hamas agreed to a so-called state of ``calm,'' then proceeded to break it repeatedly by using other groups to do its dirty work and fire rockets.

Israel, a democratic state, chose to exercise remarkable restraint.

Finally, on December 19, Hamas unilaterally broke the ``calm'' and began launching scores of rockets into Israel.

Israel chose to protect its people and defend itself.

Hamas and its fellow violent hate-mongers do not seek a few more square miles of land. They do not seek a Palestinian state.

They seek to destroy Israel, impose an Islamist dictatorship in its place, and fight on throughout the world.

Such an outcome is unacceptable to Israel.

It is unacceptable to the United States.

It must be unacceptable to all other responsible nations--because in a compromise between good and evil, only evil benefits.

Israel has made every effort to prevent civilian casualties, and has provided significant humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians.

Meanwhile, Hamas has again committed war crimes by placing its militants and weapons, in or near schools, hospitals, private homes, and other civilian buildings.

In the real world, Hamas's use of civilians as human shields would provoke international condemnation and action to stop this menace.

But how has much of the world reacted?

Too many states, and too many officials at the United Nations, have responded by blaming Israel and only Israel.

Let us remember that in the months and years before Israel started its defensive operation on December 27, the U.N. did not make any meaningful effort to stop the relentless attacks by Hamas or diminish the threat posed by its state sponsors.

But once Israel rose to protect its citizens, the U.N. swung into action, holding four Security Council meetings in less than two weeks, including last night, when it passed a resolution--that did not even mention rocket attacks against Israeli civilians; that did not even mention Hamas and its war crimes; and that called for an immediate ceasefire, not a sustainable ceasefire.

This Security Council resolution and other developments throughout the U.N. system, reflect the short-sightedness and bias that pervade that body.

The so-called President of the U.N. General Assembly called Israel's behavior a ``monstrosity,'' and the Secretary-General called for an immediate cease-fire.

Sadly, they do not recognize: that only Israel would consider itself bound by such an agreement; that Hamas would continue to pursue Israel's destruction; and that such a devil's bargain without holding Hamas and its state-sponsors accountable would only embolden these Islamist extremists to intensify their destructive agenda.

The desire to stop all violence now is understandable.

We all desire peace and regret the loss of innocent lives on both sides of the conflict.

But as the ancient rabbis stated, those who are merciful to the cruel (as the U.N. has been) will end up being cruel to the merciful (in this case, Israel).

If the U.N. wants to regain its credibility, it should advance peace and security by moving to compel Hamas and their state sponsors to: immediately stop their attacks, shut down their militant infrastructure, and recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

Madam Speaker, we've been here before.

In 2006, the violent extremist group Hezbollah kidnapped Israeli soldiers and fired rockets relentlessly against northern Israel.

In response, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire between Israel and the violent extremist group Hezbollah, which would supposedly strengthen the ability of a U.N. force in Lebanon to prevent Hezbollah from rearming.

In the last 2\1/2\ years, Israel has held up its end of the deal, while a legitimized Hezbollah has rapidly re-armed under the U.N.'s nose and has, along with its state-sponsors Iran and Syria, increased its control in Lebanon.

As a result, U.S. interests in the region have been damaged.

If we act the same way this time, we will get the same result or worse, and we are running out of second chances. Not again, Madam Speaker.

We must support Israel's right to defend itself by rooting out the Islamist militant infrastructure in Gaza and by ending--not reducing, not postponing, but ending--the threat Hamas poses to Israel's existence; to regional stability; and to global peace and security.

Then, and only then, Madam Speaker, can a ceasefire work.

Consistent with the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, we should also tighten U.S. and international sanctions against Hamas.

Additionally, the U.S. and our allies must seek to stop Iran and Syria from providing financial and other support to Hamas and other violent Islamist extremist groups.

The right way forward is not easy or pleasant, but upon it rests the security of Israelis, Palestinians, Americans, and all other peoples.

With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of our time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Congresswoman Virginia Foxx.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas who says, ``That's just the way it is,'' Judge Poe.

Madam Speaker, I am so pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor), our distinguished Republican whip.

Madam Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), a senior member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), our distinguished Republican Conference chairman.

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), a senior member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I would like to make five simple points that get to the heart of what is happening right now.

First, Israel is a democratic Jewish state that respects human rights and desires peace with its neighbors, innocent civilians, innocent Palestinians included. The jihadists in Gaza continue to terrify thousands of innocent Israelis with their attack, while Israel continues to facilitate the transfer of humanitarian aid into Gaza.

Second, Hamas is a hate filled, violent, Islamic militant group that is backed by Iran and Syria regimes and seeks Israel's destruction.

Third, like any sovereign nation, Israel has the right to defend herself, her existence and to protect her citizens from attack, whether by Hamas or Hezbollah or other radical Islamists.

I have been to Sderot, and I have watched as air raid warnings forced the entire population, including children, to hide from an incoming attack.

Fourth, the actions and aims of violent Islamist extremists and their state sponsors is not just a threat to the Middle East peace and security, but to global peace and security. Today it's Hamas, tomorrow Hezbollah, the Taliban, al Qaeda, and so on.

Fifth, the U.S. and Israel are in this together. We have a saying in Spanish about close alliances that describes the U.S. and Israel friendship perfectly, we are two wings of one bird.

We depend on each other for our security and our existence. America and Israel are engaged in a broader conflict throughout the world, a struggle between liberty and tyranny, between those who love life and those who preach death. We did not seek this struggle, but we must win it.

As we stand at this important day in our living history, let us remember the consequences of inaction in the face of evil. For many years, responsible nations turned the other way, refused to accept the reality of what Israel was subjected to.

But no responsible nation could stand by and allow such attacks to continue, allow thousands and hundreds of its people to continue to live in constant fear of being murdered at any moment. No responsible nation could defer its security of its people to entrenched bureaucrats, the European Union, the United Nations, who constantly chastise Israel for taking all necessary actions to protect her own people.

Despite the U.N.'s rhetoric, there is no moral or legal equivalent between militant Islamic extremists who target civilians and a democracy that responds by targeting them. This false moral equivalence only persuades militants to persist in the unlawful action against civilians.

So, Madam Speaker, I hope that the House will carefully consider this resolution, will look at the actual language of the United Nations' resolution that points no finger at Hamas and its violent action and only points its finger at the democratic State of Israel. It's an unbalanced resolution. The United States was correct in not voting in favor of it.

Israel must not abide by it. We all want peace, but Israel wants peace with security as well.

With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 34) recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

When a nation's towns and villages are attacked without provocation by nearly 9,000 rockets over the span of 8 years, there could hardly be a more solid case for the use of force in self-defense. At least 700,000 Israelis, 10 percent of that small nation, are now within range of missiles and rockets operated by an Islamist terrorist group committed to Israel's destruction.

I have no trouble justifying the war Israel is undertaking, but I am deeply troubled by the suffering, destruction and loss of innocent life that war inevitably entails, in this case, a war forced upon Israel by a terrorist enemy that not only targets Israeli civilians but that also bases itself among Gazan Palestinian homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals in order to use innocent civilians as human shields and as tools of a propaganda war. It is imperative that a way be found to stop the killing on both sides but in a manner that will ensure that this round will be the last round.

I know the U.S. and several other nations are working on developing such a plan. Our ally Egypt should be particularly commended for its serious efforts in this regard.

What we need is not merely a cease-fire but a transformative cease- fire. We need to ensure not just that Hamas stops firing rockets into Israel; we need to make sure that it stops receiving weapons and weapons parts and that it stops smuggling them into the Gaza Strip. We should support Egyptian efforts to prevent this illegal arms trade from crossing the Sinai toward the Gaza border.

Madam Speaker, I commend the Speaker and the bipartisan leadership for authoring this important resolution. It provides a sensible way of understanding how we got to the current situation and of how we should move forward. This is why I support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do likewise.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to recognize the chief sponsor and author of this resolution, the Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi, for 1 minute.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the chairman of the European Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Harman), who is very active on these issues.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlelady an additional 10 seconds.

I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn).

(Mr. CLYBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the majority leader for the House of Representatives, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).

(Mr. KENNEDY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).

Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1 minute to the chairman of the subcommittee that covers the jurisdiction of terrorism and arms and human rights, the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).

Madam Speaker, at this time, I would like to ask unanimous consent that there be an additional 6 minutes of debate on the resolution under consideration and that it be equally divided between both sides.

Madam Speaker, could I inquire about the time remaining on each side?

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York, the chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Mr. Engel.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request, I am pleased to yield to the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Waxman.

(Mr. WAXMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California, Mrs. Susan Davis.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a member of the committee, the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Madam Speaker, to close the debate, I am pleased to yield to the chairman of the Middle East and South Asia Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman).

Madam Speaker, When a nation's towns and villages are attacked, without provocation, by nearly 9,000 rockets over the span of 8 years, there could hardly be a more solid case for the use of force in self-defense. At least 700,000 Israelis--10 percent of that small nation--are now within range of missiles and rockets operated by an Islamist terrorist group committed to Israel's destruction.

I have no trouble justifying the war Israel has undertaken. I am deeply troubled, however, by the suffering, destruction, and loss of innocent life that war inevitably entails--in this case, a war forced upon Israel by a terrorist enemy that not only targets Israeli civilians but also bases itself among Gazan Palestinian

homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals in order to use innocent civilians as human shields and as tools of a propaganda war.

It is imperative that a way be found to stop the killing on both sides--but in a manner that will ensure that this round will be the last round.

I know the United States and several other nations are working on developing such a plan. Our ally Egypt should be particularly commended for its serious efforts in this regard.

What we need is not merely a cease-fire but a transformative cease- fire. We need to ensure not just that Hamas stops firing rockets into Israel; we need to make sure that it stops receiving weapons and weapons parts and stops smuggling them into the Gaza Strip. We should support Egyptian efforts to prevent this illegal arms trade from crossing the Sinai toward the Gaza border.

Ideally, the legitimate Palestinian Authority under President Mahmoud Abbas should be restored to its role as the effective authority in Gaza in the aftermath of any cease-fire. The Palestinian Authority was illegally expelled from Gaza by Hamas in June 2007, and it should be restored to its rightful role.

As for Hamas, it has no prospect of legitimization in the international community unless it renounces violence and disarms, recognizes Israel, and accepts the validity of all previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.

Our resolution supports Israel's right to defend itself against unprovoked terror and re-affirms this body's unwavering commitment to Israel's security and survival as a democratic, Jewish state. It condemns Hamas for its 8-year artillery war against Israel and appropriately assigns Hamas responsibility for the destructive consequences of the ongoing war in Gaza. And it insists that a cease- fire be established that is durable and sustainable and that prevents Hamas from acquiring more arms and provoking another round of fighting.

I commend the Speaker and the bipartisan leadership for authoring this important resolution. It provides a sensible way of understanding how we got to the current situation and of how we should move forward. That is why I support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do likewise.

Madam Speaker, Israel is a strong ally of our country and has a right to defend itself and I have voted on a number of times--along with a large majority of my colleagues in the House--to make clear our support of that right. According to one estimate, as many as one million Israelis live in range of rockets that have been fired from Gaza by militants. No one questions the responsibility or right of a sovereign nation to protect its people.

However, the deaths of innocent civilians wherever they may occur concerns me. I join my colleagues in condemning all acts of violence and hostilities against civilians and acts of terrorism. While Hamas may be indifferent to the suffering of Palestinians and Israelis as a result of its actions, the rest of the world must not share that indifference.

It is distressing to see this volatile region again paralyzed by a new chapter of a seemingly endless cycle of retributive violence in which no side really wins and innocent civilians lose the most. We must push to break this destructive cycle. The U.S. regional actors, and the international community all need to move quickly to defuse this situation and help to reach a cease-fire by all sides while addressing the security and humanitarian issues that cannot be allowed to continue to fester.

The unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the firing of rockets into Israel do not serve the best interest of anyone truly concerned with securing permanent peace in the region. That is why it is even more important that this House take up a resolution that makes a serious call for and helps strongly support ongoing diplomatic efforts to bring an

end to the violence, demands greater U.S. leadership and engagement in those efforts, and recognizes the great loss suffered by the Israeli and Palestinian people as a result of the violence and urges a swift end to that violence. Unfortunately, the bill before us today is not such a resolution.

Hamas' own actions time and time again show that it is a threat to regional and international peace. This is not in dispute. The House has rightly condemned Hamas time and time again including passage last March of H. Res. 951--which I supported.

However, I have several concerns about other aspects of the resolution before us today. At a time of increasing international concern about the situation in Gaza highlighted by diplomatic efforts under way at the UN, by the EU, and the Arab League--particularly a proposal put forth by Egypt and France--and the passage just last night by the UN Security Council of a resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire, I fear that his may be the wrong time for a resolution that does little to support efforts to halt the conflict.

The Security Council resolution called urgently for an ``immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.'' I am disappointed that the resolution before the House today does not support the UN's call for an immediate and verifiable cease-fire by both sides.

When a clear international consensus and diplomatic efforts are beginning to coalesce and work towards a solution, why would the U.S. Congress want to consider a resolution that takes a sharply different tack?

The resolution before us also differs in a number of ways even from a similar resolution that the Senate passed just yesterday. That Senate resolution takes a much more serious approach and puts a greater and much needed emphasis on the proactive role the U.S. needs to play to bring this latest crisis to a close. The U.S. has a vast array of diplomatic and other tools that are at the disposal of the President and his foreign policy advisers to help resolve international crises such as this. Now is the time to open that toolbox and actively use those tools.

If anything has been clear from the last eight years it is that when U.S. does not lead and stay in engaged in regional diplomacy, the situation in the region will not get better.

The EU, the UN, the Arab League all recognize that Israel's military operations must be supplemented and supplanted by a diplomatic resolution that will last. That is why the Egyptians and the French are expending considerable efforts--in the absence of U.S. leadership--to forge a cease-fire agreement that meets Israel's needs, namely ending the firing of rockets into Israel and preventing Hamas from rearming while also addressing the humanitarian needs of Gazans. Just yesterday, Secretary Rice expressed verbal support for this initiative, stating that these efforts ``should not just be applauded, but must be supported'' by the international community. But the resolution fails to even bring it up.

The resolution before the House today also expresses support for ``diminishing the appeal and influence of extremists in the Palestinian territories and strengthen moderate Palestinians who are committed to a secure and lasting peace.'' However, this resolution by its lack of a call for U.S. engagement and lack of recognition of the suffering of civilians actually undermines this goal--one that I have long advocated and supported--both in its tone and substance. The resolution ignores or fails to apprehend the tremendous damage that is being done to the efforts of moderates--either presently or in the future--by the ongoing conflict that according to one report has generated ``incredible bitterness and anger'' in the region. To expect our moderate friends in the Middle East to succeed in such an environment is foolhardy at best.

A cease-fire does not diminish or hinder Israel's right to defend itself. It does help get us back on the path to finding a political and diplomatic solution that will address Israel's security needs and lead to long-term security and peace. A cease-fire is not an end itself but is desirable as a means to halt violence and chaos in the immediate term while creating room to assure humanitarian aid and for renewed and sustained multilateral negotiations for a sustainable peace.

Congress must speak out to help stop this latest crisis in the Middle East but in a way that our message is fair, tough, and smart and that makes clear that the U.S.--while supporting Israel's right to self- defense-- can be and is an honest broker in the region. I fear that this resolution fails to meet that standard.

The best support that we can give our close friend and ally Israel is by being an impartial and honest broker that can work with all interested parties in the region, Israelis and Palestinians alike. I am wary about continuing to take actions that hinder the ability for the U.S. to be seen as such a mediator and which may throw more obstacles in the way of the incoming administration foreign policy aims.

The ongoing military operations by Israel cannot and should not substitute for a credible long-term diplomatic solution reached with the help of the international agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians that meets the needs and aspirations of both sides that will prevent the return to an endless cycle of violence that guarantees that ``security'' and peace remains elusive.

Innocent people on both sides want nothing more than to live normal lives with peace and dignity. While I cannot support this resolution in its current form, I strongly encourage the administration and the international community to undertake robust diplomacy to mediate a cross-border cease-fire and to continue to engage in constructive activities, statements, and resolutions will help bring peace to the region and address Israel's real security needs.

Madam Speaker, the resolution before us correctly condemns the actions by Hamas to target innocent civilians in southern Israel and to thwart the ceasefire that had been in place for the previous 6 months. It correctly calls for a new, sustainable ceasefire and affirms the U.S. commitment to a just and durable peace based on a two-state solution. But the resolution does not begin to do justice to the humanitarian disaster gripping Gaza, and it offers little more than lip service on behalf of a serious peace process. Focusing on affixing blame for the current crisis, it fails to emphasize the steps required to lead us toward a long-term solution.

I recently wrote an article which appeared in the January 6 Charlotte Observer and Miami Herald in which I proposed immediate actions the U.S. must take to return us to a trajectory leading to a just and lasting peace. I ask permission that it be included in the Record. After the conflict ends and the dust settles, after all the recriminations and resentments have been aired, we will be left with the crucial question of whether and how to resume efforts toward a lasting peace, This is the only goal that can meet our and Israel's long-term security needs in the region. We must act urgently, knowing that the steps we take now will determine just how steep that future road to peace will be.

U.S. Must Act Now in Gaza

(By Representative David Price)

For observers of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict committed

to a peaceful and lasting two-state resolution, the conflict

between Israel and Hamas in Gaza brings the temptation to

throw one's hands in the air in despair. Mistaken assumptions

and lessons left unlearned seem to guide each of the

protagonists down a course antithetical to the long-term

interests of both Israelis and Palestinians.

We can't help but lament another cycle of retributive

violence--both for the terrible toll it takes on both sides

and because we know it is not the way forward. Yet

exasperation and passivity are indulgences that the United

States and the world can ill afford.

Fighting vs. governing

For its part, Hamas has again proven that it would rather

fight than govern or tend to the needs of Gazans, making it

exceedingly difficult to envision it as a serious partner at

the negotiating table. Israel, while unquestionably justified

in its move to put an end to the daily barrage of rockets

falling upon its citizens, seems to have forgotten the

lessons of the 2006 Lebanon war, during which its use of

massive force alienated the Arab world and turned Hezbollah

into freedom fighters in the eyes of many Lebanese. And the

Bush administration once again offers little--only an

unconditional green light to follow the fight, now a full-

scale ground war, wherever it leads.

It is difficult to imagine how the current conflict might

ultimately lead to a just and lasting peace. Hamas, though

militarily debilitated, is not likely to disappear as a

political force or to suddenly prove more pliable in

negotiations. It may become more rather than less difficult

to bring Gaza under the authority of President Mahmoud Abbas

and Fatah, lest they be seen as capitalizing on the misery

wrought by the fighting.

And Israel, while addressing a key short-term security

objective, risks far-reaching damage to the peace process

that is essential to its most critical long-term security

objective: a resolution to the conflict. Equally troubling,

the overwhelming force of its bombardment has buttressed

support for extremist elements, like Hezbollah and the

Iranian government, that threaten Israeli and regional

security.

As ominous as the picture may be, it is strongly in the

interests of our own country to ensure that the architecture

of the peace process is not irreparably damaged. To do so,

the United States should take several immediate steps, even

as the Bush administration draws anemically to a close.

Humanitarian crisis looms

First, the administration, working with the international

community, must take swift action to avert a massive

humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Gazans have been on the verge of

a humanitarian meltdown for months; the bombing of border

tunnels--which have been used to smuggle food and

humanitarian supplies, in addition to weapons--pushes Gaza

further toward collapse.

Secondly, the administration should urgently engage Israel,

along with regional allies like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi

Arabia, in putting together the framework for a sustainable

long-term cease-fire, not simply a temporary halt to

fighting. Such a framework must protect Israel from the

persistent rocket fire on Sderot and from Hamas's stockpiling

of deadly weapons. But it also must provide relief from the

devastating embargo on Gaza. To be effective, it must involve

Egypt and regional partners as mediators and monitors.

Collateral consequences

Coming on the heels of the 2006 Lebanon war, Israel's

military actions in Gaza have had the unfortunate collateral

consequence of generating substantial domestic political

unrest for many of Israel's friendliest Arab neighbors,

particularly Egypt. The United States will need to walk a

fine diplomatic line, encouraging Arab nations to lead Hamas

toward a sustainable ceasefire while empowering them to

advocate for the just peace their citizens demand.

Finally, both President Bush and, as soon as he takes

office, President-elect Obama should explicitly express the

United States' unwavering commitment to a viable peace

process and undertake diplomacy toward that end. How the

present conflict is waged, and on what terms it is halted,

will be especially consequential on the Palestinian side of

the equation.

The U.S., Israel and moderate Sunni regimes have not done

enough to help President Abbas and Fatah gain credibility,

and that task is now even more urgent and challenging. As for

Hamas, while its military capabilities may be downgraded by

the conflict, its political stock may rise. The organization

and its constituency must be taken into account, directly and

indirectly, in any viable process. Regional mediations and

renewed Israeli-Syrian talks should figure prominently in

such efforts.

These steps will not resolve the conflict. But they will

help preserve the possibility of a future peace, a

possibility that is now teetering on the brink.

Madam Speaker, the resolution before the House today, H. Res. Israel's bombardment of the citizens of Gaza, sanctions the incursion of Israeli troops into Gaza to clear this occupied territory of Hamas fighters regardless of the human cost, and calls for ``supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process'' while innocent Palestinian women and children are being killed in Gaza. This resolution strongly and justifiably condemns Hamas, but the resolution's intent and substance are void of any relation to the hellish reality that is being inflicted on the citizens of Gaza right now or the deprivation inflicted upon Gaza families by Israel's harsh denial of food, medicine and fuel over the past year.

This is only the latest battle in a long war for respect and security between Israel and the Palestinian people. Israeli citizens have suffered for years under an intermittent but terrifying rocket bombardments launched by militants in the Gaza Strip. Since 2001, 20 Israelis have been killed by these rockets, hundreds injured, and the lives of many thousands more disrupted by the constant fear of random and indiscriminate violence from the sky. When this summer's tenuous cease-fire broke down, the rocket attacks increased precipitously, prompting Israel's current military operation in Gaza.

I recognize Israel's right to protect its citizens from the persistent and growing threat of rocket attacks. However, as an unwavering proponent of peace, and as an advocate for the rights and security of the Israeli and Palestinian people, I seriously question the proportionality of Israel's response and regretfully predict that Israel's military action will produce only short-term security gains while severely undermining the prospects of peace in the months and years ahead.

Despite the fact too many Israeli citizens are under great stress from Hamas rockets, these weapons do not represent an existential threat to Israel. Rather than a serious military challenge, these rockets are like a drug gang that uses drive by shootings as a tactic to terrify a neighborhood. When is the solution to this type of terror for authorities to lay waste to the neighborhood?

Recent weeks of Israeli air and ground assaults have resulted in nearly 800 deaths, half of these innocent civilians. A population of 1.5 million Gazans, already weakened by previous months of economic blockade, are suffering from a lack of food, water, electricity and essential medicine. With border crossings closed, civilians are literally caught in the crossfire between Hamas militants and the Israeli army with no ability to escape. The difficult situation that existed in Gaza prior to Israel's attack has quickly deteriorated into a humanitarian disaster.

The world is watching as Israel's bombardment in Gaza continues to escalate. Public opinion around the world is hardening against Israel as desperate images of destruction reach the media. For example, a high-ranking Vatican official has compared the conditions in Gaza to ``a big concentration camp.'' An Israeli official condemned the comments and chastised the Catholic leader's words as ``far removed from truth and dignity.'' But after 13 days of warfare it is reported by officials in Gaza that more than 750 people are dead, of which 40 percent are women and children.

Last night, the United Nations Security Council voted and approved a resolution for ``an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire'' leading to a ``full withdrawal'' of Israeli forces from Gaza. The resolution also called for humanitarian aid to pass into Gaza and an end to trafficking of weapons into the

occupied territory. The United States, represented by Secretary of State Rice, did not join the 14 other nations approving the measure, our Government abstained.

The Bush administration has failed to successfully work for an immediate cease-fire. And this resolution fails to call for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza. What this resolution does do is allow Israel to continue its efforts to eliminate the threat of Hamas, which will only lead to further civilian deaths. With nearly 800 Gazans already dead and Israel's international image equally bloodied, there is no victory left for either side to achieve, the present battle has become a competition for biggest loser.

An immediate cease-fire is the only option. The current fighting must end before the foundations of the peace process are undermined any further and the prospects of a two state solution are dealt a final blow. The United States Government must recapture its role as an honest broker in the Israel-Palestinian conflict and urgently commit its full energy and resources to achieving a ceasefire and sustaining its engagement to ensure the causes of the present violence--arms smuggling, rocket fire, economic blockade--are resolved.

The continued isolation of Gaza is an unacceptable option in light of the depravation and increasing desperation of the mothers, fathers and children of Gaza. If the humanitarian needs in Gaza are not quickly and comprehensively addressed, the world faces the prospect of a radicalized generation of Palestinian youth--over 56 percent Gazans are under the age of 16. America should lead an international effort, initiated immediately after declaration of a ceasefire, to heal and rebuild Gaza. The memory of the present conflict cannot be erased from the minds and hearts of Palestinian youth, but we can ensure those memories include a generous and meaningful response from the world.

The goal of the United States, and the world, must be to work for peace. And the path to peace will never be forged through violence.

For these reasons, it is my intention to vote present on H. Res. 34.