Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago this Congress passed H. Con. Res. 469, which condemned the attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and expressed the concern of the United States regarding the continuing decades-long…
Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago this Congress passed H. Con. Res. 469, which condemned the attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and expressed the concern of the United States regarding the continuing decades-long delay in the resolution of the case. I voted for that resolution because I believe that justice deferred is justice denied, and all those who are responsible certainly must be brought to justice.
I joined my colleagues in saying that we don't condone terrorist actions or military posturing by any nation, nor have I seen any evidence that suggests that those who have been accused are innocent.
But responsible foreign policy means thoughtful and insightful discussion between nations that reflects a desire for both peace and security here at home, in the Middle East, and around the world.
In the 110th Congress, the House of Representatives has passed several bills calling into question the actions of either the country of Iran or the leaders of Iran with respect to their foreign or domestic policy. Today, this Congress has brought up, under suspension of the rules, an additional three bills designed with the same intent.
This continuous renewal of U.S. objections to Iran's and foreign domestic policy can easily have the effect, intended or not, to beat the drum for war against Iran. I mean, isn't this very familiar?
The U.S. House of Representatives treats these resolutions today as being uncontroversial. Let this Congress be warned that the Bush administration can use these resolutions against this body and declare the passage of these resolutions as a green light to engage in aggression against Iran, and Iran could then be the next Iraq.
I believe this House is better served by demanding sensible and responsible diplomatic foreign policy initiatives from the Bush administration; that we should demand that the administration engage immediately in high-level diplomatic negotiations.
By continuing to neglect this duty and engaging in the ongoing condemnation of Iran, without opening of diplomatic channels, what we're doing is systematically destroying every available route to restoring peace and security in the Middle East.
We know that Iran is guilty of belligerent statements. We need to look no further than the second in command, President Ahmadinejad, to recognize the escalation of rhetoric and escalation of provocation between Iran and other nations.
But we also need to look at what's happening in our own country, with the actions of our Vice President, to know that the U.S. Government hasn't been exactly clean on these matters. On March 7, 2006 in reference to Iran, Mr. Cheney stated: ``For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime, and we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message. We will not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.''
Now when he said that, it's very clear and unambiguous what that means. When you say all options on the table, you mean a military attack included, including the use of nuclear weapons. This is widely understood to be what the context of that statement was.
So here we are talking about trying to take a direction in foreign policy that would protect this country, and at the same time, we're jeopardizing our very troops in Iraq by rattling the sabers of war against Iran.
And so I think you cannot look at these resolutions apart from the context of administration policy. The same sentiments regarding Iran are reiterated by the Vice President on February 24 at a press briefing in Australia where he said, ``I've also made the point, the President made the point, all options are still on the table.''
Now I think that we have to be careful that this House isn't really acting as a pawn of the administration or emulating irresponsible examples when it comes to our Nation's foreign policy.
Last week the administration announced plans to sell $20 billion worth of U.S. weapons to Saudi Arabia and five other Middle Eastern countries. Arms groups, as well as human rights groups, question this decision, as well they should. The distribution of more weapons in the region when the United States purports to desire peace in the Middle East is counterproductive and counterintuitive.
So we really have to look at this doctrine that we're operating under, and I think this Congress has to demand responsible foreign policy initiatives, whether it's in regard to the Middle East or any other part of the world.