2001 Ron Paul 102:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman for yielding me this time.
2001 Ron Paul 102:2
Mr. Speaker, I rise in
opposition to the resolution and not,
obviously, because it condemns violence. We all condemn the violence.
But there is more to this resolution than just condemning the violence.
I have a problem with most resolutions like this because it endorses a
foreign policy that I do not endorse, and it does that by putting on
unecessary demands. So the demands part of this resolution is the part
that I object to, not the condemnation of violence.
2001 Ron Paul 102:3
By doing this, we serve to
antagonize. We hear today talk
about having solidarity with Israel. Others get up and try in their
best way to defend the Palestinians and the Arabs. So it is sort of a
contest: Should be we pro-Israel or pro-Arab, or anti-Israel or
anti-Arab, and how are we perceived in doing this? It is pretty
important.
2001 Ron Paul 102:4
But I think there is a third
option to this that we so
often forget about. Why can we not be pro-American? What is in the best
interests of the United States? We have not even heard that yet.
2001 Ron Paul 102:5
I believe that it is in the
best interests of the United
States not to get into a fight, a fight that we do not have the wisdom
to figure out.
2001 Ron Paul 102:6
Now, I would like to have
neutrality. That has been the
tradition for America, at least a century ago, to be friends with
everybody, trade with everybody, and to be neutral, unless somebody
declares war against us, but not to demand that we pick sides in every
fight in the world. Yet, this is what we are doing. I think our
perceptions are in error, because it is not intended that we make the
problem worse. Obviously, the authors of the resolution, do not want to
make the problem worse. But we have to realize, perceptions are pretty
important. So the perceptions are, yes, we have solidarity with Israel.
What is the opposite of solidarity? It is hostility. So if we have
solidarity with Israel, then we have hostility to the Palestinians.
2001 Ron Paul 102:7
I have a proposal and a
suggestion which I think fits the
American tradition. We should treat both sides equally, but in a
different way. Today we treat both sides equally by giving both sides
money and telling them what to do. Not $1 million here or there, not
$100 million here or there, but tens of billions of dollars over
decades to both sides; always trying to buy peace.
2001 Ron Paul 102:8
My argument is that it
generally does not work, that there
are unintended consequences. These things backfire. They come back to
haunt us. We should start off by defunding, defunding both sides. I am
just not for giving all of this money, because every time there are
civilians killed on the Israeli side or civilians killed on the
Palestinian side, we can be assured that either our money was used
directly or indirectly to do that killing.
2001 Ron Paul 102:9
So we are, in a way, an
accomplice on all of this killing
because we fund both sides. So I would argue we should consider
neutrality, to consider friendship with both sides, and not to pretend
that we are all so wise that we know exactly with whom to have
solidarity. I think that is basically our problem. We have a policy
that is doomed to fail in the Middle East; and it fails slowly and
persistently, always drawing us in, always demanding more money.
2001 Ron Paul 102:10
With the Arabs, we cannot tell
the Arabs to get lost. The
Arabs are important. They have a lot of oil under their control. We
cannot flaunt the Arabs and say, get lost. We must protect our oil. It
is called our oil. At the same time, there is a strong constituency
for never offending Israel.
2001 Ron Paul 102:11
I think that we cannot buy
peace under these circumstances.
I think we can contribute by being more neutral. I think we can
contribute a whole lot by being friends with both sides. But I believe
the money is wasted, it is spent unwisely, and it actually does not
serve the interests of the American people.
2001 Ron Paul 102:12
First, it costs us money. That
means that we have to take this money from the American taxpayer.
2001 Ron Paul 102:13
Second, it does not achieve
the peace that we all hope to have.
2001 Ron Paul 102:14
Therefore, the policy of
foreign noninterventionism, where
the United States is not the bully and does not come in and tell
everybody exactly what to do, by putting demands on them, I think if we
did not do that, yes, we could still have some moral authority to
condemn violence.
2001 Ron Paul 102:15
But should we not condemn
violence equally? Could it be
true that only innocent civilians have died on one side and not the
other? I do not believe that to be the care. I believe that it happens
on both sides, and on both sides they use our money to do it.
2001 Ron Paul 102:17
Mr. Speaker, like most
Americans, I was appalled by the
suicide bombings in Israel over the weekend. I am appalled by all acts
of violence targeting noncombatants. The ongoing cycle of violence in
the Middle East is robbing generations of their hopes and dreams and
freedom. The cycle of violence ensures economic ruin and encourages
political extremism; it punishes, most of all, the innocent.
2001 Ron Paul 102:18
The people of the Middle East
must find a way to break this
cycle of violence. As Secretary of State Colin Powell told the House
International Relations Committee in October, You have got to find a
way not to find justifications for what we are doing, but to get out of
what we are doing to break the cycle.
2001 Ron Paul 102:19
Mr. Speaker, I agree with our
Secretary of State. The
Secretary also said that we need to move beyond seeing the two sides
there as just enemies. I agree with that too. But I dont think
this piece of legislation moves us any closer to that important goal.
While it rightly condemns the senseless acts of violence against the
innocent, it unfortunately goes much further than that--and that is
where I regrettably must part company with this bill. Rather than
stopping at condemning terrorism, this bill makes specific demands in
Israel and the Palestinian areas regarding internal policy and
specifically the apprehension and treatment of suspected terrorists. I
dont think that is our job here in Congress.
2001 Ron Paul 102:20
Further, it recommends that
the President suspend all
relations with Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian Authority if they do
not abide by the demands of this piece of legislation. I dont think
this is a very helpful approach to the problem. Ceasing relations with
one side in the conflict is, in effect, picking sides in the conflict.
I dont think that has been our policy, nor is it in our best interest,
be it in the Middle East, Central Asia, or anywhere else. The people of
the United States contribute a substantial amount of money to both
Israel and to the Palestinian people. We have made it clear in our
policy and with our financial assistance that we are not taking sides
in the conflict, but rather seeking a lasting peace in the region. Even
with the recent, terrible attack. I dont think this is the time for
Congress to attempt to subvert our governments policy on the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
2001 Ron Paul 102:21
Finally, the bill makes an
attempt to join together our own
fight against those who have attacked the Untied States on September 11
and Israels ongoing dispute with the Palestinians. I dont think that
is necessary. We are currently engaged in a very difficult and costly
effort to seek out and bring to justice those who have attacked us and
those who supported them, wherever they may be, as the president
has said. Todays reports of the possible loss of at least two our
servicemen in Afghanistan drives that point home very poignantly. As
far as I know, none of those who attacked us had ties to Palestine or
were harbored there. Mr. Speaker, I think we can all condemn terrorism
wherever it may be without committing the United States to joining
endless ongoing conflicts across the globe.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr120501.htm