U.S. House passes resolution threatening to suspend aid to Palestinians

[Violet_Crumble]

In an overwhelming majority, the United States House of Representatives passed Thursday night a resolution urging U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration to suspend financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority if its leaders push for a United Nations vote for unilateral recognition in September.

The resolution, which was passed by the Senate last week, was voted in by a majority of 407 out of 435 representatives, and calls for the renewal of direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

Resolution 268 was introduced by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer. Last week the Senate also called on Obama to use the U.S. power of veto to stop the potential UN vote.

The resolution was welcomed by the Anti-Defamation League, commending the members of Congress “for mobilizing a resounding message that the Palestinians cannot reject direct negotiations with Israel and embrace Hamas,” said Robert G. Sugarman, ADL National Chair and Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-house-passes-resolution-threatening-to-suspend-aid-to-palestinians-1.372112

[AverageJoe90]

1. Frankly, I can't help but agree........but the same thing goes for the Israeli far right, too.

I'm sorry folks, but as much as I still sympathize with the Palestinians, Hamas has GOT to GO. They are a FASCIST, far-right TERRORIST organization, nothing more, nothing less. And direct negotiation with Israel MUST begin again, as it once did. Otherwise, not only will this make the Palestinians look bad in front of the world, but any rejections will play directly into the hands of the Israeli far right, who, I'm sure we can all agree, are just as despicable as our own hardliners.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. Not declaring statehood isn't going to get rid of Hamas...

The only ones looking bad in front of the world with the US making nasty threats like that and trying to bully the Palestinians into not declaring their state is the US politicians who voted for it. They're hypocrites of the highest order...

[TomClash]

3. I have two questions for SugarFox

What negotiations?

Whose land is it anyway?

[leveymg]

4. The US can only veto Security Council Resolutions, not General Assembly

Doesn't matter - most of the rest of the world will recognize Palestine and the UN will continue humanitarian and development aid. Just learn to live with it, Bibi - it's called a "Two State Solution".

[oberliner]

5. The resolution does not actually do that

First, there were several significant components of this resolution that are simply ignored here.

Namely:

(1) reaffirms its 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;

I would note that a clause like this would have been unthinkable at one point in the not-so-distant past.

It goes on for ten more clauses and does not "threaten to suspend aid to Palestinians", as this headline falsely asserts (not a first for Ha'aretz by any means).

The resolution "urges the administration to consider suspending assistance to the Palestinian Authority pending a review of the unity agreement" - urging someone to consider doing something is not the same as threatening to do it.

I would also point out that it is a non-binding resolution.

[Violet_Crumble]

6. Have you got a link for the actual Resolution?

I don't know my way round US govt sites, so if you've got a link handy it'd be good to read it in its entirety...

Yr correct that such a clause as the one you mentioned would have been unthinkable not all that long ago, btw, though without yet having read the entire thing, I think that bit urging the administration to consider suspending assistance to the Palestinians is a ridiculous thing to do.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. Don't worry. I tracked it down...

Here's the entire text, and it's a hypocritical and incredibly biased piece of nonsense. Those ten clauses were predominately focused on why the US shouldn't provide assistance to the Palestinians. If only they'd spend a fraction of the time they do in threatening to try to stop aid to the Palestinians in trying to put some real pressure on Israel for things it does wrong, then this sort of stuff wouldn't be so laughable....


Reaffirming the United States commitment to a negotiated settlement of
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct Israeli-Palestinian
negotiations, and for other purposes.

Whereas the policy of the United States since 2002 has been to support a two-
state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict;
Whereas a true and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians can only be
achieved through direct negotiations between the parties and acceptance
of each other's right to exist;
Whereas Palestine Liberation Organization Chair Yassir Arafat pledged in a
letter to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on September 9, 1993,
that ``all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be
resolved through negotiations'' a pledge that served as a critical basis
for the Israeli-PLO Declaration of Principles signed 4 days later;
Whereas the unity agreement signed by Fatah and Hamas on May 4, 2011, was
reached without Hamas being required to renounce violence, accept
Israel's right to exist, and accept prior agreements made by the
Palestinians (the ``Quartet conditions'');
Whereas Hamas, an organization responsible for the death of more than 500
innocent civilians, including 24 United States citizens, has been
designated by the United States Government as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization and a specially designated terrorist organization;
Whereas Hamas kidnapped and has held Israeli sergeant Gilad Shalit in captivity
in violation of international norms since June 25, 2006;
Whereas Hamas continues to forcefully reject the possibility of peace with
Israel;
Whereas Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accepted a two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has consistently
advocated for immediate direct negotiations with the Palestinians, who,
in turn, have prevented negotiations by insisting on unprecedented pre-
conditions;
Whereas, on April 22, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton stated,
``We will not deal with nor in any way fund a Palestinian government
that includes Hamas unless and until Hamas has renounced violence,
recognized Israel and agreed to follow the previous obligations of the
Palestinian Authority'';
Whereas United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, stated on
February 18, 2011, that it was ``unwise'' for the United Nations to
attempt to resolve key issues between the Israelis and Palestinians;
Whereas Palestinian leaders are pursuing a coordinated strategy to seek
recognition of a Palestinian state within the United Nations and
directly from foreign governments;
Whereas, on December 15, 2010, the House adopted House Resolution 1765, which
reaffirmed that the House of Representatives supports 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
and opposes any attempt to establish or seek recognition of a
Palestinian state outside of an agreement negotiated between Israel and
the Palestinians;
Whereas current United States law precludes assistance to a Palestinian
Authority which shares power with Hamas unless that Authority publicly
accepts Israel's right to exist and adheres to all prior agreements and
understandings with the United States and Israel;
Whereas the United States annually provides more than $550 million annually and
has provided more than $3.5 billion cumulatively in direct bilateral
assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest
recipients of foreign aid per capita;
Whereas United States aid to the Palestinians is predicated on a good faith
commitment from the Palestinians to the peace process including direct
negotiations with Israel;
Whereas Palestinian abandonment of the Quartet conditions and inclusion of Hamas
in a government would jeopardize the positive steps the Palestinian
Authority has taken in building institutions and improving security in
the West Bank in recent years; and
Whereas efforts to form a unity government without accepting the Quartet
conditions, to bypass negotiations and unilaterally declare a
Palestinian state, or to appeal to the United Nations or other
international forums, or directly to foreign governments for recognition
of a Palestinian state, violate the underlying principles of the Oslo
Accords, the Road Map, and other relevant Middle East peace process
agreements, all of which require resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict through direct negotiations only: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) reaffirms its 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;
(2) states its firm belief that any Palestinian unity
government must publicly and formally forswear terrorism,
accept Israel's right to exist, and reaffirm previous
agreements made with Israel;
(3) reiterates its strong opposition to any attempt to
establish or seek recognition of a Palestinian state outside of
an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians;
(4) urges Palestinian leaders to--
(A) ensure that any Palestinian government will
seek peace with Israel;
(B) cease all efforts at circumventing the
negotiation process, including through a unilateral
declaration of statehood or by seeking recognition of a
Palestinian state from other nations or the United
Nations;
(C) resume direct negotiations with Israel
immediately and without preconditions; and
(D) take appropriate measures to counter incitement
to violence and fulfill all prior Palestinian
commitments, including dismantling the terrorist
infrastructure embodied in Hamas;
(5) supports the Administration's opposition to a
unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state and its use of
the veto at the United Nations Security Council on February 18,
2011, the most recent example of a longstanding United States
policy of vetoing unbalanced United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian peace
process;
(6) calls upon the Administration to announce that it will
veto any resolution on Palestinian statehood that comes before
the United Nations Security Council which is not a result of
agreements reached between Israel and the Palestinians;
(7) calls upon the Administration to lead a diplomatic
effort to oppose a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian
state and to oppose recognition of a Palestinian state by other
nations, within the United Nations, and in other international
forums prior to achievement of a final agreement between Israel
and the Palestinians;
(8) affirms that Palestinian efforts to circumvent direct
negotiations and pursue recognition of statehood prior to
agreement with Israel will harm United States-Palestinian
relations and will have serious implications for the United
States assistance programs for the Palestinians and the
Palestinians Authority;
(9) supports the position taken by Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton on April 22, 2009, that the United
States ``will not deal with or in any way fund a Palestinian
government that includes Hamas unless and until Hamas has
renounced violence, recognized Israel and agreed to follow the
previous obligations of the Palestinian Authority.'';
(10) urges the administration to consider suspending
assistance to the Palestinian Authority pending a review of the
unity agreement; and
(11) reaffirms the United States statutory requirement
precluding assistance to a Palestinian Authority that includes
Hamas unless that Authority and all its ministers publicly
accept Israel's right to exist and all prior agreements and
understandings with the United States and Israel.

http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/291491

[oberliner]

8. I don't think they spent all that much time on this

There was pretty much no debate. It was passed quickly.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. Based on the little I know of how these things work in the US...

I'd agree with bemildred that it isn't worth anything and is but one thing in a large vat of pointless noise. I'd be thinking something as one-sided as that should have been debated, but if the US works the same as here, they like sneaking some things through at the end of marathon sessions when there's slumbering MP's busting to get home. Having said that, it would have been wiser for that resolution to have not seen the light of day, because despite it not carrying any power, it probably does carry some symbolic weight...

[aranthus]

17. It's for domestic consumption.

However, it can't be giving the Palestinians the warm fuzzies.

[bemildred]

9. Congressional resolutions aren't worth a bucket of warm spit.

Just saying ...

[azurnoir]

10. Didn't the Senate do something similar recently?

Senate Resolution 185

http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/293939

I guess the House did not want to be 'outdone'

[oberliner]

11. AJC Applauds House and Senate Resolutions Opposing Palestinian UDI

"We pay tribute to the House for passing, by an overwhelming majority, this critically important and timely resolution declaring that peace between Israel and the Palestinians can be achieved only through direct negotiations," said AJC Executive Director David Harris. "We note, too, that the House resolution follows last week's equally welcome Senate resolution similarly urging the Palestinian leadership to abandon its dangerous unilateral campaign."

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ajc-applauds-house-and-senate-resolutions-opposing-palestinian-udi-125205789.html

[azurnoir]

12. well of course did you expect otherwise?

did anyone?

[oberliner]

13. You were the one expressing surprise

Not sure why you would - of course the Senate and House each have their version.

[azurnoir]

14. surprise really? I pointed out that the Semate had also done

something similar, how you convoluted surprise out that I am not sure

[oberliner]

15. Not sure why you felt it needed pointing out

Pretty standard practice.

[azurnoir]

18. oh that was your 'reasoning' I merely pointed out the Senate backed the House

with their own resolution, however IMO that fact really should have made further comment superfluous

[tootrueleft]

19. Best move for the Pals? Seek statehood on the terms verbatim by Obama but at the UN. Then lets see

him veto his own plan