General improvements over HR 4681: Unlike HR 4681, the new
version of S. 2370 expresses support for US engagement in
peacemaking and provides additional flexibility for the
Administration to further US national security. S. 2370 now does
more to strengthen Palestinian moderates, where HR 4681 weakened
them, and is more constructively and appropriately focused on
changes Hamas must make. CMEP is also grateful that S. 2370 includes
a far broader definition of humanitarian aid than HR 4681, a key
difference that was present in the bill since it was first
introduced.
A new section has been added to S.2370 entitled
"Israeli-Palestinian Peace, Reconciliation and Democracy Fund",
requiring the Secretary of State to establish a fund for $20 million
to support "through Palestinian and Israeli organizations, the
promotion of democracy, human rights, freedom of the press, and
non-violence among Palestinians, and peaceful coexistence and
reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians". This constructive
language bolsters hope for peace and peacemakers.
The Presidential certification, which is the basis for the entire
bill is now clearly focused on Hamas. By using the language, "Hamas-
controlled Palestinian Authority" in key places the Senate bill makes
it clear that this bill’s restrictions relate only to the new Hamas
government and will not remain if there is new leadership or change on
the part of Hamas. However, the overall reform requirements still
remain too broad and restrictive, mixing long-term reforms with
immediate ones.
A major requirement placed on Hamas has been reformulated to make
it more reasonable. In the new bill, rather than "recognize
Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state", the language has been
changed to "acknowledge the Jewish state of Israel’s right to exist",
which in practice will be more in line with what the Quartet has laid
out and what was previously asked of the PLO, Jordan and Egypt.
The ban on direct aid has been further moderated by including
authority for the President to waive restrictions – "in the interests
of national security"- making it possible for the President to provide
funds for specific uses: for the administrative and personal security
costs of the President of the PA; for activities of the President of
the PA related to border crossings, the peace process and democracy
and rule of law; and assistance for the judiciary branch of the PA.
The waiver still remains unduly cumbersome by creating an onerous
process by which a single Member of Congress could hold up the aid.
The visa restriction section is now entirely and appropriately
focused on Hamas. The ban now applies to "an alien who is an
official of, under the control of, or serving as a representative of
the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority” and exceptions have been added,
exempting the President of the PA and PLC members who are not
affiliated with Hamas and other FTOs, ensuring that moderate
Palestinians will not be weakened by this bill. However, the continued
restriction on travel for PLO officials at the UN, still unduly
punishes pro-peace Palestinians because Hamas is not a member of the
PLO.
The waiver on the ban on aid to the West Bank and Gaza programs has
been further broadened, including an exception for assistance for
non-Hamas members of the PLC for their participation in democracy and
peace process programming. The time that the President has to notify
Congress if he wants to certify that other types of assistance should
be allowed because they will further US national security interests
has been reduced (from 45 days to 30 days). The Senate bill has always
been far more constructive than the House because it defined
humanitarian needs broadly as “basic human needs” rather than the more
narrow “basic human health needs”, which will allow for more aid via
NGOs to reach the Palestinian people. CMEP had expressed concern that
if the definition were interpreted narrowly, the Senate’s restrictions
could still hamper important US assistance programs such as those
related to: education, private sector development and employment
generation, because those areas were not explicitly mentioned.
Excerpts from Statements Made by the Authors of S. 2370 on June 22,
2006
Sen. McConnell (R-KY): "Mr. President, today I would like to
applaud my colleagues for passing S. 2370, the Palestinian
Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006...
I particularly thank my colleague, the senior Senator from
Indiana, Mr. Lugar, for his leadership on this issue. He has been
instrumental in fashioning language on the important question of how
the United States addresses the challenges posed by the new Hamas-dominated
government in the West Bank and Gaza...
In short, this legislation urges the current Palestinian
Government to take another step toward joining the community of
peaceful nations and to step away from the ranks of terrorism. Let
me also tell you what this bill does not do. It does not cut off
assistance to the Palestinian people with respect to food, water,
medicine, sanitation, and other basic human needs. Thus,
humanitarian assistance that does not go through the Hamas-led PA
will continue. Moreover, funding for democracy programs will also be
continued. Both Senator Biden and I appreciate the need not to
punish the Palestinian people for actions their government may take.
Our concern is with terrorism and with terrorists and in providing
Hamas the proper incentives to embrace peace and to abandon the
proterror stance they have taken up until now..."
Sen. Biden (D-DE): "Mr. President, I support the Palestinian
Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006, of which I am the lead cosponsor. The
political rise of Hamas presents us with a difficult policy challenge.
None of us want to see a penny of American taxpayer money going to a
Hamas-led government that refuses to meet the basic demands not just
of the United States, but of the international community, including
the so-called Quartet of the United States, the European Union, Russia
and the United Nations. Those demands are that Hamas recognize Israel,
renounce violence, and accept past agreements. At the same time, the
situation in the Palestinian Territories is an explosive one, with
potentially disastrous consequences for the Palestinian people, Israel
and the entire region. Tensions between Fatah and Hamas militias have
been escalating in recent weeks. 165,000 Palestinian Authority
employees have not been paid in months. Avoiding a genuine
humanitarian crisis and a descent into a Palestinian civil war will
require diplomatic flexibility and sustained American engagement. In
this sensitive environment, my friend from Kentucky and I have tried
to find the right balance between isolating Hamas, while
simultaneously not doing anything to harm the Palestinian people...
But in dealing with Hamas, it is important that we keep our
strategic objectives clear. While our intention is to pressure Hamas
to accept the same terms that bound previous Palestinian governments,
it is not in the interest of either the United States or Israel to be
seen as punishing the Palestinian people...
My friend from Kentucky and I have been able to make important
changes to address the most significant issues raised by the
administration and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
These include broadening the President's waiver authority as well as
narrowing the focus of the bill to the Hamas- controlled Palestinian
Authority. I look forward to continuing to work with the
administration as the bill moves forward..."
