The following is background information designed to supplement the key elements of that message.  Discuss these issues as appropriate for the particular Member/staff, your own interests, and as it helps to undergird the message.

STEPS TO RESTORE AN ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS

BACKGROUND:  The most all-encompassing issue in the Middle East remains the need to put the Israeli-Palestinian peace process back on track.  Restoring hope for peace now is crucial to calming the violence that has taken such a heavy toll on Israelis and Palestinians.  The U.S. must put more pressure on both parties – at the very least that each side implement the steps of the “roadmap” while clearly avoiding provocative actions that destroy the possibilities of peacemaking.

Many resolutions and congressional letters are designed to show the breadth and depth of congressional support for Israel by 1) backing particular Israeli actions, e.g., construction of the separation barrier, 2) blocking the Administration from pressing Israel, and 3) criticism and/or punitive measures against the Palestinians. 

Fortunately, two non-binding resolutions introduced in House and Senate near the end of 2003 are positive toward Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking and continue to gather co-sponsors.  One should not expect that there will be hearings, floor debate, or passage of either of these resolutions.  Nevertheless, they provide a positive move toward peace by encouraging further efforts of Israelis and Palestinians working toward peace and urge President Bush and Israeli and Palestinian leaders to embrace these efforts.  S.Res.276 introduced by Senators Feinstein (D-CA) and Chafee (R-RI) currently has 5 other co-sponsors, and H.Res.479 introduced by Representatives Capps (D-CA) and Houghton (R-NY) has 44 more co-sponsors to date.  [While these resolutions are not intended to be a focus of our advocacy message, they are fairly well-known on Capitol Hill and may come up in advocacy visits.  Do not hesitate to ask for support of these resolutions, should they become part of the conversation.]

In all cases, your advocacy should exhibit support and goodwill for both Israel and Palestine – and the need for the two peoples living side-by-side in peace.

WHAT CONGRESS CAN DO:  Senators can be asked to co-sponsor S.Res.276 (the Feinstein-Chafee Resolution), and Representatives can be requested to co-sponsor H.Res.479 (the Capps-Houghton Resolution), if they haven’t already.  More importantly, Congress must refrain from putting impediments in the way of the White House and State Department as they attempt to apply pressure on both sides to end the violence, stop the settlements, and reopen negotiations within the framework of international law.  The cycle of violence – and the daily deaths of both Israelis and Palestinians – is tragic and must be calmed.  Hope for a renewed diplomatic process would bolster the moderates and those seeking peace in both Israel and the Palestinian territories. 

BUILDING MIDDLE EAST SECURITY AND DEVELOPMENT: A NEW APPROACH

BACKGROUND:  For over half a century, U.S. policy in the Middle East has been driven by security concerns related to petroleum, the State of Israel, and the Cold War.  The security concern largely ignored is the economic security of the area’s peoples and states.  It is impossible to imagine an enduring peace that ignores the pressing human needs of most peoples in the region. 

Since 1978, the Middle East has dominated the U.S. foreign assistance budget, with the vast majority of aid going to Israel and Egypt.  Between them, those two countries have traditionally received about 40 percent of congressional appropriations for foreign aid worldwide.  Over half the amount to Israel and Egypt has been for military assistance on grounds that risks taken for peace in the 1978 Camp David Accords make them vulnerable to attack.  Members of Congress are hesitant to revise this arrangement and uneasy ever to be perceived as unsupportive of Israel’s security concerns.  However, other realities argue for Congress to review the manner in which assistance is allocated in the region.  These include an overwhelming budget deficit, increased federal spending in several other areas, and the need within the foreign assistance budget to address critical problems such as HIV/AIDS.  The most likely way to increase funding for sustainable economic development in this region would be through a reallocation of the assistance already being directed to these countries.

The region faces major economic challenges, such as equitable access to water.  However it also holds promise for many economic opportunities, including trade, tourism and joint business and infrastructure projects.  Addressing these issues could become the cement of peace between Arabs and Israelis, if faced together.  Encouraging that effort should be at the core of U.S. Middle East policy.

Durable peace and stability will depend on a variety of factors, among them military reductions, sustainable economic development, respect for human rights and people’s dignity, and greater popular participation in governance.  Over the long-term, most of the financial resources for regional development will have to come from area governments and private investors.

Foreign assistance will have a limited but vital role.  To generate funds for human development, military spending in the region and in foreign aid budgets must be curtailed, redirected, and supported by a regional arms reduction regime.

However, do not explicitly call for an end of aid to Israel.  At this juncture in time in most congressional offices, this message will cause what you say to be dismissed.  Your message on economic security and development, delivered much more generally, contains what will be heard as an even more significant risk: that if Israel does not change behavior soon toward the separation barrier, settlements, etc., Members of Congress are likely to face a growing number of mainstream constituencies and even the general public explicitly calling for aid cuts to Israel.

WHAT CONGRESS CAN DO:  The release of the proposal by several religious and development organizations, Middle East Security and Development: A New Approach, coincides with many of the aspects being reported about President Bush’s upcoming “Greater Middle East Peace Initiative.”  Particularly, there is agreement on the needs throughout the region for poverty-reduction, education, improved governance, and women’s empowerment.  Likewise, Middle East Security and Development states the need for strong support of joint economic development, regional development institutions and economic infrastructure, and for broader trade access for all Middle Eastern nations.  These steps would be essential not only for Arab nations but also for the well-being of Israel.

Congress must begin a thorough re-examination of the purposes and results of the current structure of U.S assistance to the Middle East.  There are better ways for U.S. foreign aid to the region to build economic security and development.  It is necessary to find ways in which to fund the President’s Greater Middle East Peace Initiative.

          DESTROYING THE PROSPECTS FOR MIDDLE EAST SECURITY AND PEACE: THE SEPARATION BARRIER

BACKGROUND:  The separation barrier has much support on Capitol Hill.  Therefore, if one’s message of opposition to the construction of this barrier is to be heard, it is important to be careful in one’s use of language.  Many opponents of the barrier call it a wall (and other names), while supporters have labeled it a security fence.  We are purposely opting to call it a “separation barrier.”  This is an accurate description and it is intended to allow the discussion to go forward no matter what the opinion of the Member/staff.  It is essential not to become bogged down in a debate as to whether it is a fence or a wall!

Make the case of how thoroughly the barrier is destroying Palestinian civil society, farming, economic and family life, education, health care, governance, and infrastructure – and making everyday life for some nearly unbearable.  However, it is also important to remember that in Congress, the overriding concern of most offices is for the security of Israel first – and then for the well-being of the Palestinians.

Therefore, an effective argument in this milieu must be cast in terms of security.  Not only is the barrier hurting the Palestinian people, it is destroying the prospects for developing long-term security and peace.  Due to the separation barrier, many Palestinians are now talking about giving up on a two-state solution; yet, it is this very two-state solution that is supported by U.S. policy, the international community, and the member churches of Churches for Middle East Peace as the formula for a just and durable peace.  The barrier is destroying trust among Palestinians that Israel will ever be a fair partner in negotiations; thus, Palestinians are finding less reason to negotiate a solution and make peace with Israel.  Barriers may prevent particular attacks (as do other methods that governments take), but this barrier is building intense resentment toward Israel that will lead to more violence against it.  It is not in the long-term security interests of Israel to build this barrier.

A second point involves where the barrier is being built.  Whether we believe that barriers should ever be constructed between nations and peoples or not, Israel does have a right to construct a barrier – but only on land recognized as its own.  This barrier is purposely being built on Palestinian land in the West Bank and represents a land- and water-grab, a provocation that no nation (or people) would ever tolerate on its own land.  Furthermore, the separation barrier in and around Jerusalem effectively isolates East Jerusalem from the West Bank, preventing it from being the capital of a Palestinian state and the hub of Palestinian life and economy.  We continue to reiterate the church’s and the international community’s call for Jerusalem to be a city shared by two peoples and three faiths.

The barrier as it is being constructed is effectively dividing the West Bank into several non-contiguous geographical areas – as in cantons or reservations.  The barrier, for instance, being constructed around Bethlehem will have a particularly devastating effect on the Christian community.  The manner in which Palestinian communities are being isolated is rendering impossible the existence of a viable Palestinian state in the near-future.

WHAT CONGRESS CAN DO:  Israel will destroy its hopes for long-term security and peace with its Arab neighbors if it continues to build a separation barrier in the West Bank.  Unless Israel were to build solely on land recognized by the international community to be its own (on or within the Green Line), the Israeli government must be persuaded to cease construction and dismantle the separation barrier.  All congressional legislative efforts to endorse current construction of the barrier must be resisted by Representatives and Senators.  Instead, Congress should find legislative means to encourage a halt to the construction, and, at a minimum, should ensure that U.S. funds are not used for these purposes. 

March 5, 2004