July 24, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 125 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session
OPPOSING GLOBAL BOYCOTT, DIVESTMENT, AND SANCTIONS MOVEMENT TARGETING ISRAEL; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 125
(Extensions of Remarks - July 24, 2019)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Extensions of Remarks] [Page E980] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] OPPOSING GLOBAL BOYCOTT, DIVESTMENT, AND SANCTIONS MOVEMENT TARGETING ISRAEL ______ speech of HON. GWEN MOORE of wisconsin in the house of representatives Tuesday, July 23, 2019 Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, the right to participate in boycotts, whether we agree with them or not, is protected by our constitution, including political expression aimed at Israeli policy. Americans have long used such tactics to influence and pressure our government and other governments. The only difference here is we appear to be striving to carve out and treat differently, even silence, those who disagree with the policies undertaken by our ally Israel. How can you support the right under the Constitution to political speech including boycotts and then bring this resolution to the floor? Let me be clear, I oppose anyone (Palestinian, Israeli, American, etc..) who are taking actions inimical to peace. And after nearly three decades, it is fair to say all sides, including the U.S., have done so in some shape or form. Any effort that has at its heart delegitimizing the State of Israel is doomed to fail. And the BDS movement, just like unilateral actions undertaken by either side, is not going to bring two states living in peace side by side. It was born out of frustration, that we all share, with a moribund peace process that harms both Israelis and Palestinians. At this time when Congress can be doing so much more to help advance the peace process or even to just revive it, why is the only action we are taking is to bring to the floor a nonbinding resolution that doesn't address where most of the blame for the failures lay: the continuing intransigence and refusal by Israeli and Palestinian political leaders to make the tough decisions and compromises that need to be made for peace. That refusal continues to feed the status quo. But rather than call out those responsible, including several actions taken by this Administration, for setting back the cause of peace, we have decided that this moment is ripe solely to attack the First Amendment rights of Americans? Again, rather than pressing the parties to make the tough decision and concessions that will be necessary for peace, Congress has decided that the top focus at the moment is the voluntary decisions by some Americans to exercise political expression? The First Amendment does not threaten Israel's right to exist. Nor does any American exercising that right. I agree with the editorial by the New York Times which warned that attempting to ``silence one side of the debate'' is not ``in the interests of Israel, the United States, or their shared democratic values.'' Rather than attacking the First Amendment right of Americans to criticize the policies of our own government or our allies, how about pushing our own administration to actually say the words ``two-state solution'' which it refuses to do or to actually act as if its interested in pursuing that longstanding goal that this Congress and past administrations has reaffirmed is the best option for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. I am concerned that resolutions such as this one serves no real purpose, certainly not to those of us interested in working as honest brokers to bring this decades long history of simmering tensions, outright war, and hostility to an end, permanently. I fear that this resolution is just another in a long line of nonbinding resolutions considered by this House that fails to actually advance peace between the two sides, ignores the various and complex factors that have made the prospects for peace in this conflict the worse in a generation including actions by this administration that have been roundly rejected by many. Again, in looking at this resolution, I understand that it is easier to blame a host of outside actors, including those who we disagree with, for the current damaging status quo. The reality however remains that it is the consistent and repeated failure of political leaders in Ramallah, Jerusalem, and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to make the tough decisions and concessions that peace requires and which has left us in this damaging status quo. The folly of the current situation was encapsulated by the Trump administration's recent Bahrain conference which neither the Palestinians or Israelis attended. Finally, I am concerned that this resolution is a slippery slope to actually taking up binding legislation affecting cherished First Amendment rights such as the bill that passed the Senate earlier this year which was derided in media reports as a ``political stunt.'' Israeli's and Palestinians alike have had enough of political stunts. Opportunities for progress and for peace are growing fewer and farther apart as the damaging status quo and divides only harden, waiting for the next explosion of violence. And are we surprised that without prospects for peace, extremists seem to be gaining ground? I would be far more constructive if this Congress would focus on finding viable solutions to the Israel-Palestinian conflict rather that promoting legislation that raises free speech concerns. For example, H.Res. 326 which was marked up in committee at the same time as this resolution but is curiously absent from this week's calendar. I firmly believe it is our responsibility as a Congress to keep working towards peace despite pessimism and pessimists. Clearly right now, what the Middle East needs is more solutions, not more meaningless resolutions. I said this a few years ago and I will repeat it again now: both peoples would gladly trade empty resolutions from the U.S. Congress for real progress on the ground and a sincere path forward. ____________________