On February 12, 2009, the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia held a hearing titled "Gaza After The War: What Can Be Built On The Wreckage?". I have written a series of diaries on this hearing in order to describe what Congressmembers are publically hearing and saying regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
The previous entries have included:
Part One: Statements from the Subcommittee members
Part Two:Statement from David Makovsky of the Washington Institute For Near East Policy
Part Three:Statement from Dr. Ziad Asali of the American Task Force On Palestine
Part Four:Statement from Dr. Michele Dunne of the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace
Today's entry will include the statements from Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute. Her written testimony was submitted for the official record. Her oral testimony can be found on the webcast at the Subcommittee's hearing page. It last from the 52:00 to 1:00:00 minute mark. When describing the testimony, I will be using her words and phrases to the best of my ability.
Introduction
~At the request of the Subcommittee Chairman, the testimony will concern American policy goals in Gaza, assistance to the Gaza population, NGOs, and the intra-Palestinian divide.
~You will hear that change is afoot in the Middle East and that Arab nations are increasingly impatient with the likes of Hamas. You will also hear that Egypt and Saudia Arabia will no longer tolerate wanton Palestinian efforts to drag Israel-and the region-into war. These are animated by fear of Iran, not tolerance of Israel.
~These nations do not like Hamas because they recognize that jihadism is the face of the enemy. That may well serve American goals, but it does not advance the Palestinians' interests.
Policy Goals
~American policy goals should be simple and straightforward: An end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict built on a stable edifice that may, but should not necessarily, include a state of Palestine.
~A relationship with Hamas will not advance these goals, as the raison d'etre of the group is the eradication of the Jewish state.
~Efforts to tinker with Palestinian politics- efforts that the Israelis appear unable to eschew despite decades of failure-are equally dangerous.
~There are no "moderate" Hamas leaders with whom we should work.
Introduction To Recent Conflict,
~Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Hamas took over in 2007.
~Since 2005, Hamas fired apporximately 6,300 rockets at Israeli civilians.
~During the 6 month cease-fire last year, rocket attacks diminished but did not stop. After the truce ended in December, Hamas launched several hundred rockets, missiles, and mortars.
~Hamas pledged to rebuild tunnels it uses for smuggling arms, and Israeli intelligence reports are concerned that Iran will attempt to smuggle longer range missiles to Hamas.
~Until the supply of rockets to Hamas ends, Israel will be targeted. In light of the Obama Administration's professed intention to sit down and negotiate with Iran, it seems unlikely we will achieve many gains on the arms export/import front.
UNRWA And Other NGOs
~On the question of immediate aid to the Palestinians, UNRWA is central to the problem of manipulation of aid, though other NGOs are culpable as well.
~For decades, UNRWA has been an unapologetic advocate for Palestinian extremism and an unrelenting Israel detractor. That was no different in this recent Gaza war.
~UNRWA schools forment extremism, its employees are not vetted for connections to terrorist groups, its aid has been hijacked, and it has been complicit in political exploitation of its assistance to those in real need.
~Palestinians in Gaza are among the highest aid recipients in the world.
~UNRWA is singly-mindedly dedicated to perpetuating the victimhood of Palestinian refugees and pseudo-refugees. In light of its history of failure, it would be wise to revisit its existence.
~In the last week of January, the PA recognized the Internaional Criminal Court (ICC) in the territories. As a result, the ICC prosecutor has decide to open up investigations into alleged war crimes by Israel. Little good can come of this development.
Intra-Palestinian Divide
~Relatively speaking, Fatah is certainly better than Hamas. But then again, we are not Palestinian voters, who tried Fatah, tested them, and found them, unsurprisingly, wanting.
~She would like to say that Abu Mazen and Salaam Fayyad represent a new Palestine, but rather they are the old Palestine that looks better only when compared to Hamas. In fact, the Palestinian scene offers little by way of political hope for the future of the Palestinian peole.
~The international community has done almost nothing to aid the Palestinian grassroots, to bring new leadership to the fore, to educate about governance, or to demand real accountability from any Palestinian political leaders.
~Palestinians have the right to expect accountability, good governance, economic prosperity, and hope for their own future.
~The main reason they don't have the most basic of human needs has little to do with Israel and a lot to do with what is wrong with the Modern Middle East.
Conclusion
~In the short term, push off the solution to the Israel-Palestine problem until there is a solution to the Palestine problem.
~The US must isolate Hamas, and help the Israelis to do so more effectively.
~The US must vote with our aid money to marginalize aid agencies that do not serve anyone's interest except their own.
~The US must turn to private sector economic development as a means to build civil society.
~The US must use the political, economic, and military tools available to penalize Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and others who arm and finance Hamas.
~The US must start any peace-building exercise at the beginning, with the understanding that the only stable peace in the Middle East rests upon a Palestine that is more concerned with jobs and education and less concerned with Zionists.
Next Part: Testimony of Dr. Safa Rifka, National Board Chair of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee submitted by Congressmember Keith Ellison (MN-05).
