The Resolution passed 407 to 9 on Wednesday.

As the Jerusalem Post reported, “The Unites States House of Representatives on Wednesday voted 407-9 in favor of a resolution endorsing US President George W. Bush's April declarations that Israel would not have to fully withdraw from the West Bank as part of a final peace deal, and that Palestinian refugees would not be resettled in Israel.”

Representative McDermott voted in favor of the resolution. Please contact his office and voice your displeasure with him for voting in support of Bush's endorsement of Israel's unilateral moves.

Jim McDermott
7th District Office
1809 7th Avenue, Suite 1212
Seattle, WA 98101-1399
(206) 553-7170
(206) 553-7175 Fax

D.C. Office
1035 Longworth HOB,
Washington DC, 20515
(202) 225-3106
(202) 225-6197 Fax

*****

Congressman Sam Farr went on record Wednesday in support of right-wing Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon's efforts to colonize and annex large sections of the occupied West Bank.

House Concurrent Resolution 460, sponsored by right-wing Republican leader Tom Delay, “strongly endorses” the letter sent by President George W. Bush to the Israeli prime minister in April supporting his so-called “disengagement” plan. This unilateral initiative calls for withdrawing the illegal Israeli settlements from the occupied Gaza Strip, but — far more significantly — would incorporate virtually all of the illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank into Israel, leaving the Palestinians with a series of non-contiguous and economically unviable cantons collectively constituting barely 10% of historic Palestine. (Even in the case of the Gaza Strip, Sharon's plan would allow Israel to control the borders, the ports, and the airspace, as well as having the right to conduct military operations at will.)

Most observers — including moderate and progressive Israelis — recognize that by leaving the Palestinians with little hope of achieving a viable state through negotiations, this will only swell the ranks of extremist Palestinian groups and produce more terrorism. Farr rejects this analysis, however, insisting that Sharon's land grab will somehow “enhance the security of Israel and advance the cause of peace in the Middle East.”

The Farr-supported resolution calls for the Palestinian “state” that could eventually emerge (which would actually be more like a Bantustan of apartheid-era South Africa) to be “based on rule of law and respect for human rights,” but does not call on Israel to respect the rule of law and human rights, which its occupation forces and colonists are violating on a daily basis. The resolution also repeatedly cites terrorism as the obstacle to peace and security, not the occupation and repression that has spawned it. Furthermore, the resolution calls for the United States to further strengthen Israel's military prowess and defends Israel's right to launch attacks against Palestinian groups that it deems threaten Israeli citizens, including settlers.

In supporting this resolution, Farr has effectively renounced UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, which call on Israel — in return for security guarantees from its Arab neighbors — to withdraw from Palestinian territories seized in the June 1967 war. All previous U.S. administrations of both parties had seen these resolutions as the basis for Arab-Israeli peace.

These Israeli settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which deem it illegal for any country to transfer any part of its civilian population onto territories seized by military force. UN Security Council resolutions 446, 455, 465 and 471 explicitly call on Israel to remove its colonists from the occupied territories. The vast majority of these settlements that the Bush-Sharon plan seeks to formally annex into Israel were built after these resolutions were passed. Farr, however, in an incredible act of chutzpah, claims that Israel cannot now withdraw from these settlements “in light of new realities on the ground,” i.e., the new settlements that were built in violation of these UN Security Council resolutions. Congressman Farr, however, apparently agrees with President Bush that Sharon's Israel, unlike Saddam's Iraq, need not abide by UN Security Council resolutions.

Not surprisingly, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan was highly critical of the U.S. endorsement of Sharon's plan, noting that “final status issues should be determined in negotiations between the parities based on relevant Security Council resolutions.” Farr, however, appears to prefer Bush and Sharon's unilateralism to the international legal framework provided by the United Nations.

Farr has also gone of record saying refering to the illegal settlements euphemistically as “Israeli population centers” that are located “in Israel” and that recognizing the right of Palestinians refugees to return to their homes would not be “just” or “fair.”

The Bush letter that Farr endorsed effectively destroys the once highly-touted “road map” and marks the first time in the history of the peace process that a U.S. president has pre-empted negotiations by announcing support of such a unilateral initiative by one party. Both Israel and the United States have continued to refuse to even negotiate with Palestine Authority president Yasir Arafat, Palestinian prime minister Amhed Qureia, or any other recognized Palestinian leader, on substantive issues dealing with a peace settlement.

The resolution is also being widely interpreted as an effort to short-circuit last fall's Geneva Initiative – supported by the Palestinian leadership and leading Israeli moderates – where Palestinians agreed that Israel could annex some blocs of settlements, but only along Israel's internationally-recognized bo rders and only in exchange for an equivalent amount of territory currently part of Israel that would be granted to the new Palestinian state. According to public opinion polls, the majority of Americans — including a majority of American Jews — support this approach over the Bush-backed Sharon plan endorsed by Farr.

More fundamentally, Farr's effective endorsement of an Israeli annexation of land it conquered in the 1967 war is a direct challenge to the United Nations Charter, which forbids any country from expanding its territory through military force. Farr's vote therefore constitutes nothing less than a renunciation of the post-World War II international system, effectively recognizing the right of conquest.

Supporting the resolution were the Christian Coalition, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, and other right-wing groups. Leading the opposition to the resolution were Churches for Middle East Peace, the Tikkun Community, and similar progressive organizations. The “no” votes included such leading Congressional liberals as John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Pete Stark, Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey, John Dingell, and Maxine Waters. Farr, however, decided to place himself in the “aye” column with the Republican Right.

Please contact Sam Farr's offices protesting his support of this resolution which not only violates Palestinian rights, but undermines the peace process, threatens Israel's legitimate security interests, undermines the authority of the United Nations, and undercuts fundamental international law.

Washington office: 202-225-2861

Distict offices: (831) 429-1976 and (831) 424-2229

This is the listserv for the Friends of Palestine Solidarity Committee, based in Seattle. You can find out more about PSC by replying to this email address, emailing us at palestinejustice@yahoo.com, or by coming to one of our events. Once you've come to a meeting, you may become a member of PSC. We welcome all non-racists working for justice and human rights all over the world, including Palestine.