Forty years ago, Israel’s Six-Day War ended with the annexation
of Arab East Jerusalem and the enlargement of the city’s area
by roughly 2.5 times the size of pre-war West and East Jerusalem combined.
In 1980, Israel’s parliament passed a law stating that “Jerusalem,
complete and united, is the capital of Israel.”
Since then, neither the U.S. nor any other country has recognized the incorporation
of Jerusalem into the State of Israel. Former U.S. ambassador to Israel, Daniel
Kurtzer, explained: “Mutual agreement and direct negotiations between the
parties are required for final status issues, including the status of Jerusalem.”
That understanding, however, is not shared by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA), 14 co-sponsors
of House Concurrent Resolution 152, and the majority of House members who adopted
it by voice vote. The resolution celebrates the 40th anniversary of the Six-Day
War and the “reunification” of the city of Jerusalem. It also urges
the President to enforce the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 which recognizes the
city as the undivided capital of Israel and calls for the immediate relocation
of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to the ancient city. When President Clinton
waived the Embassy Act’s requirement in 1999, he explained that “Israelis
and Palestinians have agreed to include Jerusalem among the issues to be covered
in their permanent status negotiations. … The United States should not
be taking steps of its own that prejudice those negotiations and make them more
difficult.”
In opposition to the anti-Palestinian hawks in Congress, Churches for Middle
East Peace (CMEP), an organization representing 21 American Christian denominations,
sent a message to all House staff deploring that H. Con. Res. 152 prejudges the
future. It obviously ignores the significance of Jerusalem, not only to Jews
but also to Christians and Muslims.
For Jews, the city is the holy site of the first and the second temple. For Christians,
it was in Jerusalem where Jesus was tried, suffered, and crucified and rose again
from the dead. For Muslims, the city is the place where the prophet Muhammad
ascended to heaven from the Haram al Sharif. For the three monotheistic faiths,
the final settlement of the status of the city requires that religious freedom
and open access for all be guaranteed.
H. Con. Res. 152 is but one of numerous Congressional measures over the past
forty years that undermine the peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. Pressured, cajoled, and bribed by the American Israel Political Affairs
Committee (AIPAC), a majority in both houses of Congress is apparently not convinced
that a sovereign State of Israel and a sovereign Palestinian state sharing control
over Jerusalem in peace is in the best interest of the American people.
Yet, neither AIPAC, nor Tom Lantos, its chief spokesman in Congress, nor all
the other members of Congress--who routinely vote for at least $2.5 billion annually
in direct U.S. aid to Israel--have made a single constructive move to end the
40-year occupation of the Palestinian territories.
Do they approve of the more than 200 Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory?
Do they approve of the barrier of fences and concrete walls, now over 400 miles
long, along Israel’s border with the Palestinian West Bank? How long will
they continue to reject the numerous proposals--such as the Clinton Parameters,
the Geneva Accords, and the People’s Voice Initiative--that envision Jerusalem
as an “open city” and “capital for states” with Israeli
sovereignty in West Jerusalem and Palestinian sovereignty in East Jerusalem?
There are numerous Jewish voices throughout America who oppose the counterproductive
course of AIPAC and its disciples in Congress. In response to the passage of
the Lantos resolution, M. J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum wrote: “Congress
has a role to play in the Middle East …but that leadership is not expressed
by resolutions celebrating a war but by using its authority to promote security
for Israelis and Palestinians.”