Chair Cardin Speaks Against Paul Amendment to Limit Foreign Assistance to the Palestinian People

WATCH THE CHAIR'S REMARKS HERE

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, spoke on the Senate floor to urge his colleagues to vote against an amendment to the continuing resolution Congress voted on today. The amendment would undermine U.S. security coordination efforts in the West Bank and prohibit the U.S. from meeting longstanding commitments to provide lifesaving assistance to innocent Palestinians.

“Our ally Israel is at war to destroy Hamas terrorists, not at war against the Palestinian people,” said Chair Cardin. “This amendment does not serve our national security interests. It compromises our ability to have a successful conclusion after Hamas has been destroyed; it compromises our current abilities to keep peace in the region, particularly in the West Bank; it compromises what we need to do in regards to the humanitarian needs in the region.”

A copy of the Chair’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, have been provided below.

Mr. President, shortly we’re going to be voting on an amendment offered by our colleague from Kentucky, Senator Paul, that deals with restrictions on U.S. support in regards to the Middle East. I'm going to urge my colleagues to vote against that amendment.

Our ally Israel is at war to destroy Hamas terrorists, not at war against the Palestinian people. But this amendment by my colleague threatens U.S. efforts that support stability and security efforts, and that serves Israel and U.S. interests.

What it would do is put certain restrictions on what funds America can make available in the region, particularly in regards to the Palestinians. It would undermine the United States' ability to work in lockstep with Israel on critical security cooperation and on counterterrorism efforts with the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Today we have a partnership in regards to security on the West Bank.

The U.S. is helping in regards to the training of Palestinian security forces. It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination – there’s too much violence taking place everywhere. But the security forces have been successful in providing more stability in the West Bank. That would be compromised or eliminated under the Paul amendment.

The amendment would prohibit the U.S. from meeting long-standing commitments to providing lifesaving assistance for hospitals, vaccines for children, and water treatment facilities.

This goes beyond Taylor Force and cutting off potential funds to the Palestinians for their lifesaving type of activities from hospitals to water treatment facility plants. It would also prohibit future assistance, including humanitarian assistance for innocent Palestinians the day after Israel has destroyed Hamas, undermining the United States' ability to work towards a political horizon for Palestinians that protects Israel's security. We are all concerned about what happens after the war ends with Hamas – after Hamas is destroyed. 

We need to have an entity governing in Gaza that has credibility among the Palestinians. We also need to preserve the ability to have partnerships to make a lasting peace, so we can have lasting peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The Paul amendment compromises that ability. We know the tragedy of this war Hamas started. But we hope coming out of it will give us a new opportunity for peace in the region. And that will require us to be able to help deal with the crisis that's been created through Hamas' attacks, That includes being able to work to make sure there's a future for the Palestinian people living side by side in peace and security with Israel.

So this amendment does not serve our national security interests. It compromises our ability to have a successful outcome after Hamas has been destroyed; it compromises our current abilities to keep peace in the region, particularly in the West Bank; it compromises what we need to do in regards to the humanitarian needs in the region. And for all those reasons I would urge my colleagues to reject the amendment.

###