Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2010 And 2011
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2410, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act and want to thank our Chairman for his outstanding leadership and work on this major legislation.
In the words of President Obama, ``America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity,'' and this legislation rightfully commits the resources necessary to uphold that promise.
I want to just take a moment to highlight a couple of provisions that we worked to have included in this bill:
First, I want to thank Chairman Berman for including the United States-Caribbean Educational Exchange Program from legislation I introduced which previously passed the House in the 110th Congress, the Shirley A. Chisholm United States-Caribbean Educational Exchange Act.
This valuable initiative will promote better understanding of U.S. values and culture by offering scholarships to Caribbean students to pursue studies in the United States.
Second, I am pleased this legislation includes reporting language I offered regarding the enduring and horrible humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Improving the lives of the Palestinian people in Gaza is essential to fostering conditions necessary for stability, economic and social development, and lasting peace.
Finally, on the heels of President Obama's brilliant speech in Cairo, I want to take a moment to underscore the importance of supporting the President, Special Envoy Mitchell and Secretary Clinton as they bring renewed focus and energy toward advancing a two state solution that will bring lasting peace. And that includes supporting Israel's right to exist and the call for an end of the continued Israeli settlements.
Again, I want to thank the gentleman for the time and encourage support for this important bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for yielding.
Let me just rise to oppose this amendment and just very briefly say why.
Every country has a right under international law and under their own laws to defend their own sovereignty, their own country, to protect their country from attacks. Israel certainly has that right already, and it should exercise that right. We all recognize the security of Israel in terms of its being essential in any foreign policy that we develop as it relates to a peace process that is really so critical to the security of Israel.
I just have to say, with regard to this amendment, however, I am very reluctant to support it, and I'll just say why very briefly.
If you will remember, right after the horrific attacks of 9/11, we passed a resolution that I opposed, and I opposed it for many, many reasons, one of which was that the resolution was, in essence, a blank check to use force against any nation that harbored--and this is in this language here--terrorist organizations. I'll tell you that I believe that that casts a blank check once again in terms of allowing for an attack against any country. It could be Pakistan or any country which harbors terrorists, terrorists who may or may not be responsible for any unfortunate attacks.
So, for those reasons, I think this amendment is not necessary. Israel and other countries have a right and should defend themselves from any threat from Iran, from terrorist organizations or from any country. As to any country that harbors terrorists or those who want to do harm to Israel, to me, this provides for an opening, which, unfortunately, I did not believe was correct for our own country nor do I believe we should give that authority, or that rubber stamp, to any country to allow for an attack. It's just a broad blank check. For those reasons, I oppose this.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. Chair, I want to be clear that I agree with the fundamental principle that every nation, including Israel, has the right to defend itself against an imminent military threat.
Unfortunately, this amendment goes far, far beyond that bedrock principle.
Nearly 8 years ago, I stood on this House floor and confronted a very similar issue. On that day, September 14, 2001, I voted against the authorization of use of United States force against Afghanistan because it granted the US a blank check to wage war any place and any time against any enemy. It went far beyond any authority granted for international war making.
Today this amendment raises the same issue and I am compelled to draw the same conclusion.
I was unable to support US government broad blank check power, in good conscience I am not able to support that type of excessive authority for any other nation.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source