U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

97–265PDF 2015

WORDS HAVE CONSEQUENCES: PALESTINIAN

AUTHORITY INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE AND

MARKUP OF H. RES 293, EXPRESSING

CONCERN OVER ANTI–ISRAEL AND

ANTI–SEMITIC INCITEMENT WITHIN THE

PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

HEARING AND MARKUP

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

OCTOBER 22, 2015

Serial No. 114–111

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Elliott Abrams, senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies, Council on 

Foreign Relations ................................................................................................. 6

Jonathan Schanzer, Ph.D., vice president for research, Foundation for the 

Defense of Democracies ....................................................................................... 12

Mr. David Makovsky, Ziegler Distinguished Fellow, director, Project on the 

Middle East Peace Process, Irwin Levy Family Program on the U.S.-Israel 

Strategic Relationship, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy ......... 26

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Elliott Abrams: Prepared statement ............................................................... 8

Jonathan Schanzer, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ................................................... 14

Mr. David Makovsky: Prepared statement ............................................................ 29

MARKUP OF 

H. Res. 293, Expressing concern over anti-Israel and anti-Semitic incitement 

within the Palestinian Authority ........................................................................ 54

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H. Res. 293 offered by the 

Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs .............. 59

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H. 

Res. 293 offered by the Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative 

in Congress from the State of Arizona .................................................... 66

APPENDIX 

Hearing and markup notice .................................................................................... 70

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 71

Markup minutes ...................................................................................................... 72

Markup summary .................................................................................................... 74

The Honorable David Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Rhode Island: Jewish Members of Congress Condemn ‘‘Offensive and 

Incendiary’’ UNESCO Resolution Blaming Israel for Recent Surge in Violence ...................................................................................................................... 75

(1)

WORDS HAVE CONSEQUENCES: PALESTINIAN 

AUTHORITY INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE 

AND MARKUP OF H. RES 293, EXPRESSING 

CONCERN OVER ANTI–ISRAEL AND 

ANTI–SEMITIC INCITEMENT WITHIN THE 

PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY 

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2015

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Royce (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman ROYCE. This hearing will come to order. This morning 

we consider the recent wave of terror that has gripped Israel. 

In a span of weeks, Palestinian militants have attacked more 

than 100 Jewish men, women, and children. Ten of those who have 

been knifed have died. A 2-year-old toddler, a 13-year-old on a bike, 

a 70-year-old woman on a bus are among those who were wounded. 

This is terrorism at its core when anyone who steps outside could 

be next. 

These attacks, mainly stabbings, have been driven by a deliberately misleading message. Palestinian Authority officials and extremist clerics have falsely claimed that Israelis are trying to 

change the status quo by limiting Muslim access to the Temple 

Mount/al-Aqsa Mosque compound that is holy to both faiths. 

The calls for killing have been amplified on social media as Arabic hashtags like ‘‘the knife intifada,’’ ‘‘poison the knife before you 

stab,’’ and ‘‘slaughtering the Jews,’’ rapidly spread a message to attack those who are Jewish. Palestinian President Abbas regrettably 

has joined the hate speech. 

Israel is contending with a deep-seated hatred, nurtured by Palestinian leaders over many years in mosques, in schools, in newspapers, and on television channels. Consider growing up in an environment in which television shows regularly glorify terrorists who 

have killed Israeli civilians; where you are taught that Jews are 

subhuman. Or watching a small boy interviewed on television who 

speaks of wanting to be an engineer, in his words, ‘‘so that I can 

build bombs to blow up all the Jews.’’ Or seeing the family next 

door receive a generous stipend for their son igniting his suicide 

vest. 

2

Perhaps most concerning, this culture of hate is being cultivated 

by Palestinian leaders. After being exposed day in and day out to 

these types of messages for most of their young lives, many of these 

young people will react and once the Palestinian President declares, in his words, ‘‘We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem’’ there are consequences to that. 

And it doesn’t help when those in the media—or the Secretary 

of State for that matter—give this incitement a pass. Yes, there are 

many complexities in the Middle East, but there can be no moral 

equivalency when children as young as two are being stabbed. 

None. The U.S. should be speaking loudly and clearly—Palestinian 

officials must work to restore calm and renounce the incendiary 

statements. And its leadership must be confronted with the questions: How does this incitement serve the interests of Palestinian 

men, women, or children? How does this lay the groundwork for 

peace? 

The international community also has a responsibility. There is 

the international outcry for the generations of children which are 

growing up on blind hatred. There is an outcry. But that outcry is 

pretty muted compared to what I have seen in the international 

press. We need to amplify that voice. We need to build on some of 

the things that we have done here in the hearings in order to try 

to convince the Palestinian Authority to toss these textbooks and 

go with a lesson plan that teaches coexistence. Given that about 

one-third of the Palestinian Authority’s budget is financed through 

foreign aid, international donors have leverage on this. They should 

be using that leverage. They could follow the lead of the U.S. Congress and make direct funding of the PA off limits until the incitement stops. 

This is a very tough time for Israel. It is my hope that President 

Abbas and others will seek to restore calm in the coming days and 

incitement is challenged so reconciliation has a chance. 

And I now turn to the ranking member for any opening comments that Mr. Eliot Engel of New York might have. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for calling this hearing. Obviously, the Palestinian violence in Israel and the West Bank is reaching a crisis point. Our 

immediate goal must be to demand that those responsible end this 

senseless and lawless bloodshed. But it is also important that we 

seek to understand why this violence has reared up now, while continuing to demonstrate unwavering support for our ally, Israel. 

I am glad that our witnesses are here to be part of this conversation. Let me say to all of you: Welcome to the Foreign Affairs Committee. 

It is heartbreaking, I have to say, to wake up seemingly every 

morning to a new report of a stabbing or shooting of an innocent 

civilian in Israel. I can only imagine what it is like for the victims 

and their loved ones, and no person anywhere should have to live 

with that kind of fear. 

And let me just say for people who have grievances and who feel 

that the Government of Israel hasn’t done what it should do: Terrorism is not the answer. And I support a two-state solution. But 

the Palestinians will never get their state on the backs of terrorism. If they think that they can use terrorism to get their state, 

3

they are sadly mistaken and that has to be understood by everyone. 

These are innocent civilians who have had no role whatsoever in 

anything. And it is terrorism pure and simple when you go and just 

stab somebody or make them afraid that you are going to harm 

them when they are just innocent civilians in the street. 

That is not anything that should in any way, shape, or form be 

condoned and there is no moral equivalency. No government anywhere should hesitate to defend its citizens from that sort of violence and why there would be any question about that baffles me. 

Israel has the right to defend itself and its people, plain and simple, and we know what the Israelis are up against. 

This wave of violence isn’t some random flare up. It is the product of years and years of anti-Israel propaganda and indoctrination, 

some of which has been actively promoted by Palestinian Authority 

officials and institutions. 

These ugly ideas have been woven into Palestinian society and 

media for decades. Books that teach children that Israelis are their 

enemies, political cartoons depicting Jews as apes and pigs, the glorification of terrorists as martyrs and heroes in a holy war—every 

slur, every slogan, every lie told about Israel and Jews is like adding another piece of kindling to the stack. One small spark and it 

starts burning and that is what we are seeing today. 

The best option for stopping these attacks would be for Palestinian leaders to demand an end to the violence and bring those responsible to justice. 

Unfortunately, that is not what we are hearing from the Palestinian Authority. Instead, we are hearing a false equivalence between terrorists and Israeli law enforcement. We are hearing 

blame put on the Israelis for defending their people. 

False claims about changing the status quo on the Temple 

Mount, lies about the Israelis executing an attacker when that 

attacker is actually being treated in an Israeli hospital—statements like these just throw gasoline on the fire. 

Chairman Royce and I are circulating a letter to President Abbas 

imploring him to repudiate this wave of violence and to stop the 

PA’s incitement of this brutality. 

So much depends on bringing a quick end to these attacks because in addition to the horrible cost of life and limb crises like this 

one play into a much bigger picture. 

With each drop of blood shed, the goal of a two-state solution becomes harder and harder to reach. Violence and terrorism will 

never be the foundation of a peaceful future. 

Palestinians need to put down their knives and guns and their 

leaders need to come back to the negotiating table with no preconditions. 

I sincerely hope for the sake of Israelis and Palestinians alike 

that President Abbas shows real leadership in the days ahead. 

For now, I think it is important that we continue to speak out 

against the mayhem that this Palestinian violence has brought to 

Israel. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about what is behind this recent violence, how it will be halted and what, if anything, we can do to help reach that goal more quickly. 

4

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Engel. 

We are going to go to 2 minutes for our chairwoman and ranking 

member of the Middle East Subcommittee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, 

and then to Ted Deutch. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Chairman Royce and 

Ranking Member Engel, for convening this important and timely 

hearing and for calling forward the resolution I introduced alongside my friend and south Florida colleague, Congressman Ted 

Deutch, House Resolution 293, for markup immediately following 

today’s hearing. 

As you said, Mr. Chairman, words do have consequences and so 

also do actions and what we have seen for far too long from the 

Palestinian Authority and Abu Mazen words and actions that are 

designed to incite violence, stoke tensions between Israelis and Palestinians, and shut down the path to a peaceful settlement between 

the two. 

Why do we see this? Because Abu Mazen is weak and self-serving. This is the only course of action he can take as a charade to 

attempt to look strong to the Palestinian people. 

But the Palestinian people have grown tired of his failed leadership and they don’t trust him nor his corrupt allies. So what does 

he do when the people start to turn on him? He turns them against 

Israel. 

When in doubt, the PA blames Israel in order to deflect the tension away from its own shortcomings. We will never see peace 

achieved between the two until we see real leadership from the 

Palestinians, leaders who are willing to work for the Palestinian 

people instead of against Israel. 

The Palestinians need a leader who is willing to reach peace instead of inciting violence and that man has never been nor will 

ever be Abu Mazen. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Ileana. 

Mr. Ted Deutch. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the ranking member for moving specifically to hold this hearing to examine 

the official Palestinian incitement as this wave of violent attacks 

continues in Israel. 

I want to welcome back the witnesses today. I look forward to a 

productive discussion, one that I trust and know will be rooted in 

fact. 

Let me first add, I believe the last 2 weeks of violence in Israel 

is a direct result of incitement. These attacks aren’t about protecting religious rights. They are acts of terrorism. 

Let me be clear. All violent attacks on innocent civilians must be 

condemned, regardless of whether the perpetrators are Palestinians 

or Israelis, and I welcome statements by Prime Minister 

Netanyahu condemning violent attacks of revenge and warning 

against vigilantism. 

But these recent attacks flow directly from Palestinian figures 

attempting to turn a political conflict into a religions conflict by 

making false and inflammatory accusations about Israeli actions 

with respect to the Temple Mount. 

5

These kinds of messages have nothing to do with the current political situation between the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority. 

When President Abbas himself says, ‘‘We welcome every drop of 

blood spilled in Jerusalem,’’ that sends a dangerous message that 

violence is the only way to preserve Muslim sites. 

Unfortunately, incitement within official channels of the PA is 

nothing new. There are countless examples in official textbooks, social media pages, and television speeches that call for armed conflict or depict Jews as dirty pigs. 

President Abbas came to power on a platform of nonviolence. He 

pledged to seek a stable Palestinian state through direct negotiations with Israel. If this is still his platform he must speak out to 

his people. He has yet to condemn one stabbing or armed attack 

in the past few weeks, instead, choosing to go on television and 

claim that Israel was engaged in the summary execution of children. 

And as Secretary Kerry said this week, President Abbas had 

been committed to nonviolence. He needs to be condemning this 

loudly and clearly and he needs to not engage in the incitement 

that his voice has sometimes been heard to encourage. 

That has to stop. Mr. Chairman, if officials within the Palestinian Authority never publicly acknowledge the benefits of the cooperation that is taking place between the Palestinian security 

forces and Israeli forces to calm the situation, if they never prepare 

their people for what peace looks like, a Palestinian state living 

side by side next to the Jewish state of Israel, and if their children 

never see Israel existing on a map in their textbooks, they continue 

to refuse to condemn the recent acts of terror, incitement will unfortunately continue and peace will, unfortunately, be dramatically 

harder to obtain. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Deutch. 

This morning we are pleased to be joined by a distinguished 

panel. We have with us Mr. Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Prior to 

this, Mr. Abrams served as the deputy national security advisor in 

the previous administration. 

Dr. Jonathan Schanzer is vice president for research at the 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Dr. Schanzer has written 

two books on the region and served as a counter terrorism analyst 

at the Department of Treasury. 

And Mr. David Makovsky is a director and distinguished fellow 

at the Washington Institute for Near East policy. Mr. Makovsky recently served as a senior advisor to Secretary of State Kerry on the 

Middle East. 

And without objection, the witnesses’ full prepared statements 

are going to be made part of the record here and members will 

have 5 calendar days to submit any statements, questions, or extraneous material for the record. 

So we will start with Mr. Abrams. Please summarize your remarks and let us get the microphone right about there. 

6

STATEMENT OF MR. ELLIOTT ABRAMS, SENIOR FELLOW FOR 

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

Mr. ABRAMS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding 

this hearing. 

What leads a teenager to stab or attempt to stab to death someone he or she had never met? Stabbing is the most intimate of attacks. It is not setting a bomb for people you will never see. It is 

not shooting from a distance. It is reaching out to someone inches 

away from you and taking that person’s blood. 

The answer is, I think, the teaching of hate, as the statements 

you have made indicate. We use the term incitement but that is 

a polite way of saying the teaching of hatred—the demonizing and 

dehumanizing of Jews. 

Teaching hate by honoring terrorists, teaching hate by telling lies 

about what is happening on the Temple Mount. You can read in 

the press sometimes that these killings are the product of poverty 

and hopelessness or disappointment about the peace process. 

But, you know, there is not more poverty or hopelessness in October than there was in June. That is not the explanation. It 

doesn’t explain the timing. 

So why now? I think the most logical explanation is these lies 

about changes at the Temple Mount, that Israel is undermining it 

or defiling it, and those lies are being repeated not only in the Palestinian media but by the top Palestinian leadership. 

Several of you have quoted President Abbas on this question. 

Once the violence began, the Palestinian leadership, unfortunately, 

starting with President Abbas, have been feeding it. And, again, 

you have used some of the terrible terminology that he has used. 

‘‘Each drop of blood that was spilled in Jerusalem is pure 

blood’’—President Abbas. He accused Israelis of ‘‘the summary execution of our children in cold blood.’’ This was a reference to a Palestinian teenager who is alive. 

Once could go through lots of examples of the glorification of individual terrorists. Probably the worst is Dalal Mughrabi, a woman 

who was involved in the killing of 37 civilians, 12 of them children, 

in a 1978 bus hijacking. 

She has been turned into an absolute hero. There are schools and 

summer camps and sports tournaments named after her. The PA 

celebrated the 31st anniversary of that terrorist attack with an 

hour-long TV special. The Palestinian Bar Association decided 

about a week ago to award a great honor to Mohammed Halabi, a 

19-year-old who killed two Israelis on October 3rd, stabbing them 

to death in the old city of Jerusalem. They call him a heroic martyr 

and gave him an honorary law degree. 

Well, the U.S. Government reaction to all this has been to condemn incitement. The problem is that we have been condemning 

incitement for decades but we never do anything about it and it is 

a bipartisan error. We don’t do anything about it under administrations of both parties. 

Usually, there is something else we want more that day or week 

or month. We want the Palestinians to do something with the U.N. 

or not do something with the U.N. or we have a negotiation coming. 

7

So what do we do? It is not an easy question, because if you 

think about ‘‘Let us cut off every cent for the PA’’ the first people 

to tell you ‘‘Oh, don’t do that,’’ will be the Government of Israel because if the PA collapses it collapses into their laps. 

So I have just three suggestions. First, close the PLO office in 

Washington and do not let the PA open an office here until there 

has been real progress in stopping in the incitement by PA institutions and officials. 

Second, if we cannot usefully stop all PA funding, let us try to 

stop the illegal personal funding, the corruption that is rife there. 

It is widely known that corruption has increased significantly since 

Salam Fayyad resigned as Prime Minister 21⁄2 years ago. We 

should be doing more in investigating and preventing corruption. 

And third, we should keep track of who is doing the incitement 

that you have referred to. Who are the individuals doing that incitement, and they should be barred from getting visas for the 

United States, at least for a time. 

There ought to be a personal price to pay. These are not panaceas, these three steps, but they are better than what we usually 

do, which is, frankly, nothing. 

What we have seen in the last few weeks, the teaching hatred 

and glorifying terror, eventually results in acts of terror that reflect 

that hatred. So we need to act ourselves. 

Thank you for inviting me here today. I look forward to any 

questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Abrams follows:]

8


97265a-1.eps
9


97265a-2.eps
10


97265a-3.eps
11


97265a-4.eps
12

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN SCHANZER, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH, FOUNDATION FOR THE DEFENSE OF 

DEMOCRACIES 

Mr. SCHANZER. Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Engel, members of the committee, on behalf of FDD, thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

The current violence can be traced to Palestinian allegations that 

Israel seeks to change the status quo on the Temple Mount. 

Israel controls access to the site but it does not interfere in matters of religious prayer and over the last year there have been approximately 4 million Muslims on the site compared to just 12,000 

Jews. 

Yet, the Palestinian media is filled with wild reports that Israel 

seeks to undermine Muslim rights there, and at the forefront of 

this campaign is WAFA, the news agency of the PLO. 

To calm tensions, Israel has barred ministers and parliamentarians from entering the Temple Mount, and when Jews visit, they 

are forbidden from praying. Israeli security enforces this rather 

strictly. 

Unfortunately, Mahmoud Abbas, who is both PLO chairman and 

Palestinian Authority President, has taken no steps to reduce tensions. In a speech last week, Abbas accused Israel of working to 

change the status quo and he accused Israel of terrorism and 

shooting Palestinian children in cold blood. 

Abbas now faces some tough choices. He can back a third 

intifada and ride the support of his people. But the chaos could 

upend his rule in the West Bank. He also risks invoking the ire of 

the Israelis, who could easily topple him. 

If he stands down, he can maintain security cooperation with 

Israel to fight the domestic forces that threaten his grip on the 

West Bank. But in so doing, he fails to galvanize his people. 

This is why Abbas has tacitly embraced the unrest but has not 

unleashed PLO or PA forces against Israel. 

Interestingly, Hamas also has one foot in the uprising and one 

foot out. Hamas has kept a lid on the violence in Gaza for fear of 

another war that could devastate their territory. 

But Hamas is a key driver of the stabbings and other violence 

in the West Bank and Jerusalem. For Hamas, the benefits of fomenting unrest in the West Bank are two-pronged. They get to 

challenge Israel and also undermine their political rival, the Palestinian Authority, which they have tried to unseat for more than a 

decade. None of this poses a risk to Hamas’ grip on Gaza. 

With neither Abbas nor Hamas fully committed to war, social 

media has taken an outsized role. 

One particularly disturbing hub is the Palestine Dialogue Forum, 

or PLDF, which depicts Jews as monkeys and pigs, Palestinian toddlers wearing Hamas headbands and wielding knives, and worse, 

they promote hashtags calling for the Jerusalem intifada and the 

knife intifada. 

Hamas and Fatah also maintain dangerous social media channels calling for Palestinians to embrace violence. I identify these 

and many other outlets in my written testimony. 

Mr. Chairman, amidst all of this, the Obama administration has 

issued talking points that have arguably led the Palestinians to beVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:22 Dec 02, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\102215\97265 SHIRL
13

lieve that their violence is justified. To put it mildly, this is 

unhelpful. 

I am often asked whether this is a third intifada. In short, I don’t 

know, but I can offer the following six suggestions. 

Number one is halt Iranian cash to Hamas. Iran’s financial ties 

with Hamas are well documented. After Iran begins to receive 

sanctions relief, pursuant to the nuclear deal signed this summer, 

Hamas stands to benefit even more. Congress must stop these 

funds from flowing. 

Number two, pressure Qatar and Turkey to stop supporting 

Hamas. Both countries, because of their status as U.S. allies, think 

they can support Hamas without being viewed as state sponsors of 

terrorism. Congress should not let this stand. 

Number three, target the PLO. The PLO is technically the peacenegotiating body for the Palestinians. In reality, it is a bloated and 

opaque organization that has consistently stymied diplomacy. Congress should consider punitive measures until the PLO halts its incitement. More broadly, it should rethink its recognition of the 

PLO. 

Number four, investigate the Palestine National Fund. The PNF 

is the official financial organ of the PLO. The PNF receives funding 

from the PA budget, to which America contributes 20 percent. The 

PNF uses its funds to help the families of ‘‘martyrs, ’’ and it funds 

Palestinian media organs. Congress should determine whether the 

U.S. funds the PNF and take action accordingly. 

Number five, stop the Palestine 194 campaign. When Israel responds to terrorist attacks, the Palestinian Authority alleges war 

crimes. This is part of a campaign designed to both delegitimize 

Israel and pave the way for unilateral declaration of statehood. 

Congress should clarify U.S. policy on this dangerous campaign. 

And finally, prepare for Palestinian succession. Washington must 

hasten the orderly exit of Mahmoud Abbas. After a decade of corruption and poor governance, he lacks the ability to lead. This has 

been made clear by his half-hearted stance on Palestinian violence. 

Now is the time to make plans for a new leader. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for inviting me here today. I look 

forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Schanzer follows:]

14


97265b-1.eps
15


97265b-2.eps
16


97265b-3.eps
17


97265b-4.eps
18


97265b-5.eps
19


97265b-6.eps
20


97265b-7.eps
21


97265b-8.eps
22


97265b-9.eps
23


97265b-10.eps
24


97265b-11.eps
25


97265b-12.eps
26

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Dr. Schanzer. 

Mr. Makovsky. 

STATEMENT OF MR. DAVID MAKOVSKY, ZIEGLER DISTINGUISHED FELLOW, DIRECTOR, PROJECT ON THE MIDDLE 

EAST PEACE PROCESS, IRWIN LEVY FAMILY PROGRAM ON 

THE U.S.–ISRAEL STRATEGIC RELATIONSHIP, THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Engel and 

distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the situation in Jerusalem. 

In discussing it, we should be clear what I think we would all 

agree on—there is no justification for any incitement to violence. 

When you say that Israel wants to change the status quo on the 

Temple Mount Haram al-Sharif, it is equivalent to yelling fire in 

a crowded theater. 

Given the role that such allegations have played before in provoking violence in the past, I had added up just since 1991 when 

we have had these spurts, 269 people have been killed as a result 

of these allegations before the current round, which Chairman 

Royce mentioned. 

Secretary of State Kerry said in an interview on NPR last Friday 

there is no excuse for the violence—Palestinians need to understand and President Abbas has been committed to nonviolence but 

he needs to be condemning this loudly and clearly and he needs to 

not engage in some of the incitement that his voice has sometimes 

been heard to encourage. So this has to stop. 

This incitement includes public remarks. As we have heard, 

every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem is pure, every martyr will 

reach paradise and every injured person will be rewarded by God 

and Jews ‘‘have no right to desecrate the mosque with their dirty 

feet.’’ Yes, he has called for a nonviolent struggle in recent days but 

the damage here is pretty strong. 

Sadly, this is not a new charge that Israel is out to destroy the 

mosque. Since the 1929 Hebron Massacre, there have been, like I 

mentioned, several incidents. 

But a few things needs to occur to ensure that this pattern is not 

repeated, and I would just like to associate myself with some of the 

comments like the idea of blacklisting people engaged in such incitement. 

I think even a congressional delegation to deal with your European counterparts who are also generous supporters of the Palestinians—there needs to be some sensitizing there. 

But when it comes to the mount itself, there needs to be acknowledgement that the Temple Mount is holy to both Muslims 

and Jews. While Israeli leaders of all stripes have asserted the 

sanctity of the area to Muslims—the Haram al-Sharif—the reverse 

has not been the case. 

The Palestinian leadership does not acknowledge the site’s historical significance for the Jewish people. At the Camp David summit in 2000, Yasser Arafat famously angered President Clinton by 

denying the temples even existed, saying they were located in 

Nablus or even in Yemen. Clinton reportedly responded that every 

27

Sunday school student in Arkansas knew that this was not the 

case. 

The vast majority of Jews and Israelis around the world do not 

attempt to pray on the Temple Mount. From 1967 and on its chief 

rabbinate has forbidden Jews from visiting the area, believing this 

should not occur until the messianic age. 

Yes, a few radical Israeli activists and even some politicians, including Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel, have recently visited the 

mount. 

Yuval Diskin, the former head of the Shin Bet, echoed the view 

of many who urged not to allow this, saying that this is ‘‘the most 

fuel-saturated flammable area in the Middle East.’’ To the credit of 

the Netanyahu government, it has refused to change the status 

quo. 

Ironically, the lack of acknowledgement on the Palestinian side 

was not always the case. A pamphlet for tourists published by the 

Supreme Muslim Council in 1924 says the fact that the al-Aqsa is 

built on the site of the Solomon’s Temple is ‘‘beyond dispute.’’

However, the intertwining of religion and nationalism ensured 

that the historical acknowledgement was erased. Of course, neither 

side has to accept the narrative of the other as sacrosanct. 

But they can acknowledge that the other side reveres the site as 

they do. Violence is bound to continue, as we have seen, and it is 

very important that—you know, we want to be clear that there are 

other factors here. But there is, like I said, no excuse for violence. 

What can be done in terms of the site? I think one thing is to 

help define the status quo with an explicit set of understandings. 

It would add a measure of predictability. This means also that the 

Jordanians would a take side to this along with Israel and the Palestinians. 

Jordan, being the custodian of the Temple Mount for the Arab 

side, would have to affirm that the status quo is indeed being 

maintained. 

Another idea—Israel is able to use social media when it comes 

to reaching Palestinians in Gaza, urging them to get out of harm’s 

way. 

There has to be a way for the start-up nation with all its high 

tech prowess to find ways to communicate directly to the smart 

phones and cell phone and text messaging on the Arab side. 

My final point is this, that that is the situation. It could get 

worse. It is important to remember that Israel and the Palestinian 

security officials are engaged in daily security cooperation that is 

vital to both sides. We are approaching the 20th anniversary of the 

killing of Yitzhak Rabin. 

Nobody could call Rabin a dreamy peacenik. Yet, he understood, 

I would like to say in conclusion, that the traumas endured by the 

Israelis and Palestinians require them to separate. 

This insight underscores the need to continue to work for separate political entities to give dignity to both sides. 

But the bloodshed in Jerusalem reminds us that the Palestinians 

need to come to terms with the fact that both sides have both political rights but each side has a religious connection to the land. 

If that recognition is not reached, I worry that the violence will 

continue to periodically erupt and even intensify. 

28

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Makovsky follows:]

29


97265c-1.eps
30


97265c-2.eps
31


97265c-3.eps
32


97265c-4.eps
33

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Makovsky. 

So in testimony here, one of the discussion points was the case 

of Mohammad Halabi, a 19-year-old who attacked an Israeli family 

with a knife, killing the father, injuring the mother, and the 2-

year-old son. 

So we have somebody going after a 2-year-old with a knife and 

I guess at this point we are not surprised that he would be honored. We are sort of used to that being a reaction. 

The question to me—what jumped out at me was he was honored 

by the Palestinian Bar Association. So that is what I was going to 

ask the panel here. 

So he is given an honorary law degree. One would think that a 

society’s lawyers might be in a place to find some, you know, moderation or tolerance in this debate, that they wouldn’t jump to the 

conclusion that this individual who perpetrated the attack would 

be given a law degree. 

So if not among the bar, where can we find those forces among 

Palestinian society today? Mr. Makovsky. 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. I would refer you to a colleague of mine, Mohammed Dajani, who is at the Washington Institute. He is a teacher 

at al-Quds University. He took 29 Palestinian students of his to 

Auschwitz because there has been a lot of denial of the Holocaust. 

Now, sadly, when he returned his car was torched. He lost his 

job. But he remains steadfast. He is now at the institute. We hope 

he will be returning and there is—his movement to focus on moderation. 

But we need religious leaders. We need academics. We need all 

kinds of opinion shapers to be part of the solution and not part of 

the problem. 

Chairman ROYCE. Well, one of the questions I would ask here is 

with all of the donations made by the international community, 

why not textbooks that focus on history, focus on facts, focus maybe 

on coexistence, focus on something other than hate. I don’t think 

it is a prerequisite that we have a lesson plan in there. 

But I have gone through these textbooks and I know from an 

audit that we have had done here that there is some reversal from 

where we were, you know, maybe 6 years ago with respect to 

UNRWA. 

But how would we substitute instead of this message and instead 

of the lesson plans, and I have seen footage of that and broadcasts 

and I have talked to President Abbas about this issue as has other 

members—Mr. Engel and other members of this committee—how 

could we sort of change the calculus here? 

Because it seems the central issue is—I think it was Mr. Abrams 

that said this—the central issue is that both political parties have 

never—they have talked about incitement in terms of the White 

House but we haven’t had really a plan to make it a central issue 

that we substitute that kind of teaching. 

To me, it is like the 600 madrassas or Deobandi schools, as they 

call them in Pakistan, that we know are teaching jihad and they 

never are closed. 

We never substitute some lesson plan or the government never 

does. Why not give lesson plans that prepare a pathway toward an 

understanding of the world done in an objective framework? 

34

Mr. MAKOVSKY. I would just add what we said in our remarks 

about we need to socialize the Europeans. This message has to be 

heard in stereo and they have tended to be more reflexive in their 

support of the Palestinian cause and I think there needs to be a 

congressional plan to get this message out so the Palestinians are 

hearing it from all directions, not just from the United States. 

Chairman ROYCE. Well, we will work with you and put together 

a delegation and start a dialogue because I think in real time we 

ought to figure out a way to substitute the textbooks with lesson 

plans that will at least assist children in learning something other 

than the bombastic message that their goal in life should be to kill 

Jews. 

Mr. ABRAMS. I was just going to add, Mr. Chairman, I think 

rather than giving unearmarked cash budget support for the PA, 

earmark some of the funds for things like this—a new set of textbooks. 

Chairman ROYCE. Mm-hmm. All right. 

I think my time has expired or is about to. I will go to Mr. Engel 

of New York. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, this breaks my heart. It really does. As someone who 

believes in a two-state solution—best for both peoples, I believe—

this thing is spiraling out of control and, again, there can be no 

condoning acts of violence, acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. 

So we all agree the Palestinians must end their incitement to violence, case closed. But the problem really goes much deeper. 

For there ever to be a two-state solution, the Palestinians have 

to prepare their people for peace and that means much more than 

simply stopping calls to jihad and armed struggle. It means accepting Israel’s right to exist. 

It means openly acknowledging the almost 4,000 years of Jewish 

presence in the lands which are now Israel and the deep connection 

of the Jewish people to this land and it means joining in the effort 

to build a modern society on this ancient land rather than stoking 

ancient hatred to tear down the advances which modernity has 

brought. 

So let me just ask an open ended question. What can be done to 

encourage the Palestinians to prepare their people for peace? And 

many of us had such high hopes with the Oslo Accords. Has so 

much time passed since the Oslo agreements and since there has 

been so many failures in the meantime is this still even possible? 

Whoever would care. 

Mr. ABRAMS. I would just say briefly, Mr. Engel, I think there 

is a desire still for separation, at least on the part of the Israelis. 

The form of the separation is more under debate than the goal 

of separation. But here I would agree with David Makovsky. Part 

of the problem is there are a lot of messages coming in to Palestinians. 

They come from the Arab world, they come from the Europeans 

and, of course, they come from the United States and we can’t control the other messaging. But we can perhaps try to influence it. 

Mr. SCHANZER. Congressman Engel, I would just add to what Elliott has just said that I think so much of this just comes straight 

35

from the leadership and, again, I would point to not just—I mean, 

I know there has been a lot of focus on the PA, but I think so much 

of the messaging about Israel comes from the PLO and comes from 

Mahmoud Abbas himself, and I think one of the things that FDD 

has looked at is the question of succession. Can we begin to prepare for the exit of Mahmoud Abbas in an orderly way but, more 

importantly, can we begin to identify next generation leaders? 

One of the things that has happened in Mahmoud Abbas’ term—

he is now 10 years into a 4-year term with no signs of leaving—

is that he has run out every possible challenger within that political system. 

And so it is all people who think the way he does and view the 

conflict the way he does. We need a next generation of leadership, 

and I think from there, change can begin to flow. 

Mr. ENGEL. Well, let us—go ahead. 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. I tried to say by my remarks about the security 

cooperation—and I am glad you mentioned the support for two 

states—is whether it is Yuval Diskin who was the head of the Shin 

Bet, whether it was Benny Gantz, the former chief of staff of the 

IDF who just spoke at my institute, you know, that security cooperation is vital for Israelis and Palestinians. 

I think Elliott mentioned, you know, the idea that Israel doesn’t 

want a collapse because it would collapse in Israel’s lap. So this is 

always why it is such a delicate dance. 

But maybe if we could do some of these, you know, more targeted 

intervention and then the idea of earmarking for tolerance in the 

schoolbooks, I think, is probably a good idea. That could be part of 

it. And I agree with Dr. Schanzer that we need—that succession 

is a big issue. 

The question is anything that the United States is seen to drive 

will be a kiss of death in that system. And so this is why it is complex. 

But, clearly, he is someone who is turning 81 in March and I 

think this issue of succession is vital. How it is done and who does 

it is where it gets complicated and I just worry that if it is an 

American-led succession he will be called a puppet. 

I also—we have to be careful of unintended consequences. A few 

years ago, I think all of us warned that to cut off the money altogether, you know, that Fayyad was the goose that lays the golden 

eggs and without Fayyad, you know, the goose goes if there is no 

more golden eggs. 

And sure enough, he was scapegoated for the stopping of money 

even though he was against—he even broke his wrist on a coffee 

table urging Abbas not to go the route he did at the U.N., saying 

it would lead to cut off in funds. 

But it was he who was targeted. And so that is part of it—you 

know, we can have the best of intentions and we get the opposite 

results. That doesn’t mean we should be paralyzed but we should 

think about how we are going to get the results we want. That is 

all. 

Mr. ENGEL. I would like to ask quickly, because I know my time 

is up, but I just want to talk about Abbas for just a quick moment 

because sometimes I think there is a split personality running the 

Palestinian Authority. 

36

On the one hand, President Abbas makes vile comments. He denies the historic Jewish connection to Israel and calls perpetrators 

of terrorists acts as heroes and martyrs, as you have all pointed 

out. 

On the other hand, he has also backed cooperation between 

Israeli and Palestinian security services in an effort to limit violence. 

So how should we interpret those mixed messages coming out of 

the PA? Can you help us understand more about President Abbas? 

Is there a method to his madness or is he schizophrenic? I mean, 

what is—you know, what is happening with him? 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. I don’t want to speak for my colleagues. I just 

feel, look, there is another element of bitterness here that doesn’t 

justify any violence. I keep repeating no justification for violence. 

He did have death threats during the intifada—the second 

intifada—where he said that this was—that the second intifada 

was wrong and certainly was counterproductive. There were times 

he said terrorism was morally wrong, I think during Elliott’s time, 

and the polling numbers crashed. 

But he has been consistently against violence in the macro, saying you need security cooperation. But then look at the statement 

about every ounce of blood. 

So yeah, this is—I don’t know how to attribute it. I can’t read 

his mind. He is vilified in the Palestinians for not being supportive 

enough of violence but, you know, as a leader you have responsibility and you can’t escape that. 

Chairman ROYCE. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you to the witnesses. 

Sadly, when the PA incites violence and we see a terror attack 

or continued increase in violent activity, as we have seen over the 

last month and a half, we find this wrong reflexive response from 

the international community to make a false moral equivalence between the PA and Israel. 

And what we see all too often is the unwillingness to call out 

Abu Mazen and the PA, all of their officials for their reprehensible 

words and their actions without finding the need to also reprimand 

Israel, and that is that false moral equivalence. 

When it comes to the Palestinians, some do verbal gymnastics so 

as not to upset the fragile nature of Abu Mazen and the PA. But 

there is no such concern when it comes to blasting the Israelis. 

Some, very lamely, blame settlement activity by Israel as the justification for increased violence instead of putting the blame where 

it should be—with the Palestinian Authority, with Abu Mazen, 

with their longstanding practice of inciting violence and hatred 

against Israel. 

Why is there this double standard that is applied to Israel? Why 

does the international community feel the need the handle Abu 

Mazen with kid gloves and doesn’t this send the wrong signal and 

essentially legitimizes Abu Mazen, emboldens his action to continue the acts of terror and this incitement isn’t just intended for 

the limited consumption of the Palestinian people. 

In recent years, as we have seen, Abu Mazen has taken his 

harmful rhetoric to the international stage using the U.N. General 

37

Assembly and other U.N. bodies as the preferred platform to gather 

like-minded nations together in an attempt to delegitimize the Jewish state. 

We saw this several weeks ago when Abu Mazen addressed the 

U.N. General Assembly and announced that the PA is no longer 

bound by the Oslo Accords nor its international obligations. 

This is outrageous. He accused Israel of trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount and threatened a religious conflict 

that would spread across Jerusalem and the Palestinian Authorities. 

And what happened when he said that we are no longer bound 

by the Oslo Accords? A standing ovation each time he said that. 

And now Abu Mazen has requested, and it is my understanding 

that it was granted, he has requested to address an emergency 

meeting of the Human Rights Council next week. 

While I think it is safe to say that he will make no attempt to 

defuse the situation but only to inflame the tensions. We have a 

great deal of leverage at the U.N. with many of the nations that 

encourage Abu Mazen’s actions in that body. 

What steps can we take to get other nations at the U.N. to put 

pressure on Abu Mazen to desist with the incitement, with his 

harmful rhetoric and instead begin working for the betterment of 

the Palestinian people and toward true peace with Israel. 

Mr. Abrams, and anyone else. 

Mr. ABRAMS. These are very difficult questions. 

I think he pays no price. That is the problem. He keeps doing 

it because he never pays a price for doing it. So what is the price? 

I mean, we have been reading these terrible quotes from him. So 

what happens this week? Gets a meeting with the Secretary of 

State. Now, will the Secretary of State come out and denounce him 

and condemn him? 

I don’t think so. So the lesson he learns is it is okay. It is acceptable, and I think what he is doing, this is in answer to Mr. Engel’s 

question, actually. What is he doing? He is trying to keep calm in 

the West Bank. 

That is why there is security cooperation. Just like Hamas tries 

to keep calm in Gaza. But Hamas wants violence in Israel and the 

West Bank, and Abbas wants violence in Israel. He just doesn’t 

want it back home in the West Bank. It is a very cynical game. 

And as long as he pays no price, he will keep it up. 

Mr. SCHANZER. I would fully agree with Elliott. 

The only thing that I would add here, and I may sound like a 

broken record today, is that so much of this had to do with the 

question of succession that Abbas has made it—I mean, it is a binary proposition: He has made it either it is Hamas or it is me, 

right? 

So no one wants to touch him. You talk about why everyone handles him with kid gloves, all right. He had made it such that he 

says, I am the only thing standing in the way of Hamas taking 

over both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, so you are going to 

play by my rules. 

And it is for that reason that we see, I think, the United States 

bending over backwards, refusing to condemn a lot of what he has 

38

done because we don’t see new opportunities around the bend for 

new leaders. 

Again, I will stress that I think we need to begin to pave the way 

for succession. Abbas won’t like it, that is for sure. But I can tell 

you this, that the guy is a pack-a-day smoker. He is not healthy. 

When he drops dead——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you. 

Mr. SCHANZER [continuing]. We are going to have problems. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, sir. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. 

Mr. Brad Sherman of California. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I want to identify myself with the statements of 

the chair, the ranking member. 

We mourn for the victims of terror. We condemn the terrorists 

and those whose lies incite and glorify terrorism. We condemn 

those who reward terrorism with payments to the families of terrorists and with glorification of their deeds. Arab leaders have 

much to answer for. 

As to Israel, in the days of the Roman Empire those zealots who 

claimed to be the most pro-Israel did enormous harm. So now we 

see a few fringe Israeli leaders who want to disturb the status quo 

on the Temple Mount. 

They too are harmful. They provide a pretext for those who incite 

terrorism in Israel and those who seek delegitimization abroad. 

As to a two-state solution, I don’t blame those who are pessimistic. I would doubt the sanity of anyone who bubbled with optimism about a two-state solution. 

But those who don’t voice pessimism about a two-state solution 

but those few Israeli leaders who oppose a two-state solution also 

do immeasurable harm. 

The definition of insanity, of course, is to keep doing the same 

thing and expecting a different result. I have been here 19 years. 

I feel like it was just yesterday. 

We condemn what the PA does, we threaten and then we continue to subsidize. So I want to focus my questions on whether we 

should change the nature of or eliminate or reduce our aid to the 

PA. 

Now, you gentleman all have incredible background. I have constituents who are considerably simpler. They simply say why are 

we giving the PA money and it might be helpful to our efforts in 

the Middle East if we stopped. 

It might be helpful if we continued. Hard to tell except for one 

thing—we reduced the deficit by $500 million if we stopped giving 

money to the PA. That is the only thing that is certain. 

So the biggest reason that is given to give money to the PA is 

that if we don’t give them money there will be more acts of terrorism. 

I will point to the policies of Thomas Jefferson, our first President to involve us in the Middle East, who refused to pay tribute 

to terrorists in the state of Tripoli, and the short term result was 

additional terrorism focused on American ships in the Mediterranean. 

39

I am not sure that it is a good thing to give money to people who 

say we are going to kill innocent folks if you don’t give us money. 

Those are not good people. 

One approach would be—and I will also point out only in the 

world—only in world affairs is it considered insulting or cruel to 

give somebody $400 million. 

But since we gave them $500 last year, it is cruel. Anyone who 

wants to be cruel to me by delivering $400 million I will provide 

my address at the end of these hearings and I will deal with the 

Ethics Committee later. 

I want to explore with you what about the idea of at least cutting 

the aid and delivering not cash but delivering food and delivering 

textbooks already printed and guess what they are going to say 

about the history of the Middle East. 

Mr. Abrams. 

Mr. ABRAMS. I think you are absolutely right about the cash 

question, the budget support question. Budget support suggests 

trust in how they are going to spend the money. 

I don’t think anybody has that trust anymore. So we should move 

to services rather than cash. The cash started with Salam Fayyad, 

actually. 

He is gone so maybe the——

Mr. SHERMAN. I had a little bit more trust back then. 

Mr. ABRAMS. Right. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Makovsky, what if cut the aid to $250 million? Would the world come to the end? 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. No, the world won’t come to an end. 

Look, I agreed with what Elliott said about earmarking funds for 

education and tolerance. But just say that we have cut off the 

funds before and that was my comment that when we did that—

did that I think two or three times about the U.N. we lost Fayyad. 

That doesn’t mean we should be paralyzed. 

But I could tell you that talking to a lot of the Israeli security 

professionals who deal with this they come to me and say, I pray 

America does not cut off the PA because we work with them on a 

daily basis to fight terrorism in the West Bank, of course. 

But I—you know, it is hard for me to say I know better than you 

do when they are closer to the situation than I am, whether it is 

the Chief of Staff Gantz, whether it is Diskin, head of the Shin Bet. 

So I think we have to think in different ways. And can I just say 

to Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s point about the U.N. Human Rights 

Council and the U.N. system, we know there are double standards. 

How many times has the U.N. Human Rights Council condemned 

the carnage in Syria where over 1⁄4 million people have been killed 

versus how many times do they condemn Israel? And so——

Chairman ROYCE. Gentleman’s——

Mr. MAKOVSKY [continuing]. The problem goes way beyond 

Abbas. 

Chairman ROYCE. The gentleman is out of time. We need to go 

to Mr. Chris Smith of New Jersey. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

It is great to see the three of our distinguished witnesses. Thank 

you for your insights and testimony. 

40

Secretary Abrams, you pointed out that incitement means teaching generations of Palestinians to hate Jews by demonizing and dehumanizing them and teaching hate and terror by honoring terrorists. 

I have been very concerned about many of the statements coming 

from Prince Zeid of Jordan, the U.N. High Commissioner for 

Human Rights, which always tilt heavily against Israel. 

They are one-sided, and to have a human rights point person in 

the United Nations taking such a one-sided position does grave 

damage to the truth and I have been working on this issue, perhaps not as much as Elliott Abrams, but for the 35 years that I 

have been here. 

And for 20 years have been raising the issue of UNRWA, had 

several hearings on it, joined by Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Henry 

Hyde when he was chairman. Of course, our distinguished chairman today offered amendments on it, always getting back from 

UNRWA officials and State Department officials that they are 

working on it, they are trying to excise the textbooks from the virulent anti-Semitic hate that is contained within it. 

I remember at one of our hearings we talked about pep rallies, 

like American football game pep rallies, where terrorists were 

extolled and lifted up as heroes to young children who are, obviously, impressionable. 

So it has been many years. We have provided over $4 billion—

we are the largest donor—$408 million in 2014. Closest contributor 

would be the European Commission at $139 million and the U.K. 

at $95 million. 

So we are disproportionately the biggest contributor to UNRWA. 

So as you pointed out in your testimony but you might want to 

elaborate on it, Mr. Secretary, U.N. Watch pointed out and was 

able to expose 12 UNRWA-linked Facebook accounts that incite violence. 

I have looked at each and every one of them. They are horrific. 

They have called on Ban Ki-Moon as well as the UNRWA chief to 

fire these people. 

Have they fired them? Has a commission of inquiry been established as was asked for by U.N. Watch? I mean, this is absolutely 

disgusting. Remember ‘‘South Pacific’’ that famous song, you have 

got to be taught—‘‘You Have Got to be Taught’’ hate, and these 

children are being taught hate every single day and our money is 

complicit in it. 

Secretary Abrams? 

Mr. ABRAMS. Thank you. 

Yes, as you know, many Palestinian children don’t go to PA 

schools. They go to UNRWA schools and U.N. Watch has found 

these employees who are teaching hate. 

I think you are asking the right questions. So far as I am aware, 

no one has been disciplined. No one has been fired. There is not 

a commission of inquiry. The usual UNRWA response is to cover 

up in the hope that, you know, you will forget about this in a 

month. 

So I think it is really important that you don’t let the State Department, the U.S. Government forget about this because, again, 

41

the lesson that is going to be learned by UNRWA is it doesn’t really matter. 

You know, they get angry for a week and then it passes and then 

it happens again and again and again. We know that there are lots 

of UNRWA employees in Gaza who are actually part of Hamas. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask you, Mr. Schanzer, you pointed out that 

Hamas stands to benefit from Iranian’s $150 billion in sanctions relief. You might want to expound upon that. What do you think 

qualitatively and quantitatively that will give Hamas the ability to 

do? 

Mr. SCHANZER. Absolutely. A terrific question. 

Look, first of all, we are about to provide Iran with $150 billion. 

How that is disbursed over the next 10 or 12 years, I think, still 

remains to be seen, and we continue to hear from the administration that very little of that will go to terrorism. I think the thing 

that is probably important to point out here is that even, let us just 

say 5 percent of that goes to terrorism, you are still looking at a 

huge sum. 

What that means practically for Hamas, I mean, you are going 

to be looking at cash transfers, which is hugely important for 

Hamas just to be able to maintain control over its territory. 

The tunnels have been cut off largely by Egypt, and so they are 

going to need cash to be able to pay salaries and to keep their security people on the streets. On top of that, there is the home grown 

rocket-making ability that we have seen that Iran has been able 

to help Hamas develop over time. 

Tunnel drilling also, we believe, also comes from Iran on some 

level and then, of course, the rockets that are imported in, the Fajr5’s and some of the other longer range missiles that we saw fired 

into Israel last year during that 50-day war. 

So there is quite a bit of damage that can be done through these 

cash transfers, which we fully expect to take place, largely to the 

Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you for calling this important hearing. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Smith. 

Mr. Albio Sires of New Jersey. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for being 

here today. I would like to associate myself with the comments my 

colleague from New Jersey made. 

You know, when I look at this money, $500 million, this just 

brings back, like, almost a bribe to organized crime to keep peace 

in a certain section. 

I mean, I just don’t know what stipulations are added to this 

money. I don’t know if we require any strings attached to this 

money that would bring the violence down. 

I mean, we are losing generations of young Palestinians and we 

are paying to have these young Palestinians become so radical. So 

it is almost like the history of organized crime. 

I don’t know if I really do agree with the fact that we shouldn’t 

cut out some of this money. You know, we are paying to keep peace 

in a certain section. 

42

I just have a—when do you think this surge of violence is going 

to end? You know, the stability and the influence of the Palestinian 

Authority—do you think it ends if this doesn’t end well? 

Mr. ABRAMS. Prime Minister Netanyahu made the comment 

about a week ago that these acts—these stabbings—are actually a 

form of suicide because you are almost certain to get killed by a 

police officer or military person, and there is hopefully a finite 

number of Palestinians who want to commit suicide that way. We 

just don’t know what the number is. 

I am surprised, candidly, that we are into Thursday now and it 

is still going on and I really thought it would begin to burn out, 

and that is still my hope that it will begin to calm down in the next 

few days. 

Mr. SCHANZER. There was an interesting article that appeared 

today by a former national security advisor to Netanyahu. He is 

now back in the private sector. His name is Yaakov Amidror, and 

he noted that more than 90 percent of the attacks have been taking 

place by residents of east Jerusalem. 

And so what we have is something very specific to these neighborhoods, these several hundred thousand individuals, and to me 

it is still unclear that it is entirely the PA or the PLO that is driving it, that it is entirely Hamas. Some of this really is grass roots 

or perhaps forces that we have not yet discovered. 

And so, you know, a lot of people are wondering whether this is 

a third intifada. Again, it is hard to tell exactly what that means 

but it is quite likely that we will look back on this several months 

from now and it could still be going and this could be one of those 

events that doesn’t have an official end. 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. Look, compared to the second intifada, within a 

month of the first—in the second intifada we had 1,500 people injured. I mean, the order of magnitude we are facing now compared 

to 2,000 to 2,004 is very small and this—if one life is taken it is 

one life too much. So I want to be very clear about that. 

But this has not been a mass intifada that we saw. We know 

what that looks like. This is not it now. Could there be, like, a 

Muhammed al-Dura incident, this boy was—whether it was fabricated on TV, that is, if Israel killed him when that wasn’t the 

case and that brought a lot of people to the streets. That, I think, 

you know, could change the order of magnitude. 

I am concerned, though, that—I hope this does not become the 

new normal, that a de factor binational reality sets in. I will just 

say, you know, what John Schanzer said about the east Jerusalem 

neighborhoods, this has been an area where they are now moving 

the concrete dividers that have been outside these neighborhoods, 

now there is a move with checkpoints to change that. 

So I tend to think that we could see changes in Jerusalem as 

well as a result of this violence with the barriers being——

Mr. SIRES. I just have one last, you know—do you believe that 

the status quo surrounding the Temple Mount can be maintained 

after this? 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. I just would like to repeat I hope Secretary 

Kerry over there could help reach a set of understandings and 

maybe that can be formalized by a set of delineated understandings 

43

of what is this status quo. So we will know if there is a change to 

it. 

But that requires the Jordanians as the custodians. Last year, 

Kerry, Abdullah, and Netanyahu totally ended the violence in 

Amman last November. 

It was a great success story for the United States. But I think 

there needs to be some sort of a delineation. I think that would be 

very important in my view but it requires the Jordanians to do 

something they don’t want to do, which is publically step up when 

Israel maintains the status quo. 

They might want to whisper that but whispers don’t help us unless they say it publically and we don’t see that right now. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Sires. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Sires, and now we turn to Mr. Salmon of Arizona. 

Mr. Salmon. 

Mr. SALMON. Madam Chairman, I am going to yield back my 

time. 

Thank you. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you. 

Mr. Duncan. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

You know, I have met with Benjamin Netanyahu, as many of us 

have, and one thing that really stuck out with me in our meetings 

was a commitment to Israel to even having a conversation about 

a two-state solution but they had one request—that the Palestinians recognize their right to exist. 

You know, there is a simple solution to get everybody to the table 

to talk about a solution and that is just acknowledge each other’s 

right to exist. 

One side of the equation is not willing to do that. My appeal to 

the Palestinians is acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. But what we 

see going on is this talk about removing their access to the Western 

Wall. 

If you look at history of the Western Wall, it was a place the 

Jews were able to go and worship. It was an area that was given 

to them. It was a trash dump. 

The Muslims controlled the Temple Mount—threw their rubbage 

over, oftentimes feces and garbage. It is not the case now but that 

is the history, and now we are hearing that we are going to even 

take the Western Wall away from the Israelis. 

A simple solution is recognition of a right to exist. So I will move 

on. 

What can we do? What can the administration do? What can 

Congress do to stop this violence? 

I want to say that in a prepared testimony last February Dr. 

Schanzer stated,

‘‘I don’t believe that peace between the current leaders is likely 

nor do I believe that this administration has earned to trust 

of either side. However, the next set of leaders may well make 

progress. But even if deadlock persists, Washington cannot abdicate its role as the honest broker. Once we return to that 

role, we may have an opportunity to call for a halt to all uniVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:22 Dec 02, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\102215\97265 SHIRL
44

lateral activity and guide this conflict toward a more constructive dynamic.’’

I thought pretty wise clairvoyant words there. 

What advice to you have for Congress to play a role in this? Future leaders—we got a Presidential election. We may have someone 

that looks at this situation a little differently, that looks at the role 

of America differently in negotiating peace. 

And so I am asking you what advice do you have to the United 

States Congress here in October 2015 to play a role in minimizing 

if not eliminating the senseless violence? 

I asked Dr. Schanzer there but I will be glad to move—let us let 

him answer first and we will come to you. 

Mr. SCHANZER. Well, thank you, Congressman Duncan. 

What I would want to stress right now is that America does not 

intend to abdicate its leadership role in the region. 

I think a lot of actors in the Middle East right now have given 

up on the United States, that we have rolled over on Iran, that we 

have declined to battle ISIL and that in general, we have had a 

more hands-off approach to the region, a so-called rebalancing of 

our foreign policy or pivot to Asia or whatever you would like to 

call it. 

But we need to make it very clear to the region that we intend 

to reengage, and I would argue that America has been the most effective in its peace making opportunities when it has demonstrated 

its strength. 

So if you look after the first Gulf War, that was the moment 

where the United States demonstrated that it was not going to 

take no for an answer. That is when the Israelis and the Palestinians fell in line and began to work with the administration toward 

peace. 

I look forward to a day where we can, again, look to American 

strength as leading the way in the region. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I appreciate that and I agree with what you have 

said. 

I think our allies don’t trust us and our enemies don’t fear us, 

and a strong America is—and our presence in certain regions is a 

very unifying force. Mr. Makovsky. 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. Look, I tend to use sports analogies a lot so I 

hope you will indulge me. The last three times that we have been 

involved 2000 with Camp David—2007 and 2008, Condoleezza 

Rice, the Annapolis process, the process I was involved in was Secretary Kerry as well. 

There was an effort made from the top levels to try to hit the 

home run ball, so to speak, and solve the whole conflict. It was very 

admirable. Secretary Kerry was relentless and putting in a lot of 

effort. 

But I think what these three efforts have shown us is that these 

leaders are not able to do the end game. I would rather us see 

some singles, some doubles and to try to do what we can do because whenever we try to hit that home run ball we could strike 

out. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Reclaiming my time real quick and with 3 seconds, 

Israelis pulled out of the settlements. They made a good faith effort. 

45

From that point forward, rockets continued to fly into Israel until 

last summer. I think Israel has made a good faith effort. It is time 

for the Palestinians to make a good faith effort, and I yield back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Duncan. 

Mr. Deutch, my south Florida colleague. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Makovsky, can we start with a focus on the security cooperation that exists currently between the Palestinian security and the 

Israelis. 

I would like to probe that a little because, given the extent of 

that cooperation, everything that we have been discussing this 

morning makes no sense in terms of the actions and statements 

that President Abbas makes. 

But can you just confirm the extent of that cooperation? 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. So, Congressman Deutch, you have a situation 

that, you know, you have the central command, the West Bank 

command of the IDF. You have the Shin Bet. 

They are working with their Palestinian colleagues to keep 

Hamas out of the West Bank and to keep things quiet, and I would 

say that it has been successful not judging by my standard, by 

what—you know, I quoted Gantz and Diskin as saying that that is 

why there has been quiet. 

And if you got rid of that, then what you would have is Hamas 

more in the West Bank, the PA probably more overrun. So I think 

that security cooperation is indispensable going forward and I 

think we have to be very careful to say well, we don’t need it because it is somehow a graft payment, I don’t see it that way. 

I see it as Israelis and Palestinians really interpreting what 

peace should mean, which is working together for security. So I 

would just be very cautious before I would take that piece out, 

given that it has shown tangible results and this was not always 

the case. 

You know, in the ’90s things were very politicized. These were 

politicians—Jibril Rajoub, Mohammad Dahlan. These are now professionals on the Palestinian side and Israelis think very highly of 

them. 

Mr. DEUTCH. So here is what is so puzzling, I think, to so many 

of us. 

We spent all this money providing assistance that contributes to 

security for Israelis and Palestinians that keeps Hamas out. And 

then President Abbas—you brought up the prior example—President Abbas then goes on TV and says that Israel is summarily executing 13-year-old kids despite that fact that, one, he was still alive 

being treated by Israel, and two, had perpetrated a terrorist act. 

And when he does that and when he engages in this incitement, 

all of the dollars that we spend on security to help secure the 

Israelis and the Palestinians from Hamas attacks becomes less effective because his statements only make the situation worse and 

embolden those who would ultimately be supportive of Hamas. 

Isn’t that the case? Dr. Schanzer, isn’t that the case? 

Mr. SCHANZER. Look, it is the case and part of the problem here 

is that Abbas is, I think, trying to struggle with some competing 

interests. 

46

On the one hand, he does need to maintain that absolute iron 

grip over the West Bank and he needs Israel 100 percent in order 

to do that. He cannot do it himself. 

I have heard estimates that if the Israelis were to stop cooperating with the PA, that in less than a month, the West Bank would 

be overrun. 

At the same time, he has his political constituents who don’t like 

the fact that he is working with the Israelis, and so there is a popularity issue and, of course, his popularity has been sagging for 

quite some time because of corruption, because of poor governance, 

because he has not been able to unify the territories, et cetera. 

And so you see him sort of, you know, neither here nor there. 

And then, more broadly, there is this question of ultimately his 

goal of establishing a Palestinian state, and the longer that he does 

not achieve that, the more frustration we see from him. And some 

of these bombastic statements, I think, are absolutely a result of 

that. 

Ironically, I think a lot of that comes from his own diplomatic positions. I think he has had opportunities to negotiate peace and he 

has stepped away from that several times. 

Mr. DEUTCH. And how does—just the last question I would ask 

is how is it that, and I am being sincere—I mean, how does he—

how does he get away—how is it somehow acceptable to make an 

assertion about the religious sites that is patently false and then 

have that assertion become a talking point that many around the 

world start to adopt? How does that happen? 

Mr. Abrams, do you have thoughts on that? 

Mr. ABRAMS. Well, there are lots—you know, there is a discourse 

out there that is filled with lies about Israel and this just becomes 

another small piece of that discourse. 

People will believe almost anything, and I think, unfortunately, 

in the Arab world it is very common that people assume that their 

leaders are lying to them half the time. 

So the fact that he is lying to people, not such a big deal, unfortunately. 

Mr. DEUTCH. So Madam Chairman, I would conclude by saying 

that while I acknowledge the importance of our security assistance, 

I think it is very important this has to be—these statements and 

these actions have to be relevant to our debates and for those in 

the region who have said they don’t care what—how Congress use 

this there is a lot at stake in terms of their own security in the 

way we address this and we are paying close attention. 

It does matter, and I thank the witnesses for their testimony 

today. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Deutch. 

Mr. Meadows is recognized. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Thank each of you for your testimony today. I guess this comes 

a little bit personal to me in that I just returned from Israel. 

In fact, still on jet lag, having arrived on Monday, spending a 

week up close and personal with a number of these terrorist attacks, changing our plans as we were there on the ground with a 

number of our security detail concerned about where we were 

going, where we were not going and, indeed, 10 minutes after we 

47

left a particular area it was reported that the very place that we 

left there was an attack by a Palestinian dressed as a reporter on 

either IDF or police security forces right where we were. 

And I find that interesting because all of this incitement that 

continues to go on, and I agree with some of the other statements 

that have been made because I have tried to work on eliminating 

the money for the Palestinian Authority if it is going to be used to 

pay terrorists a stipend and I say not only a stipend, it is actually 

a very good salary where they can be incentivized to complete and 

conduct terrorist activities. I find it just mind boggling that we 

would continue to do that. 

That being said, I do agree that the Palestinian Authority, from 

a standpoint of security, provides a meaningful tool to work with 

the Israeli Government. And so it is more complex than perhaps 

this guy from North Carolina could figure out. 

That being said, it is important that the truth be told and the 

truth is that with regards to the Temple Mount where there may 

have been a few comments that have been made by Israelis on one 

extreme that the government in itself is not trying to change it. 

The only person who couldn’t go to the Temple Mount was not 

the Muslim worshipers. It was this Member of Congress that 

couldn’t go because it was not safe for me to do that. 

Now, I say that because somehow in this whole narrative what 

we are finding, and I normally ask questions but today is my 

chance to make a statement, we are missing the fundamental question of incitement and how we are either ignoring or not addressing 

the issue as a nation who can address it. 

I was in a courtroom where there were six defendants there who 

had been accused of terrorist activities, five of those Hamas related, one of those ISIS related, and with the pride in their face 

as they talked back and forth to members of their families and 

friends, almost cheering the fact that they were there sitting trial 

and being applauded as heroes. 

Enough is enough. And what we must do is put pressure on our 

European allies to address this particular issue. That is where it 

is. 

We may stand firm but let this day be the start of where our European allies understand that they must join us in this fight to 

make sure that the incitement is eliminated. 

And with that, I would be—in the time remaining I would ask 

how do we start to provide services for the Palestinian Authority 

versus cash payments where we can perhaps still provide the security-related issues that are out there. 

Is there a creative way for us to address this and finally have 

a resolve where we can do that. Anybody that wants to—Secretary? 

Mr. ABRAMS. Just a quick idea. Just earmark everything. No 

unearmarked budget support. 

I mean, if you want to dock one particular thing, do it. If you 

want more for education, do it. Just don’t give any unearmarked 

cash. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Abrams, let me go with that because at a 

table very much like yours I talked to the Under Secretary of State 

almost a year ago and said that this money that was going for paying of terrorists was—that program was going to go away and inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:22 Dec 02, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\102215\97265 SHIRL
48

deed it went away from there but only shifted to another area 

which says, well, it is not here in this pot, it is in a different pot. 

When are we going to address that? That one area? 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. Look, this is why—what you said about the Europeans I just want to say amen, amen because this is what is required. We can’t do this by ourselves, and if we have a quartet with 

the Europeans dealing with the Palestinian issue, administration 

to administration, I think there needs to be more consultation with 

the funding arms in Europe. 

I am not saying we will succeed immediately. But we need to 

start with awareness. I also want to say, because we have been 

talking about security, and I also think that some of the people to 

people programming that does go on, I don’t like to say any of this 

is a panacea—I know there is some effort now, I’ll map a coalition 

of people to people trying to see what could be done on conflict resolution. I think that is a good idea. 

I think that is one piece. There is going to be 20 different pieces 

to this puzzle. Earmarking could be a piece but consultation with 

Europe, I think, is critical. People to people is a piece of this. There 

is going to be a lot of different pieces if we are serious about taking 

this issue on. 

Mr. SCHANZER. Just a quick note that the funding that you are 

talking about, the PA funding for prisoners, ultimately is, as I understand it, was moved over to the PLO and, again, I think we 

have to just note that the PLO has outlived its usefulness. 

It is no longer actually a partner in peace. It is supposed to be 

the negotiating partner for the PLO. It is not doing that. Instead, 

what we are seeing is the funding of prisoners. 

On top of that, we are seeing the funding of these media organs 

that have been spreading lies about the Temple Mount. And so I 

really think that we need to see a significant overhaul of the PLO. 

Perhaps Congress could begin to weigh whether we want to continue to recognize the PLO in light of its recent activity. 

I thank you. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Meadows. 

Mr. Cicilline of Rhode Island. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Madame Chair. 

Thank you to our witnesses for being here. I, like my colleagues, 

am incredibly disturbed by the recent events and really want to 

join in all the strong condemnation of this recent round of violence. 

I particularly associate myself with the chairman and ranking 

member’s earlier comments. 

And I am particularly concerned about the incendiary and irresponsible words and texts that played a leading role in this volatile 

situation. 

The bottom line is that terrorist acts of violence are being perpetrated against Israelis and this must be strongly condemned by 

all parties, particularly by the Palestinian Authority. 

I want to note that yesterday I joined every single member of the 

Jewish caucus in Congress in issuing a statement rejecting the irresponsible and factually inaccurate resolution passed by UNESCO 

executive board which falsely blames Israel for the recent surge in 

49

violence. One sided inflammatory statements like this are part of 

the problem. 

They fan the flames of hatred and prevent us from moving forward in cooperation in the peace process that could lead to a twostate solution. 

And Mr. Chairman, with your consent I wish to enter this statement into the record. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. 

And I thank you for your testimony. In particular, I thank you, 

Mr. Abrams, because in your testimony you spoke about one case 

in particular, the case of Dalal Mughrabi, one of the most deadly 

terror attacks in Israeli history where 37 civilians, 12 of them children, were killed in the hijacking of a bus, and this was glorified 

by naming schools and summer camps and sports tournaments 

after this terrorist, and it is just one example of the kind of glorification of terror and violence that continues to persist in the Palestinian Authority. 

And so my first question is, are there any alternative Palestinian 

voices coming from the PA or society, more broadly, that are calling 

for Palestinians to cease these recent acts of terror? 

Mr. ABRAMS. There are, and, you know, we can point to, for example, former Prime Minister Fayyad as an example of this. And 

there are clearly many others. 

The problem has been the leadership has been the same group. 

First it was Arafat, now it is Arafat’s survivors and acolytes, starting with President Abbas, who are in charge. 

They are in charge of the PA. They are in charge of the PLO. 

They are in charge of Fatah and you are not getting that kind of 

cooperation from them. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Also, I know for many years the educational system in the West Bank and Gaza and other ports of region have 

really put forth dangerous, inaccurate perceptions about Jews and 

Israelis and sort of fostered a lot of the hatred. 

And I know there has been a lot of conversation. I spoke to President Abbas about his myself several years ago and there were assurances they were working on this. 

A, is there any evidence that there have been sort of any 

progress in terms of the curriculum and the textbooks? And to your 

earlier point, has the time come that we simply do not provide educational aid in terms of financial resources but provide the actual 

textbooks that reflect the kind of curriculum that will foster understanding and kind of more—sort of a context in which a relationship can actually between two communities? 

Mr. ABRAMS. I think it goes forward and backward. There is 

sometimes a new textbook that is better. Then a few years later a 

worse textbook comes out. 

I think part of the answer is to insist more. It may be to see if 

we can provide textbooks including textbooks that have been done 

in Arabic in other places in the world including the U.S. 

There is an UNRWA problem because about so many—tens of 

thousands of Palestinian children aren’t going to PA schools. They 

are going to UNRWA schools, which have their own textbooks. 

50

And finally, there is this PLO problem that Jonathan Schanzer 

was referring to and which led me to say it is time to close the PLO 

office in Washington. 

Mr. CICILLINE. And I just want to say I think that this question 

of how do we stop the next generation of engaging in the same kind 

of behavior really does start with education. And I would love to 

hear more, Mr. Abrams, right after Mr. Schanzer about closing 

about the PLO offices here. 

Mr. SCHANZER. Actually, I wanted to just mention something 

about the textbooks. I think, without question, the textbooks are a 

problem, and we continue to focus on that here in Washington. But 

so much of this has to do with the teachers themselves, right? 

What is taught in the classrooms comes down to the people who 

are teaching it. And so you have an administrative education problem. 

You could change the textbooks all you want and the teachers 

could still teach their children that Israel is the enemy or that 

Israel doesn’t exist on a map, and so it is a much more systemic 

problem than just textbooks. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Very important point. 

And Mr. Abrams, with my last few seconds would you speak a 

little bit about why you think closing the PLO offices is a good 

strategy? 

Mr. ABRAMS. First, because of the way in which the PLO has 

been conducting itself but secondly because nobody elected the 

PLO. Once upon a time, there were PA elections. The PLO is a 

nondemocratic body. The PLO does not in fact represent the Palestinian people even though the U.N. thinks it does. 

So in my own view, they are not doing anything helpful. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. I thank you, Madam Chairman. I 

yield back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. 

Dr. Yoho. 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Gentlemen, I appreciate you being here and, you know, you wonder about the increase—escalation of violence in that region and I 

look at, you know, this administration—I remember Nancy Pelosi, 

John Kerry, if I remember correctly, saying that Hamas was a humanitarian organization and giving them credibility and I hear the 

President saying the acts of terrorism that Israel is conducting or 

what Israel is going through are acts of terrorism yet they are just 

trying to defend their people. 

You know, and you wonder why things are escalating. I see that 

happening and, Mr. Abrams, you were talking about getting new 

books into the schools. 

You know, as Dr. Schanzer pointed out, it is much deeper than 

it systemically because the books aren’t going to change anything. 

The children are a product of their environment. Their environment are the parents, it is the society, it is government. 

And until you change that it is not going to happen and to go 

in and say we need to have a—you didn’t say regime change but 

that is what I am hearing from you guys and I think we have meddled too much in too much of that. 

51

That has to come from within and we can’t give it outside. And 

as Mr. Makovsky said, you know, it will be a puppet of the U.S. 

and we have done that over and over again. We can’t do that. 

So this is a much deeper problem and we had introduced here 

over a year ago a resolution to pull all funding from the Palestinian 

Authority because our hard working American taxpayers are paying taxes that go in the name of peace to the Middle East and we 

have just seen an escalation that is not working. 

So my goal is to remove all funding from the Palestinian Authority. I think your idea, which I do agree with, of closing the PLO 

office, I think that is another step that we should go into. 

But just to go on and doing what we are doing. I have only been 

here 3 years but I have seen an escalation in violence. We had the 

war last year that went on for, what was it, 6 weeks? 

You know, and we are giving all this money, $500 million, roughly, a year. And I agree with my colleague, Mr. Sherman, that that 

money should go to deficit reduction in America where it will make 

a difference here. 

And, you know, what can we do different than what you have 

said? I mean, the textbooks to me, yeah, that is a nice thing that 

will make us feel good because they won’t have all this inflammatory language. 

But it is a lot deeper than that. I just know doing what we are 

doing is not going to work. You well know what the definition of 

insanity is. 

I should like to see a whole different paradigm shift in our foreign policy that we support people that are on the same page as 

we are. I don’t want them to live like us. I don’t want to tell them 

what kind of government. 

But they should believe—the people that we assist, I would 

think, are the same—the countries that believe in the same ideals 

we do—life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, religious freedom. 

I am not going to dictate that to anybody but if you want our 

help you need to come to this side of the table. 

What are your thoughts on changing that whole narrative and 

paradigm? 

Mr. SCHANZER. I will just very briefly say this, that I think one 

of the biggest problems with our relationship with the Palestinians 

is that it is transactional, not transformational—that we simply 

fork over funds and we have a sort of expectation that they just 

keep the peace. 

And by the way, that is the same paradigm that we had with 

Egypt and many of the authoritarian governments that have collapsed over the last 5 or 6 years, and we see how that has worked 

for us. 

And so ultimately, I think, we have to come to the conclusion 

that this is a failed paradigm. This is not to say that in our attempts to transform Palestinian society that we need to be the people who are dictating exactly who comes in and how they operate. 

But I think we can begin to set standards, right, for elections, 

making sure that, you know, people, as in the case of Mahmoud 

Abbas, that he is not—you know, now he is 10 years into his term. 

He has no sign of going anywhere. 

52

We need to make sure that there are at least some semblances 

of democracy, of participation in that society, and I think it is at 

that point that we begin to see some of the changes that may be 

worth funding in the PA. 

But the one word of warning here is that if you just remove the 

entire infrastructure by defunding it, you have got the potential for 

chaos, and that is what we have got to try to avoid. 

Mr. MAKOVSKY. If I could, look, I agree with this last point of 

John. We have got to be careful. If we think we just rid of the old 

infrastructure that things will be better when we know we are 

going to get worse. 

We know it. And we have withheld funding before. It is not like 

we haven’t tried it. 

We have tried a different paradigm and we didn’t get the result 

we wanted. 

I do think though out of this hearing is coming some real ideas. 

I mean, you know, I think you have heard from the three of us. 

You know, John and Elliott have been talking about closing the 

PLO offices, which I think could be a signal. 

I think the idea of blacklisting who we know are involved in incitement, earmarking funds for things we believe in, the issue of 

trying to get European awareness so we are not on this incitement 

focus by ourselves. We need to—these are four different things that 

are not being done now. 

Mr. YOHO. All right. I will tell you what we will do. Our office, 

and I know the chairmen they will go ahead and probably go along 

with us. Our resolution to defund the $500 million until Palestine 

got rid of Resolution 21 and 23, we did that. 

They got rid of those resolutions but we know that money is fungible and is still being sent over there, still being used somewhere 

that is aiding them to be able to pay the stipends to people in prison. So I like those recommendations and I am sure you will see 

those come out soon and I appreciate your time, Madam Chair. 

Thank you for——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Dr. Yoho. 

And as we recess our hearing I want to notify our members that 

we will commence our markup of House Resolution 293 at approximately noon. Without objection, we are in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman ROYCE. This committee will come to order. 

Pursuant to notice and with concurrence of the ranking member, 

we meet today to markup House Resolution 293 on incitement, and 

without objection all members may have 5 days to submit statements and related materials for the record. 

I now call up H. Res. 293 and without objection it is considered 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

Before moving to statements, I call up Royce Amendment 204, 

the bipartisan amendment in the nature of a substitute that was 

circulated to all offices previously, which I am offering on behalf of 

myself, Ranking Member Engel, subcommittee chair Ros-Lehtinen 

and Ranking Member Deutch. 

Without objection, that amendment, which members have in 

their packets, is considered read and is base text for purposes of 

amendment. 

53

[The information referred to follows:]

54


97265d-1.eps
55


97265d-2.eps
56


97265d-3.eps
57


97265d-4.eps
58


97265d-5.eps
59


97265e-1.eps
60


97265e-2.eps
61


97265e-3.eps
62


97265e-4.eps
63

Chairman ROYCE. After recognizing myself and the ranking 

member, I will be pleased to recognize any members seeking recognition who wants to then speak on the resolution. 

House Res. 293 reflects many of the concerns we have discussed 

this morning, an escalation of violence against Israelis and the way 

in which that escalation of violence is praised and encouraged and 

even fueled by Palestinian Authority officials. 

This resolution rightly condemns this incitement and the outbreak of violence and expresses support for those who are working 

to encourage peace and cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians. 

And I want to thank our chairman emeritus and Middle East 

subcommittee chair, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen—you are very welcome—

and Middle East Subcommittee Ranking Member Ted Deutch for 

authorizing this important measure. 

And I would also note that many members beyond the committee 

have been focused on combating incitement and terrorism against 

Israel including Congresswoman Martha McSally of Arizona, who 

introduced an important incitement resolution earlier this week 

and worked with us on this draft resolution. 

Martha McSally is right. It is critical that we stand by our good 

ally, Israel, at this challenging time. And I now recognize the ranking member for his remarks. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to associate myself with your statement that you just 

made. I thank you for bringing this resolution forward. 

I want to thank our colleagues, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Ted 

Deutch, for working so long and hard on this. This is a very important and timely resolution, and as we just heard at our hearing, 

the Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens is getting out of 

hand. 

We need to dial up pressure on Palestinian leaders to repudiate 

this violence, bring those who are responsible to justice and put a 

stop once and for all to the ugly anti-Israel anti-Jewish incitement 

that has permeated Palestinian culture. 

So this resolution sends a clear message that the violence must 

stop. It must stop to protect the lives of the innocent. It must stop 

if there is any hope of working toward a two-state solution. 

Again, I think our hearing that we just had showed us loudly 

and clearly that this cannot continue. I want to reiterate everything I said in my earlier statement in our hearing and I urge my 

colleagues to support this measure, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Do any other members seek recognition? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and 

Ranking Member Engel, for bringing up House Resolution 293 to 

markup today. 

This resolution, which I introduced alongside my friend and 

south Florida colleague, Congressman Ted Deutch, condemns antiIsrael and anti-Semitic incitement within the Palestinian Authority 

and the timing of this markup and today’s hearing—Mr. Chairman, 

I thank you for this—could not be any more appropriate. 

64

Last week, committee staffers traveled to Jerusalem and they 

visited the holy sites and were constantly in earshot of the ambulances attending to the victims of these horrific attacks. 

Over the past month and a half, we have seen a new wave of terror and violence that has spread across Israel, spurred on in large 

part by incitement by Abu Mazen and the Palestinian Authority officials. 

This latest round of terror and violence is just that, only the latest round. It may take a new form with knife attacks being the preferred method of terror this time around. 

But the reality is that what we have come to expect when the 

Palestinian people have been indoctrinated and incited to violence 

for years and years by their supposed leaders we need to hold Abu 

Mazen and the PA accountable for their actions to date and let the 

PA know in no uncertain terms that it needs to stop fueling the 

violence and start working toward peace. We need the parties involved to reconcile their differences, come together, de-escalate the 

tensions. 

Abu Mazen needs to put aside his self-interest and finally do 

what is right for the good of the Palestinian people instead of inciting violence and promoting hatred. Abu Mazen needs to call for 

calm and work with the Israelis to restore the peace. 

The King of Jordan also has an important role to play as the 

guardian of Jerusalem’s Islamic holy sites. Everyone involved has 

an interest in seeing the incitement and violence stop. 

Jerusalem is home of the holiest sites for Jews, for Christians, 

for Muslims, and it is time for Abu Mazen to renounce the violence 

and stop the incitement for his government. 

So I urge my colleagues to support this measure and I urge the 

international community to impress upon on Abu Mazen how vital 

it is that the incitement stop immediately. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Ileana. 

We now go to Ted Deutch of Florida. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to extend my thanks to you and to Ranking Member 

Engel and your staff for working diligently to move this timely resolution forward, and I want to thank my friend and my partner, 

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen, for her bipartisan efforts on today’s measure. 

We have just spent the last 2 hours discussing how incitement 

within official channels of the Palestinian Authority breeds violence. 

And by passing today’s resolution, this committee sends a message to the world that Congress is watching and that violent hateful rhetoric will not be tolerated. We won’t tolerate officials using 

religion as a means to spur violence. 

We won’t tolerate actions like we saw this week as a Palestinianbacked resolution at UNESCO attempted to rewrite history and inflame tensions on the ground by challenging history. 

President Abbas is supposed to be a partner for peace. It is time 

he stands on the world stage and loudly condemns violent attacks 

against innocent citizens. 

65

It is time that he speaks truthfully about two states living side 

by side in peace and security. It is time that he returns to direct 

negations and works to truly fulfill the goals of creating a brighter 

future for his people. 

There has to be an end to this vicious violence. The only way to 

do it is by courageous leaders stopping the spread of false, inflammatory, accusatory rhetoric and promoting a culture of nonviolence 

and a culture of cooperation. 

I appreciate the support of my colleagues today and I encourage 

the passage of this resolution. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Ted. 

Any other members want to speak? Mr. Boyle. 

Mr. BOYLE. I just want to briefly say I am proud to cosponsor 

this resolution and thank the author as well and the chair and 

ranking member for having this hearing and passing it. 

It is important to remember specifically what started this latest 

round and that was that false rumor that Israel was going to cut 

off access to the Temple Mount, the al-Aqsa Mosque. 

Completely untrue, completely false, and yet there have been attack after attack, killing innocent people in Jerusalem and, of 

course, the people perpetrating those attacks as well. 

It is important that all of us who are fortunate to have elected 

positions exercise them with responsibility and I hope that those 

within the Palestinian Authority recognize just how much damage 

and destruction has been caused to both Israelis and Palestinians 

because of their own words. 

I also want to thank and associate myself with the efforts of Jordan to attempt to bring a resolution to this latest effort and stop 

this absolute madness that will lead to nothing except for more 

bloodshed. 

Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. All right. Hearing no further request for recognition on the base text, are there any additional amendments? 

Mr. Salmon. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have an amendment at the desk. 

[The information referred to follows:]

66

Mr. SALMON. I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for bringing up this timely measure. It is critical that Congress go on the 

record to oppose the PA’s blatant incitement of violence in Israel 

and it is unacceptable and we can’t remain silent. 

My Arizona colleague, as you mentioned in your opening statement, Congresswoman Martha McSally, who cares deeply about 

this issue, has worked on a similar resolution of condemnation of 

the Palestinian Authority. 

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of her resolution. My 

amendment would add a small but important provision from Congresswoman McSally’s resolution to the one before us today. 

The amendment, very simply, expresses the U.S. Congress’ support for the Government of Israel’s fight against terrorism. 

After Palestinian President Abbas encouraged protestors to protect Jerusalem and blessed every drop of blood that has been 

spilled for Jerusalem as blood spilled for Allah, it is critical that 

Congress speaks with a firm voice to acknowledge the challenges 

the Israeli Government is confronting and offer our support for this 

struggle with eyes on a goal of peace for both Palestinians and the 

Israelis. 

I commend Congressman Ros-Lehtinen and Congresswoman 

McSally for their efforts on this important issue and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my amendment. 

Chairman ROYCE. Any other members seek recognition to speak 

on the amendment? 

Hearing none, the question occurs on the amendment. All those 

in favor say aye. All those opposed no. 


97265f.eps
67

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. The amendment is 

agreed to and hearing no further amendments the question occurs 

on approving the resolution as amendment. 

All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. House Resolution 

293 is agreed to as amended and without objection it I ordered it 

is ordered favorably reported as amended and staff is directed to 

make any technical and conforming changes. 

And also without objection the Chair is authorized to seek House 

consideration under suspension of the rules for this bill and that 

concludes all the business today, and I want to thank our ranking 

member, Mr. Engel, and all of the committee members for their 

contribution, their assistance with our markup here today. 

The committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(69)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

70

f


97265n.eps
71


97265m-1.eps
72


97265m-3.eps
73

f


97265m-2.eps
74

f


97265s.eps
75

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE DAVID CICILLINE, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND


97265g-1.eps
76

Æ


97265g-2.eps