•HRES 11 EH 
Israel in international forums, including vetoing one-sided 
resolutions in 2011, 2006, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 
1997, and 1995 before the United Nations Security 
Council; 
Whereas the United States recently signed a new Memo-
randum of Understanding with the Government of Israel 
regarding security assistance, consistent with long-
standing support for Israel among successive Administra-
tions and congresses and representing an important 
United States commitment toward Israel’s qualitative 
military edge; 
Whereas on November 29, 2016, the House of Representa-
tives unanimously passed House Concurrent Resolution 
165, expressing the sense of Congress and reaffirming 
longstanding United States policy in support of a direct 
bilaterally negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian 
conflict and opposition to United Nations Security Coun-
cil resolutions imposing a solution to the conflict; 
Whereas on December 23, 2016, the United States Perma-
nent Representative to the United Nations disregarded 
House Concurrent Resolution 165 and departed from 
longstanding United States policy by abstaining and per-
mitting United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 
to be adopted under Chapter VI of the United Nations 
Charter; 
Whereas the United States’ abstention on United Nations Se-
curity Council Resolution 2334 contradicts the Oslo Ac-
cords and its associated process that is predicated on re-
solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict between the parties 
through direct negotiations;
•HRES 11 EH 
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 
claims that ‘‘the establishment by Israel of settlements in 
the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including 
East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a 
flagrant violation under international law and a major 
obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and 
a just, lasting and comprehensive peace’’; 
Whereas by referring to the ‘‘4 June 1967 lines’’ as the basis 
for negotiations, United Nations Security Council Resolu-
tion 2334 effectively states that the Jewish Quarter of 
the Old City of Jerusalem and the Western Wall, Juda-
ism’s holiest site, are ‘‘occupied territory’’ thereby equat-
ing these sites with outposts in the West Bank that the 
Israeli government has deemed illegal; 
Whereas passage of United Nations Security Council Resolu-
tion 2334 effectively lends legitimacy to efforts by the 
Palestinian Authority to impose its own solution through 
international organizations and through unjustified boy-
cotts or divestment campaigns against Israel by calling 
‘‘upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this 
resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, be-
tween the territory of the State of Israel and the terri-
tories occupied since 1967’’, and will require the United 
States and Israel to take effective action to counteract 
the potential harmful impact of United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 2334; 
Whereas UNSCR 2334 did not directly call upon Palestinian 
leadership to fulfill their obligations toward negotiations 
or mention that part of the eventual Palestinian state is 
currently controlled by Hamas, a designated terrorist or-
ganization; and
•HRES 11 EH 
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 
both sought to impose or unduly influence solutions to 
final status issues, and is biased against Israel: Now, 
therefore, be it 
Resolved, That— 
(1) it is the sense of the House of Representatives 
that— 
(A) the passage of United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 2334 undermined the long- 
standing position of the United States to oppose 
and veto United Nations Security Council resolu-
tions that seek to impose solutions to final status 
issues, or are one-sided and anti-Israel, reversing 
decades of bipartisan agreement; 
(B) the passage of United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 2334 undermines the prospect of 
Israelis and Palestinians resuming productive, di-
rect negotiations; 
(C) the passage of United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 2334 contributes to the politi-
cally motivated acts of boycott, divestment from, 
and sanctions against Israel and represents a con-
certed effort to extract concessions from Israel out-
side of direct negotiations between the Israelis and 
Palestinians, which must be actively rejected;
•HRES 11 EH 
(D) any future measures taken in international 
or outside organizations, including the United Na-
tions Security Council or at the Paris conference on 
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict scheduled for Janu-
ary 15, 2017, to impose an agreement, or param-
eters for an agreement including the recognition of 
a Palestinian state, will set back the cause of peace, 
harm the security of Israel, run counter to the en-
during bipartisan consensus on strengthening the 
United States-Israel relationship, and weaken sup-
port for such organizations; 
(E) a durable and sustainable peace agreement 
between Israel and the Palestinians will come only 
through direct bilateral negotiations between the 
parties resulting in a Jewish, democratic state living 
side-by-side next to a demilitarized Palestinian state 
in peace and security; 
(F) the United States should work to facilitate 
serious, direct negotiations between the parties 
without preconditions toward a sustainable peace 
agreement; and 
(G) the United States Government should op-
pose and veto future United Nations Security Coun-
cil resolutions that seek to impose solutions to final 
status issues, or are one-sided and anti-Israel; and
•HRES 11 EH 
(2) the House of Representatives opposes United 
Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 and will work 
to strengthen the United States-Israel relationship, and 
calls for United Nations Security Council Resolution 
2334 to be repealed or fundamentally altered so that— 
(A) it is no longer one-sided and anti-Israel; 
and 
(B) it allows all final status issues toward a 
two-state solution to be resolved through direct bi-
lateral negotiations between the parties. 
Attest: 
Clerk.