CRISIS IN LEBANON -- (Senate - August 01, 2006)

   Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, since July 12th we have watched with growing horror as hundreds of Hezbollah rockets have landed deeper and deeper inside Israel, indiscriminately killing and injuring civilians, and Israeli bombs, missiles and artillery shells have destroyed much of the civilian infrastructure in areas of Beirut and southern Lebanon.

   Some 550 Lebanese have died, the vast majority of them civilians, and an estimated 866,000 one in five Lebanese citizens have fled their homes and are either displaced in Lebanon, living in schools and public buildings, or as refugees in Syria. Fifty Israelis have died, and in Haifa and other towns in the north many families are living in terror in basements or shelters.

   Meanwhile, three Israeli soldiers remain as hostages and their families remain in anguish hostages held in violation of the Geneva Conventions and every other international norm. In another sense, Hezbollah and its supporters Syria and Iran are holding the entire population of Lebanon hostage.

   Of the 26,000 American citizens who were living in or visiting Lebanon when this crisis began, more than 12,000 have been evacuated, and the exodus continues. The cost to the U.S. Government of this air and sea lift is expected to be at least $46 million.

   The evacuation took too long to get started, and the delay and confusion caused a lot of frustration and anxiety among Americans in Lebanon as well as their families back home.

   As after Hurricane Katrina, I hope the administration has learned something from this experience. At the same time, I want to commend the State Department employees and U.S. military personnel who worked around the clock to help Americans who were trapped in Lebanon find a way out.

   The unprovoked, indiscriminate and utterly inexcusable kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and rocket attacks by Hezbollah should be universally condemned. Those who ordered it should be brought to justice. It has ignited a conflict that Hezbollah cannot win but which could engulf the region if a way

is not found to stop the spiral of violence from widening.

   It is clear that a buffer zone patrolled by an international force is urgently needed along the Israeli-Lebanese border to prevent these kinds of violent incursions against Israel and its people, and that Hezbollah must be disarmed in order for Lebanon to finally finally--break free of Syria's harsh grip.

   While hundreds of Hezbollah's missiles continue to rain down on Israel, Israel's military response has also caused the deaths of hundreds of civilians in Lebanon, including four United Nations observers. One of the latest tragedies is the destruction by an Israeli missile of an apartment building in Qana that resulted in 57 Lebanese deaths including 34 children, children who were not terrorists.

   Secretary Rice's whirlwind visits to the region have been welcome but they have produced few tangible results. This type of crisis diplomacy rarely achieves lasting solutions. She is also occupied with a widening civil war in Iraq, resurgent Taliban violence in Afghanistan, an increasingly recalcitrant and aggressive regime in North Korea, a worsening humanitarian crisis in Darfur with no end in sight, the specter of a nuclear-weapons-capable Iran in the world's future, and other pressing problems. She is simply unable to focus the sustained, high-level attention on the Middle East crisis that is needed.

   I and others like my friend from Nebraska, Senator Hagel, have urged President Bush to appoint a special envoy with the stature and the authority to work on a continual basis to help broker an immediate cease-fire and long term solutions to Israel's conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah someone who wakes up every single day with the challenge, the portfolio and especially the authority to help resolve this conflict. I renew this call for such an envoy again today.

   Some U.S. officials have questioned the possibility of a cease-fire with a terrorist organization like Hezbollah. That is a valid question, but cease-fires have been achieved with other terrorist groups, and while imperfect the results have been sharp reductions in violence.

   A cease-fire is needed immediately in Lebanon, to be followed with similar urgency by the deployment of an international peacekeeping force on the border. Too many innocent people are dying innocent people--in both countries. A peacekeeping force is necessary to prevent further loss of Lebanese and Israeli lives.

   The United States is committed to protecting Israel's security and we support Israel's right of self defense, including going after Hezbollah fighters who often launch their attacks from civilian areas.

   But for Israel's sake, for ours and especially especially--for the sake of innocent lives on both sides of these battle lines, it is vitally important to ask whether destroying Lebanon--not Hezbollah, but destroying Lebanon--will make Israel more secure or instead rally Muslims behind Hezbollah and give rise to further hatred and insecurity. I believe that continued bombing of civilian areas in Lebanon will not destroy Hezbollah, but in a perverse way, it may strengthen it.

   The fact that these attacks are being carried out with such intensity and are yielding so much death and destruction, with weapons supplied by the United States, and at a time when we are trying to repair our already frayed relations with Muslims around the world, is all the more reason for the United States and the people of Israel to consider and answer this question frankly and honestly. I am concerned, as others have also warned, that a short-term tactical victory--even if possible--could prove to be a hollow victory at great human cost.

   We should also reflect on the circumstances that preceded this crisis. For the past 5 years, the Bush administration's approach to the Middle East has been either to ignore it or to parachute in for just enough time for a few handshakes and photographs. There has never been an effective strategy. They have never been willing to expend any political capital. Their policy toward Syria and Iran has been erratic and ineffective. Their relations with the Palestinians have stagnated.

   It was clear since the earliest days of this administration that this laxity would define their approach to these tinderbox issues, and the terrible harm of that approach--to our ally Israel, to the Palestinians, and to the prospects for resuming a meaningful peace process in that region is all the more clear today.

   I am not among those who believe that the United States pulls all the strings in the Middle East. There are forces there over which we have only limited influence.

   But neither do I believe there can be a lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict without the active, creative and sustained engagement of the United States, including direct talks with those with whom we strongly disagree, like Syria and Iran. That has been sorely lacking under this administration, and we are witnessing the price of that neglect in Lebanon and Israel today.