Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I have 13 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; that the committee-reported title amendment be agreed to; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I now ask for a second reading, and, in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 567.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 583.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I know of no further debate on the resolution.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Thursday, March 21; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of Executive Calendar No. 117, Jose Rodriguez, to be an Assistant Secretary of Labor; further, that at 11:30 a.m. the motion to proceed to the vote by which cloture was not agreed to on the Rodriguez nomination be agreed to, the motion to reconsider the failed cloture vote be agreed to, and the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Rodriguez nomination, upon reconsideration; further, that if cloture is invoked, all time be considered expired at 2 p.m.; that following the confirmation vote, the Senate resume legislative session for the consideration of Calendar No. 340, S.J. Res. 62, that the motion to proceed be agreed to and the Senate immediately vote on passage of the joint resolution; that upon disposition of the joint resolution, the Senate resume executive session and resume consideration of the Schydlower nomination; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Thursday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 348, S. 3648.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Sanders.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, following my remarks, Senator Cardin be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes prior to the scheduled vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to express my strong support for the confirmation of Nicole Berner of Maryland to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. She is an outstanding nominee to represent Maryland on that court. That is why Senator Cardin and I were proud to recommend her nomination to the Senate Judiciary Committee. We are pleased the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced her nomination to the floor of the Senate, and today we are proud to recommend her nomination to the full U.S. Senate. Ms. Berner's impressive legal career is a testament to her exceptional skill and unwavering dedication to justice, to fairness, and to service. Ms. Berner is a highly experienced litigator. She knows the courtroom. She is currently a partner at the law firm of James & Hoffman, where she is on full-time retainer as the general counsel of the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU. In over 15 years as the general counsel to SEIU, she has represented the union's 2 million members in a diverse range of professional sectors, making her deeply knowledgeable about the challenges facing working people throughout the United States of America. There are few judges on the Federal bench--and none on the Fourth Circuit--who have this practice background. As part of her substantial litigation responsibilities, Ms. Berner has worked on a range of matters, including cases arising under labor and employment laws and regulations, as well as advising on legal claims involving criminal law, voting rights, Federal preemption, antitrust, bankruptcy, immigration, and the list goes on. She has served as counsel in more than three dozen cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and dozens more in Federal courts of appeals. Earlier in her career, Ms. Berner was a staff attorney with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, litigating cases to protect and expand access to reproductive care and healthcare. She also spent several years in private practice. She has also worked to train future lawyers as an adjunct professor at Vanderbilt Law School. She earned her J.D. from the University of California Berkeley Law School and went on to clerk for two Federal judges--one in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and one in the District Court for the Northern District of Columbia. Based on all her legal experience, the American Bar Association gave Ms. Berner its highest rating of ``well qualified'' for the position she has been nominated for. Her confirmation would mark a significant milestone for the Fourth Circuit. If confirmed, she would be the first openly gay, LGBTQ judge to serve on that court. Ms. Berner's qualifications, her values, and her life experience, coupled with her notedly steady, thoughtful, and calm demeanor, which was exhibited during the hearing and questioning on the Senate Judiciary Committee, will make her an exceptional addition to the Fourth Circuit. Her nomination has inspired letters and statements of support from a host of organizations, including 27 interfaith organizations, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights under Law, the National Women's Law Center, a number of union presidents--23 of them-- the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, among many others. I know that Ms. Berner would say and she has told us that she has traveled this important journey of her life alongside other members of her family: her wife Debra and their sons Mattan, Naveh, Segev, and Ari. I join my good friend and colleague, the senior Senator from the State of Maryland, Ben Cardin, in strongly recommending that the U.S. Senate confirm Nicole Berner to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. But Prime Minister Netanyahu's role in keeping Hamas in control in Gaza did not end there. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a New York Times piece, again, from December of last year headlined: ``Israel found the Hamas money machine years ago. Nobody turned it off.''

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I want to quote from Mr. Levy, who is quoted in that article. He was the Mossad chief in charge of economic policy. He says: ``I can tell you for sure that I talked to him''--referring to Prime Minister Netanyahu--``about this. But he didn't care that much about it.'' The article goes on to point out that Mr. Netanyahu's Mossad chief shut down Mr. Levy's team, the task force called Harpoon that focused on disrupting the money flowing to groups including Hamas. So let's go back to why Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extreme rightwing allies, like Smotrich and Ben Gvir, wanted to keep Hamas in place in Gaza. It is because, as they have said, their primary goal was to avoid the establishment of a Palestinian State. And so long as they could keep the Palestinians divided, they could avoid a united national movement for such a state. And so long as Hamas was in control of Gaza, it proved a useful foil against recognizing a Palestinian State that included the West Bank and Gaza, until the horror of October 7. The corollary of not threatening Hamas's control of Gaza has been to systematically weaken the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. The terrible irony, of course, is that while helping perpetuate Hamas-- which was dedicated to the destruction of Israel and is dedicated to the destruction of Israel--Prime Minister Netanyahu and his allies have undermined the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, which, for over 30 years, since the Oslo Accords, have recognized Israel's right to exist and have sought to coexist with Israel. Their strategy: Keep Hamas in place; undermine the Palestinian Authority. In fact, even today, during the war in Gaza, Finance Minister Smotrich is withholding an even greater share of the PA's own funds, and, since coming to power, the Netanyahu government has advanced even more settlements and allowed even more outposts deeper in the West Bank. And, of course, that further undermines the legitimacy of the PA in the eyes of the Palestinian people by exposing their total inability to stop those actions, even as they, the PA, help provide to Israel with security in certain areas of the West Bank. So Prime Minister Netanyahu has advanced the strategy of weakening the Palestinian Authority and facilitating Hamas in order to prevent Palestinians from being able to live in dignity in a state of their own. And the reason--the reason--that Prime Minister Netanyahu and the far-right extremists in his government, like Smotrich and Ben Gvir, don't want a Palestinian State in the West Bank is that they want it all for themselves in what they envision as a ``Greater Israel.'' If you have Palestinians in the West Bank or who stay in the West Bank, you can't implement the vision of a ``Greater Israel''--their version of one state. So we come full circle. UNRWA was established to be a bridge to provide services, like education, to Palestinian refugees after they were displaced. I am sure its founders did not expect it to be around for so long, but that is because they likely never envisioned that, 74 years later, the conflict that gave rise to UNRWA would remain unresolved. But it is unresolved, and now Prime Minister Netanyahu has openly opposed President Biden's call to resolve it, ultimately, by enacting a real two-state solution that would include normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia and the other Arab countries that have yet to recognize Israel--important security needed for the Jewish State of Israel. And at the same time that Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to torpedo a two-state solution to resolve the conflict, he also wants to pursue his long-term goal of ending the organization that was not born out of that conflict, UNRWA, and eliminating the services that it currently provides to Palestinian refugees. The United States should not be complicit in this scheme. We should not be a party to defunding UNRWA in Gaza, which is, right now, playing a critical role in the delivery of desperately needed food and humanitarian assistance to starving people. Nor should we be complicit in defunding the essential services UNRWA provides in places like the West Bank, Jordan, and other places. I support reforming UNRWA but not eliminating it. The question of defunding UNRWA is, at this very moment, the biggest unresolved issue in the Foreign Operations appropriations bill. I call upon responsible Members of Congress in the Senate and the House to ensure that the United States does not defund UNRWA. Members of Congress who argue for the elimination of UNRWA have never bothered to drive a short distance from Jerusalem to visit an UNRWA school and hear young students talk about their dreams to be doctors, engineers, and educators, like some of us have done. There is hope in these schools, not hate, and, frankly, that is what we should be able to do here in the U.S. Senate. We should be on the side of hope. We should not be a party to more people starving in Gaza. We should not be a party to the closing of schools for Palestinian students in the West Bank, Jordan, and other countries. And the United States should not be a party to creating even more instability in the Middle East. Like many of my colleagues, and like President Biden, I believe the only way to create some light at the end of this dark tunnel is to find a path that ensures security for the Israeli people and dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people. That is why I stand with our colleague Senator Schumer and his important and timely comments this morning that rejecting the idea of Palestinian statehood and sovereignty is a ``grave mistake'' for regional security and especially for the security of Israelis and Palestinians. Prime Minister Netanyahu has said that a two-state solution would be a big reward--reward, he says--for Hamas, but the opposite is true. Hamas has one plan: the destruction of the State of Israel and replacing the Jewish democratic state with one of their own. They want one state. A two-state solution is contrary to everything Hamas stands for and all it seeks to achieve, so, far from being a reward, it would be a denial of their goal of one state under Hamas control. We all know that the road ahead will be long, and it will be hard. In the aftermath of the horrific Hamas attacks of October 7 and the current humanitarian disaster in Gaza, it is hard to imagine a time of peace and stability. That will only come when Palestinian leaders who fully embrace the right of Israel to exist in security and Israeli leaders who recognize that Palestinians must have a viable state of their own both make the necessary risks for peace. So let us push for an immediate cease-fire and a release of all the hostages, and then let us create a flicker of hope in this moment of darkness. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, during his State of the Union Address last week, President Biden once again rightly pointed out that Israel has the right and I would say the duty to defend itself in the aftermath of the brutal Hamas terror attack of October 7 that left approximately 1,200 brutally murdered and 240 taken hostage. There must be no more October 7s. President Biden also described the ongoing humanitarian disaster taking place in Gaza today. Over 31,000 Palestinians have been killed-- over two-thirds of them women and children--and likely thousands more unaccounted for, buried beneath the rubble. Gaza has become a hellhole of human suffering. Humanitarian organizations that have operated worldwide for decades say they have never witnessed a more terrible situation. Among those suffering in Gaza are not only over 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians but also over 130 hostages still held by Hamas, including Americans. Earlier this week, I met with some of the families of Israeli hostages whose loved ones were kidnapped and are still being held captive, as well as one brave woman who was held hostage and released during the November pause. Every day that they are separated from their loved ones, not knowing what will happen to them next, is a day of unimaginable mental anguish and torment. That is why we must prioritize the release of the hostages and end the suffering of Palestinian civilians. The only way to do that is to secure an immediate cease-fire and release all of the remaining hostages. That must happen, but until it happens, we must do everything in our power to protect innocent civilians and end the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. Today, four out of five of the hungriest people on Earth are in Gaza. Hundreds of thousands of them are on the verge of starvation, and over 23 children have crossed that grisly threshold and have died of starvation. Cindy McCain, the Director of the World Food Programme, has warned of an imminent famine. Injured children are having their limbs amputated without anesthesia. Sewage is spilling onto the streets, and humanitarian officials are seeing spikes in the spread of various preventable diseases, like diarrhea, among children. Two weeks ago, the world got a glimpse of a horrible scene: Over 100 starving Palestinians were killed as they reached for food from trucks. In the aftermath of that horrible event, President Biden has ordered airdrops of food supplies. I support that decision because when people are starving, every parcel of food counts. But airdrops are just a drop in the ocean of need, so I was also glad to see the President order the building of a temporary port to help deliver more aid by ship. But that port will likely not be ready for at least 60 days, and even then, it will not be sufficient to meet the humanitarian need. All of these extraordinary efforts to deliver aid by air and by sea are being undertaken when we know that during the prewar period, when there was already a near blockade of Gaza, about 500 trucks still crossed daily through the Kerem Shalom crossing into Gaza. And those 500 trucks crossed every day when the need was far less acute than it is right now. So the obvious question is, Why? Why in the world should we have to resort to these extraordinary and more expensive means to deliver insufficient amounts of food and aid by air and sea when we could bring in sufficient amounts of food and aid by truck much more efficiently through Egypt's Rafah crossing and the multiple crossing points into Gaza from Israel? The answer is because this is a man-made disaster. The starvation in Gaza is not the result of food scarcity caused by drought or other natural disasters that we see in many parts of the world. This has been caused primarily because the Netanyahu government has used a series of tactics to restrict the amount of aid entering into Gaza. Anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear knows that. Members of the Netanyahu government, like Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, have made no secret of their intentions. In October, after the war began, Ben-Gvir said: So long as Hamas does not release the hostages, the only thing that should enter Gaza is hundreds of tons of Air Force explosives--not one ounce of humanitarian aid. Smotrich used his power as Finance Minister to block a shipment of flour that could feed 1.1 million people for a month in Gaza. The shipment was finally released 2 days ago after having been blocked for 5 weeks at least, all while people were starving. At one point, Prime Minister Netanyahu said his government was allowing just the ``minimum'' amount needed, and that was at a time when he and others denied that there was even a humanitarian disaster in Gaza; denied that there was a scarcity of food in Gaza; denied that there was hunger in Gaza. This is why President Biden has called out those restrictions and why he said in his State of the Union Address: Humanitarian assistance cannot be a secondary consideration or a bargaining chip. The President said that his administration is going to ``insist that Israel facilitate more trucks and more routes to get more and more people the help they need--no excuses.'' More than 5 weeks ago, on February 2, 25 Senators sent a letter to President Biden, calling for the Netanyahu government to implement five specific actions to significantly increase the amount of humanitarian aid entering Gaza. To date, none of them have been fully implemented. That is why many of us have called on President Biden to immediately invoke and implement the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act, which is section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act. Now that NSM--National Security Memorandum--20 is in place, which is based on an amendment that 19 of us proposed to the National Security Act, it is essential-- essential--that the Biden administration enforce its terms to get humanitarian aid delivered where it needs to go. When people are starving, patience is not a virtue. It needs to be said that getting humanitarian aid into Gaza is only half the battle. The other half and the more dangerous half is distributing the aid once it is inside of Gaza. It doesn't do any good if you can't safely transport the food to the people who are starving. In other words, you need a safe distribution system for aid inside Gaza. Now, the organization that is the primary distributor of assistance within Gaza has been an entity called the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, known by its shorthand as UNRWA. Americans may have not heard much about UNRWA, so I want to say a little bit about why UNRWA exists and what it does in Gaza and elsewhere. But before I do that, I want to jump to why this is a pressing issue right now. The future of UNRWA is an urgent matter right now because Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extreme rightwing allies want to get rid of it not just in Gaza but everywhere that it operates. And guess what. Prime Minister Netanyahu and folks on the far right in his government have wanted to abolish UNRWA not just since October 7 but since at least 2017. In fact, in 2018, Prime Minister Netanyahu actually changed official Israeli policy with respect to UNRWA, saying that they wanted to cut off all funding to UNRWA, even at a time that his security team warned that it could create instabilities throughout the region if that happened. Now we have Republican Members of the House and Senate who are jumping on this bandwagon and saying they want to abolish UNRWA. And how do they want to do this? By inserting a provision in the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations bill, which is being considered and debated right now as we gather here, to cut off all U.S. funding for UNRWA. That is what they want to do. So let's go back to why UNRWA was created in the first place. In 1949--a year after the establishment of the State of Israel--the United Nations formed a new agency to provide vital services for over 700,000 Palestinian refugees who were displaced during the first Arab- Israeli war. Back then, the idea was that UNRWA would provide services to Palestinian refugees until a just and durable solution to their plight was found. As we know all too well, over 73 years have passed without a resolution to that conflict, which is why UNRWA's mission remains essential. Among other services, UNRWA provides schools and primary health services to Palestinian refugees and their descendants in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and in Gaza. I hope we all agree that the Palestinian people deserve to live in dignity. The way to do that is to ensure that they also have self- determination in a homeland of their own, just like every Israeli deserves dignity and self-determination in the Jewish and democratic State of Israel. President Biden and I and many others believe that the only viable, long-term solution to this conflict is a two-state solution, and President Biden has put that idea forward as the best way to create some light at the end of this very dark tunnel. UNRWA was really intended to be a bridge until such a resolution was reached. Prime Minister Netanyahu has stated very clearly that he is opposed to a two-state solution. He was opposed to the Oslo Accords, and he has been a severe opponent of the two-state solution. And as I said earlier, he also wants to eliminate UNRWA, which today is an organization of over 300,000 employees providing services to Palestinians in three countries and, as I said, also in the West Bank and Gaza. Mr. President, 13,000 of those 30,000 UNRWA staff operate in Gaza-- many of them as teachers. Since the war started with the brutal Hamas attacks on Israel of October 7, UNRWA's schools in Gaza have shut down; and as a United Nations agency, it has deployed its resources to supply humanitarian relief to the civilian population there. It is the main vehicle for distributing humanitarian assistance in Gaza. It won't do any good to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza if you dismantle the U.N. organization principally responsible for delivering that aid to people in Gaza. This morning, I met with chef Jose Andres, and I applaud him for his efforts and the efforts of the World Central Kitchen around the world, including in Israel and in Gaza. He said: Support for UNRWA is vital. If you want to feed people you need to support UNRWA. We may have a temporary port, but when the ship gets to the port, someone has to transfer that food and other assistance from the ship to the people who need it in Gaza, and UNRWA is the principal distributor of assistance. If you talk to the World Food Programme and others, they say very clearly they cannot replace that capacity that UNRWA has. In late January, the Netanyahu government alleged that up to 14 of UNRWA's 13,000 employees participated in the horrific October attacks against Israel. These are, of course, very serious allegations, and UNRWA has taken them seriously. All agree that any individuals involved in that horror must be held accountable, and even though the Netanyahu government has not provided UNRWA with the underlying evidence, UNRWA immediately fired the alleged perpetrators. The U.N. Secretary General also took swift action and announced the launch of a full and independent investigation, led by the U.N.'s highest investigative body, into the allegations; and that is ongoing. At the same time, President Biden suspended all U.S. contributions to UNRWA pending the outcome of that investigation. A number of other countries followed suit, as did the EU. But, since then, two things have changed. First, the Netanyahu government has not shared the underlying evidence with UNRWA nor, as reported by The Wall Street Journal, has it shared the raw evidence with the United States. In fact, I urge every one of my Senate colleagues to read the classified report prepared by the DNI, and I especially urge my colleagues to read the intelligence assessments about the many other claims the Netanyahu government has made against UNRWA--and there have been many. I am sure that many of my colleagues are unaware of the fact that UNRWA has long provided both Israel and the United States with the names and identities of all its employees for full review and vetting. Now, Israel, of course, has far more extensive intelligence capabilities than UNRWA; but, apparently, they have never previously raised complaints about any of the UNRWA employees on the lists given to them. Second, the EU and many countries that initially suspended their financial support for UNRWA have since restored their contributions because they have acknowledged the desperation in Gaza and the irreplaceable nature of UNRWA. In fact, even prior to these allegations, UNRWA had asked the U.N. Secretary General to convene an Independent Review Group to assess whether UNRWA was doing everything within its power to ensure neutrality. So, again, UNRWA in Gaza--an organization with a staff of 13,000 people--is delivering essential life-sustaining aid to over 2 million people. And what the EU and these other countries that have restored UNRWA funding recognize is that it is inhumane to cut off assistance to 2 million people because of the atrocious, alleged acts of 14. Punish the 14. Don't punish 2 million innocent Gazans, and that is why I believe that President Biden should restore this assistance now. The notion that UNRWA is, somehow, a front group for Hamas is a total lie--pure and simple. The individual dispatched by President Biden to be the U.S. humanitarian coordinator in the region is a veteran diplomat, Ambassador David Satterfield. He has repeatedly debunked claims made by members of the Netanyahu government that humanitarian aid provided by UNRWA has been diverted to Hamas. Specifically, he said the following: I have not received any allegations, evidence or reports of any incidence of Hamas diversion or theft of U.S. or other assistance or fuel from UN delivered assistance from any of our partners or from the Government of Israel since the humanitarian assistance resumed in Gaza October 21. Not a single report from Israeli Government officials or anybody else about Hamas diverting aid that was being transported by UNRWA or other U.N. agencies. My colleagues, you should all know that the individual overseeing operations on the ground in Gaza today is an American named Scott Anderson. He is a 21-year Army veteran from South Dakota. He is a no- nonsense guy. I urge every Senator to talk to him. The notion that Scott Anderson is part of a front organization for Hamas is patently absurd. The truth is that before the war started, Prime Minister Netanyahu did not pretend that he wanted to dismantle UNRWA on the grounds that it was a proxy for Hamas. He has long wanted to eliminate UNRWA not only in Gaza but everywhere else that it supports education for Palestinian schoolchildren and healthcare for Palestinians, like in the West Bank and Jordan. As I said, he has been trying to do that since at least the year 2017. And now he has Republicans in Congress joining him and calling for the defunding of all U.S. support for UNRWA, not only in Gaza but throughout the region. Attempts to discredit UNRWA and the U.N. have gotten so bad that 18 heads of all the major U.N. humanitarian and refugee agencies, together with NGOs like Save the Children and CARE, signed a statement calling for a ``halt to campaigns that seek to discredit the United Nations and non-governmental organizations doing their best to save lives.'' It is making it harder for them to save lives. If you want to take a combustible situation in the West Bank and make it even worse, then close down schools for kids there. Take away any chance of an education. Snuff out any hopes they may have for a brighter future. Really? If you want to create instability in Jordan, shut down UNRWA schools and services there. Why do we all think that King Abdallah has warned us about the consequences of shutting down UNRWA? Here is the crazy thing about this moment: Prime Minister Netanyahu has seized on the lies about UNRWA being a proxy for Hamas in Gaza to achieve his long-term goal of shutting down UNRWA everywhere. And what adds insult to injury is that UNRWA has not perpetuated Hamas in Gaza, but Prime Minister Netanyahu himself has done exactly that. Let me explain. You know, there is a lot of talk here in the U.S. Senate about the malign actors who have supported Hamas over the years. One of them is a very malign actor, Iran. Now, Iran did not create Hamas, nor does Iran exercise command and control over Hamas. But it does support Hamas because, like Iran, Hamas has the despicable goal of eliminating Israel. That is why Iran has supported Hamas. But what we rarely, if ever, discuss is the inconvenient truth that, until the unexpected horror of the Hamas attack on October 7, Prime Minister Netanyahu himself saw it as in his interest to keep Hamas in control in Gaza. Don't take my word for it. He told us in his own words back in 2019 at a Likud Party meeting where he said: Anyone who wants to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state needs to support strengthening Hamas. This is part of our strategy to divide the Palestinians between those in Gaza and those in Judea and Samaria. Prime Minister Netanyahu: Anyone who wants to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state needs to support strengthening Hamas. Mr. President, I would like to have printed in the Record a piece that appeared in Haaretz, in October of last year, entitled ``A Brief History of the Netanyahu-Hamas Alliance.'' I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. After all, so long as Hamas was in control in Gaza, how could anyone ask Israel to accept a Palestinian State that included Gaza and the West Bank? It is a fair question. So what are some of the ways in which Prime Minister Netanyahu has enabled Hamas to maintain its control in Gaza? Well, another thing we have heard a lot about around here is the money from Qatar that went to Hamas. It is well established that every penny of that money flowed from Qatar to Hamas with the concurrence of Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel. That has been the testimony of witnesses in both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee. It has also been well documented in numerous news sources. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a CNN article entitled ``Qatar sends millions to Gaza for years--with Israel's backing.''

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a New York Times article from December of last year entitled ``'Buying Quiet': Inside the Israeli plan that propped up Hamas.'' The sub headline is ``Prime Minister Netanyahu gambled that a strong Hamas (but not too strong) would keep the peace and reduce pressure for a Palestinian state.''

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Will the Senator from South Carolina yield for a question?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. We really should debate because I don't know any evidence at all for your--

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Will the gentleman yield on that?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, the United States and Turkiye have an important and complex relationship, and I have been repeatedly outspoken about my concerns regarding Ankara's actions under President Erdogan. These include President Erdogan's ongoing attacks against our Syrian Kurdish allies, his aggressive actions in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the role he played in supporting Azerbaijan's military assaults against Nagorno-Karabakh. The Biden administration recently briefed me on these issues and provided some answers around my concerns. Though I have been glad to see that President Erdogan has ceased the incursions by military aircraft into Greek airspace, the administration informed me that they continue to monitor this matter closely in order to encourage the ongoing dialogue between Greece and Turkiye. Additionally, I received assurances from the administration that it will continue to warn Azerbaijan against taking further military action against Armenia and that they will work with Turkiye to prevent any further escalation of that conflict. I remain deeply troubled by President Erdogan's attacks against the Syrian Democratic Forces--SDF-- in Northeast Syria; however, the administration assured me that they continue to voice their strong objections to these attacks, including the threat posed to U.S. forces working with the SDF, and reaffirmed their ongoing commitment to supporting this crucial partner, who has served as the tip of the spear in our campaign to defeat the Islamic State. The administration told me that they would more clearly communicate that commitment to the SDF to allay concerns that have been expressed about a reduced American commitment to our partnership. While Turkiye's ratification of Sweden's NATO membership was long delayed, it has been a welcome step forward and an important signal to the NATO community. I hope that this step indicates a broader realignment of Turkiye's actions with U.S. national security interests and serves as a platform upon which we can address these other lingering issues in the bilateral relationship. It is for these reasons that I will be opposing S.J. Res. 60, which would disapprove of the sale of 40 F-16s and other defense articles and services to the Government of Turkiye. I will continue to stay in regular communication with the administration regarding their assurances on these and other key issues. It is clear that we must keep a close watch on Turkiye in the weeks and months ahead; actions speak louder than words.