Engel stands with Israel

Congressman Eliot Engel and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs joined the chorus of public figures denouncing a UN resolution that condemned Israel and that the U.S. allowed the resolution to pass by abstaining from the vote. 

The house committee said the resolution that the UN Security Council adopted on Dec. 23 was “an obstacle to Israeli-Palestinian peace.” 

In a speech to the House of Representatives on Jan. 5, Engel called for bipartisan unity in denouncing the resolution, which he has said fails to support the long-lasting alliance between the U.S. and Israel.

“We are condemning what happened because we think it’s unfair and unjust,” Engel said in his speech. “Throughout its entire history, the state of Israel has never gotten a fair shake from the United Nations. Year after year after year, member states manipulate the UN to bully our ally Israel, to pile on with one-sided resolutions placing all of the blame for the ongoing conflict on Israel.”

The outgoing Obama administration has drawn criticism lately from Israel’s allies on both sides of the allies. 

The UN resolution, which condemned Israeli settlements in the West Bank and in east Jerusalem as illegal, could have been vetoed by the United States. President Barack Obama’s decision to abstain has drawn criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, who argue the United States must continue to be Israel’s greatest ally on the world political stage. 

Engel also criticized a speech that Secretary of State John Kerry made in the wake of the UN vote. Kerry asserted his support for a two-state solution, but Engel said Kerry placed much of the blame for continued conflict on Israeli settlements. 

“Secretary Kerry’s remarks on the Middle East yesterday demonstrated his lifelong personal commitment to a two-state solution.  Unfortunately, I believe his speech will not advance the cause of a peaceful solution,” he said. “While he said that settlements are not the whole or even primary cause of the conflict, the speech appeared to put the entire onus on Israel and the settlement enterprise.”

Engel went on to say “there is plenty of blame to go around, and this speech appeared to point fingers overwhelmingly at Israel.”

He reiterated the need for the United States to protect Israel on the global stage, where Israel is often in the minority. 

“Israel can’t get a fair shake in international bodies, so it relies on the United States to shield it from unfair and biased initiatives,” Engel said. “Undermining Israeli confidence in its only true friend will only make Israelis feel more alone in the world.”

State lawmakers won’t attend Cuomo’s speeches

Legislative leaders in Albany have said they won’t attend any of Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s six regional speeches that begin on Jan. 9. 

Representatives for Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie and Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan were quoted by news reports as saying the two will not be attending Cuomo’s speeches, as both legislative bodies will be in session at the time.

Cuomo announced at the start of the New Year that he would not be giving the traditional State of State address at the sate capitol. Instead, he elected to give six speeches directly to constituents in different parts of the state.

Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz also said he would not be in attendance, and offered a hypothesis on why the governor elected to break from tradition in such a major way. 

“Until Gov. Cuomo, the address was given in the Assembly Chamber.  He changed that, OK, in part so he can control who gets in,” he said in an interview on Jan. 6. “I can only assume that this year he was not only concerned about who got in but who wouldn’t show up, but you know I can’t read his mind.”

In an earlier interview, Dinowitz said several legislators had told him they would not be attending this year. He did not name any names.  

“I just think that there are certain things that you do, sometimes conditions are better than others,” he said. “Sometimes you bite the bullet, and he chose not to bite the bullet.”

He called Cuomo’s decision not to speak directly to lawmakers about his plans and goals for the coming year “disrespectful.”

“He is entitled to speak whenever he wants, wherever he wants. I regret that he chose not to do this, because it shows—not only is it a break with tradition, and sometimes you break with tradition—but it is also a sign of disrespect to the 213 legislators that were elected by the people of New York,” Dinowitz said. “Among other people who attend the State of the State are the nine members of the Court of Appeals, so I think it is a sign of disrespect for the fact that we have three branches of government, not just one.”