First. I want to comment on the amendment just proposed by the gentleman from Minnesota Out of this authorization. you propose a cut for Israel from $76.000.000 now in the bill to $65.000.000. But you propose no cut for the Arab refugees. Also. we must remember that the Arab refugees will be getting more contributions from the U. N. fund besides our own. so that the gentleman from Minnesota is to that degree making an inequitable proposal. Now. to answer the argument of the gentleman from North Carolina . regarding the point he made about the impounding of the funds in Israel: Humbly I state at this time that I have been working with the State of Israel toward a solution of this problem. and I am very happy to say that as of yesterday there is a solution and an agreement in being to unfreeze these funds. which will take place very shortly. To cut the authorization to Israel is destructive. It will not bring peace to this area nor will it bring peace between the Arab States and Israel. The Committee on Foreign Affairs. on which I have the privilege of serving. carefully considered the needs of the Arab refugees and the needs of Israel and the ability of this great new democracy to contribute to the free world as our allies. The important problems in the Near East are well known to all of us. I firmly believe we would take a very constructive approach to this area by approving the full amount of assistance to Israel. As my colleague the gentleman from New York explained. we are primarily interested at this time in the resettlement of the refugees in this area and to make them selfsufficient. As far as Israel is concerned. we must encourage and strengthen this friendly. democratic state and we must assist in solving her economic problems. Aside from the fact that Israel is a great fortress of democracy in the Near East. she has the largest and the strongest military force in this area. next to Turkey.
Keywords matched
refugees