E-mail a friendRep. Ray LaHood
airdate July 24, 2006
Serving his 6th term in the House, Illinois GOP Rep. Ray LaHood - one of few members in Congress of Lebanese descent - is viewed as someone who works across party lines to achieve policy goals. He serves on the Appropriations Committee and chairs the Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Intelligence Committee. A former schoolteacher, LaHood previously served in the state House of Representatives and as an aide to his predecessor, Rep. Robert Michel. He's a member of the Republican Main Street Partnership.
Rep. Ray LaHood
Tavis: Congressman Ray LaHood, Republican of Illinois, is one of only four Lebanese-Americans serving in the House. During his time in office, he's traveled nearly a dozen times to Lebanon. He also serves as the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee's terrorism sub committee. He joins us tonight from Washington. Congressman LaHood, nice to have you on the program, sir.
Rep. Ray LaHood: Tavis, it's an honor to be with you.
Tavis: Let me start with the news of the day. Of course, the big story, Secretary Rice is in the Middle East, her first stop though, surprise to many, Lebanon, Beirut specifically. What'd you make of that?
LaHood: Very pleased. I think it shows that this administration and this Secretary of State cared deeply about the people who've been hurt very badly by the attacks in Beirut, in southern Beirut, and throughout the country. And I think it shows that, and I know she talked about some humanitarian aid for the people now who are without food, without water, without housing, and without roads. And I couldn't be any happier. I really applaud the President and Secretary Rice for making the first stop in Beirut.
Tavis: When you said you couldn't be any happier, do I take that to mean that you think that a quick stop in Beirut is better than a cease fire?
LaHood: Well look, a cease fire is the ultimate. It's the ultimate solution. It's the way that we can get innocent people out of harm's way, particularly in Lebanon. My heart goes out to people in Beirut and other parts of the country of Lebanon, where there is no Hezbollah influence, and yet, homes have been bombed, and people are without food. But it's the first step, and it's a very good first step. And I think it shows that this administration does care about innocent people in Beirut and in Lebanon.
Tavis: To that point again, if the administration cared as much as you think they do, why not press more for a cease fire? Let me ask more expressly what you make of Secretary Rice's, and by extension this administration's view, that now is not the time for a cease fire?
LaHood: Well, I happen to think it is, and my hope is that when the Secretary gets to Israel and talks to the prime minister there, she will persuade him that there's one or two things that need to be done, like the return of the two soldiers that were captured. Like some kind of military capability in the southern part of the country as a buffer zone. If he would agree to those, perhaps a cease fire could take place very quickly.
But we know that Israel wants to frankly bomb the hell out of the southern part of Lebanon to root out Hezbollah. And they are a very bad group. They're a terrorist group, and they've caused a lot of mischief and a lot of heartache in that area. But I think a cease fire has got to be the ultimate goal, and something that I hope the Secretary's talking to the prime minister of Israel about.
Tavis: To your point that Israel wants to bomb the hell out that particular region, I quote you there, tell me what your sense is, as one who is Lebanese, how do I put this? How do you square that? How do you view a country going after a terrorist organization - let's face it. To your point, Hezbullah is not a nation-state. It is a terrorist organization. So how does one who happens to be of Lebanese descent watch a country bomb the heck out of his homeland, but at the same time, try to juxtapose that with the notion that they are, in fact, a terrorist group?
LaHood: Two years ago, Tavis, I was in Lebanon. I was in Beirut on one of the trips that I've taken there just every year that I've been in Congress. I criticized the president for taking an additional term, which violates the Constitution. And I also said that the leaders of Lebanon should begin immediately moving troops into the southern part to bring under control Hezbollah.
If the government had been doing what they should have been doing, in terms of hospitals, health clinics, schools, housing, all kinds of things like that in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah would not be entrenched. They provided all those things over the last several years. And when their people ran for the Parliament, they were elected. So I fault the government.
I've criticized the president. I've said he shouldn't have taken another term. But I also don't believe that Israel ought to be bombing areas of Beirut and areas of Lebanon where there are innocent people. And also, where there are people who have no fight in this game. And destroying infrastructure that really inhibits the people's ability to live their lives. So look, I think I've been pretty balanced on this. And it is up to the government now to take control of the southern part of the country. And with some UN troops and their own troops, I think they have the ability to do that.
Tavis: Speaking of balance, let me ask you directly, then. Do you think Israel has gone too far in this campaign?
LaHood: I think they've gone too far in parts of Beirut and parts of Lebanon where there are people who are innocent, who have no fight in the game, whose infrastructure and housing have been destroyed. And these are innocent people. There are no Hezbollah in certain parts of these neighborhoods that have been bombed.
Tavis: There are a lot of folk who've been critical of Secretary Rice and Mr. Bush for who they are willing to talk to, and not willing to talk to. I think of one great leader out of Israel, in fact, who once suggested that you can only make peace with your enemies. So what good, from your perspective, does it do to send our Secretary of State to the region, and yet we all know there's certain players in this drama that the administration is not interested in talking to. Is that a wise strategy?
LaHood: Well look, I do think the administration - doesn't have to be the Secretary, but it could be some of the people that work for her - could have direct talks with Syria. We know they're in this game. We know that they're a part of fomenting all of this mischief and terror, and these activities that go on there. And I think there should be some discussions with these people.
But look, we're not gonna engage in a discussion with the president of Iran. This guy, his whole goal is to wipe out Israel. That's wrong. And I don't agree that we should engage with him. But there are other players in the region that I think our government could engage with, and carry on a discussion. And hopefully, they can be helpful. That's what happened yesterday when the Saudi Arabian leaders came to this country and met with the President at the White House.
I think there's lots of discussions going on with the president of Egypt, and with King Abdullah of Jordan. And these are certainly legitimate talks with real, strong Arab leaders who hopefully can help us in this matter.
Tavis: Make the case to me. What's to be gained by talking to Syria, were the administration to engage in that conversation?
LaHood: Because they have caused a lot of the problems in Lebanon. At one time, they occupied the country. They have caused a great deal of mischief, and we ought to try and talk the leadership into Syria to coming to their senses and realizing that nothing can be gained from this and it's hurting the people in Lebanon, and see if we can talk some sense into them.
Tavis: There's been some conversation, mainly on the part of the Israelis, about a NATO-led force. Your thoughts?
LaHood: Well, I think eventually there will be some kind of a multinational group of soldiers that will come in and begin to offer the buffer zone and offer the opportunity for a buffer zone in the southern part of Lebanon. Lebanon has to be a part of that. They do have an army. It's a 60,000 strong army. And they need to be a part of that, too. I don't think there's any question there will be a multinational force in the southern part, as a buffer area.
Tavis: Let me flip it, if I might, right quick. Is it possible that, to the extent that there are those inside of Lebanon who have not heretofore been sympathetic to Hezbollah, but believe now that Israel has, in fact, gone too far in its campaign, might that turn their sensitivity toward a terrorist organization, albeit like Hezbollah?
LaHood: Well, look. Hezbollah has infiltrated the neighborhoods in the southern part of the country by providing all kinds of social services, all kinds of other services and housing, over a long period of time. That's why they've elected 13 people to the Lebanese parliament. Because people feel endeared to them for what they've done. Now whether the innocent people in areas that have been bombed, where again, as I said, they have no fight in the game, and they're innocent people, whether they turn their hearts and their minds to Hezbollah I don't know. I think time will tell on that.
Tavis: I wanna put a quote up on the screen from a fellow Republican, your fellow Republican, to be clear. (Laughs) You're a Republican, and so is Ken Mehlman. In fact, he's the chairman of your party. Mr. Mehlman said in a speech last week to Christians United for Israel, and I quote, we stand for Israel because their war is our war, too. Today, we are all Israelis. What do you make of those remarks by Ken Mehlman?
LaHood: Well, I do think the Israel war is our war. That's pretty obvious. I'm an American first. I'm also a Lebanese-American second. My grandparents came to the United States in 1895, and came to Peoria in 1895. I'm very proud of that. They've contributed mightily to what we call this great country, America, as well as many other immigrants. So, I call myself an American.
Tavis: You think Mr. Mehlman and the party that he represents values the life of an Israeli baby in the same way they value the life of an Arab baby?
LaHood: Look, I think that anybody who's in a position of leadership values the lives of innocent people. I hope that they do. I certainly believe President Bush does. And I certainly think Secretary Rice does. They're the policymakers here. The fellow that you're making reference to is a political leader. Not a policymaker.
Tavis: Let me ask you finally what you think the best thing is that the U.S. ought to be doing, or can be doing, right now?
LaHood: Exactly what Secretary Rice is doing. Shuttling back and forth, trying to make sense out of this, trying to negotiate some kind of an opportunity, so that innocent people's lives will be spared. Tavis, I do wanna compliment the Bush administration on helping people get out. By providing the military capability through our ships, by providing the cruise ships, thousands of innocent people are now exiting Lebanon.
And I do think that shows that our country cares a great deal about the innocent people. I think Secretary Rice first visit to Beirut, I think her shuttling back and forth, it's all gonna be helpful.
Tavis: Republican Congressman from Illinois, Representative Ray LaHood, one of only four members in the House of Lebanese descent. Representative LaHood, nice to have you on the program. Thanks for your insight, sir.
LaHood: Thank you, Tavis.
Tavis: It's my pleasure. Up next, Emmy-winning actress Patricia Heaton. Stay with us.
Back to July 24, 2006