Fifth in a series
In any negotiation, each side will have several "deal-breaking" points on which they will not compromise. The same holds true for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The Palestinians will never agree to a compromise that gives Israel absolute control over all of Jerusalem. (This is reasonable.) Israel will never permit all of the Palestinians who left in 1948 -- along with their descendants -- to return to and settle within the Jewish State because the resulting demographic mix would eliminate the country's Jewish majority. (This is also reasonable.) I will discuss the issue of Jerusalem in a future post, but for now I wish to address the "Right of Return."
Before and after Israel declared independence in 1948, millions of Arabs left their homes for the areas now known as the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as for neighboring Arab countries. But opinion is divided on why they left. Did Israel kick them out under threat of violence? Did the people who became known as Palestinians leave voluntarily to escape the warfare that erupted in 1948? Did Arab and Palestinian leaders ask or tell them to leave? We can never really know the entire truth.
(My personal opinion, based on Prof. Benny Morris' research, is that the Arabs left Israel for all of these reasons. In certain instances, they were forced to leave under threat of violence. Other times, they left voluntarily or at the recommendation of local Palestinian leaders. In essence, sometimes Israel was to blame -- and other times, it was not. It depends on the specific event.)
But the crux of the issue is that neither side can live in the past. What's done is done. Jews cannot invoke the Holocaust to justify any and every Israeli action. Palestinians and Arabs cannot cite atrocities committed decades ago -- and, yes, sometimes they did occur -- as a reason to murder civilians. For any progress to occur, all negotiations must start from the present reality on the ground. And the reality is that Israel -- whether rightly or wrongly -- will never allow all the Palestinians to return to Israel proper because the Jewish State wishes to remain, well, Jewish.
In the interests of peace, the Palestinians, therefore, must forgo their desire to return to Israel proper and instead demand the right to return to the future Palestinian state that will exist in the West Bank (and, most likely, Gaza).
Still, there is an element of hypocrisy in the demand for a Right of Return. The Palestinians were actually Jordanians before Israel -- following an attack by Jordan -- took the West Bank from that country in 1967 to defend against future aggression. But Jordan never allowed all of the Palestinians to settle in their former country. Israel, of course, has treated the Palestinians harshly (with some justification in specific contexts), but the neighboring Arab countries have treated them no better. Arab countries only pretend to care about the Palestinians when they can invoke their cause to raise anti-Israeli sentiment.
The world also seems to forget that many Jews in Israel and elsewhere can also claim a Right of Return: following Israel's declaration of statehood in 1948, millions of Jews in the Middle East were expelled from the Arab countries in which they lived. But, of course, no one seems to demand that they return as well. The idea of Right of Return also applies to American Indians. The United States, of course, took their land and decimated their populations. But the political reality is that the U.S. government will never give them back, say, the entire Old West. The same holds true for the Palestinians, as well as Jews from Arab countries and American Indians. In negotiations, one must be realistic. The Palestinians cannot demand a Right of Return to Israel proper as a condition for peace.
The entire series: Part VI: Israel and Syria; Part IV: The Palestinians Need a Viable State; Part III: Settlements and the Separation Barrier; Part II: Israel Needs Electoral Reform; Part I: Fix the Palestinian Authority
Now Available: E-Book download: "Letters from Israel: An American journalist’s adventures in the Holy Land."
Related posts:
- Solving the Middle East, Part VI: Israel and Syria
- Solving the Middle East, Part IV: The Palestinians Need a Viable State
- Solving the Middle East, Part I: Fix the Palestinian Authority
- Solving the Middle East, Part III: Settlements and the Separation Barrier
- Solving the Middle East, Part II: Israel Needs Electoral Reform
Very measured and good post. Thank you. Maryam in Marrakesh(Quote)
Fair enough, yet, are the neigboring Arab countries to blame for not absorbing all the refugees? Are the refugees to remain in the “camps” forever? These people are now caught in the middle of high-level politics and negotiations, while eking out, meanwhile, a pretty miserable existence. It’s clearly not reasonable to expect them all to “return” to the West Bank and Gaza — the latter is already overpopulated. I would like to see you address the refugee issue more in depth. Jeff(Quote)
Another great post. I enjoy reading your blog. Keep up the good work. smithofthelongfield(Quote)
Jeff,
I would say that Jordan should have accepted any and all refugees from the West Bank once Israel took control of that area in 1967 — especially since Jordan causes the crisis by invading Israel.
After all, the Palestinians were — and are? — Jordanians. Imagine if Mexico took control of Texas, but the U.S. government would not allow Texans to come to other parts of the United States. (The analogy is not perfect, but you get my point.)
Since Jordan did not step up to its responsibility, then neighboring Arab states should have taken more — if not all — refugees. But other Arab states never put their money where their rhetoric is. They have always claimed to support the Palestinians, but they actually do little to help them.
I’d be the first to state that the Palestinians’ current standard of living is miserable. That’s why I advocated in a prior post for a large influx of foreign assistance — from Israel, the United States, the UN, the World Bank, the Red Cross and others — in order to build infrastructure and create a viable state.
I don’t remember the total number of Palestinians worldwide. Could everyone not currently in the West Bank fit in the West Bank? I don’t know. That’s why I think they should all have a choice between building a state in the West Bank/Gaza and returning to, say, Jordan. Samuel J. Scott(Quote)
First, I agree that Arab states have historically been less than willing to absorb their Arab brethren. But, the issue is not that simple.
Palestinians, while sharing some history with Jordanians, are not Jordanians. Still, Jordan already absorbed many of those who fled there, and Palestinians in Jordan are known as some of the most successful citizens there.
Regardless of history, too, there are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of Palestinian refugees. To allow them all to be absorbed into Jordan would ruin the economy there. Where will they get jobs? How will they buy food to eat? No county in the Middle East is big enough to absorb the populations of miserably poor Palestinians living in camps. Nor was any country ever, probably. Therefore, it’s ridiculous to expect that Jordan offer a “right of return,” as well as being rather beside the point.
Finally, you said yourself that the West Bank lacks resources. How will it support even MORE people than it already does? Foreign aid is one thing, but a lack of jobs and a lack of hope will only lead to more misery and more suicide bombers.
I’m not sure you have a clear picture of the history here, but it’s clear that your “solution” for the refugees is untenable. It’s not certain there is a solution, but here’s a proposal:
Israel cannot solve the refugee issue on its own and nor can any future Palestine. Many generations now have been born in refugee camps, and these people are a destabilizing influence, they are poor, and they are also pawns of Palestinian negotiators.
There are two main rights issues with refugees: the “right of return” and the rights that citizens of countries enjoy that Palestinians, especially those in refugee camps, do not (such as jobs, freedom to travel, etc.) Any solution to the refugee issue must address these two elements. Thus:
1. Israel should offer the right to a home in Israel to any persons formerly resident within the current boundaries of Israel. This eases the demographic problem, as these people are bound to be old and few and not really need jobs (though they will need a form of social security). It also is a literal interpretation of the right of return. A more generous offer would be to allow those persons and their immediate offspring (sons & daughters only) to return with them. Or, some combination thereof.
2. For the relatives of those who move back, Israel must allow the right to visit.
3. Future Palestine should allow anyone who wishes to become a citizen of Palestine to be a citizen of Palestine. This fact should be obvious, as ciitizenship is a principle of statehood. To deny Palestine the right to decide who is or isn’t a citizen is to deny full statehood.
4. Arab states should, as much as possible, step up to the plate to integrate Palestinians fully into their societies. This will not be easy in the least, and it’s extremely unlikely, but it would certainly be helpful. It would also be a nice gesture for other countries to welcome Palestinians who would like to emigrate. Jeff(Quote)
Jeff,
it’s ridiculous to expect that Jordan offer a “right of return,” as well as being rather beside the point.
I’ll grant that — as long as we agree that the surrounding Arab countries should offer to take in many more Palestinian refugees in general.
Finally, you said yourself that the West Bank lacks resources. How will it support even MORE people than it already does? Foreign aid is one thing, but a lack of jobs and a lack of hope will only lead to more misery and more suicide bombers.
My prior post said that the entire international community — the United States, Israel, surrounding Arab countries, the World Bank, the United Nations, the European Union, the Red Cross, private volunteers, experts in agriculture and urban planning, et cetera — should pour massive amounts of monetary, physical and infrastructural aid into the West Bank and Gaza. This would be a good start.
1. Israel should offer the right to a home in Israel to any persons formerly resident within the current boundaries of Israel.
In theory, I would support this, but there are some problems: 1.) How does one prove they lived in land that would become Israel several decades ago? 2.) All residents of the State of Israel would have to swear loyalty to the country and (like the Druze and others) serve in the army. 3.) The number of income residents cannot tip the balance so that Jews would be a minority or close to one. 4.) I doubt any descendents could live in Israel — that would negate number 3.
2. For the relatives of those who move back, Israel must allow the right to visit.
3. Future Palestine should allow anyone who wishes to become a citizen of Palestine to be a citizen of Palestine. This fact should be obvious, as ciitizenship is a principle of statehood. To deny Palestine the right to decide who is or isn’t a citizen is to deny full statehood.
4. Arab states should, as much as possible, step up to the plate to integrate Palestinians fully into their societies. This will not be easy in the least, and it’s extremely unlikely, but it would certainly be helpful. It would also be a nice gesture for other countries to welcome Palestinians who would like to emigrate.
I agree with all of this. Samuel J. Scott(Quote)
Solving the Middle East, Part <span class="caps">VI</span>: Israel and Syria | Considerations // Jul 10, 2010 at 16:47