“Addressing the Palestinian
Refugee Problem”
Sub-Committee on the Middle
East and South Asia
Of the House Committee on
Foreign Affairs
By Shibley Telhami
Anwar Sadat Professor for
Peace and Development
University of Maryland
And Senior Fellow, Saban Center
The Brookings Institution
May 8, 2007
Mr. Chairman,
I commend you on holding a
hearing on the important subject of refugees the resolution of which is
essential for a lasting Arab-Israeli peace settlement. Six decades after the onset of the conflict
hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees remain stateless and living in humiliating
conditions in refugee camps. Today, there are approximately 4.5 Million
refugees registered with the United Nation Relief and Works Agency (UNWRA) and
hundreds of thousands more who had become refugees after the 1967 war and who
are classified as “displaced” individuals. Some, like the 400,000 refugees in Lebanon are not
only stateless but have little access to jobs and social services in there host
country. The vast majority of Gaza’s population is made up of refugees who left
in 1948 from what is now central Israel–with many remaining in crowded camps.
This human tragedy should
alone propel the international community to act. I know that there has been
much focus in Congress in recent years on the issue of text books as motivating
factors for young Palestinians. This is certainly a legitimate area of
discussion, but it should also be clear that the miserable conditions of
refugee camps coupled with a pervasive sense of injustice provide far more
powerful motivations.
Changing the living
conditions of refugees will be central, but it is a mistake to think that the
issue of Palestinian refugees is only an issue of material compensation and
settlement. There are important political, legal, psychological, and moral
aspects to this issue that have been even bigger barriers to its resolution.
Unless a peace settlement finds way to address these aspects, it is unlikely to
be stable.
Allow me to briefly
articulate five central issues for the resolution of the Palestinian refugee
problem:
- The
Issue of “Right of Return”: The Palestinian refugee claim to the
right of return to their original homes in what is now Israel is one of the most
difficult challenges to a peace agreement. But it is not beyond
resolution. The primary Israeli concern in accepting a Palestinian “right
of return” is that many Palestinians would choose to return and thus make
Jews a minority in their own state. Thus it is highly unlikely that
Israelis would recognize a Palestinian “right of return” before the shape
of a final settlement on refugees is already agreed. It is also certain
that Palestinians will continue to demand an acknowledgement of such right
as a pre-condition for any agreement. This is not merely a bargaining
tactic intended to maximize compensation from Israel, but a deeply held
conviction that’s tied to how Palestinians have defined their struggle in
the past six decades. The right of return" has been the single most
important issue that has mobilized refugees into a political movement in
the past 59 years and has become part of Palestinian identity. It has
provided the moral explanation for all the hardship that two generations
of refugees have painfully endured. It is a highly emotional issue whose
acknowledgment could go a long way toward healing.
-
But
the issue is also partly legal; in the end Israel’s interest in closing the
files of potential refugee claims once and for all entails acknowledging
particular rights, claims to which are settled through practical arrangements.
Even if one ignores the specific phrase “right of return,” Israel would
still have to contend with UN resolutions and other bodies of international law
that allow Palestinians to file claims, individually and collectively. This is
certainly true of UN resolution 194, which stipulates that “that the refugees
wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should
be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation
should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of
or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in
equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.” In
other words, the choice of return rests with refugees. In this regard, Israel’s
interest is also in seeing that all legal claims such as emanating from UN
Resolution 194 are settled once and for all, with Palestinians foregoing future
claims. This suggests that both the acknowledgement of Palestinian rights and
the specific settlement of claims to these rights must be simultaneous.
- Practical
Settlement. One must
differentiate between “rights” and the specific settlement of claims to
these rights. The practical steps
to settle refugee claims are well defined by the nature of a political
settlement. The basis of a
two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a nationalist
framing of the conflict that sees a need for Jews and Palestinians to have
states of their own. This entails Israel as a state with a Jewish
majority, and thus Israel will not accept the return of most Palestinian
refugees to Israel itself In
reality, some Palestinian polls suggest that even if given a chance to
return to their homes in Israel, Palestinians would choose other
alternatives if available. The key
issue here is not so much the compensation for property, but the actual
permanent resettlement of refuges.
What is central is providing refugees with options including
compensation. Those options could
include citizenship in the Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, settlement in host countries as negotiated,
perhaps multilaterally with these countries, settlement in potential
countries in the West, including Europe, the United
States and Canada,
and a lottery for a limited number, agreed upon between Israel and the Palestinians, for possible
settlement in Israel
itself. Israel
has already signaled at various stages a possible willingness to accept a
limited number of Palestinian refugees so long as it does not alter Israel’s
Jewish majority.
- “Historical
Justice”: No one has monopoly on
justice, but each group’s sense of justice provides motivation that’s hard
to ignore. While a political settlement cannot be primarily based on
either side’s notion of what is just, these notions cannot be entirely
ignored in the pursuit of a lasting settlement. But a process of examining
issues of historical justice that could bring healing after decades of
painful conflict can only occur after an agreement is signed. A peace
agreement must establish a “truth and reconciliation commission” similar
to the one established in South
Africa to review historical claims. It
is much easier to tell the full historical story and to have maximal
honesty when the results will not affect the actual terms of a settlement
or lead to punishment of those found to have committed crimes.
- Linkage
with Jewish Refugees. The issue
of Jewish refugees from Arab states is an important one and must also be
raised and discussed in the context of a comprehensive settlement of the
Arab-Israeli conflict. While both the Palestinian refugee issue and the
Jewish refugee issue have some common elements, it is important to also
note differences that suggest minimizing the link at the bilateral Israeli-Palestinian
level. First, the primary Palestinian refugee claims are with Israel,
while Jewish refugee claims are not with the Palestinians but with Arab
states. Second, it is not even an Israeli interest to create a direct link
and suggest unified solutions: Many
Arab states are prepared to accept return of Jews to these countries, but Israel is
not prepared to accept most Palestinian refugees. Thus the place for such
linkage is primarily in multilateral negotiations pertaining to the costs
of compensation and the responsibilities of the various parties in
contributing their share to these costs.
- The
Role of the United
States and the International Community. While the Palestinian refugee issue is at the
core an Israeli-Palestinian issue, it also involves host countries,
international agencies, and other countries that may provide final
settlement options for refugees. The costs of compensation will inevitably
be high, thus in practice requiring major international contributions. All
this entails a need for international role, especially American, in
coordinating multilateral efforts that will be required not only in
implementing agreements reached, but in providing options that make an
agreement possible.