the issue of Return,please read this piece by my late friend
Issam Nashashibi and Rodrigo R. Nasser. Yousef
The Palestinian Right of Return.
By: Issam Nashashibi & Rodrigo Readi Nasser
April 28, 1995
This summary addresses issues raised about the validity of the Palestinian
right of return, why it should be implemented and arguments presented
against its implementation.
right of return, why it should be implemented and arguments presented
against its implementation.
The right of return to one's home was so BASIC that it was thought
of as a universal right that was not deemed necessary to be formally
prescribed or codified. However, it was codified in 1215 in the Magna Carta,
the Geneva Civilian Convention of 1949, The Universal Declaration
Human Rights and The International Covenant on Civil Rights.
of as a universal right that was not deemed necessary to be formally
prescribed or codified. However, it was codified in 1215 in the Magna Carta,
the Geneva Civilian Convention of 1949, The Universal Declaration
Human Rights and The International Covenant on Civil Rights.
The Palestinians' right of return to their homes is like that of other
human beings. Despite this right, UN Resolution 194 that reiterates
it and recommends ways for its implementation, Israel continues to deny
Palestinians the right to return to their homes. In addition, the Resolution
gives the Palestinians, and no one else, the right to CHOOSE to return
to their homes. It also provides for compensation for the damage to
their property or the right to demand compensation if they do not
choose to return.
human beings. Despite this right, UN Resolution 194 that reiterates
it and recommends ways for its implementation, Israel continues to deny
Palestinians the right to return to their homes. In addition, the Resolution
gives the Palestinians, and no one else, the right to CHOOSE to return
to their homes. It also provides for compensation for the damage to
their property or the right to demand compensation if they do not
choose to return.
UN Resolution 194 has not been implemented. Its call for the implementation
of the Palestinians rights to return to their homeland is a corner stone of a just
and peaceful solution in the Middle East.
of the Palestinians rights to return to their homeland is a corner stone of a just
and peaceful solution in the Middle East.
Arguments against the implementation of the inalienable rights of the
Palestinians to return to their homes had been presented to justify the
position that if the Palestinians have a right of return, it should be to a
to-be defined-Palestinian state and not all of Palestine.
Palestinians to return to their homes had been presented to justify the
position that if the Palestinians have a right of return, it should be to a
to-be defined-Palestinian state and not all of Palestine.
In fact, if the resumption of Jewish life in Eastern Europe is a right and is feasible,
then the return of Palestinians or their descendants to their home is equally
a right and as feasible.
then the return of Palestinians or their descendants to their home is equally
a right and as feasible.
The arguments presented against the Palestinian right of return
and their rebuttals are:
and their rebuttals are:
1. Why should Israel agree to the Palestinian right of return?
Because it is just. Because a permanent peace, MUST be built on Justice.
As long as there is injustice there will be no permanent peace. Hopes
that the Palestinians will forget their country, Palestine, or melt away in
Jordan are racist and are not supported by historical evidence.
This argument promotes Israeli intransigence instead of reconciliation
and justice. With intransigence, Zionism is hoping that the current
generations of Palestinians will die and the new Palestinian generations
would never demand their rights.
As long as there is injustice there will be no permanent peace. Hopes
that the Palestinians will forget their country, Palestine, or melt away in
Jordan are racist and are not supported by historical evidence.
This argument promotes Israeli intransigence instead of reconciliation
and justice. With intransigence, Zionism is hoping that the current
generations of Palestinians will die and the new Palestinian generations
would never demand their rights.
Palestine is the common patrimony of the Palestinian Nation.
Moreover, the World has reaffirmed Palestinian right of return
through many UN resolutions, including UN resolution 194. The
Palestinian struggle for justice will be continued by the next generations
if Israel does not agree to a just solution.
Moreover, the World has reaffirmed Palestinian right of return
through many UN resolutions, including UN resolution 194. The
Palestinian struggle for justice will be continued by the next generations
if Israel does not agree to a just solution.
On the other hand, Zionism promotes the right of Jews to return to
Israel as its standard policy. This policy is accepted despite the lack
of evidence to prove that today's members of the Jewish faith
are descendants, or that they are the only descendants, of the Hebrews
who inhabited Palestine about 2000 years ago. Even if one agrees
with Zionism's argument, the land really belongs to the Canaanites,
who were conquered by the Hebrews at about 1000 BC.
Israel as its standard policy. This policy is accepted despite the lack
of evidence to prove that today's members of the Jewish faith
are descendants, or that they are the only descendants, of the Hebrews
who inhabited Palestine about 2000 years ago. Even if one agrees
with Zionism's argument, the land really belongs to the Canaanites,
who were conquered by the Hebrews at about 1000 BC.
Notwithstanding its historically unjustifiable argument, Zionism calls for
the Jewish return after the passage of millennia and considers it morally
justifiable. If Zionism assumes that its claim is justifiable, then Zionism
must find as moral the right of the Palestinians to return to their homes,
after just 50 years of the Palestinian Diaspora.
the Jewish return after the passage of millennia and considers it morally
justifiable. If Zionism assumes that its claim is justifiable, then Zionism
must find as moral the right of the Palestinians to return to their homes,
after just 50 years of the Palestinian Diaspora.
The “Zionist double standard,” of accepting the right of return for
Jews and rejecting it for non-Jewish Palestinians, is based on racism.
It also assumes that Palestinians will never have the power to implement
their rights. Such a stance does not leave the Palestinians a peaceful
alternative for implementing their right to return to their homes in
Palestine. If Israel is serious about peace; she should accept and
implement the Palestinian Right of Return as recognition of one of
their basic human rights.
Jews and rejecting it for non-Jewish Palestinians, is based on racism.
It also assumes that Palestinians will never have the power to implement
their rights. Such a stance does not leave the Palestinians a peaceful
alternative for implementing their right to return to their homes in
Palestine. If Israel is serious about peace; she should accept and
implement the Palestinian Right of Return as recognition of one of
their basic human rights.
If that is not a practical enough reason, there are moral reasons.
Reasons like humanity, compassion especially towards victims and other
commandments that Judaism, as well as other religions espouses.
Reasons like humanity, compassion especially towards victims and other
commandments that Judaism, as well as other religions espouses.
2. How can the Israelis be convinced to accept the Palestinian right of return?
The Israeli position is that "Israeli democracy" will determine the right
of Palestinians to all of Palestine. This is a smoke screen to continue
violating the Palestinians' human rights. If an election on the subject
were allowed to take place, a negative result will confirm Zionism's
racist ideology's hold on the Israeli voter. A racism that continues to
dehumanize the Palestinians and deny them their basic human rights.
After all, electoral decisions are not infallible; the Nazi party won
through a popular election.
of Palestinians to all of Palestine. This is a smoke screen to continue
violating the Palestinians' human rights. If an election on the subject
were allowed to take place, a negative result will confirm Zionism's
racist ideology's hold on the Israeli voter. A racism that continues to
dehumanize the Palestinians and deny them their basic human rights.
After all, electoral decisions are not infallible; the Nazi party won
through a popular election.
The Israeli government's intransigence is founded on the assumption
that Israel will retain the land when this generation of Palestinians perishes
with the passage of time. Isn't wishing someone's death tantamount to
murdering that person? Isn't wishing the Palestinians' demise in
order to deprive them of their property equivalent to robbing the dead?
that Israel will retain the land when this generation of Palestinians perishes
with the passage of time. Isn't wishing someone's death tantamount to
murdering that person? Isn't wishing the Palestinians' demise in
order to deprive them of their property equivalent to robbing the dead?
While murderers and robbers like Rabin and Shamir are alive, their sins
are not absolved. The next generation of Zionist occupiers will not be
free of responsibility for their parents' crimes, as children are responsible
for their parent’s debts. For the next generation of Zionist occupiers,
this responsibility is actually inescapable because the parent’s crimes were
committed in the name of the survival of the Zionist State.
are not absolved. The next generation of Zionist occupiers will not be
free of responsibility for their parents' crimes, as children are responsible
for their parent’s debts. For the next generation of Zionist occupiers,
this responsibility is actually inescapable because the parent’s crimes were
committed in the name of the survival of the Zionist State.
If the Israeli government wishes a just peace, it can persuade the electorate
to vote for the return of non-Jewish Palestinians to all of Palestine. It is no
different from convincing a majority of Israeli voters of the fallacy of
(previously immovable) arguments such as:
to vote for the return of non-Jewish Palestinians to all of Palestine. It is no
different from convincing a majority of Israeli voters of the fallacy of
(previously immovable) arguments such as:
a) "Sharm El-Sheikh without peace is better than peace without Sharm El-Sheikh";
b) "We cannot talk to the PLO" and ,
c) "There is no such thing as the Palestinians"
3. Exercising the Palestinian right of return will lead to the destruction of the
state of Israel because the returning Palestinians will violently oppose Jews
like they did in the past.
state of Israel because the returning Palestinians will violently oppose Jews
like they did in the past.
This predictive statement is only true if the Palestinians violence was based
on pure racism. The historical fact is that “ it was European Jews who
stole the Palestinian lands, terrorized them and forced their evacuation
from their homes not the other way around.” Palestinian resistance
was a legitimate self-defense against a colonialist power
(Jewish Europeans) similar to the Warsaw Uprising.
on pure racism. The historical fact is that “ it was European Jews who
stole the Palestinian lands, terrorized them and forced their evacuation
from their homes not the other way around.” Palestinian resistance
was a legitimate self-defense against a colonialist power
(Jewish Europeans) similar to the Warsaw Uprising.
The Warsaw Uprising was against a power that wanted to destroy
the Jewish Poles. Palestinian self-defense is against a colonial power,
the Yishuv. The Yishuv had its own army whose purpose was
the destruction of Palestine (which it had accomplished to date) and the
ethnic cleansing non-Jewish Palestinians. (See Aba Eban's
"My People" page 388 for a definition of the Yishuv, its objectives
and power.)
the Jewish Poles. Palestinian self-defense is against a colonial power,
the Yishuv. The Yishuv had its own army whose purpose was
the destruction of Palestine (which it had accomplished to date) and the
ethnic cleansing non-Jewish Palestinians. (See Aba Eban's
"My People" page 388 for a definition of the Yishuv, its objectives
and power.)
The Yishuv's terrorist acts against the non-Jewish population are
documented in many places including Manachem Begin's unsanitzed
1952 memoirs, "The Revolt." In these memoirs he described the
Zionist Irgun gang's terrorist attack on the Village of Deir Yassin as
"advanc [ing] like a knife through butter." Begin also boasted of the
"heroic" act of murdering the village's 254 men, women and children on
May 9, 1984. For more details on the Yishuv and its destructionist intents,
See Simha Flapan's, "The Birth of Israel Myths and Realities."
documented in many places including Manachem Begin's unsanitzed
1952 memoirs, "The Revolt." In these memoirs he described the
Zionist Irgun gang's terrorist attack on the Village of Deir Yassin as
"advanc [ing] like a knife through butter." Begin also boasted of the
"heroic" act of murdering the village's 254 men, women and children on
May 9, 1984. For more details on the Yishuv and its destructionist intents,
See Simha Flapan's, "The Birth of Israel Myths and Realities."
In reality, the Zionist mantra that Palestine was "a land without a people
for a people without a land" dehumanizes non-Jewish Palestinians.
It is also a CLEAR indication of Zionism's aim to inflict "genocide
that intended to murder the national ethnic, racial, religious, political,
social gender of a people, non-Jewish Palestinians. In addition to
this Zionist mantra, Herzl, the father of Zionism, viewed the taking
of land and the expulsion of non-Jewish Palestinians as complementary
aspects of Zionism. Herzl wrote in his diaries "We shall spirit the penniless
population [Non-Jewish Palestinians] across the border by procuring
employment for it in transit countries, while denying it any employment
in our own country... Both the process of expropriation and the
removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
Besides this call for the ethnic cleansing of non-Jewish Palestinians,
Golda Meir always maintained that "There is no such thing as the
Palestinians." These statements can only be interpreted as a declaration
of Zionism's racist policy that denies a whole people's existence and
aims to destroy the Palestinians and their culture as Nazism tried to
do with Jewish culture in Europe. It is the promotion of a racist policy
of "Nichtjudenrein in Palestine"
for a people without a land" dehumanizes non-Jewish Palestinians.
It is also a CLEAR indication of Zionism's aim to inflict "genocide
that intended to murder the national ethnic, racial, religious, political,
social gender of a people, non-Jewish Palestinians. In addition to
this Zionist mantra, Herzl, the father of Zionism, viewed the taking
of land and the expulsion of non-Jewish Palestinians as complementary
aspects of Zionism. Herzl wrote in his diaries "We shall spirit the penniless
population [Non-Jewish Palestinians] across the border by procuring
employment for it in transit countries, while denying it any employment
in our own country... Both the process of expropriation and the
removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
Besides this call for the ethnic cleansing of non-Jewish Palestinians,
Golda Meir always maintained that "There is no such thing as the
Palestinians." These statements can only be interpreted as a declaration
of Zionism's racist policy that denies a whole people's existence and
aims to destroy the Palestinians and their culture as Nazism tried to
do with Jewish culture in Europe. It is the promotion of a racist policy
of "Nichtjudenrein in Palestine"
Jewish and non-Jewish Palestinians lived together peacefully before
the advent of Zionist immigration to colonize Palestine at the turn
of the twentieth century. Both groups of Palestinians will do so after
the injustice to non-Jewish Palestinians has been remedied.
(For historical details on how Jewish-Arabs lived in peace and
prospered in Arab countries, "the Golden Age of the Jews," see
Aba Eban's book My People starting page 124)
the advent of Zionist immigration to colonize Palestine at the turn
of the twentieth century. Both groups of Palestinians will do so after
the injustice to non-Jewish Palestinians has been remedied.
(For historical details on how Jewish-Arabs lived in peace and
prospered in Arab countries, "the Golden Age of the Jews," see
Aba Eban's book My People starting page 124)
4. The Return of the Palestinians will change Israel's character.
This is only true if the state of Israel's character, the way it defines itself,
is a state for an exclusive group. That is, a state that discriminates
and strives for its citizens tribal exclusivity. Such a state is a racist
state, similar to Nazi Germany. Israel's definition of ethnicity rests
on a religious basis. Such a policy is racist and is also alien to
Christianity and Islam. If however, Israel is a democratic state with
equal rights for its citizens, then the argument that the return of the
Palestinians will change Israel's character cannot be valid.
is a state for an exclusive group. That is, a state that discriminates
and strives for its citizens tribal exclusivity. Such a state is a racist
state, similar to Nazi Germany. Israel's definition of ethnicity rests
on a religious basis. Such a policy is racist and is also alien to
Christianity and Islam. If however, Israel is a democratic state with
equal rights for its citizens, then the argument that the return of the
Palestinians will change Israel's character cannot be valid.
5. There is no court that has jurisdiction to enforce the right of the
Palestinians; therefore they should negotiate with the Israelis to
limit their right to the to-be-defined state of Palestine.
Palestinians; therefore they should negotiate with the Israelis to
limit their right to the to-be-defined state of Palestine.
This statement is pure extortion. It is an attempt to force the Palestinians
to accept less than their full rights. It is also an admission of the
Palestinians rights under international law, but arrogantly flouts its
disrespect for international law. The argument also exploits the
world's inability to implement such law. The enforcer of international
laws should be the UN, as it was in the case of Iraq. However,
US policy, led by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, will
veto any such decisions to implement the inalienable right of the
Palestinians to return to their homes. So, it is left for the Israeli
government to implement the right of return if it truly seeks a just
Permanent peace. The continuation of Israel's racist intransigence
and arrogance can only sow the seeds of future violence.
to accept less than their full rights. It is also an admission of the
Palestinians rights under international law, but arrogantly flouts its
disrespect for international law. The argument also exploits the
world's inability to implement such law. The enforcer of international
laws should be the UN, as it was in the case of Iraq. However,
US policy, led by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, will
veto any such decisions to implement the inalienable right of the
Palestinians to return to their homes. So, it is left for the Israeli
government to implement the right of return if it truly seeks a just
Permanent peace. The continuation of Israel's racist intransigence
and arrogance can only sow the seeds of future violence.
6. Nothing in the "common practice of nations" has allowed for
the return of populations to their homes, e.g., the partition of British
India, the exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey, etc.
the return of populations to their homes, e.g., the partition of British
India, the exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey, etc.
Slavery was the "common practice of nations," including our own
(the USA), does that make slavery right?
(the USA), does that make slavery right?
The cited population exchanges, plus the expulsion of the non-Jewish
Palestinians from Palestine, are cases of ethnic cleansing, pure and
simple. Mahatma Gandhi never called for the expulsion of Moslems
from India. Greeks whose homes and roots were in Turkey still
carry their Turkish sounding last names. Moreover, needless to say,
what both Greece and Turkey did is not right.
Palestinians from Palestine, are cases of ethnic cleansing, pure and
simple. Mahatma Gandhi never called for the expulsion of Moslems
from India. Greeks whose homes and roots were in Turkey still
carry their Turkish sounding last names. Moreover, needless to say,
what both Greece and Turkey did is not right.
The Palestinians were the ones expelled from their homeland
and the world community expects them to be allowed to return.
Denying the non-Jewish Palestinians their right leaves them no
alternative but violence with which to confront the violence that
caused their expulsion.
and the world community expects them to be allowed to return.
Denying the non-Jewish Palestinians their right leaves them no
alternative but violence with which to confront the violence that
caused their expulsion.
7. Jewish-Arabs (Mizrachis) have immigrated to Israel. Arab
countries should absorb the Palestinians in return.
countries should absorb the Palestinians in return.
This is another statement that condones ethnic cleansing.
It is morally deplorable. All Mizrachis are welcome back to
their homes in Arab countries. They have every right to do
so. Some Mizrachis were coerced to leave their homes,
such as in Iraq, by Zionist bombs and a corrupt Arab regime.
The Mizrachis of Yemen and Morocco were induced to emigrate
by economic incentives.
It is morally deplorable. All Mizrachis are welcome back to
their homes in Arab countries. They have every right to do
so. Some Mizrachis were coerced to leave their homes,
such as in Iraq, by Zionist bombs and a corrupt Arab regime.
The Mizrachis of Yemen and Morocco were induced to emigrate
by economic incentives.
8. Mizrachis cannot return to the societies they, or their parents
or grandparents left because the social relations and culture
in which they once lived are long past. Likewise, Jewish
Europeans or their descendants do not have a possibility or
reestablishing Jewish communities that were destroyed
in Europe.
or grandparents left because the social relations and culture
in which they once lived are long past. Likewise, Jewish
Europeans or their descendants do not have a possibility or
reestablishing Jewish communities that were destroyed
in Europe.
This is another paternalistic racist statement masquerading
as fact. The Mizrachis right to return to their homes in Arab
countries has never been denied. In fact, it is supported
by many, if not a huge majority of Palestinians. There
is no evidence to support the presented argument, yet there
is ample evidence to support the rebuttal.
as fact. The Mizrachis right to return to their homes in Arab
countries has never been denied. In fact, it is supported
by many, if not a huge majority of Palestinians. There
is no evidence to support the presented argument, yet there
is ample evidence to support the rebuttal.
a) Jewish communities were revived in Germany and Eastern
Europe. This effort is still ongoing. The World Jewish Congress
(WJC) is undertaking an effort in Eastern Europe to reclaim
Jewish property through lobbying the relative governments to
change their laws. If this a valid goal for the WJC, why should
not be a valid and implementable goal for the Palestinians?
Europe. This effort is still ongoing. The World Jewish Congress
(WJC) is undertaking an effort in Eastern Europe to reclaim
Jewish property through lobbying the relative governments to
change their laws. If this a valid goal for the WJC, why should
not be a valid and implementable goal for the Palestinians?
b) Jewish communities prosper in many Arab countries.
For example, the Moroccan Minister of Tourism is a Jewish Arab.
For example, the Moroccan Minister of Tourism is a Jewish Arab.
c) Jewish Arabs, as in the case of Jewish Syrians, are returning,
from Europe and the United States, to their homes in Arab
countries, NOT to Israel.
from Europe and the United States, to their homes in Arab
countries, NOT to Israel.
d) Mizrachis are not inherently against their fellow Arabs.
Mizrachis still venerate the King of Morocco and thank him in
their prayers for offering them shelter after 1492 and the
Spanish inquisition.
Mizrachis still venerate the King of Morocco and thank him in
their prayers for offering them shelter after 1492 and the
Spanish inquisition.
9. There is no evidence that any significant number of Mizrachis
want to leave Israel for Syria, Iraq or North Africa.
want to leave Israel for Syria, Iraq or North Africa.
Racism and continued perpetuation of the Jewish exclusivity
of Israel are the motivation for this statement. There is equally
no evidence that Mizrachis do NOT want to return to their homes
in Arab countries.
of Israel are the motivation for this statement. There is equally
no evidence that Mizrachis do NOT want to return to their homes
in Arab countries.
It may be that there is no evidence because no one asked
them the question. In fact, much anecdotal evidence
indicates that some wish to leave Israel and would welcome
the opportunity to return to their homes in Arab countries.
them the question. In fact, much anecdotal evidence
indicates that some wish to leave Israel and would welcome
the opportunity to return to their homes in Arab countries.
great! I used these arguments in my lectures and speeches
in Germany and neither zionists nor german could stand
against them. But I feel sorry and pain to see the
PA is ready to sell our rights for the cheapst price!
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment