Why right of return is essential to peace

Many analysts are now focusing on the argument that if Palestinians are granted their right of return to historical Palestine, most of them will not take up the offer. Daily, an influx of journalists (Arab and Western) are putting forward the argument that Palestinians have far more pressing issue on their minds than their right of return, which is last on their agenda. For example, Hassan Fattah of the New York Times is saying: "many [Palestinians] ... now say returning is becoming less and less feasible". These journalists are missing the point.

Their incorrect "focus" would have us reach a conclusion that give or take other Palestinian rights and while negotiating with Israel, Palestinians would and should give this notion up once and for all, for the sake of other "more important" things such as a Palestinian state.

But at the core of Palestinian pillage since 1948 is the fate of the refugees who were displaced in 1948, again in 1967, and again in 1982 by naked Israeli ethnic cleansing. This issue has been pushed so far down the agenda of negotiations, despite its importance, it has now made its way back to the surface. It is a legal, political and ethical right for Palestinians.

Strategy

The Israeli stance has historically held the same negotiating strategy: to refuse any discussion at all of the refugee claim to return or be compensated and repatriated.

The debate has been brought back again recently by plans to revive the Saudi Peace Initiative (put forth in 2002) which entails offering Israel full recognition and permanent peace with the Arab states in return for Israel's withdrawal to 1967 borders, the establishment of an independent Palestine with occupied East Jerusalem as its capital and a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194" of 1948.

It's important to note that a "just solution" has already been confirmed by the international community; it is the return of the refugees. Otherwise, what ends up happening is a stretching out exercise over the coming years through endless meetings to negotiate what a "just solution" could mean and proposing various alternatives that are suitable for Israel.

Resolution 194 says, "Refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date," and calls for them to be compensated if they choose not to return. This UN resolution has been affirmed annually since 1948.

One cannot help but ask, why should there be a compromise by Palestinians given the world community's unanimity? Even the US has supported the resolution, with Israel being the lone rebel.

The right of return is controversial and the Israelis don't want to actually admit or honour this right because they see it as a slippery slope and one that would lead to serious demographic problems. They think that Palestinians will flood Israel and essentially, "demograph" it out of existence.

Argument

Beneath the surface plausibility of this Israeli argument one mustn't forget that the state of Israel was created in 1948 at the very expense of the indigenous Palestinian population. It would have never come into existence without the uprooting and dispossession of more than 800,000 Palestinians from their homes. Plus from a practical point of view, the Palestinians will soon be a majority in historic Palestine as they are now at parity.

It is shameful that the mere mention of the right of return constitutes a perceived rejection to the existence of Israel. The two separate issues are purposefully intermingled by Israel to overshadow the universally recognised human rights of Palestinians.

Palestinian refugees, who now number at more than 6 million, are still waiting for their rights to be implemented. These refugees are scattered around the globe and suffer from varying conditions of hardship, statelessness and homelessness.

To cut a long story short, the Palestinian people will not and cannot give up their right of return, even if the Palestinian leadership uses it as a bargaining chip against Israeli demands. This is because there is no exchanging or negotiating if human rights are taken away. The right of return applies regardless of the political composition of the country or whether there is one state or two states.