Israel's answer to the Palestinian 'right of return'


By bataween
February 23, 2010
Share

Yesterday evening, Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, quietly passed a bill that could change the Middle East agenda forever.

Up to a million Jews were forced to leave Arab countries and Iran in the decades following the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948, due to state-sanctioned persecution and violence. Today only some 4,000 Jews are left in the Arab world, bringing to an end a Jewish presence that in many cases pre-dated Islam and the Arab conquest by 1,000 years.

The bill has taken two years, since its initiation by MK Nissim Ze’ev of the Sephardi Orthodox Shas party, to become law. The new law aims to protecting the rights of Jewish refugees from Arab countries and Iran in future peace negotiations in the Middle East. The bill defines a Jewish refugee as an Israeli citizen who left one of the Arab states, or Iran, following religious persecution. It stipulates that the Israeli government must include Jewish refugee rights, notably compensation, in all future peace talks.

Stanley Urman, the head of the advocacy group Justice for Jews from Arab Countries, welcomed the Knesset decision, saying: “The world must realise that Palestinians were not the only Middle‐East refugees; that there were Jewish refugees who also have rights under international law. This recognition is good for the State of Israel and it is good for the people of Israel."

Why is this bill so important? Because it holds the key to real peace in the Middle East. So many efforts at making peace between Israel and the Palestinians have run aground on the rock of the Palestinian ‘right of return’. Not content with a Palestinian Arab state in the West Bank and Gaza, even the ‘moderates’ of the Fatah camp have been reluctant to recognise Israel as a Jewish state. The reason is that they are reluctant to drop their demand for the Arab refugees of 1948 – who now number upwards of four million if you include their descendants - to return to their homes in what is now Israel. This demand amounts to no less than the destruction of Israel by demographic means and the de facto creation of two Palestinian states, one in the West Bank, and one in place of Israel.

For too long the Arab refugees have occupied centre-stage in the Arab-Israeli drama. They are seen as the main victims of an Israeli injustice. By introducing the Jewish refugees into the picture - now just under half the Jewish population of Israel - it will now be accepted that there were two sets of refugees, both with rights, who exchanged places in the Middle East.

Some people will say, why not also give the Jewish refugees a ‘right of return’ to Arab states ? Firstly, there is no precedent for such a return. The seven million Hindus and Muslims who swapped places in the Indian-Pakistani war of 1947 constituted a permanent exchange. So did the Greeks expelled from Turkey and Turks driven from Greece after the end of the First World War.

Secondly, apart from the chaos and turmoil generated by a mass population movement of this type, a Jewish ‘right of return’ to countries which spat out their Jews is like asking a prisoner who has tasted freedom to go back to jail. Three generations have now been happily resettled in Israel and the West. They have have lost most of their their cultural and linguistic links with the Arab world. No Jew wishes to return to an Arab country, except perhaps as a tourist. These lands are not friendly, nor are they safe for Jews. Even in lands of apparent stability, things can change overnight. In Morocco, even the remaining 3,000 Jews have their suitcases ready-packed in case of sudden regime change.

That’s why the bill’s emphasis on compensation is quite deliberate. It is stating: let both sets of refugees stay where they are – the Jews in Israel and the Arab refugees in Arab states. Let both sets receive compensation – case closed.

Crossposted at Point of No Return:http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2010/02/israels-answer-to-palestinian-right-of.html

COMMENTS

moshetzarfati2

23 February, 2010 - 21:33

Rate this:

0 points

Bataween (that was the Jewish area of Baghdad, wasn't it?), this legislation is just another Israeli device of avoiding a deal with the Arab world. Also, not to put too fine a point on it, given that Shas is behind the legislation, don't you think that they want to get their grubby little mitts on yet more cash? They have form on this, you know?

bataween

23 February, 2010 - 22:35

Rate this:

0 points

Quite the opposite: it will make a deal more likely. Don't forget that a good proportion of the Israeli electorate are bitter at their treatment and expulsion by the Arabs. Why should the Arab refugees have rights (and don't forget their side started the hostilities with Israel) while the Jewish refugees, among the most deprived in Israeli society, have no rights? This legislation will help achieve reconciliation between the two sides.
As for Shas getting their mitts on cash we are a long way from seeing the Arabs pay out any compensation, if they ever do. It will go to individual families, not political parties.

moshetzarfati2

24 February, 2010 - 07:45

Rate this:

0 points

Bataween, I admire your optimism. However, the experience of European Jews tells us that once Israeli institutions and political groups get their mitts on any "compensation", individuals will have to whistle Dixie before they see any of the cash.
Why should Arab refugees have rights? Well they were expelled from their homeland, while the Mizrachi Jews had a homeland created for them.
If you want reconciliation, then perhaps a truth and reconciliation committee should be set up.

John Gold

24 February, 2010 - 13:42

Rate this:

0 points

bataween.

But the number of Palestinian refugees is in it's millions, and many live in camps...

Yvetta

24 February, 2010 - 14:11

Rate this:

0 points

The Arab nations could have solved their plight by absorbing them, instead of using them as pawns against Israel.

moshetzarfati2

24 February, 2010 - 14:42

Rate this:

0 points

Yvetta, why should the Arab nations "absorb" them? Should Britain "absorb" refugees from other countries? The Palestinian refugees are not the other Arab nations' problem. They are the problem of the Israelis and the Palestinians.

tomeisner2

24 February, 2010 - 15:04

Rate this:

0 points

I would love a Palestinian to have my "right" of return.They deserve it I do not. I might consider selling it on ebay with a £0 price.

bataween

24 February, 2010 - 18:02

Rate this:

0 points

Yes let's have a truth and reconciliation commission, Moshe - up to now we've only heard half the truth. The compensation given to Holocaust survivors took the form of state reparations from Germany to Israel as well as individual reparations. I think the state reparations will not apply in this case.
John - the Palestinians are only in the millions because they are the only group of refugees who are allowed to pass on their status to successive generations. The camps have become towns by now, but more worrying is the Arab host nations' refusal to give descendants of refugees normal civil rights - denying them the right to certain jobs and to own property, for instance. If Arab states had any humanitarian concern for Palestinians they would have absorbed them long agol. Britain absorbed me and my family, Sweden is absorbing loads of Iraqi refugees because they are doing the right thing- why are Arab states absolved ?Tom, if you found yourself hounded out of an Arab country with no where else to go you would be glad of your 'right of return' to Israel.

moshetzarfati2

24 February, 2010 - 18:11

Rate this:

0 points

Quite frankly, Bataween, I don't believe we have had any truth, let alone half of it. All we have heard is political posturing and narratives from both sides.
Also, what makes you think the treatment of Sephardim and Mizrachim will be any different when it comes to compensation than the Ashkenazim? Who do you think will handle the compensation? Who will do the compensating if not the states involved?

bataween

24 February, 2010 - 22:54

Rate this:

0 points

Ooh you are cynical, Moshe. Actually it was Bill Clinton who first came up with the idea of an international compensation fund in 2000 for all refugees, Jewish and Arab. Israel and the Arab states would each contribute, and so would the EU and the US. The US would probably contribute the lion's share. Then they need to disband UNWRA, (that would save them quite a packet).

tomeisner2

12 April, 2010 - 19:57

Rate this:

0 points

It is interesting how Israel now is starting to tell the truth about how they really did evict 750000 Palestinians in 1947-48, For years they had said that Our people bought the land etc. It is funny how eventually the truth comes out isn't it? One wonders what other truths will emerge as the years go by.

Jon_i_Cohen

12 April, 2010 - 21:46

Rate this:

0 points

tomesiner2
you have deliberately misunderstood the post above.
Something else for you to read, it may help you understand the issue.
http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/refugees-what-refugees
Israel did not expel anyone, historical evidence of the radio broadcasts from the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Syrian, Jordanian and Egyptian leaders at the time all urging the Arabs to leave, to make way for the victorious arab armies, (not!) - this is what actually happened tomeisner2

tomeisner2

12 April, 2010 - 22:45

Rate this:

0 points

Jon come on that stuff about the radio broadcast just isn't true.That is part of the lies that were fed to us in our childhood. For the absolute speak to Palestinians who were there or read Illan Pappe

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 07:53

Rate this:

0 points

In 1948, Israel declared independence from the British and was invaded on all fronts by the combined forces of the Arab league including contingents from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Hanzar irregulars were discovered fighting on the fronts. The Mufti arranged for the assassination of Jordanian King Abdullah, brother of Emir Faisal and one of the few moderates left on the scene, as revenge fro his appointing someone else as Mufti of Jerusalem. During the combined Arab invasion of Israel, The Mufti declared a radio broadcast, "I declare a Holy War, my Muslim brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!"

Azzam Pasha, the Arab League Secretary, declared on Cairo radio: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.

There is also a wealth of evidence [] from Arab sources to show that the Arab League at an early stage of the campaign adopted a policy of evacuating the Arab population to the neighbouring countries, being convinced that their absence would be of short duration and would facilitate the impending military operations: "This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country."
From The Arabs by Edward Atiyah, formerly the Secretary of the Arab League Office in London, Penguin Books, 1955, p. 183.

How many more do you want? you can look them up for yourself, history is littered with numerous broadcasts and press statements.

Perhaps you think the historical proof has been faked by "the conspiracy"?

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 09:01

Rate this:

0 points

Jon, you appear to ignore what Benny Morris, a "New Historian" who appears to have converted to the right-wing Zionist cause. He wrote that Israel did indeed ethnically cleanse areas of Palestine, particularly Lod, Ramle and the Galil (although he thinks that perhaps Ben-Gurion didn't go far enough).
And not only those areas. In fact, next time you are in Tel Aviv, take a walk northwards from the Hilton and look towards beach. There, you'll seem some remains of an Arab village called Manshiyeh which was ethnically cleansed to make room for the city's expansion northwards. Then there's Ramat Aviv. It used to be a village called Sheikh Munis. There are still some remains where the university is.
And let's not forget the village of Abu Kabir, now almost obliterated but some bits remain near the sprawling mess that is the central bus station.
And Jaffa used to extend further north than it does today. Look for the Hassan Beq mosque when you are next at the David Intercontinental.

DLeigh-Ellis

13 April, 2010 - 09:46

Rate this:

0 points

Given Jon's previous demonstration of his scanty grasp of historicity, I am loathe to take anything he says at face value.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 10:44

Rate this:

0 points

mt2
ethnically cleansed is not the right expression. I would rather use re-settled.
These are the facts:- the areas you refer to were indeeed re-settled. However, and it is a big HOWEVER, this was after the Arabs had fled following the instructions given to them by their own military, government and religious leaders, details of which I allude to above, all a matter of historical record that you cannot ignore.
VACANT areas EMPTY villages we then re-settled
No-one weas expelled by Israel, no-one was forced out by Israel - you are trying to perpetuate a MYTH.
The historical evidence is clear, the Arabs fled of their own volition.
What do you think Israel should have done once hostilities ceased? Invite them all back?
(NOT! DOH!)

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 10:51

Rate this:

0 points

Resettled, Jon? Where in Israel were they resettled? No new Arab towns have been built in Israel. Ever. And the residents of the towns of Ikrit and Biram, in Galil, were expelled but told they could come back after 6 months. Sixty-two years later, they are still waiting. They are likely to wait even longer because their land has been taken by Kibbutz Baram. Yes, a kibbutz, that great socialist idyll is living off land taken from others.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 11:12

Rate this:

0 points

Or perhaps, Jon, you mean that they are present absentees. You know, like the people of Eyn Hud, who live in ramshackle huts not connected to the electricity grid or running water and whose original homes are now lived in by the residents of the artists' colony Ein Hod.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 11:55

Rate this:

0 points

DLE
You don't have to take what I say at face value, I wouldn't expect you to do so.
But just do a bit of research and check the FACTS for yourself.
I know its 60 odd years ago and people forget, and now in recent years people like mt2 like to distort the truth and unfortunately people reading and blogging on this web site have had their views distorted by inaccurate and wrong information that over the years the lefties have come to accept as "fact", when the reality is somewhat different. - and NO, it is not my reality, it is the reality of history.
It is you guys that live in a make-believe world of fantasy or historicity - (trying to) change history to suite your own agendas.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 12:00

Rate this:

0 points

The reality of history, Jon, as written by Benny Morris and others, is that Israel expelled more than 700,000 Arabs from their homes and villages. Large tracts of the Galil and the centre of Israel were ethnically cleansed.

Jonathan Hoffman

13 April, 2010 - 12:35

Rate this:

0 points

only a handful of the 130,000-160,000 villagers who left their homes, had been forced out by the Jews.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/1948--israel--and-the-...

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 13:17

Rate this:

0 points

Commentary magazine, Jonathan? Hmm…the self-described "flagship of neoconservatism". Colour me unsurprised that you cite that as a source. Why don't you cite Benny Morris?

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 13:20

Rate this:

0 points

I'm glad you are back, Jonathan. Perhaps you can explain why the ZF was quick to disseminate the false claim that Mira Awad cancellled because of death threats, yet hasn't been so quick to clarify that it was her choice not to perform for the ZF on Yom Ha'atzmaut. There wasn't an agenda here, was there?

DLeigh-Ellis

13 April, 2010 - 13:57

Rate this:

0 points

Jon (IC), you still have not bothered to respond to the criticisms of your last post. Don't bother to talk to me about selectively interpreting history until you get your own house in order.

i'm not saying that everything you say is by default false, simply that I would not trust anything you say due to the manner in which you have demonstrated an apparent lack of critical faculties in revent weeks.

You tell me to do some research... Are you sure that's what you want, last time it just resulted in me being able to prove the manner in which you pick and choose what you want to hear.

I can do it again if you'd like.....

bataween

13 April, 2010 - 14:28

Rate this:

0 points

It's astonishing how all the discussion above revolves around how many Arabs left of their own free will and how many were expelled. Let's just move the argument on and say there was an exchange of populations between Jews from the 'Arab World' and Arabs from 'Palestine', not taking account those Jews who ended up in Europe and America. The vast majority of these Jews were terrorised, intimidated and harassed into leaving Arab lands. The Jews came off worse in this exchange - we are not talking little villages like Sheikh Munis here, but one third of Baghdad, Alexandria, Tripoli, Damascus, Sanaa, Casablanca abandoned and so on, with their wealth, commerce, schools, synagogues, land, hospitals, businesses. It's been estimated that Jews lost four or five times the whole of Israel in seized deeded land.
By all means let's have discussion, but with context.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 14:35

Rate this:

0 points

No, bataween, there was no "exchange of populations". Parts of Palestine were ethnically cleansed of their original inhabitants. That's what happens in a war. Indeed, a lot of Jews left Arab countries because of local terror. But let's not forget the hand of certain clandestine Zionist organisations in trying to spread fear among the Jews of Baghdad, Marakesh, Casablanca etc by placing grenades in synagogues.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:00

Rate this:

0 points

Where does mt2 get his information from?
Some of his posts can be entertaining, even interesting, then occassionally we get a biggy - a real humdinger of left-wing anti-Israel, Guardianesque clap-trap.
And here we have one!

DLeigh-Ellis

13 April, 2010 - 15:01

Rate this:

0 points

mmmm Jon... totally....

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:03

Rate this:

0 points

As for DLE; a spellchecker might come in handy!

revent weeks.?

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 15:05

Rate this:

0 points

Err...Jon (IC), It's in the Ziomist Archives, in Jerusalem. Also, such eminent historians and writers as Sasson Somekh and Eli Amir, both Baghdadis, have written about it. And if you look into the Esek Bish and the sinking of the Egoz, a boat full of Moroccan Jewish immigrants, you'll see for yourself.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 15:07

Rate this:

0 points

I almost forgot, Jon. Shlomo Hillel, the former Speaker of the Knesset, also wrote about it. In fact, he justified it to get the Baghdadi Jews out.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:17

Rate this:

0 points

Err..no! more left wing clap-trap, the ship Egoz was caught in a storm, (as you well know!), and sunk - everyone on board drowned. There was NOTHING sinister, it was tragic accident or act of god - that's all it was..

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 15:22

Rate this:

0 points

But why were they on the Egoz, Jon? Why were they leaving so quickly? Because someone had planted grenades in their synagogues, and it wasn't the locals.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:37

Rate this:

0 points

Come on mt2!
Wrong again!
Have you heard of:- Operation Ezra and Nehemiah?
Shlomo Hillel went to Baghadad in 1946 and stayed there for a year negotiating to get the Baghdadi Jews out. He went again in 1950 to negotiate immigration of all of the Jews from Iraq, 120,000 of whom were airlifted to Israel in Operation Ezra and Nehemiah between 1950 and 1952. On these trips, he disguised himself as either a Frenchman or an Englishman. The airlift was made possible through the help of Iran, an ally of Israel in those days (ha ha beleive it or not!)
Hillel worked with Ronnie Barnett, a Brit who worked for Trans-Ocean Airlines. Whilst he arranged pilgrimages to Mecca, Barnett met Abdul Rahman Raof, owner of a travel agency called Iraq Tours, they met in Rome and Hillel came along as "Richard Armstrong." Raouf saw that there was money to be made in transporting the Jews out of Iraq, and arranged for the Barnett and Hillel to meet with Tawfiq al-Suweidi the then prime minister of Iraq, who was a board member of the travel firm. Al-Suweidi complained that the illegal emigration of the Jews was harming Iraq because they were probably smuggling out property and leaving without paying their taxes. They estimated that 60,000 Jews would leave the country if they could. They agreed on a ticket price of 12 dinars (about $48) per ticket. $2.8 million dollars in his greasy Iraqi back pocket! A lot of money in those days!
So, yes subtefuge and corruption big time but no "clandestine Zionist fearmongering".
Just more of your twisting the facts to suite your Guardianesque lefty de-legitmise Israel agenda.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 15:42

Rate this:

0 points

I know all about Ezra and Nehemiah. He may have negotiated to get them out, but many did not want to leave, especially not to Israel. So they had to be given a little "push" - hence the fearmongering and grenade attacks.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:46

Rate this:

0 points

Just one word this time - starts with a:- b and ends with an s and has 8 letters!!

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 15:54

Rate this:

0 points

Blossoms? I am satisfied that the truth is beginning to blossom in your head.

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 15:57

Rate this:

0 points

Nope - wrong, try again.
Clue there is a c and a k before the s!

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 16:02

Rate this:

0 points

Jon, I see you can't be bothered with the truth about some of the actions Israel took to get Jews to leave their homelands. Oh well...You find lots about it in bookcases (nine letters, I know)

Jon_i_Cohen

13 April, 2010 - 16:07

Rate this:

0 points

mt2
I am afraid that your version of the "truth" differs from the reality of the actual "truth".
And no doubt you and I will continue to differ, but I hope that one day you will come to accept the truth as it really is and NOT as you would like it to be.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 16:12

Rate this:

0 points

Jon, as I would like one day for to accept that your support for Israel while giving your critical faculties the day off will end too.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 16:21

Rate this:

0 points

Sorry, Jon, that was really poorly phrased. Maybe one day you'll support Israel without giving your critical faculties a day off. True friends tell the truth, even if it hurts.

Jonathan Hoffman

13 April, 2010 - 16:27

Rate this:

0 points

SF2 is a notorious purveyor of untruths

DLeigh-Ellis

13 April, 2010 - 17:30

Rate this:

0 points

To be honest Jic, if the only thing you can get on me is the occasional typo I really don't mind... The fact that the 'v' is next to the 'c' on the keyboard clearly demonstrates your lack of imagination.

Jon, honestly, you and I would get on a lot better if you would simply stop bringing the Guardian and sandals into everything you talk about. (Also, you can stop going on about this alleged 'lefty' agenda you are clearly so obsessed with.)

DLeigh-Ellis

13 April, 2010 - 17:34

Rate this:

0 points

btw... are you going to withdraw the biased untruths you were so intent on putting forward the other week in your last blog. Your argument was systematically dismantled!

Quite frankly, when the choice is publicising an anti-academic and misleading essay versus a typo, I know what I would rather have on my conscience.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 18:20

Rate this:

0 points

Speaking of untruths, Jonathan, why does the ZF under your stewardship still persist in disseminating the false claim that Mira Awad cancelled her London performance because of death threats. Lo dubim, ve'lo ya'ar, as we used to say -- (there were no bears and there isn't a forest).

bataween

13 April, 2010 - 18:54

Rate this:

0 points

Moshe:
I fail to see how you can deny that there was an exchange of populations: 600,000 Jews were resettled in Israel, roughly the same number of Arabs ended up in Arab states. As for ethnic cleansing, the term applies more appropriately to Jewish refugees who were not even on the battlefield. 99 percent fled Arab lands as a result of a deliberate policy of persecution and marginalisation, whereas there are a million Arabs living and participating fully in Israel today.
As for clandestine Zionist organisations planting grenades, what is your evidence? Shlomo Hillel and Eli Amir never admitted any sort of bombing by Zionists. In fact Mordechai Ben Porat, who led the Zionist movt in Iraq, won a court case clearing his name. Quit the apologetics, Moshe, the Arabs ethnically cleansed their Jews.

bataween

13 April, 2010 - 18:56

Rate this:

0 points

I'm puzzled by your reference to the Egoz. No doubt you'll find some twisted way of blaming the Zionists for sinking the boat.

moshetzarfati2

13 April, 2010 - 20:05

Rate this:

0 points

Bataween -- that's the Jewish neighbourhood of Baghdad, isn't it? -- it's very convenient to claim there was a population exchange. It absolves the Israelis of having to deal with the ethnic cleansing in the Galil and the centre. But OK, if there was a population exchange, I'm sure you will be up for returning to Iraq if the Palestinians are allowed to return to their land.

12next ›last »

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

LATEST COMMENTS