Refugees? What refugees?


By Jon_i_Cohen
February 10, 2010
Share

Prof. Nitza Nachmias of the Jewish-Arab Center in Haifa University says that if it wasn’t for UNRWA and its half-billion dollar annual budget, the Palestinian refugee problem would have been solved long ago.
“In essence,” she told Arutz Sheva’s Shimon Cohen on Sunday, “there’s no such thing as Palestinian refugees. If people would stop calling the places in which they live ‘refugee camps,’ then they would see that these places are just like villages and towns anywhere else, and the inhabitants are totally rehabilitated… Refugee camps are like the maabarot [in which Israel housed its hundreds of thousands of new immigrants from North Africa and elsewhere] in the 1950’s or the camps now in Haiti – not the villages with streets and stone houses in what is known as Palestinian refugee camps of today.”
“They are rehabilitated better than refugees who are not supported by UNRWA,” Nachmias said. “Practically, factually and legally, there is no such thing as ‘Palestinian refugees.’ … Refugee camps are a fiction, and most of those who claim to be refugees have already been integrated into other countries."
Prof. Nachmias, a senior researcher at the Jewish-Arab Center who also teaches in Asheklon College and the University of Maryland, feels that Israel has taken the wrong approach in dealing with this issue: “We can’t simply push it off to the ‘final status talks’ and say, ‘We don’t accept the demand for the right-of-return because it will destroy the Jewish character of our state;’ what do they care about our Jewish character? If they deserve to be here, then it’s tough luck on us! Rather, Israel should take a pro-active approach, basing itself on international law and precedents, and declare that the Palestinian refugee issue no longer exists. They are no longer refugees!”
Rules for Palestinians are Different?
“According to international law,” Nachmias explains, “a refugee is an individual or family that was forced to run away – but this definition does not extend to children [of the original refugees], a community or a group. The only exception to this rule is the Palestinians, for whom the international laws are apparently different.”
If it wasn’t for UNRWA, Nachmias indicates, the issue of Palestinian refugees would have gone away a long time ago: “UNRWA is [no longer] a welfare agency, but rather an international employment agency for the Palestinians. UNRWA has 30,000 Palestinian employees, with 100 international experts at the helm. It is the biggest employer of Palestinians, and has an annual budget of a half-billion dollars. I discovered documents of pension funds of over a billion dollars a year, managed by brokers in Switzerland. All this for what is defined as a ‘welfare agency’ whose mandate is renewed every three years.”
'Send UNRWA Out'
“Israel must nullify the status of Palestinian refugee camps; there is no other place where the UN controls territory. We must send the UNRWA out and transfer the control of these places to the Palestinian Authority, and then when the status of each individual resident there is reviewed, we will see that none of them match the legal definition of a refugee, and they are established citizens.”
“Only in Lebanon are there refugees who are not allowed to work in certain professions; they are a small fraction of the total.”
Despite the UNRWA’s power and well-oiled financial network, “the world will support Israel in this case because it will also remove the onus of the refugees, and also because Israel can show, if it makes the effort, that it is rooted in international law.”

COMMENTS

ibrows

11 February, 2010 - 02:16

Rate this:

0 points

It is widely accepted that 750,000 Palestinians were displaced in 1948, the only issue of dispute is over whether they were forcibly or voluntarily fled, most analysts including Benny Morris conclude it was a mixture of the two.

Palestinian refugees certainly exist, in Benny Morris book 'Birth of the Palestinian Refugee problem' he has a whole chapter (chapter 6) entitled 'blocking the return' in which he details efforts by Zionists to prevent the Palestinians returning to their homes they had fled from or been expelled from. Morris claims there was 400 Palestinian villages and towns depopulated in 1948 (page 342).

Jon, what your calling for is a total denial of a people's existence, like the Bedouin in the unrecognised villages that exist, but the state of Israel refuses to recognise and provide basic services for, despite claiming taxes from many Bedouin. Perhaps if Israel sought to fully incorporate Palestinians into the state of Israel, by giving more citizenship and equal rights, this would end the 'refugee problem'. You must remember based on census figures i have cited on these blogs before that Palestinians largely outnumbered Jews prior to 1948, i.e Palestinians have land rights in Israel, they existed here before Israel's creations, as such they are part of Israel and must be accepted as such


Avraham Reiss

11 February, 2010 - 05:27

Rate this:

0 points

"Palestinians largely outnumbered Jews prior to 1948, i.e Palestinians have land rights in Israel, they existed here before Israel's creations, as such they are part of Israel and must be accepted as such"

- In 1948 there were 600,000 Jews in Israel (the same 'magic' number given in the Bible at the time of the Exodus from Egypt, and incidentally 1/10 of the Jews murdered in Europe - THAT is decimated!). I don't think there was an equal number of Arabs here at that time.

Those who were here in '48 do have rights. And since the fighting in 1948 Israel has made no attempt to expel them, and no such intention is in site. As for their lands here, over 200 leftist kibbutzim have settled on them - a concrete example of the hypocracy of the left: "your rights end where my rights begin".


bataween

11 February, 2010 - 09:06

Rate this:

0 points

Nitza is right. Most of the Palestinian refugees would have been born in these Arab countries.

The vast majority of 'Palestinian refugees' now live outside Israel. Bedouin unrecognised villages are an unrelated issue. Bedouins in Israel have Israeli citizenship, but Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Iraq are not entitled to citizenship and deprived of other rights, such as the right to work and own property ( Lebanon). Only in Jordan were Palestinians given citizenship, but currently 3,000 Palestinians are being stripped of their Jordanian citizenship. Where is the outcry?

The treatment of Pal refugees by Arab countries contrasts with the absorption of a greater number of Jewish refugees (850,000) by Israel and the West. They were given full civil rights.


ibrows

11 February, 2010 - 13:45

Rate this:

0 points

The census of 1922 puts the number of Palestinian 'Arabs' at 660,641 out of a total population of 752,048.

In the 1931 census out of the total population of 1,033,314, 73.52% were ‘Palestinian ‘Arabs’, numbering 759,700.

I will leave your magic of the bible numbers at arms length, these figures I cite are based on reality


Avraham Reiss

11 February, 2010 - 13:50

Rate this:

0 points

We're talking about 1948 and you bring figures (whose accuracy is dubious whenever an anti-semite quotes them) from 1931?

Very funny.


ibrows

11 February, 2010 - 14:24

Rate this:

0 points

I am proving that loads of Palestinians lived in what is now Israel prior to 1948, these are census figures, where as you are claiming loads of Jews lived their based on the bible

One is an historically accurate document, the other is not and many rabbis will accept this fact that figures and dates in the bible are not all historically accurate


Avraham Reiss

11 February, 2010 - 14:35

Rate this:

0 points

fool, I was just commenting on a seeming coincidence (in Jewish mysticism it goes a lot deeper).

As for bible accuracy, you go your way and I'll go mine. You are an anti-semite frustrated by the success of the State of Israel, while I am a proud Israeli, sitting in my home in Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Israel, laughing at how low the anti-semites have fallen since 1945. Maybe there are more of them now than then, but the quality? Phew!

Keep on writing, there's nothing else you can do, like others here you don't have the guts to put your money where your mouth is, and go to Gaza to assist the poor miserable depressed population there.


ibrows

11 February, 2010 - 15:20

Rate this:

0 points

Why do you have to resort to abuse and claims of anti-semitism simply because we disagree

criticism of is Israel is allowed it doesnt mean it anti-semitic


Jon_i_Cohen

11 February, 2010 - 15:40

Rate this:

0 points

Critiscism of Israel IS antisemtism.
Crtisicism of Israel is simply the trendy lefty, politicallly (in)correct, Guardianesque, smokescreen, buzz word or substitute for antisemitism - nothing less.
But as Avraham Reiss points out, "we've heard it all before and none of you anti-semites blogging on this web site have a 3 digit IQ" - so we see nothing new.


Avraham Reiss

11 February, 2010 - 17:39

Rate this:

0 points

What Jon wrote above, expresses my opinion as well.

"Why do you have to resort to abuse and claims of anti-semitism simply because we disagree"

To answer your above quoted words, stop playing the naive simpleton, pretending that you and I have a 'simple disagreement'. Your general tone is one of an anti-semite - of which we have about 2k years of experience - one who cares only about the fate of Arabs (to which I am not indifferent, but as long as Hamas is their representative they will pay the price: if you sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas).

Since the Holocaust, we take a maximalistic approach towards even suspected enemies; shoot first, questions later. Its a policy that creates casualties, but not on our side. Stay away from us, get a life elsewhere, and you might even achieve longevity.

But if you want to keep on cooking in this kitchen, be prepared to get your fingers burnt.


Jon_i_Cohen

24 February, 2010 - 08:48

Rate this:

0 points

Now the "Arabs" are accepting that they displaced themselves and that the "refugee problem" was of their own making, read on:-

Arabs Begin to Blame Their Own Leaders for ’Refugee' Status
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
(IsraelNN.com) Arabs who left Israel in the 1948 are are beginning to blame Arab countries for leaving them stateless after promising a quick return to “Palestine.” "They [Arab leaders] said, 'A week, two weeks, approximately, and you'll return to Palestine,'" Sadek Mufid, formerly of Akko (Acre) and now living in Lebanon, recently told Palestinian Authority television.
His comments were translated by Palestinian Media Watch.
Saudi Arabia has led an Arab world demand that normalization of ties with Israel and the establishment of the PA as a state be conditioned on Israel's allowing the immigration of approximately five million Arabs. Most of them are descendants of Arabs who claim they used to live in Israel.
The United Nations has classified them as “refugees” and placed them in villages, known as “camps,” in Judea, Samaria and Gaza and Arab countries. The Arab designation of “refugees” is maintained today by the refusal of Arab countries to allow them citizenship, voting rights, or the ability to move into better housing, in order to preserve their “unique status.”
Mufid’s testimony represents a new trend of Arab leaders, writers and former Israeli Arab residents who have begun to speak out and openly blame the Arab leadership for the creation of their situation.
Mufid describes a mass departure to Lebanon from Israel, which led to the creation of "11 or 15 refugee camps." He does not place the blame on Israel. As Palestinian Media Watch has previously reported, other recent accounts also describe a deliberate exit from Israel under orders from Arab leaders, as the Israeli government has always claimed, which contradicts the Palestinian leadership's charge that the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who left in 1948 were expelled by Israel.
Mufid, who left the village of Dir Al-Qasi near Akko in 1948, told the PA TV's weekly program Returning, "We headed first from Dir al-Qasi to Rmaich [Lebanon], considering what they [Arab leaders] said at the time: 'By Allah, in a week or two, you will return to Palestine.'
“The Arab armies entered Palestine, along with the Arab Liberation Army. We left - we and those who fled with us - and we all headed for Lebanon. Some people came to Rmaich and others came to the villages on the border, such as Ein Ibl and also to Bnit Jibil. People scattered. And we have about 11 or 15 [refugee] camps in Lebanon."
In another PA television interview, an elderly Arab recalled how his family left Ein Kerem, in eastern Jerusalem. “The radio stations of the Arab regimes kept repeating to us. ‘Get away from the battle lines. It's a matter of 10 days or two weeks at the most, and we'll bring you back to Ein Kerem.’
“And we said to ourselves, 'That's a very long time. What is this? Two weeks? That's a lot!' That's what we thought [then]. And now 50 years have gone by."
Two years ago, Jordanian-based Aryan journalist Jawad Al Bashiti wrote in Al-Ayyam, “The reasons for the Palestinian Catastrophe [establishment of Israel and the refugee problem] are the same reasons that have produced and are still producing our catastrophes today... The first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the ‘Arab Salvation Army’ told the Palestinians, ‘We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission in the best way and so you won't be hurt.' It became clear already then, when it was too late, that the support of the Arab states [against Israel] was a big illusion.”
All of this is a matter of historical and current record, so whatever spin our "lefty", Galloway loving, Guardianesque friends try and put on it the fact of the matter is that the "Arabs" brought the refugee problem on themselves, and it is for the "Arabs", Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, with Saudi and Gulf money to resolve it, NOT Israel.


Yvetta

24 February, 2010 - 09:26

Rate this:

0 points

Criticism of the Israeli government's actions and policy is not necessarily antisemitic; I say "necessarily" advisedly, because I suspect very strongly that such criticism (when totally ignoring very real human rights abuses in other countries) is motivated by antisemitism.
Wishing destruction upon Israel, or believing that (in contrast to all other nations) Israel's right to exist is not absolute but contigent upon its behaviour, is antisemitic.


moshetzarfati2

24 February, 2010 - 09:50

Rate this:

0 points

Yes, Jon, we note that that comes from the hate-spewing Israeli colonialist radio station, Arutz 7, which is about as objective as Press TV and twice as objectionable.


John Gold

24 February, 2010 - 11:57

Rate this:

0 points

I think that the term 'antisemitism' is banded about far too often and that the term is losing it's value and meaning. It should be used in it's original form, meaning 'racism against Jewish people'.

However now it seems to be used to mean 'opposed to Zionism' or 'not agreeing with some Israeli policies'.
And when I say Zionism for me that can mean two completely different things, firstly some people understand it as meaning 'Israel's right to exist' (i.e having their own country and identity), some people understand Zionism to mean 'colonialism and the desire to eat up more land from surrounding areas'.

I think because people don't readily realize that the term Zionism can mean two completely different things that people are (often incorrectly) accused of antisemitism when they are anti-Zionist (in the second meaning and sense of the word).

Lastly if we are saying as seems to be suggested by quite a few people on these blogs that 'Israel is above reproach' or that 'you should never criticize or challenge some Israeli actions' then I feel that we are embarking into a dangerous situation where the state becomes a G-d like figure, where you no longer hold any object-ism, only having blind faith and support by many people (Israeli's and diaspora).
To put that kind of power into fallible human beings without a level of accountability or objectiveness in my opinion is ultimately dangerous (not to mention potentially harmful to other nationalities or nation states).

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.