The (historical) long-standing refugee issue

The Palestinian refugee issue consists of a chronic denial of state security to the people wherever they are, and a lack of international protection to its stateless condition[1]. As such, the Palestinians are one of the longest-standing refugee populations in the world, with approximately two in five world’s refugees being Palestinian, who furthermore have fled the Palestinian territories (at no particular time since 1948), or are internally displaced, and are confronted with a stateless identity[2]. Furthermore, through their massive displacement they, of course, constitute the oldest refugee community in the Middle East since the WWII[3], whereby the refugees have found new [second-class] homes in the neighboring Arab countries.

For example, a large number of Palestinians fled to Lebanon, whereby more than 50 per cent of the registered 455,000 refugees still live in the UNRWA[4] (since 1949[5]) camps which were set up at the time[6], whereby most of these camps suffer from poverty, unemployment, overcrowding etc.[7]. This indicates that the Palestinian refugees within the domestic realm of Lebanon do not enjoy the same political, social, legal and civic rights as the Lebanese nationals do[8]. As such, there is a wide gap between the life-possibilities of the refugees and the Lebanese nationals, which furthermore reflects the secondary-class feature of the stateless Palestinians in a host land[9].

Though these circumstances are disturbing, the point here is principally that the Palestinians no matter where they exactly reside [were it Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, or for that matter the Occupied Palestinian Territories], they do not enjoy rights of equity, which in the realm of the international community, especially as a nation which is still territorially linked to the Occupied Territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, on a first glance should have. [Even in the light of the UNRWA-registered Palestinian refugees, they have the right to additional international protection of their human rights and needs[10], but which foregoes the main point made here]. Therefore, the most fundamental question on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains the one on the rights to the territory of Mandate Palestine and the Palestinian refugees, who at the time, and all the years that followed, were forced to leave their homes and their lands[11].

Yet, it is not as simple as that, especially since the issue has been left unsettled in the sixty-year long aftermath of the successful establishment of the Israeli State. As such, it becomes apparent, that where the Palestinians would claim a right of return [supposed that the Palestinians have a historic recognized right to consider Palestine as their state], in historical context, it would disclaim the Jewish right of return to Israel[12]. As such, the arguments in order to disconnect the Palestinian people to the Palestinian land(s) vary in following degrees: firstly, that the Palestinians are and never were the people with recognized rights to Palestine; additionally, that they did not flee the country, but that they left the Palestinian territories by own will; thirdly, the Palestinians forfeited their land through the Arab war against victorious Israel; and finally, that the Jews are the natives, and historically the owners, of the land of Palestine, and that as such, the Palestinians cannot overrule such claim on statehood[13]. Initially, such competing claims were initiated by the British inconsistent rule during its Mandate, whereby such Mandate was to safeguard the Palestinian territory for Palestinian benefit, but while they were contributing to the efforts of the Belfour Declaration to build a Jewish state[14]. This is the starting-point of the conflict and all the wrong events that subsequently followed, especially when considering that the legal nationals of Mandate Palestine were the Palestinians, who were holding a Palestinian passport![15], which of course negates the argument stated above, as if the Palestinians did not have a recognized right to the Palestinian land, prior to the birth of the Jewish state.

However, implications to a possible legal solution [to the refugee issue] consist of, firstly, the fact that international law does not provide these, or that Israel uses the same principles to defend their own right of return, and secondly, that the issue raised is not necessarily about the Palestinian existing right of return, but whether or not such return can be realized without negatively effecting the existence of the Jewish state[16]. Be this is as it may, it should not imply a future without an [legal] end, or settlement, to this issue or the conflict in general. A legal framework to offer solutions to the refugee problem is therefore preferable as necessary; because what other [peaceful] options remain open there?

Helena Uzelac


[1] Akram, Susan M., (2011) “Myths and Realities of the Palestinian Refugee Problem: Reframing the Right of Return” In Akram (Susan M.), Dumper (Michael) et.al: International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Rights-Based Approach to the Middle East Peace, London [etc.]: Routledge, p. 13
[2] Ibid.
[3] Kamel Doraï, Mohamed (2011) “Palestinian Refugee Camps in Lebanon: Migration, Mobility and Urbanization Process” In Knudsen (Are) and Hanafi (Sari): Palestinian Refugees: Identity, Space and Place in the Levant, London [etc.]: Routledge, pp. 67-8
[4] This is the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees, which provides assistance to some 5 million Palestinian refugees residing in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as to be “pending a solution to their plight”. (Website UNRWA, found at web page: http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=47 (February 3, 2012)
[5] Website UNRWA, found at web page: http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=85 (February 3, 2012)
[6] Kamel Doraï, 2011: 67
[7] Website UNRWA, found at web page: http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=73 (February 3, 2012)
[8] Kamel Doraï, 2011: 67
[9] Ibid.
[10] Custer, Scott (2011) “United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA): Protection and Assistance to Palestine Refugees” In Akram (Susan M.), Dumper (Michael) et.al: International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Rights-Based Approach to the Middle East Peace, London [etc.]: Routledge, p. 64
[11] O’Keefe, Roger, (2010) “Israel/Palestine Sixty Years On” In Giegerich (Thomas) and Proelss (Alexander): Krisenherde im Fokus des Vӧlkerrechts – Trouble Spots in the Focus of International Law, Berlin: Duncker  Humblot, p. 55
[12] Akram, 2011: 14
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid., 15
[15] Ibid., 17
[16] Akram, 2011: 31
Posted in articles, Home, News | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off

Water disputes in Palestinian territory

The Israel-Palestine water conflict has been going on since 1967, when the water disputes first became evident, and over time it has become a necessity to reach a reasonable understanding of the water needs in Palestine. Different treaties have been made but none have accomplished its goal on implementing efficient water management in the region. For this reason, it is important to mention that the conflict over water issues in the area does not come up on the world’s political agenda, so the purpose of this article is to create awareness over the issue of water allocation. As such, it is important to mention first some of the facts occurring on the field to have a better understanding of the situation. It will be followed by some conclusions in order to give workable solutions to better approach these water issues. Continue reading

Posted in articles, News | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off

International law in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Part II

This – six-decade long – conflict is probably one of the world’s obvious conflict cases, in which international law has proven to be ineffective, if not (mostly) useless. This especially, since the Palestinians have suffered, and continuously endure the suffering of, a great historical injustice[1]. Not only have they been failed by the whole international community altogether, but indeed specifically by the United Kingdom [as the Mandatory power], the United States of America [as the unfair superpower and an unlike fair broker], and – surprisingly – their Arab neighbors [by using the Palestinians as pawns in a geostrategic game][2]. Continue reading

Posted in articles, News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

International Law in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Part I

Palestine. This is a country that since its Nakba (1948) is suffering from chronic internal dispositions. At the time, when a new Jewish State was to be established, the fact that the aspirated territory had its already existing Arab population did not mean a thing to the ambitious Zionists. Their history and aspirations mattered even less. As such, even at the time of the British mandate, the British largely condoned and supported the large import of Israeli settlers into the territory of historic Palestine[1]. This continues to this day, with the necessary international law violations from Israeli side in order to establish a strong Jewish State. Continue reading

Posted in News | Comments Off

The Negotiated Two-State Solution Myth

Opinion by Jan Elshout

Every couple of years, the formula of the “Two States” serves as a direction sign towards the solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict. Some people argue that this solution is no longer possible as the Israeli colonisation of the West Bank is already too advanced. A question which is usually not considered by most is whether there actually is support for this solution, especially on the Israeli side. This question is not so much important with regard to International Law. However, it is very essential for the solution of the conflict through Israeli and Palestinian negotiations. I do not believe that the former is realistic; only pressure from outside will lead to negotiations. Continue reading

Posted in News | Comments Off