Palestinian right of return

[MalaspinaGold]

A few notes:
a) Israel already has a housing crisis; this would just make it astronomically worse.
b) There is no such thing as an enforced fundamental right of return. Rarely do we see cases where people kicked out of a country are given special rights to go back. This isn't the case with Pakistan/India, or East European Germans, or Middle Eastern Jews, or Greek Cypriots from Northern Cyprus, etc. etc. etc. Now it is true that some countries have voluntarily established some sort of limited right of return, but it should be noted that for the most part, these have come about voluntarily, rather than coerced from the international community, and furthermore have been mostly symbolic (LOLSpain).
c) It would be a political disaster. Political disasters should GENERALLY be avoided, even if it makes some universal humanists sad. Ideally, I'd like to see a United Europe that is completely integrated; it doesn't stop me from calling out the Eurozone from what it is.

Also, PJ, agree with everything you said, with the exception of the end goal being secularization. While this might be nice, it is unlikely, for various demographic reasons, and attempting to blindly pursue secularization has generally proven disastrous (ex: the gigantic cluster**** achieved by trying to integrate Haredim into the armed services). Unless you're willing to go into Beit Shemesh and pulling a Peter the Great on them, it's best to work with them to allow them to live their lives as they want, while minimizing the amount of Haredism that spills outside their communities.

[MalaspinaGold]

1) Israeli exceptionalism. The belief that the Western world owes the Jews to secure them a nation state after persecuting them for centuries while we do not owe the Palestinians anything.

2) Context/time. Expulsion as a consequence of war was generally accepted in that era (Germans from Eastern Europe, Indian partition etc.). We are before the postwar human rights regime (in the politological sense of a comprehensive set of norms, discourse, practices and structures) was established and it is anachronistic to apply those norms to that era. The DoHR is from 1948, but it had not yet translated into an actual HR regime - even among Western countries. Today we view it differently and the Dayton agreement gave Bosnians the right to return - and a few did, but it will open a can of worms to try to correct old wrongdoings using a similar yardstick (several Western countries are themselves founded on some form of ethnic cleansing).

3) Whataboutery. There are other more questionable ethnic cleansings like the Turkish one in Hatay in 1939 (it was done in peacetime and the French  had no legal or moral right to cede that territory to Turkey), which makes it less obvious why the Israeli expulsion of Arabs should be singled out as one to be reversed.

4) The practical view. The long term Jewish character of Israel is already under pressure from a high Arab birth rate. In such a situation general paranoia is increased and will sky rocket if you start talking about return of 1948 refugees. There will never be peace if the Israelis do not feel secure.

It is a mix of reasons held in different proportion by different people. The last one is the one people will most often tell you. The first might be the most important. The second and third are important to me.

No it isn't. Arab birth rates are dropping, while Jewish birth rates are rising (because Haredim).

[MalaspinaGold]

1) Israeli exceptionalism. The belief that the Western world owes the Jews to secure them a nation state after persecuting them for centuries while we do not owe the Palestinians anything.

2) Context/time. Expulsion as a consequence of war was generally accepted in that era (Germans from Eastern Europe, Indian partition etc.). We are before the postwar human rights regime (in the politological sense of a comprehensive set of norms, discourse, practices and structures) was established and it is anachronistic to apply those norms to that era. The DoHR is from 1948, but it had not yet translated into an actual HR regime - even among Western countries. Today we view it differently and the Dayton agreement gave Bosnians the right to return - and a few did, but it will open a can of worms to try to correct old wrongdoings using a similar yardstick (several Western countries are themselves founded on some form of ethnic cleansing).

3) Whataboutery. There are other more questionable ethnic cleansings like the Turkish one in Hatay in 1939 (it was done in peacetime and the French  had no legal or moral right to cede that territory to Turkey), which makes it less obvious why the Israeli expulsion of Arabs should be singled out as one to be reversed.

4) The practical view. The long term Jewish character of Israel is already under pressure from a high Arab birth rate. In such a situation general paranoia is increased and will sky rocket if you start talking about return of 1948 refugees. There will never be peace if the Israelis do not feel secure.

It is a mix of reasons held in different proportion by different people. The last one is the one people will most often tell you. The first might be the most important. The second and third are important to me.

No it isn't. Arab birth rates are dropping, while Jewish birth rates are rising (because Haredim).

They have dropped more than I thought, but in 2013 the Jewish birth rate was 1.7%, the Muslim 2.4% and the Christian 1.6%. So the Arab share of the Israeli population is still increasing -  and significant parts of the country are already Arab majority. A right of return would tip the balance.

Anyway, my main argument here was perception. The paranoia unleashed by the thought of becoming a minority in your own country. This is a powerful factor.

Large parts of Israel have always been Arab majority- Triangle, Bedouin areas of the Negev, since 1048. This won't change, and there won't be any flips between "Jewish majority" to "Arab majority", because there are very few places that have roughly equal populations of Jews and Arabs.

Of course if Israel really cared about the so-called "Demographic Armageddon" then it wouldn't keep trying to desperately clutch to the West Bank.

The real problem with the right of return is not the inherent idea of millions of people moving back, but the inescapable economic chaos, coupled with political chaos and backlash this would cause. It would quite simply be in no one's interest.

[MalaspinaGold]

Also, PJ, agree with everything you said, with the exception of the end goal being secularization. While this might be nice, it is unlikely, for various demographic reasons, and attempting to blindly pursue secularization has generally proven disastrous (ex: the gigantic cluster**** achieved by trying to integrate Haredim into the armed services). Unless you're willing to go into Beit Shemesh and pulling a Peter the Great on them, it's best to work with them to allow them to live their lives as they want, while minimizing the amount of Haredism that spills outside their communities.

Haredism does pose a unique issue. I would prefer Israel abolish conscription entirely and extend a basic minimum income to all instead of requiring Haredis to work. However, the growing population of Haredi Jews means that they are going to have a growing influence over public policy, and it's imperative that the government stops bending over backwards to that before the Haredi population grows even more.

Secularization is important for more reasons than just Haredi integration though. The entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict is kept alive by the Jew vs. Muslim mentality. If the Israeli and Palestinian governments cut ties with their Jewish and Muslim roots, symbolically or otherwise, it will help move towards ending the perception of each government representing a certain religion and promote the idea that the Jews and Muslims can coexist.

Zionism is a secular nationalist ideology and some of the most prominent and radical Palestinian nationalists have been Christians, so not buying this argument.

Basically this. To read this as other than a national issue (Jew vs. Palestinian) is to give certain... apocalyptics the legitimacy they don't deserve.

[MalaspinaGold]

Do Israeli citizens from Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, S.Arabia, Iran, Libya, Tunisia..(you get the idea) get "monetary compensation" in this scheme of yours?


(and does your lists refer to all their descendants too?  I assume so, cause "special", if so, add that to the question too)

Well, they have citizenship and have not been living in refugee camps for the time being. Their situation is very different. A Jew who was expelled from an Arab country or left voluntarily and moved to Israel did not face anywhere near the loss of economic and social capital that a Palestinian who was expelled from Israel [or left voluntarily, you seem to have missed part here] to a neighboring country has faced.

Indeed, and it seems like nobody involved has learned a damn thing from this situation.  Do you think Jordan, Lebanon, etc would be better off today had they had been as accepting as Israel?  Would the refugees be better off?

(and I'm going to need a cite that the average Palestinian lost more "economic and social capital" when forced to flee than the average Jew that was forced to flee, that seems dubious)

I'm not sure why you think Jordan or Lebanon are under any obligation to accept Palestinian refugees unconditionally. Israel wanted to get as many Mizrahi Jews into the country as possible to tilt the demographic scales in their favor. The Mizrahi Jews, in return, got citizenship and a crash course in living in a developed country. Conversely, having a bunch of Palestinians suddenly move in didn't really fit with Jordan or Lebanon's long-term goals. Do you think if Hungary invaded Austria, Germany should simply let all the Austrians come live in Germany since they're all German-speaking? That's the kind of flawed logic you're using here. You think it's perfectly reasonable for a Syrian Jew to throw a Palestinian Muslim out of their house and for the Palestinian Muslim to simply shrug and go live in Syria. The Syrian Jew has no inherent business living in Israel and the Palestinian Muslim has no inherent business living in Syria.

no

[MalaspinaGold]

Both Lebanon and Jordan are countries with a delicate ethnic balance and small populations. Jordan is majority Palestinian no matter what, so giving citizenship to the last 400 000 may be reasonable, although obviously not something the Bedouin descendants would like. Lebanon is a different story. It will make it even harder for the country to function if you give citizen rights to the Palestinians. Resettlement would be preferable - the question is of course where.

You also set a dangerous precedent if countries that take in refugees are forced to make them citizens later on. If accepted as the norm that will increase the number of countries that simply refuse to take any refugees in the first place.

How about in Palestine?

[MalaspinaGold]

Both Lebanon and Jordan are countries with a delicate ethnic balance and small populations. Jordan is majority Palestinian no matter what, so giving citizenship to the last 400 000 may be reasonable, although obviously not something the Bedouin descendants would like. Lebanon is a different story. It will make it even harder for the country to function if you give citizen rights to the Palestinians. Resettlement would be preferable - the question is of course where.

You also set a dangerous precedent if countries that take in refugees are forced to make them citizens later on. If accepted as the norm that will increase the number of countries that simply refuse to take any refugees in the first place.

How about in Palestine?

Dunno, the place is pretty packed as it is

I mean people are calling for all 7 million to move to Israel so I think 1-2 million moving to Palestine is reasonable.

[MalaspinaGold]

Both Lebanon and Jordan are countries with a delicate ethnic balance and small populations. Jordan is majority Palestinian no matter what, so giving citizenship to the last 400 000 may be reasonable, although obviously not something the Bedouin descendants would like. Lebanon is a different story. It will make it even harder for the country to function if you give citizen rights to the Palestinians. Resettlement would be preferable - the question is of course where.

You also set a dangerous precedent if countries that take in refugees are forced to make them citizens later on. If accepted as the norm that will increase the number of countries that simply refuse to take any refugees in the first place.

How about in Palestine?

Dunno, the place is pretty packed as it is

I mean people are calling for all 7 million to move to Israel so I think 1-2 million moving to Palestine is reasonable.

Excellent idea. That will make the area a lot more stable...

Keep in mind I never supported the return of 7 million to Israel proper.

[MalaspinaGold]

I said some people think that, and since for some reason it's being bandied about like it's reasonable, they should also be able to talk about 1-2 million going to Palestine. I agree I could have phrased that better.

Those young poor uneducated ex-refugees are going to be going somewhere. I'm pretty sure Palestine is a bastion of stability compared to Lebanon or Syria. Ideally it would be best to phase out the camps over the course of 10 years or so.

[MalaspinaGold]

A merging of the Iseael and Palestine would be acceptable. Aside from the fact that the "right of return" is hardly guaranteed, the two coming together with a stringent foreign security to stabilize the region would most definitely help. Palestinians would likely immigrate to Egypt and Jordan while still not being oppressed as the region stabilizes.

It's a win-win for both sides: A state for Palestinians without oppression, and the survival of the Israeli state.

Why on earth would Palestinians in a functioning one-state solution voluntarily emigrate to economic basket cases that currently want them even less than the Zionists do now?  If anything, a functioning one-state solution would face immigration pressure from Egypt and Jordan, not the other way round.

Oxymoron, etc.