Book Review: The Issue of Return | The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com | Alex Grobman PhD. | 25 Sivan 5784 – Sunday, June 30, 2024

“How could one possibly say anything new about the Arab-Israeli conflict?” ask Adi Schwartz and Einat Wilf, acknowledging that it seems as if “every detail of the conflict has already been thoroughly investigated and discussed.” Yet in their intellectual, political and historical search, they found that there is still a great deal to be said.

Their aim is to challenge the traditional approach to the role of diplomats and mediators in resolving protracted conflicts. Instead of engaging in shuttle diplomacy, which involves forcing “reluctant sides” to make concessions, diplomats must properly assess the root causes of the conflict and work diligently to remove the real obstacles that stand in the way of a peaceful solution. They claim that this explains why this Middle East conflict remains insoluble.

Her left-wing background might be a reason to avoid reading her work, but her left-wing views make this a compelling read. Einat Wilf, who has a PhD in political science from Oxford University, was a member of the Knesset for the Independence and Labor parties, where she “advised and worked closely with Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin, the architects of the Oslo Accords.” Adi Schwartz worked for ten years as a journalist for Haaretz, a well-known left-wing newspaper in Israel.

Supporters of the two-state solution

Both were “very strong supporters” of the two-state solution and supported any effort to advance a peace agreement based on that formula. Like many Israelis, they grew up believing that peace would prevail once the Arabs had their own state in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, with their capital in eastern Jerusalem.

Yasser Arafat’s refusal to reach an agreement with the Israelis in 2000 and 2008, as well as the Second Intifada, when the Arabs launched barbaric attacks to inflict as much pain and suffering as possible on the Israeli civilian population, caused them to question some of their basic assumptions about the conflict.

Arab refugees demand the “right of return”

In their search for the reason for the war’s indecision, they found the answer “has been in plain sight for decades.” They claim that one of the core issues of the conflict that has “almost completely disappeared from the consciousness” of Israelis and those seeking a peaceful solution is the Arab demand for the “right of return” of Arab refugees. They consider this to be the main issue preventing an end to the conflict, since the Arabs consider themselves “refugees from Palestine,” which reflects their “relationship to the land and their willingness (or lack thereof) to share any part of it with the Jews.”

Among the key questions that the authors say have been overlooked are: Why are there still Arab “refugees” from a war that ended 70 years ago? Why do Palestinians insist that every single Palestinian refugee for all generations has an individual and indeed “sacred” right to return to the sovereign state of Israel, even though there is no actual legal basis for this? Who and what prevented the Palestinian refugees from being rehabilitated like the Jewish refugees in 1948? Was it a lack of interest or money, or were there other, ideological motives? Is the “right of return” a real demand or just a bargaining chip that can be negotiated if other demands are met? What does a “right of return” mean in the context of a comprehensive peace agreement? And if this demand is real, can we move forward, and if so, how?”

UNRWA

The authors blame the West for funding the UN, which in turn funds the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) with “an estimated one and a half billion dollars a year,” according to investigative journalist David Bedein. They explain that until May 1950, when UNRWA began operations, aid agencies provided aid to anyone deemed in need. Over time, UNRWA formulated a definition of “registered Palestine refugees,” even if they were not legitimate refugees in the usual legal sense. According to UNRWA, an Arab only needs to have lived in Palestine for two years before being considered a refugee.

Israel’s publication of the names of UNWRA staff accused of involvement in the October 7 terrorist attacks and kidnappings in southern Israel, including their photographs and their alleged role with Hamas, underscores once again the shameful role the organization plays in Gaza in perpetuating hatred of Israel and ensuring that refugees remain a source of contention.

In another forum, AB Yehoshua, an Israeli novelist and peace activist, put the refugee issue into perspective: Jews and Palestinian Arabs who fled or were expelled should not be called refugees, but displaced persons. A refugee flees or was expelled from his country; a displaced person flees or is expelled from his homeland but remains within the borders of his homeland. The Jews who fled or were expelled by Arabs into Israeli territory were never refugees, but merely displaced persons who were given a new home in Israel.

Palestinian Arabs were labeled refugees, although most of them remained in Palestine and lived no more than 20 to 40 km from their homes. The Arabs from Ashdod and Ashkelon settled in Gaza, just 20 km away. The Arabs from Lod and Ramle moved to the Ramallah area, about 30 to 40 km from these cities. Some Palestinian Arabs who fled or were expelled went to Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, where, with the exception of Jordan, they were denied citizenship and remain refugees.

A final note

The Arab demand for a “right of return” and the involvement of UNRWA in perpetuating the refugee crisis have been the subject of numerous studies, including those by David Bedein, historian Daniel Pipes and Professor Gerald Steinberg, who have shown how the West enables the problem to persist.

The war with Israel is not just about Arab refugees. The occupation of Arab soil cannot be tolerated, notes Bernard Lewis, because they consider it sacred Arab land. He explains that once a territory has become part of the rule of Islam, it can never be relinquished or given to anyone. Article 13 of the Hamas pact explains why the war against Israel is a holy war to regain control of the land of Israel: “There is no solution to the Palestinian question except through jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and futile efforts. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to their future, their rights and their destiny being played with.”

The contribution of Adi Schwartz and Einat Wilf to our understanding of the ‘right of return’ of Arab refugees cannot be underestimated. Their position on the left lends credibility to the findings of this important and valuable study.