From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: BILL CLINTON ON ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE
Date: 22 Aug 92 06:40:28 GMT
Organization: Australian National University

rivk@ellis.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis) writes:

>In article <1992Aug21.083408.18787@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:
>>In article 5946@usenet.ins.cwru.edu, bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein) writes:

>>>Your parents apparently voluntarily left Haifa, 
>>The fact is that most refugees anywhere leave "voluntarily".  

>Granted. And it doesn't make them any less refugees. But it does make
>them not "forced out".

There is no sharp boundary between "voluntary" and "forced".  Even
the many Palestinians who left with a gun at their heads made the
"voluntary" choice to cooperate, instead of refusing to leave and
taking the consequences.  Towards the other extreme, many left without
direct contact with Jewish forces, having been frightened by tales
of terrible massacres (partly true, but exaggerated by both Arab
and Jewish propagandists for different reasons).  The well-documented
early departure of Arab leaders obviously had a major demoralising
effect as well.  I don't think there is much justice in drawing
moral or legal distinctions within that class.  Certainly, any
"refugees" who left primarily for military or political purposes
can be regarded differently, but 44 years of concerted effort by
Israeli propagandists have failed to establish that more than a
very small percentage of Palestinian refugees fit that description.

>>That doesn't 
>>make them any the less refugees and it sure as hell does not remove their 
>>right of return.  

>What I haven't figured out yet is where any of you people, Jew or Arab,

I am neither.  I'm an atheist from an Anglo/Irish Christian background.

>are getting the concept of a right of return in the first place. It
>seems to have been made up out of whole cloth especially for the Arab-
>Israeli conflict; both sides use it, and neither has cited a reason.
>Rights come from somewhere... the right to return to a place you left,
>no matter why you left it, has never been recognized anywhere else in
>the world and it does not have a source I can identify in any other
>right that *is* recognized. So what in the hell makes anyone think 
>that either Jews or Palestinians have a right to be anywhere in any
>country whose government decides it does not want them there? If I
>left the United States, for any reason whatsoever including fear for
>my life, and either gave up citizenship while I was gone or had the
>country undergo a revolution while I was away, so that U.S. citizen-
>ship was not the sort that would get you access to this particular
>piece of land anymore, I wouldn't expect to be allowed back in -- and
>that's even if I *hadn't* been spending the time while I was abroad
>working to tear down the new government.

I'm no lawyer, but I am sure that the right of refugees to return
to a place from which they have been expelled has been recognised
by international authorities (such as the World Court and the
UN Security Council) many times.  There are UN resolutions still
in force that acknowledge that right for the Palestinians.

However, you are certainly correct in one circumstance.  I have
never heard of such right of return being applied to the
distant descendants of the refugees.  

All that aside, usually when I refer to "rights" am not thinking 
of some abstract legal or religious principle, but just to some 
internal conviction about how it is reasonable for humans to 
behave towards one another.  

>>This is especially true since (even according to
>>Zionist propaganda) most of the residents had every intention of 
>>returning.  Any suggestion that they _abandoned_ their property, in the
>>common English, or legal English, sense of the word is pure lie.

>True in a technical sense, but you've left out the circumstances under
>which they intended to return. If I leave something on the street, wait
>around a corner, and plan to jump out and murder the person who tries
>to pick it up so I can get it back from them, I have not abandoned the
>property -- but neither do I have any legal or ethical right to demand
>that they give it back voluntarily when my murder attempt fails.

Maybe, but your analogy doesn't apply.  (Actually, you probably DO 
have a legal right to your property but like I said, I'm no lawyer.)

>>>and have no more right to
>>>return their than my grandparents had to return to the Russia they fled for
>>>their lives.
>>
>>If your grandparents fled Russia for their lives, they have every right
>>to return there if they so wish.

>And do I have such a right? My grandparents did indeed flee Russia for
>their lives (well, two of them fled Russia, two of them fled Poland);
>I and my parents were born here, but of their descent. Are we still
>refugees? I still don't see where this "right" comes from -- the Russian
>government certainly wouldn't recognize it, and nobody else in the
>world seems to think this is unreasonable of them. It's only considered
>unreasonable when it's Israel doing it. I think not.

Maybe you just don't hear about the other cases.  Actually, the
issue comes up nearly every time there is a major refugee crisis.  

>	-Nora