I was just as surprised by his answer. But their actions have been far more eloquent than any statements could ever have been. Certainly, the US ambassador was not trying to deceive me, nor was he out to defend the policies of the Likud. He was only trying to abide strictly by the official policies of his own country, which is not greatly troubled by the Palestinian refugees or their right to repatriation. Furthermore, his country is not keen on becoming involved in a debate over whether or not the early Zionist leaders and later the leaders of Israel carried out ethnic cleansing campaigns against the Palestinians.
Silence is usually the best strategy in such situations.
Israel lashed out at the President s spontaneous response to a question posed to him by Abdel Moneim Said, who commended US efforts to repatriate the Albanian refugees, and inquired whether similar standards of repatriation would be applied to the Palestinians. The argument regarding Zionist and, later, Israeli ethnic cleansing practices had thus moved from the realm of academia to formal diplomatic confrontation within the context of the peace process. Israel immediately refused any grounds for comparison between the Palestinian refugees and the Kosovar Albanians, anxious to avoid any suggestion that the same approach should be adopted regarding the Palestinians refugees. Israel has always maintained that the Palestinian refugees left their right to repatriation. Now the wall of silence surrounding the rights of the Palestinian refugees and the ethnic cleansing campaigns carried out by all Israeli governments came tumbling down.