Abbas about to depart. What it means
With Palestinian moderate leader Abbas indicating he will not seek re-election we must ask where the prospects for peace between Israel and Palestine are headed and why. I am ever optimistic that peace will push its way into that corner of the world by the end of Obama’s first term, but I must admit that increasingly my optimism survives despite evidence to the contrary. So what’s the problem? Everyone is better off with peace. In fact, however war is resolved, the same deal presumably could be struck without all the costs of fighting so why can’t the leaders on each side look ahead and work out a sensible arrangement? Well, what is good for the people is not necessarily good for the individual leaders. Netanyahu’s constituents, for example, surely want peace (on their own terms) but are unwilling to make near-term sacrifices (settlements, water access, etc.) for long-term gains. Most of us, sadly, are relatively short-term maximizers, hoping others will bear the long term costs instead of us. And how about Hamas? They seem divided between those who want to pursue a moderate course and those whose own importance and well-being is tied to prolonged extremism. Abbas and Fatah have tried to play a moderating role and gotten precious little in return. That, of course, strengthens the arguments of hardliners. So why has Abbas been able to achieve so little (and lose so much — especially Gaza to Hamas).
One problem is that short-term electoral gains in Israel promote a tough stance. Another is the failure of US leaders to be creative in advancing the prospects of peace. Early in Obama’s term he gave a speech in Cairo that seemed to mark a sea-change in the US approach to the region. Sadly, as on so many other fronts (e.g., health care) the president was long on talk and short on follow-up action. And now, with Abbas saying he will step down (of course, he may be bluffing — anyone care to build a data set and use the online game to forecast what is likely to happen to Abbas and the prospects of elections in Palestine in January!) what does this say about the strategic need to threaten and cajole to get serious discussions moving forward.
For Netanyahu, negotiation at the expense of settlements seems like a no-brainer — Palestinians don’t vote in Israel so their interests are unlikely to shape his calculations. OK, so let’s throw some ideas out there.
One of the allegedly big issues between the contending sides is the “right of return.” Now under a UN resolution from the late 1940s Palestinians born in what is now Israel would have a right of return. Of course, we are 60 years beyond the resolution so the number of people it actually covers is probably pretty small. This seems really to be more a symbolic issue than real, at least under international law. Anyone in the international community willing to compensate those who fall under the resolution if they agree not to return? Just a thought. Later I will take up Jerusalem and other territorial issues.
3 Comments Add your own
1. Peter Quinn | November 6th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Hi. I am a long time reader. I wanted to say that I like your blog and the layout.
Peter Quinn
2. Danny Kohn | November 14th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Based on what you write I believe there is a little knowledge lacking on your part. Knowledge that I think will influence your calculations.
“One of the allegedly big issues between the contending sides is the “right of return.” Now under a UN resolution from the late 1940s Palestinians born in what is now Israel would have a right of return. Of course, we are 60 years beyond the resolution so the number of people it actually covers is probably pretty small. This seems really to be more a symbolic issue than real, at least under international law.”
The problem is that normal definitions of what a refugee is does not seem to apply in this conflict. This conflict has a very special definition of what constitutes a refugee not found in any other conflict on the earth.
“Under UNRWA’s operational definition, Palestine refugees are persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. UNRWA’s services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of the original Palestine Refugees are also eligible for registration. When the agency became operational in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, 4.6 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.”
(http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/whois.html)
This means in fact that the number of refugees will increase indefinitely.
Given that politically stated during centuries in arabic, the right of return always have been said to be more important than an own state and the fact that no serious internal work has been done on nation building, I think one must conclude that the leadership is not really interested in a “palestinian state side by side with Israel living in peace”.
I think their leaders are not interested in building a state because that would mean the world loosing it’s interest in funding “the refugees”, something that has shown to be a very lucrative business for all of the top echelon leaders.
3. admin | November 14th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Thank you for your thoughtful comment Danny. However, your statement of the right of return is an interpretation and there are others, such as the one I offered. I believe we will find that international law does not and will not support a fully open ended interpretation of the right of return but rather will take the narrow view of the UN Resolution which applies to few people still living as I believe international courts would interpret it today. But, of course, that remains to be analyzed, negotiated, and ultimately resolved. This would be a perfect problem for someone to model based on the positions the various interested parties will argue for rather than based on some currently unknown final interpretation of the law. Danny, want to build a data set and give it a try — could be fun, informative and important.
Thanks,
Bruce
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed