‘Right Of Return’ Must Be Integral To Negotiations

The current Palestinian war on Israel is much less about borders and land swaps, security matters and the status of Jerusalem, and much more about the so-called “right of return” of descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees to move into Israel rather than a new Palestinian State. Any discussions between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, as well as at the United Nations, must bring the matter to the forefront and make clear that settling that point will be done at the national level.

If that sounds obvious, you do not understand the U.N.’s adoption of the Palestinian negotiating point, that the ‘right of return’ is for every individual to decide on his/her own about moving to Israel, outside of governmental negotiations.

US and Israel On ‘Right Of Return’

When President Bill Clinton formulated a peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians in 2000, mediator Dennis Ross summarized the working proposal as follows: “On the issue of refugees, there would be a right of return for the refugees to their own state, not to Israel, but there would also be a fund of $30 billion internationally that would be put together for either compensation or to cover repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation costs. And when it came to security, there would be a international presence, in place of the Israelis, in the Jordan Valley.”

This was the stated policy of both Democratic and Republican parties for years. Republican President George W. Bush sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in April 2004 that stated a “just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.” The 2008 Democratic platform echoed the sentiment that “The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel.“

Palestinians and UN On ‘Right of Return’

But when John Kerry tried to negotiate an agreement between the parties in 2014, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas pulled back from any discussion about refugees and said “Let me put it simply: the right of return is a personal decision. What does this mean? That neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return…. The choice is yours. You want to return? You will return. You don’t? You’re free to remain; there is compensation and other details … I just wanted to remark on this point, that the right of return is a personal right. Even a father cannot forgo his children’s right.”

This ended any possibility of concluding the conflict via negotiations as Abbas handed the matter of refugees to millions of individuals.

The United Nations agrees with the Palestinian position.

In June 2023, the UN Office of Human Rights issued a report on World Refugee Day called “Right of return of Palestinian refugees must be prioritised over political considerations: UN experts.” It stated that “We urgently call upon the international community to adopt a rights-based approach that addresses the root causes of violence and prioritises the individual and collective right of return for refugees and internally displaced persons, over political considerations.”

The current formulation that Israel has no say on who it allows into its country and that 5.7 million Palestinian Arabs can unilaterally decide they can move to towns where ancestors lived will never be accepted by any Israeli government – right, left or centrist – EVER. It is a recipe for perpetual bloodshed and animosity.

To enable any chance for there to ever be a negotiated solution, the United Nations must be clear that the matter of the descendants of Palestinian Arabs who once lived in modern Israel is a matter to be handled by the PA, and not for individuals. Alternatively, the UN can state clearly that the ‘right of return’ is only limited to individuals who actually left Israel and not for their descendants.

The ‘two-state solution’ became unviable when the UN and Palestinian leadership decided that a ‘right of return’ for millions of Palestinians into Israel is an inalienable individual right. For there to be a chance of ending the bloodshed and conflict, it must be made clear that Palestinian leadership will negotiate the parameters of a “right of return” with Israel.