Right of Return vs Lebanon's Future

There are rumors circulating that the support by the West to the loyalist dinosaurs in Lebanon - namely Hariri, Gemayel, Jumblatt, Geagea and Siniora - is because the West is promising them power and financial support in exchange for their agreement to a plan for settling the Palestinian refugees permanently in Lebanon, which ultimately relieves pressure off of Israel since it will no longer have to face the Right of Return claimed by the 1948 and 1967 Palestinian refugees.

Since the Palestinians are in their vast majority Sunni Moslems, this plan benefits Hariri and the Lebanese Sunnis in the first place since their numbers surge by about 0.5 million - Both the Americans and the Saudis appear behind the idea, which is why they support Hariri. In contrast, the Shiites, who have worked (i.e. terrorized, bombed, kidnapped...) very hard to get themselves heard, will see their rise stunted by that development, which explains the hostility between Iran (Hezbollah's patron) and the West. The Christian Lebanese have been already emasculated by the wars of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, with everyone standing against them (the West, Israel, the Arabs, etc..) indeed to make place for the Palestinians, which explains why they are split right down the middle: Some side with the Sunnis - mostly the traditionalists, the corrupt and former warlords who still think they can reclaim the crumbs of power they once had from under the Saudi robe of Hariri. Others side with the Shiites and Hezbollah - namely Aoun and the FPM, who seem to think they can trick the hardline Shiites long enough to undermine the Sunnis, then effect a comeback for the Christians once both Sunnis and Shiites have been weakened enough by the current hostility.

One way to interpret the current standoff in Lebanon is through this prism of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Two issues remain an obstacle to a Palestinian State: The status of Jerusalem (and Olmert hinted a few months back that Israel would be willing to concede Abu-Dis - the Palestinian East Jerusalem district - to be the future capital of the Palestinian State), and the Right of Return of the millions of Palestinian refugees scattered outside Palestine proper. Lebanon may be the place where the solution to the second obstacle is being played out.

Here is what Joseph Hitti (of the New England Americans for Lebanon organization in Boston, Massachusetts) has proposed:

END THE PLIGHT OF PALESTINIAN REFUGEES IN LEBANON:

RE-DISTRIBUTE THEM TO ARAB COUNTRIES AND COUNTRIES OF EMIGRATION

Joseph Hitti – Boston – Massachusetts

· Both the Arab world and the West are to blame for the plight of the Palestinian refugees

· The history of western anti-Semitism ultimately led to the creation of Israel and the displacement of the Palestinian people

· All Arab countries have abused their Palestinian refugee populations for political motives

· Lebanon is a small country of 3.5 million people with a sensitive demographic composition. The Lebanese people are unanimous in categorically rejecting the permanent settlement of the 500,000 Palestinian refugees on their soil

· Israel has so far refused to grant the refugees the Right of Return because it too fears a demographic imbalance.

· The refugee camps in Lebanon never were, are not, and will never be the permanent home of the refugees.

· In order to end the terrible plight that these refugees have lived for the past 60 years, and until their final status is determined between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, the refugees should be encouraged to leave the squalid camps of Lebanon and emigrate for re-settlement in the following countries:

- WEST BANK: the Palestinian Authority should re-settle those refugees who wish to return to Palestine. It’s their country!

- ISRAEL: Until the Right of Return is finally decided, Israel should at least financially compensate those refugees who agree to waive their Right of Return, thus helping in their re-settlement elsewhere.

- ARAB COUNTRIES: The 21 Arab Member States of the Arab League should, each in proportion to its population density, accept the re-settlement of those refugees who wish to do so. A quota system may be adopted such that the largest and wealthiest countries re-settle larger numbers of refugees than smaller and poorer countries.

- THE WEST: The traditional countries of emigration - US, Canada, Mexico, Central and Latin America, Australia, and New Zealand as well as those European countries who were directly responsible for the genesis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (e.g. Germany, the UK, etc.) – should offer to permanently settle on a quota basis those of the refugees who elect to do so.

· The Palestinian refugee problem is not Lebanon’s responsibility.

· Lebanon has no legal or moral obligation to the refugees beyond the shelter it gave them for 60 years and the wars and devastation they inflicted on it over the past 40 years through their political and military organizations (PLO, Al-Saika, PFLP, Fatah Al-Islam and many others).

· It is time for the world to unburden Lebanon of the refugees:

• Give the refugees a chance for a better life
• Allow Lebanon to finally be on the track of recovery, and
• Contribute to the final resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.