al majdal 1

mm jjddal majdal aims to raise

public awareness andsupport for a just solution

to Palestinian residencyand refugee issues

BADIL Resource Centerfor Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights

ISSUE NO.15 ~ September 2002

aa llaall

Updates on Refugee Activities for the Right of Return/Real Property Restitution

Zionism Facing the Challenges of the Intifada

Refugee Voices: Memorandum Concerning Public Opinion on the Right of Return

Recent 'Peace Plans' and Refugee Rights

Updates on Refugee Protection and Assistance

Racism, Refugees,and Apartheid

aa

2 September 2002

Cover Photo: Qalandia checkpoint, October 2002

al- Majdal is a quarterly newsletter ofBADIL Resource Center that aims to raise

public awareness and support for a justsolution to Palestinian residency and

refugee issues

Annual Subscription(4 issues)

US$ 20

Published byBADIL Resource Center for Palestinian

Residency and Refugee RightsPO Box 728

Bethlehem, PalestineTel/ Fax: 972- 2- 274- 7346

Email: info@ badil. orgWeb: www. badil. org

EditorTerry Rempel

Editorial TeamTerry Rempel, Nihad Boka'ee, Mohammad

Jaradat, Ingrid Jaradat Gassner

Layout & DesignAtallah Salem

Advisory BoardSalem Abu Hawash (Palestine)

Salman Abu Sitta (Kuwait)Abdel Fattah Abu Srour (Palestine)

Susan Akram (USA)Mahmoud al- Ali (Lebanon)

Aisling Byrne (UK)Marwan Dallal (Palestine)

Randa Farah (Jordan)Arjan al- Fassed (Netherlands)Jalal Al Husseini (Switzerland)

Mahmoud Issa (Denmark)Mustafa al- Khawaja (Palestine)

Scott Leckie (Switzerland)Ali Nasser (Syria)

John Quigley (USA)Rosemary Sayigh (Lebanon)Rami Shehadeh (Palestine)

Table of Contents

Back issues of al- Majdal are available in hard copy formatfrom BADIL. The full set of back issues are also archived inhtml and PDF format on the BADIL website.

Racism, Refugees, and Apartheid

Campaign for Palestinian Refugee Rightsn Community and International Mobilization: 3rd AnnualAl-Awda Rally (Chicago)n Refugees reaffirm rights and take stand against SariNusseibehn Al-Awda (London) activitiesn Commemoration activities for 20th anniversary ofSabra and Shatila massacren Boycott/Sanctions Update: Palestinian civil societyorganisations call for Israel boycottn War Crimes: Update on the case against Ariel Sharonn War crimes and impunity in the occupied territories

Refugee Protectionn Update on Refugee Protection in Host Countries (andIsrael): Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, occupied West Bank andGaza Stripn UN and International Protection: PLO report on doublestandards; UN Secretary-General report on Jeninn UNCCP Annual Report; UNHCR and refugee protection(BADIL Brief No. 7).

Durable Solutionsn Real Property Restitution - Update: Israeli cabinetrecommends restricting land use in Israel to Jewsn Israeli High Court suspends privatization of 'statelands' (i.e., refugee properties)n Recent 'Peace Plans' and Refugee Rights

Commentary: Zionism Facing the Challenges of theIntifada

In Memoriam: List of Names of Palestinians Killed by IsraeliMilitary Forces during the al-Aqsa Intifada

Refugee Assistancen UNRWA Fundingn Emergency Programs in the 1967 Occupied Territoriesn Jenin Camp Update

Refugee Voices

BADIL Resources

Documents

3

8

15

26

28

32

33

38

40

41

al majdal 3

Racism, Refugees, and Apartheid

September 2002 marked the first anniversary of the launching of a global campaign to end Israel'sbrand of apartheid. The campaign was inaugurated in Durban, South Africa at the 2001 WorldConference against Racism (WCAR). September 2002 also marked the second anniversary of thesecond Palestinian uprising - al-Aqsa intifada in the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories. Over thepast year, the Israeli government has responded to Palestinian demands for an end to the occupation,equality inside Israel, and implementation of the right of refugees to return to their homes of originwith increasingly overt forms of racial discrimination, ongoing displacement and attacks on Palestinianrefugees, and new measures that bolster forced segregation and apartheid.

Racial Discrimination

In the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories theIsraeli government continues to advance polices andunderwrite practices - including the expansion ofthe network of colonies (i.e., settlements),confiscation of Palestinian land, and demolition ofPalestinian homes - that aim to permanently alterthe demographic, ethno-national composition of theWest Bank, includingeastern Jerusalem, and theGaza Strip. Freedom ofmovement of thePalestinian populationbetween cities, towns andrefugee camps is virtuallynon-existent, whilefreedom of movementwithin population centersis severely restricted byongoing rolling curfewsthat keep Palestinianslocked in their homes fordays and weeks on end.Israeli Jewish colonists(i.e., settlers) meanwhile,continue to move in and out of the occupiedterritories on the specially constructed 'bypass roads.'

Palestinian civilians, moreover, have born the brunt- in lives, injuries, damage to homes and propertiesetc. - of Israel's military campaign to suppress thePalestinian uprising. There is no apparent distinctionbetween civilian and combatant in Israel's self-declared 'war on terrorism' in the occupiedterritories. The July extra-judicial killing of Hamasactivist Saleh Shehada, which left more than a dozen

other Palestinians dead and 140 injured, includingwomen and children, is only one example. Israelimilitary officials, who characterised the attack as agreat success, also admitted that they were awareof the fact that the assassination would result incivilian deaths. One can only explain the scope ofthe humanitarian crisis resulting from Israel's militarypolicies, where more than 50 percent of thepopulation is unemployed and more than 60 percent

are living below thepoverty line (US$ 2 perday), if one accepts theview that every singlePalestinian - by virtue oftheir ethno-nationalcharacter - is a potential'terrorist.'

Israel's profiling of anentire population based ontheir ethno-nationalcharacter, however, is notlimited to the 1967occupied territories. Overthe past year the Israeligovernment has adopted

policies that have led to further isolation andmaginalization of Palestinian citizens of the state.These policies include: suspension of familyreunification for Palestinian citizens marrying non-resident Palestinian spouses; consideration of newlaws to further restrict Palestinian access to land;the reactivation of a Council for Demography tostudy mechanisms to increase the Jewish populationrelative to the Palestinian population; establishmentof new Jewish settlements to alter the demographyin the Galilee and Naqab; revocation of citizenship;

Only a global, co-ordinated and effective BoycottCampaign can convey a clear message to Israeland change the unfavorable balance of forcesin favor of universal respect for international lawas the foundation for building a comprehensive,just and durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Palestinian refugees.It is contingent upon all those interested in acomprehensive, just and durable solution to theconflict to return to the roots of the conflict -i.e., the mass displacement and dispossessionof the Palestinian people in 1948 and after.

4 September 2002

population transfer (i.e., ethnic cleansing) havebecome regular staples of public discussion anddebate inside Israel.

"[Israel] is a country in which the streets areplastered with posters calling for a populationtransfer," comments Israeli journalist Gideon Levy,"and no one bothers to remove them or to indictthose who put them up." (Ha'aretz, 9 September2002). Recent public opinion polls by the RabinCenter, the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, andindependent researchers, moreover, have found thata majority of Israel's Jewish citizens support theidea of limiting Palestinian rights, that thegovernment should prefer Jews over Arabs becauseIsrael is a Jewish state, that Palestinian citizensshould be encouraged to leave the state, and thatPalestinian political parties should not take part in agoverning coalition and should not be involved inimportant decisions. Commenting on proposalstabled over the summer to restrict access to land toJews, former MK Shulamit Aloni noted, "By theright of our might, we are acting as a racist nation.South Africa, as well was white and democratic [areference to Israel's definition of itself as a Jewishand democratic state].' (Ha'aretz, 9 July 2002)

ongoing attacks on the traditional way of life andland ownership of the Bedouin; and refusal toaddress rights of internally displaced Palestinians.These policies have been accompanied by a veiledcampaign to target outspoken Palestinian politicalleaders including MKs Azmi Bishara and AhmadTibi as well as the Islamic Movement.

While most of these policies are framed in thelanguage of 'national security', the primarymotivation behind these policies is the over-ridingpolitical imperative to maintain Israel as a 'Jewishstate.' According to a 1988 Israeli High Courtdecision (Ben Shalom vs. Central ElectionCommittee), the Jewish character of the state isdefined by three-inter-related components: 1) thatJews form the majority of the state; 2) that Jewsare entitled to preferential treatment such as theLaw of Return; and 3) that a reciprocal relationshipexists between the state and the Jews outside ofIsrael. Israel's definition of itself as a Jewish statealso explains the public discourse around the so-called demographic threat posed by the Palestinianpopulation inside Israel and in the 1967 occupiedterritories. Public discussion of the demographicthreat and the concomitant 'final solution' of

Annual Al-Awda Right of Return Rally, Chicago, 29-9-2002 (Al-Awda US)

al majdal 5

Refugees

The outcome and continuing impact of this systemof racial discrimination has been the creation ofmillions of refugees. The creation of the Jewishstate in 1948 resulted in the expulsion anddisplacement of some 800,000 Palestinians. Morethan 500 Palestinian villages with a land base of17,178 km2 were erased from the map in a processdescribed as "cleaning up the national views."Between the end of the first Arab-Israeli war in1948 and the beginning of the second war in 1967tens of thousands of Palestinians who remainedinside the territory that became the state of Israelwere transferred internally, forced across armisticelines and deprived of their lands. It is estimatedthat by the 1960s Israel had expropriated some700 km2 of land from the indigenous Palestiniancommunity that remained within the borders of theJewish state.

In 1967 some 400,000 Palestinians were displaced- half for a second time - during the second Arab-Israeli war. Israel acquired immediate control ofmore than 400 km2 of land in the West Bank andGaza Strip. Throughout the post-1967 periodPalestinians remaining in areas of their historichomeland have been subject to continueddisplacement and dispossession through a processthat includes deportation, revocation of residencyrights and demolition of homes. It is estimated thanmore than three-quarters of a million Palestinianshave been affected while Israel has acquired controlof an additional 300 km2 of Palestinian land insideIsrael and more than 3,000 km2 of land in theoccupied territories.

Today, it is estimated that more than two-thirds ofthe Palestinian people are displaced; more than halfof the Palestinian people are displaced outside theborders of their historic homeland. WhilePalestinians owned over 90 percent of the land inmandatory Palestine on the eve of the 1948 wartoday Palestinians have access to just 10 percentof their land. The Palestinian people constitute oneof the largest and longest standing unresolved casesof displacement in the world today. Approximatelyone in three refugees world-wide is Palestinian. Intotal, 6 million Palestinians - more than two-thirdsof the Palestinian people world-wide - are refugeesor displaced persons.

The lack of geographical and temporal limitationson the displacement and dispossession of thePalestinian people for over five decades points to aclear policy of population transfer or in morecommon parlance - ethnic cleansing. While somecommentators are reluctant to use to the term 'ethniccleansing' as descriptive of Israeli policies andpractices, it is worth remembering that the modernorigins of the term ('etnicko ciscenje' in Serbo-Croatian), which conjures up images ofconcentration camps and mass graves in the formerYugoslavia, initially related to administrative andnon-violent policies in Kosovo fully a decade beforethe mass displacement and slaughter of the civilianpopulation in Bosnia and Kosovo. The causes ofpopulation transfer in the Palestinian case are bothdramatic, as in the case of armed conflict in 1948and 1967, and subtle and insidious - a kind of 'low-intensity transfer' - through decades ofdiscriminatory legislation, planning and theadministration of justice.

Racial Discrimination and Refugees

The Committee on the Elimination of RacialDiscrimination,

Conscious of the fact that foreign military, non-military and/or ethnic conflicts have resulted inmassive flows of refugees and the displacementof persons on the basis of ethnic criteria in manyparts of the world,

2. Emphasizes in this respect that:

(a) All such refugees and displaced persons havethe right freely to return to their homes of originunder conditions of safety;(b) State parties are obliged to ensure that thereturn of such refugees and displaced personsis voluntary and to observe the principle of non-refoulement and non-expulsion of refugees;(c) All such refugees and displaced persons have,after their return to their homes of origin, the rightto have restored to them property of which theywere deprived in the course of the conflict and tobe compensated appropriately for any suchproperty that cannot be restored to them. Anycommitments or statements relating to suchproperty made under duress are null and void;

General Comment XXII, 'Article 5 and refugees anddisplaced persons,' Convention on the Elimination ofRacial Discrimination (excerpts)

6 September 2002

Apartheid

Israel's system of racial discrimination has not onlyled to the mass displacement, denationalization anddispossession of the majority of the Palestinianpeople, it has also engendered a system of physicalseparation characterised by segregation and'bantustanization.' The NGO Declaration andProgram of Action from the 3rd World Conferenceagainst Racism termed this system as Israel's 'brandof apartheid.'

The imposition of a military government between1948 and 1966 to 'administer' the remainingPalestinian towns and villages inside Israel enabledthe state to consolidate its hold on the land andcongregate the Palestinian population in isolatedzones separated by Jewish only colonies built onland expropriated from Palestinian refugees as wellas Palestinian citizens of the state. The processreplicated itself in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

following Israel's military occupation in 1967. The1967 territories were further segregated under theOslo process into Areas A, B, and C, (H1 and H2in Hebron), and then subdivided once again for so-called security reasons during the last two years ofthe Palestinian uprising.

Today, the West Bank is divided into some 64 non-contiguous zones surrounded by 46 permanentcheckpoints and 126 roadblocks. As of May 2002Palestinian residents need special permits issued bythe Israeli Civil Administration, Israel's militarygovernment, for travel between Palestinian citiesand between the various 'zones' or 'bantustans.' Theculmination of the idea of separation is unfolding in

the form of a new wall that is eventually to run thelength of the border area separating Israel andJerusalem from the West Bank. According to detailsreleased to the public the components of the barrierspread over a width of about thirty meters and atrench intended to create an obstacle against tanks,a dirt path that would constitute a "killing zone" ontowhich access is forbidden, an electric warning fence,a trace path to disclose the footprints of infiltrators,and a two-lane patrol road. In some areas the zonemay be as wide as 100 meters. (B'tselem,Separation Barrier, September 2002). The GazaStrip is already surrounded by a similar fence.

Palestinian refugees in exile, meanwhile, areseparated from each other by virtue of the bordersof the host countries in which they reside, and theyare separated from their historic homeland by Israel'srefusal to accept its obligations under internationallaw and permit the voluntary, safe and dignified returnof Palestinian refugees to their homes of origin simply

because the refugees are not Jewish. According tothe 1973 Convention on the Suppression andPunishment of the Crime of Apartheid (Article II),the 'crime of apartheid' includes legislative measuresthat deny members of a racial group basic humanrights and freedoms, including the right to leave andto return to their country and the right to a nationality,for the purpose of establishing and maintainingdomination by one racial group of persons over anyother racial group of persons and systematicallyoppressing them. It also includes legislative measuresdesigned to divide the population along racial lines bythe creation of separate reserves and ghettos formembers of a racial group and the expropriation ofland property belonging to a racial group.

Qalandia Checkpoint, October 2002

al majdal 7

Beyond Oslo

The experience of the Oslo period raises seriousquestions about the viability of a two-state solutionto the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Since thebeginning of the Oslo process, for example, everyIsraeli government has continued to strengthen thenetwork of colonies in the occupied territories,expanding Israeli control over Palestinian land andother natural resources such as water, andseparating the Palestinian population intoincreasingly smaller non-contiguous zones. As oneobserver noted already back in the 1980s: "In thelong-term the [Palestinian] community would becut into isolated blocks [by the colonies], separatedfrom one another. … On a West Bank segmentedin this fashion it would be difficult to imagine anygenuine self-government beyond the municipallevel as a practical possibility." (W. Harris, TakingRoot: Israeli Settlement in the West Bank, theGolan, and Gaza-Sinai) Over the last two years,the government of Ariel Sharon has used thePalestinian uprising as a means to wipe out theinfrastructure of Palestinian autonomy and the lastvestiges of the Oslo process.

Throughout this period the US and Europe havelargely sat on the sidelines. Policy has beencharacterised by the complete absence of basicstandards of international humanitarian and humanrights law, substituted by an emphasis on 'dialoguewith Israel' and minimal political intervention. Whileboth the US and Europe continue to promote atwo-state solution, the absence of effective andtimely political intervention has resulted in asituation where prospect of a Palestinian state inthe West Bank and Gaza Strip is no more likelythan the creation of an Israel apartheid state in allof Palestine or a binational or secular democraticstate in all of historic Palestine. International donormoney has now largely shifted from projectsintended to build a prosperous Palestinian state toshort-term relief for the Palestinian peopleintended to reduce such things as malnutrition andepidemics. For all practical purposes Israel has're-occupied' the 1967 Palestinian territories (as ifit ever left) only now the international communityis paying for the occupation. The likelihood ofeffective international intervention is furtherdiminished by the US-British focus on war againstIraq.

In this context only a global, co-ordinated andeffective Boycott Campaign can convey a clearmessage to Israel and change the unfavorablebalance of forces in favor of universal respect forinternational law as the foundation for building acomprehensive, just and durable solution to theIsraeli-Palestinian conflict and Palestinian refugees.It is contingent upon all those interested in acomprehensive, just and durable solution to theconflict to return to the roots of the conflict - i.e.,the mass displacement and dispossession of thePalestinian people in 1948 and after. "The refugeeissue needs to be placed at the centre of the processfrom where it has mysteriously disappeared. [A]llthose involved in resolving the conflict must havethe public courage to confront the Israeli denial ofthe expulsion and ethnic cleansing at the heart ofthe Palestinian refugee question. This remains thesingle largest stumbling block towards a lasting peacebetween both peoples." (Karma Nabulsi and IllanPappe, "Facing up to Ethnic Cleansing" TheGuardian, 19 September 2002).n

Annual Al-Awda Right of Return Rally, Chicago, 29-9-2002(Al-Awda US)

8 September 2002

UPDATECampaign for the Defense ofPalestinian Refugee Rights

All Out for Palestine - Third National Al-AwdaDemonstration (Chicago): On 29th September al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition heldits third National Demonstration. Participantscommemorated the 2nd anniversary of the intifadaand the 20th anniversary of the Sabra and Shatilamassacre. A march and rally was held in downtownChicago to draw the public's attention to the diresituation in Palestine, the plight of the Palestinianrefugees, Israel's gross human rights abuses andthe suffering it has inflicted over 54 years, andcommemorate and honor those lost in the 1982massacre of Sabra and Shatila in Beirut, Lebanon.

For more information about the rally see the al-Awda (US) Palestine Right to Return Coalitionwebsite, http://al-awda.org.

Palestinian Refugees Publicly Affirm Rights: Inthe context of continued Israeli and internationalefforts to undermine Palestinian refugee rights,refugees continue to find it necessary to issue publicstatements clarifying and affirming basic rights,foremost being the right of return. DuringSeptember, for example, some 100,000 Palestinianrefugees living in camps in Lebanon signed amemorandum reaffirming the right of return.(WAFA, 4 September 2002) The memorandum alsoexpressed support to the Palestinian leadership andreminded the international community, in the contextof US-led efforts to marginalize Yasser Arafat, thatonly the Palestinian people are entitled to choosetheir leadership. The memorandum was preparedby Palestinian organisations and political parties inLebanon.

In the 1967 occupied territories, Palestinians,including refugees, reacted strongly against a jointinitiative by Sari Nusseibeh, coordinator of theJerusalem portfolio for the PLO, and Ami Ayalon,former head of the Israeli secret service (Shabak)that called upon Palestinian refugees to forego theirbasic human right to return to their homes of origininside Israel. The initiative was denounced by

Annual Al-Awda Right of Return Rally, Chicago, 29-9-2002(Al-Awda US)

political parties and by refugees themselves. ThePLO Department of Refugee Affairs issued a publicstatement clarifying the position of the PLO, whichis based on international law as set forth in UNGeneral Assembly Resolution 194, affirming theright of each individual Palestinian refugee to chooseto return to his/her home of origin.

Selected statements are reprinted in al-MajdalDocuments (page 39).

Al-Awda (London): On 16 September, over 300people attended a talk organised by Al-Awda UKon the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Thelecture was held at SOAS, University of London.Speakers included Dr. Mahmoud Issa, a researcherfrom the Danish Refugee Council and campaigneron the right of return, and Dr. Ilan Pappe, an Israelihistorian from Haifa University and AcademicDirector of the Research Institute for Peace at Givat

www

al majdal 9

never meant to be a process that would deal withthe key issues, including the right of return. Eightypercent of the land of Palestine was erased fromthe agenda of the peace process and negotiationsleaving the remaining 20 percent up for discussion.Since 1993, the Palestinian leadership has joinedthis 'game', a measured attempt that would havesucceeded had it not been for the start of the newintifada. The best way to counter the serious threatof another Nakba is to develop a campaign focusedon divestment from and sanctions against Israel.Secondly, the campaign to end the occupation mustcontinue. This campaign, however, should also be acampaign against a two-state solution, which is ameans of continuing the occupation through differentand indirect means. And thirdly, it is necessary toupdate the language and debate on a seculardemocratic state. This is the only way to solve theconflict in Palestine, implement the right of return,and stop discrimination of Palestinians in Israel.Aisling Byrne, Al-Awda UK.

For information on Al-Awda UK's activities andevents, please see our website:www.al-awda.org.ukor contact us on info@al-awda.org.uk

Workshop on Oral History of Expulsion: A pilotproject workshop on oral history and the story ofthe Nakba, entitled "The Experience of Expulsion"was convened by Karma Nabulsi of NuffieldCollege, and Ilan Pappé of Haifa University atOxford University this past September. Theworkshop was largely sponsored by NuffieldCollege, with additional assistance and support fromthe Refugee Studies Centre and St Antony's MiddleEast Centre, both part of Oxford University. It wasa chance for scholars (oral historians, political

Haviva. The meeting was chaired by Dr. KarmaNabulsi, Fellow from Nuffield College, OxfordUniversity, and Special Advisor to ParliamentaryMiddle East Councils' Commission of Enquiry onPalestinian Refugees and their report Right ofReturn (March 2001).

Mahmoud Issa spoke about his research on thePalestinian village of Lubya where he was born.The village, located in the Galilee, wasdepopulated and demolished during the 1948 warin Palestine. The inhabitants of Lubya werescattered in more than 20 different countriesaround the world. Before the expulsion of itsresidents, Lubya had a population of about 3,000people, the majority of whom were farmers andtraders. The village had a rich cultural and sociallife, unique to the village but not dramaticallydifferent from the life found in most other Palestinianvillages of the time. Today the descendants fromLubya number about 45,000 people. Thepresentation included a collection of photographsdocumenting life in the village before the Nakba in1948 as well as the life of refugees from Lubyaafter their expulsion. Although refugees from Lubyalive thousands of kilometres from their village -thousands currently reside in Denmark - they stillhave a common feeling of belonging to the samecommunity. A documentary film about Lubya andits descendants was produced by Danish TV; theresearch is now the basis for a large internationalethnographic exhibition on the social and culturallife of Palestinian villages before 1948.

Professor Ilan Pappe spoke about the issue of theright of return in Israeli discourse with particularfocus on current debate on the impending war onIraq and the 'conditions' this may produce for IsraeliPrime Minister Ariel Sharon to implement 'ethniccleansing' under the cover of war. A master plan isnot the most important thing in carrying out ethniccleansing. 'Ethnic cleansing' is linked to anatmosphere where people who have already beenindoctrinated and conditioned - a long-term campaignof education and propaganda - to "know what todo" when the situation is ready. When the momentcame in 1948 people 'knew what to do'. Since thelate 1960s, the peace agenda has been an Americangame; what is important is that there is a processand this process is more important than peace. Thisprocess has served the interests of Israel. It was

Aerial photo of Lubya, 1945 (Mahmoud Issa)

www

10 September 2002

scientists, sociologists, anthropologists, historians ofpolitical thought) and practitioners from all over theworld for an intensive weekend of work, duringwhich the various methods and means to proceedwith this crucial research was discussed. It alsoprovided an opportunity to explore both theintellectual and practical difficulties that have andwill emerge in this complex endeavour, and toestablish the relationship between the oral historyof the Nakba with the current political, social, andcivil situation of the refugees today.

The opening presentation by Illan Pappe firstexamined the challenging intellectual questions raisedby the particularisms and peculiarities of the literatureon Palestine and the Palestinian expulsion and themystifying language created to deal with it. The firstpart of the workshop focused upon a generalintroduction to oral history's purposes and its mainapproaches. With the help of experts on the subject,the workshop reviewed the latest developments inthe field, discussed the growing importance of oralhistory in historiographical enterprises, and exploredsome of the difficulties and restrictions that are posedby this method. Naseer Aruri gave an overview ofthe current situation of the study of Palestine, andset out the parameters of the debate. Silvia Salvaticipresented her work on the Archives of Memory ofKosovo, giving a fascinating comparative approach,and made clear the importance of maintaining aplurality of voices when reconstructing a nationalhistory of an event, or period. Gabi Piterberg fromUCLA gave useful theoretical and methodologicalunderpinnings to the use of texts as oral history. SusanSlyomovics and Ted Swedenberg presented theimportance and difficulties with materials, looking at,respectively, photographs of life before 1948, and ofmemory after it. May Seikaly, Mahmoud Issa, andSalman Abu Sitta all showed a little of their extensivework on the oral history of (respectively), one village,several villages, and the whole of Palestine.Rosemary Sayigh introduced the next day's work witha measured overview on the current state of play inthe oral history of Palestine overall. Marilyn Deeganof The Refugee Studies Centre at Oxford Universitydemonstrated the possibilities of a virtual databaseand internet based research, with a presentation oftheir Online programme. There were twopresentations by community based organisationscurrently working in refugee camps. The first wasgiven by Terry Rempel representing Badil, and

explored the potentials for connecting oral history withcurrent projects underway and anticipated. Theimportance of the involvement of the refugeecommunities with oral historians and Palestinianinstitutions was reconfirmed. The second presentationwas of the work by ARCPA (the Arab ResourceCentre for Popular Arts) and their pathbreaking workin the gathering of family oral testimonies of theNakba undertaken by the children in the camps ofLebanon.

The final session explored the possible waysforward, and established certain common groundfor the enterprise. First and foremost amongst themwas the understanding amongst all participants ofthe importance of relocating the refugee questionback to the heart of the peace agenda. Further, allagreed this should be part of a redress and restitutioncampaign, and that Palestinian civil society in therefugee camps who are playing an active role inthis endeavour must be supported by scholarshipon the oral history of the expulsion. It wassuggested that facing the past as way of constructingthe future was the clear way forward, in associationwith the community organisations, intellectuals,institutions, political activists, civil society, and youth.The bi-national element of this project wasemphasised, as well as the education andreconciliation aspects of the work.

Second was the new intellectual framework thatneeded to be mapped out for establishing theparadigms under which to conduct study on thecatastrophic events of 1948. The use of the conceptof ethnic cleansing clearly provides the mostsubstantial advance in illuminating the study of whathappened during the expulsions of 1947-49. It wasunderstood that there should be a continualassessment of the history of the Nakba with othercases of ethnic cleansing, in order to both compareand contrast theoretical, methodological, andempirical similarities and differences, and open newapproaches.

Finally, the type of institutional apparatuses anddatabases that will be necessary to encourage andfurther the work already undertaken on theexperience of expulsion was debated and discussedat great length. The need to link already existingactivities was reinforced. The relative strengths ofthe idea of a network centre, or a more formal

al majdal 11

documentation centre, or simply a hub that co-ordinates between different parts of aninternationally scattered intellectual and activistcommunity, were all raised and explored. Theenthusiastic participation from all those who hadattended the sessions, as well as the contributionsfrom other participants drawn from the broadercommunity, made this session of the workshopparticularly useful for the convenors - who nowhave the delicate task of absorbing, assessing,synthesising, and transforming the wealth of inputinto the first draft of a future collective agenda. DrKarma Nabulsi, Nuffield College.

20 th Anniversary of the Sabra and ShatilaMassacre : September 2002 marked the 20thanniversary of the massacre of Palestinian refugeesin the Beirut camps of Sabra and Shatila. Eventscommemorating the massacre and the ongoing warcrimes against Palestinians were held around theworld, including events in the Middle East, Europeand in North America. In Beirut, European andJapanese delegations visited Shatila camp to express

sorrow at the continuing suffering faced byPalestinian refugees. The delegation met withrefugees in the camp and visited the martyr'scemetery.

In the West Bank, Archmandrite Dr. Atallah Hannaof the Orthodox Church organised a memorial ritein the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Old Cityof Jerusalem. Hanna described his feelings uponvisiting Sabra and Shatila camps for the first timeand told worshippers that the massacre would notbe forgotten. He also spoke about the massacre inthe context of Israel's continued military assault onthe Palestinian population in the occupied territories,particularly in Jenin and Nablus. In Jericho, a

memorial was organized by the PalestinianAuthority Ministry of Tourism. Organizers screenedtwo films about Israel's military invasion of Jeninand Bethlehem in April 2002 invasion. Inside Israel,the Coalition for Women for a Just Peace issued apublic letter to the Palestinian community in Lebanonrecognising the forced expulsion of Palestinians in1948 and condemning those responsible for the 1982massacre, including Ariel Sharon. "We condemn thebrutal murderers of your loved ones and wecondemn the leaders who must be held accountablefor these war crimes, Ariel Sharon above all."

See, http://www.coalitionofwomen4peace.org

In Abu Dhabi the Zayed Center hosted apresentation by Chibli Mallat, one of the lawyersrepresenting the plaintiffs in the case against Sharoncurrently in the Belgian courts, and Sanaa Sarsawi,an eyewitness of the massacre. Mallat requestedArab diplomats to support the appeal against Sharonand other war criminals. The Centre also organiseda photo exhibition of the massacre and the victims.

In London, the Palestinian Return Centre (PRC)organised a public seminar on the massacre at theSchool of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS),University of London. The seminar examined thepossibilities of pressing legal charges in a British courtagainst Ariel Sharon and other political and militaryofficials involved in the 1982 massacres and morerecent war crimes in the occupied territories.Speakers at the seminar included Dr. Swee Chai Ang,a British surgeon who worked in Gaza Hospital duringthe time of the Sabra and Shatila massacres; LloydQuinan of the Scottish Parliament, one of the firstBritish and European officials to visit the Jenin refugeecamp in April 2002 after Israel's military assault onthe camp; Belgian lawyer Michael Verstraeten, whoparticipated in the case brought against Sharon inBelgium; and, Owen Davies of the British Queen'sCouncil who participated in several high profileinternational cases, including the case against formerChilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.

For more information on the seminar,see the PRC website: http://www.prc.org.uk

In North America, the commemoration of the 20th

anniversary of the Sabra and Shatila massacre wasincorporated into the annual Right of Return rallyheld this year in Chicago. (See above)

Shatila refugee camp, September 1982. (UNRWA)

www

www

12 September 2002

British Jews Renounce Citizenship

As the Israeli government embarked on a new policy of stripping Palestinian citizens of their Israeli citizenshipbased on grounds of 'violating state security and breach of trust' a group of 46 British Jews published an openletter in the British daily, The Guardian (8 July 2002), renouncing their right of residency and citizenship in Israelas set forth in Israel's 1950 Law of Return in protest of the discriminatory nature of the law and against Israeli policyin the occupied Palestinian territories. The letter is reprinted below.

"We Renounce Israel Rights"We are Jews, born and raised outside Israel, who, under Israel's "law of return", have a legal right to Israeliresidence and citizenship. We wish to renounce this unsought "right" because:

1) We regard it as morally wrong that this legal entitlement should be bestowed on us while the very peoplewho should have most right to a genuine "return", having been forced or terrorised into fleeing, are excluded.2) Israel's policies towards the Palestinians are barbaric - we do not wish to identify ourselves in any way withwhat Israel is doing.3) We disagree with the notion that Zionist emigration to Israel is any kind of "solution" for diaspora Jews, anti-semitism or racism - no matter to what extent Jews have been or are victims of racism, they have no right tomake anyone else victims.4) We wish to express our solidarity with all those who are working for a time when Israel, the West Bank andGaza Strip can be lived in by people without any restrictions based on so-called racial, cultural, or ethnicorigins.

We look forward to the day when all the peoples of the area are enabled to live in peace with each other on thisbasis of non-discrimination and mutual respect. Perhaps some of us would even wish to live there, but only if therights of the Palestinians are respected. To those who consider Israel a "safe haven" for Jews in the face of anti-semitism, we say that there can be no safety in taking on the role of occupier and oppressor. We hope that thepeople of Israel and their leaders will come to realise this soon.

The full list of names is available at: http://www.redmagic.co.uk/returnwww

Boycott/Sanctions Campaign

Palestinian Civil Society Organisations Call forIsrael Boycott: One year after some 3,000 civil societyorganisations from around the world approved theirNGO Declaration and Program of Action at the thirdWorld Conference Against Racism in Durban, SouthAfrica, Palestinian civil society organizations in theoccupied territories issued a joint call to strengthenand broaden the Israel boycott campaign until Israelcomplies with international law. (The full statementis reprinted in al-Majdal Documents, page39)Boycott campaigns have also targeted US companieswith business ties to Israel, including Starbucks Coffee,Caterpillar, Intel Corporation, and Coca Cola. InSeptember, for example, activists from SUSTAIN(Stop US tax-funded Aid to Israel Now!) served anarrest warrant to Caterpillar officials in theirWashington, DC office, accusing the company ofknowingly selling equipment to the Israeli DefenseForces with the knowledge that the equipment wouldbe used for demolishing Palestinian homes andcommitting other war crimes and crimes againsthumanity, and for refusing to cease such sales whenillegal uses were documented. Students on variousuniversity campuses across the United States andEurope have also organised divestment campaigns topressure universities to divest from Israel.

For more information on product boycotts,campaigns, events and news, see the followingwebsites:http://www.boycottisraeligoods.orghttp://www.bigcampaign.orghttp://www.sustaincampaign.orghttp://al-awda.org

The boycott was one of several recommendationsincluded in the NGO Declaration and Program ofAction.

The Declaration and Program of Action areavailable on the BADIL website, http://w w w . b a d i l . o r g / R e s o u r c e s / W C A R /

WCAR2001.htm

www

www

Belgian Action Platform on Palestine

al majdal 13

War Crimes

Update on the Case Against Sharon: On June 26a Belgian Appeals Court ruled on narrow proceduralgrounds that Belgium did not have jurisdiction toprosecute Ariel Sharon on charges of genocide, warcrimes, and crimes against humanity for the 1982massacre at Sabra and Shatila based on the factthat Sharon was not on Belgian soil. On July 3,lawyers representing 23 survivors of the massacrelodged an appeal on the grounds that the conditionon which the case was rejected (i.e., presence ofthe accused on Belgian soil) was not entailed orforeseen by Belgium's 1993 law on universaljurisdiction.

On 17 July an agreement was reached betweenmajor Belgian political parties to safeguard theessence and guiding principles of Belgium's lawon universal jurisdiction. The agreement confirmsthe will, already expressed by the legislature in1993, that complaints against presumedperpetrators of crimes against humanity, warcrimes and genocide are admissible, even if theaccused parties are not on Belgian territory. Theagreement, however, limits victims' invocation ofuniversal jurisdiction to particular cases. TheFederal Prosecutor will be competent to initiateproceedings only in cases in which the allegedcrimes have not been committed on Belgianterritory and the plaintiffs are neither Belgian norresident on Belgian territory for one year or moreand the accused is not on Belgian territory. Theseconditions are not applicable to crimes committedbefore the entry into force of the Statute of thenew International Criminal Court (ICC) (1 July2002). They also do not apply to crimes committedafter 1 July 2002 on the territory of a state notparty to the statute of the ICC or by the nationalof a non-party state, or if the Security Council hasreferred the crimes to the ICC.

The proposed law provides for the immunity of stateofficials from application of the 1993 universaljurisdiction law within the limits established byinternational law. Thus, the legislature has decidedto grant Belgian courts the power to interpret anyquestions linked to immunities. Under Article 27 ofthe Statute of the ICC there is no criminal immunityfor the most serious crimes, i.e., genocide. Theagreement will be followed by a proposal for an

interpretative law to enable the pursuit of pendingcases and investigations.

For more details on the Sharon case see, thewebsite of the International Campaign forJustice for the Victims of Sabra and Shatila athttp://www.indictsharon.net

In July the Israeli High Court rejected a petitionasking for public disclosure of classified informationin the government's investigative report into theSabra and Shatila massacre. The petition was filedby parents of an Israeli soldier killed during Israel'sinvasion of Lebanon. The family argued thatpublication of the report 18 years after it was writtenwould not endanger state security and that thepublic's right to know is more important than ArielSharon's "right to maintain his reputation." The HighCourt, which relied on the conclusions of a teamcomprised of representatives of military intelligence,Shin Beit and the Mossad, refused to accept thepetitioner's arguments based on security stating thatit was up to the government to decide whatconstituted a matter of state security. Theinvestigative team concluded that the release of thereport would aggravate the current conflict with thePalestinians, would burden security forces fightingterror, and would adversely affect Israel's foreignrelations. (Ha'aretz, 15 July 2002)

War Crimes and Impunity in the OPT: Theagreement in Belgium concerning universaljurisdiction and the case against Ariel Sharon (Seeabove) came only days prior to Israel's decision todrop a one-ton bomb from a US-made F-16 fighterjet on a crowded residential area in the heart of theGaza Strip. The extra-judicial execution of politicalactivist Salah Shehada also killed 15 Palestinian

www

Solidarity march, France. (WCAR NGO Forum)

14 September 2002

area, these deaths and injuries were absolutelyforeseeable." (HRW, 23 July 2002) Under US law,wherever it is demonstrated that a state receivingU.S. foreign aid is responsible for "a consistentpattern of gross violations of internationallyrecognised human rights," the Foreign AssistanceAct of 1961 requires that all military and economicaid be immediately and automatically terminated.

The Israeli organisation Gush Shalom, meanwhile,announced that it has begun to collect evidenceconcerning alleged war crimes committed by Israelisoldiers in the occupied territories. The purpose isto warn officers and soldiers alike that certainactions could lead, at some future date, to theirindictment before an Israeli court and theInternational Court of Justice in The Hague, onsuspicion of war crimes. The Israeli AttorneyGeneral initially threatened to open an investigationinto the organisation but later decided not to pursuethe issue at the present time. Gush Shalom produceda pocket guide for soldiers detailing the actions thatconstitute war crimes. It also produced a radiobroadcast, which the Broadcasting Authority refusedto release even as a paid ad.

For more details, see,http://www.gush-shalom.org

www

civilians, including 9 children, and wounded some140 others. The following day the US House ofRepresentatives allocated an additional US$ 200million in aid to Israel as part of a larger US$ 28.9billion "anti-terror package."

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon labelled theexecution as a great success. Israeli Chief of StaffMoshe Ya'alon acknowledged to the Israeliparliamentary committee on foreign and securityaffairs that he gave orders to assassinate Shehadaon 22 July although he knew that Shehada's wifeand daughter were accompanying him. (PCHR, 12September 2002) According to the 1998 Statute ofthe International Criminal Court, which came intobeing on 1 July, war crimes include: intentionallylaunching an attack in the knowledge that such anattach will cause incidental loss of life or injury tocivilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread,long-term and severe damage to the naturalenvironment, which would be clearly excessive inrelation to the concrete and direct overall militaryadvantage anticipated. "An attack that killed thirteencivilians and injured scores was clearly not carriedout in a manner that minimized casualties. It shouldnever have gone ahead," said Joe Stork, Washingtondirector of the Middle East and North Africa divisionof Human Rights Watch. "In such a crowded civilian

Civiliandestruction asa result of theextra-judicial

killing ofHamas activist

SalahShehadeh in

Gaza, July2002

(electronicintifada)

al majdal 15

Refugee Protection

provided by the PLO to the occupied territories andby UNRWA's chronic budget problems. Thesituation for non-registered refugees is particularlysevere. In its July newsletter (Hakouk, Issue 3),the Palestinian Human Rights Organisation (PHRO),a non-government organisation based in Beirut,relates the story of a recent case illustrating theproblem faced by this group of Palestinian refugeesin Lebanon. In late June 2002 Nasser Muhammad,a registered Palestinian resident of Lebanon, andhis wife, a 'non-registered' (NR) Palestinian refugee,gave birth to a 'non-ID' baby. Non-ID refugees donot possess any form of valid ID and are registeredneither by UNRWA nor by Lebanese authorities(versus non-registered refugees who are notregistered by UNRWA but are issued an ID byLebanese authorities). Due to the fact that themother is a non-registered refugee she was deniedthe necessary medical services standard duringpregnancy; she was also unable to receive a referralfrom UNRWA in order to deliver her baby in ahospital. The baby was born at home and sufferedfrom respiratory distress upon birth. She died threedays later.

The story also highlights the importance of acomprehensive registration system that covers allPalestinian refugees without distinction as to periodof displacement, gender, place of exile, etc. In 1982the UN General Assembly instructed the SecretaryGeneral, in co-operation with UNRWA, to issue IDcards to all Palestine refugees and theirdescendents, irrespective of whether they wererecipients or not of services from the Agency, aswell as to all displaced persons and to those whohave been prevented from returning to their homesas a result of the 1967 war (including their

**In an effort to raise greater awareness aboutprotection issues in all areas of exile, al-Majdalwill begin to expand coverage of protection issuesoutside of the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories.Readers interested in knowing more about the basicrights of refugees in host countries, pendingimplementation of durable solutions, including theright of return, should refer to the 1951 ConventionRelating to the Status of Refugees and the 1965Casablanca Protocol adopted by the League ofArab States. It should be noted that most Arabstates are not signatories to the 1951 Conventionwhile implementation of the Casablanca Protocolis often dictated by domestic political concerns ofindividual state signatories.

Lebanon: Refugees in Lebanon continue to facesome of the most severe restrictions on basic rights,including access to employment, housing rights, andhealth. Lebanon imposes severe restrictions on newconstruction as well as expansion of existing sheltersin refugee camps. In some camps, it is forbidden toimport building materials. Combined with themassive destruction of refugee shelters during the1980s in the context of Israel's invasion and thecivil war, the severe restrictions on housing meanthat many refugees live in shelters that do not meetuniversal standards for adequate housing. In Julya young Palestinian refugee tried to 'smuggle' somesmall building material into Buss camp on the backof a motorcycle. Lebanese security forces openedfire on the youth resulting in the death of an innocentbystander.

Adequate health care remains an ongoing concern.Over the last decade the situation has beencompounded by the relocation of some services

International protection involves the direct protection of refugees' humanrights on a day-to-day basis, and the search for and implementation of durable solutions.Durable solutions include repatriation, host country integration, and third country resettlement.Housing and property restitution is among the rights associated with refugee repatriation. The primaryprinciple governing each of the three solutions is voluntariness or refugee choice. Among the threesolutions, only repatriation or return is a recognised right under international law.

16 September 2002

descendents). The initiative failed, however, due tolack of co-operation of host states.

As in the 1967 occupied territories, physicalsecurity continues to be a major issue of concernfor Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. During Augustclashes over the detention of a Lebanese fugitivewho had fled to Ein al-Hilweh camp earlier in thesummer following the killing of three men from theLebanese military resulted in two deaths and 9injuries. In early September, the Lebanese armybroke an understanding between Lebanese officialsand Palestinian refugees - whereby popularcommittees in the Palestinian refugee camps inLebanon are called upon to handle suspectedsecurity breaches - when it entered al-Jalil refugeecamp in Baalbeck in search of weapons allegedly

belonging to Fatah's RevolutionaryCounsel. In protest, refugees in the campblocked the road, giving rise to clashes andconsequent injuries. Three Palestinianrefugees were killed, 15 wounded, threeseriously, and one Lebanese soldier shotdead. Human rights organisations haveraised concerns that Lebanese forces mayapply the same tactic on a larger scale orto a larger camp where the repercussionswill be even greater. PHRO further noted(Hokouk, July 2002) that there is aconsensus among Palestinian refugeesthat the Lebanese official forces cannotsubjugate camps to Lebanese securitywhile at the same time refusing to offerbasic services such as the (re)building ofinfrastructure, development, socialservices, etc.

Iraq: As the US gears up for a potentialwar on Iraq concerns are being raisedabout new mass flows of refugees in theregion. This includes the roughly 90,000Palestinian refugees living in Iraq.Approximately 5,000 Palestinians tookrefuge in Iraq in the aftermath of the 1948war in Palestine. Generally, Palestinianrefugees who sought refuge in Iraq in1948 are treated on par with Iraqi nationalswith the exception of political rights.During the 1991 Gulf War thousands ofPalestinians who were living andemployed in Kuwait were unable to return

to their country of first asylum due to the lack oftravel documents and ended up in Iraq as the onlyplace of refuge.

Jordan: Concerns about the mass displacement orexpulsion of Palestinians from the West Bank intoJordan in the context of Israel's military operationsin the 1967 occupied territories and an impendingUS-led war on Iraq have led to severe restrictionson the freedom of movement of Palestinians,including refugees, at border crossings into Jordan.During the summer months thousands ofPalestinians were stuck at the Jordan bridge in harshconditions and high temperatures for weeks. In mid-July news reports indicated that any West BankPalestinian intending to visit Jordan would need toprovide personal guarantees supplied by a Jordanian

Housing in Shatila refugee camp (foreground), Lebanon.(Gerhard Pulfar)

al majdal 17

citizen before being allowed entry into the country.(Jerusalem Times, 18 July 2002) This was aretraction of an earlier demand that Palestiniansentering the kingdom would have to provide bankguarantees ranging from 2-5,000 JD (US$ 2,800-7,000). While fears of 'low-intensity' or masstransfer may be real, the restrictions are notconsistent with obligations of Arab host states setforth in the 1965 Casablanca Protocol. Severerestrictions on movement, moreover, should not beused as a substitute for effective regional andinternational intervention to end Israel's militaryassault on the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the35-year illegal occupation there

Israel: Palestinians residing inside Israel continueto face new forms of displacement through thedenial of family reunification, revocation ofcitizenship, land confiscation and house demolition.In late August, Adalah, the Center for Arab MinorityRights in Israel, submitted 12 individual petitions toIsrael's Supreme Court on the Israeli government'sinterim policy cancelling all pending familyreunifications if the non-citizen spouse isPalestinian. (See al-Majdal 14) The interim policyspecifically states that applications from others willbe considered in light of their national origin. Thepetitions will be heard following the submission ofthe State's response, which is due in mid-October.The Court also granted Adalah's request for atemporary injunction, prohibiting the deportation ofthe petitioners until a final decision has been made.The Court further stipulated that the prohibitionwould continue until the Israeli Ministry of theInterior enacts its new procedure for familyreunification. (Adalah Press Release, 29 August2002)

After months of threatening to revoke thecitizenship of Palestinian citizens accused of'breaching state security' the Israeli Minister of theInterior signed a special decree in early Septemberunilaterally revoking the citizenship of Mr. NihadAbu Kishik, a Palestinian citizen of Israel. Article11(b) of Israel's 1952 Nationality Law grants theMinister of Interior discretion to revoke thecitizenship of an Israeli citizen for "breach ofallegiance to the State of Israel." Under internationallaw, however, states are prohibited from making theirown citizens stateless. In its 1998 report to the UNHuman Rights Committee, the Government of Israel

wrote that "as a practical matter," revocation ofcitizenship for "breach of allegiance" is neverinvoked. The right to citizenship was upheld by theformer Israeli Minister of the Interior and by theSupreme Court in Hilla Alrai v. the Minister ofthe Interior, in which the Ministry was asked by athird party to strip the citizenship of Yigal Amir, theIsraeli citizen who assassinated former PrimeMinister Yitzhak Rabin. In this case, the thenMinister of the Interior declined to revoke Amir'scitizenship, noting that although the law granted himthe authority to revoke citizenship of individualssuspected of breach of trust such an action wouldbe extreme and drastic. (Adalah Press Releases, 8August and 10 September 2002)

Over the summer months Arabic languagenewspapers in Israel revealed plans by the IsraelLands Administration (ILA), which controls mostof the land inside Israel, to expropriate the remaininglands of Palestinian Bedouins in the Naqab withinthe coming three years. The plan was approved on25 June with the consent of Israeli Prime MinisterAriel Sharon. The plan involves restarting the landsettlement process that was suspended in 1976. Forthe Bedouin community, the legal process appearsto be a no-win situation; no Bedouin has ever wona land claim to any of the more than 3,000 lawsuitsfiled over the past several decades. The Israeligovernment also announced plans to establish 14new Jewish settlements upon the lands of theunrecognized Palestinian villages. Plans for theconcentration of all the Bedouin in the Naqab into16 villages continue.

As in the 1967 occupied territories, Israel authoritiescontinue to demolish Palestinian homes built withouta permit, which are difficult and sometimesimpossible to obtain. During the first week in JulyIsrael demolished four homes in the Naqab thatbelong to the Zanoun tribe and the al-Azazmi tribe.(Kul al-Arab, 5 July 2002, ArabHRA). Israelibulldozers accompanied by 500 policemen and ahelicopter levelled the four houses leaving 13 childrenand their families without shelter. The houses werelater rebuilt. According to the Israeli Ministry ofInterior, there are 30,000 unlicensed buildings, whichbelong to Bedouin citizens in the Naqab. Duringthe second week of July Israel demolished a homein the unrecognized village of al-Qaren in the Naqabunder the pretext that it was built without a permit

18 September 2002

on 'state land.' (Panorama , 12 July 2002,ArabHRA) In late July Israeli forces demolished35 homes in the unrecognized village of al-Araqib.(al-Ahali, 1 August 2002, ArabHRA)

Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip: Thesituation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip continuedto deteriorate over the past three months affectingthe entire panoply of basic human rights of thePalestinian population, including the more than 1.5million refugees who comprise over half thepopulation of the occupied territories. The underlyingcause of the humanitarian crisis is Israel's currentmilitary and economic siege and illegal militaryoccupation and the absence of effective internationalpolitical intervention.

Since the beginning of Palestinian uprising inSeptember 2000 the Palestinian economy has lostthe equivalent of over half of its annual grossdomestic product, unemployment has increasedthreefold, and poverty has risen substantially, withmore than two-thirds of Palestinian households livingbelow the poverty line. The situation is generallyeven more severe for Palestinian refugees. Asnoted by the findings of the December 2001 reportof the Geneva-based Graduate Institute ofDevelopment Studies, there is a statisticallysignificant relationship between loss of job, povertystatus, and refugee camp status.

According to the UN Conference on Trade andDevelopment (UNCTAD), the Palestinian economyis now set on a path of "de-development." (26 July2002) De-development is characterised by the"deliberate, systematic deconstruction of anindigenous economy by a dominant power." "De-development is an economic policy designed toensure that there will be no economic base, evenone that is malformed, to support an independentindigenous existence." (Sara Roy, The Gaza Strip,The Political Economy of De-Development,Washington, DC: Institute for Palestine Studies,1995, p. 4) According to the Office of the UNSpecial Coordinator for the Occupied Territories(June 2002), the "[Palestinian] economy can nolonger 'bounce back', even if closures were liftedand conditions returned to pre-intifada levels." "Totaleconomic breakdown is prevented only withcontinued injections of budgetary support frominternational donors, the release of a small

percentage of PA revenues withheld by Israel, andhumanitarian aid."

Over the past three months studies by various UNand international agencies have found conclusiveevidence that the severe damage inflicted by Israelimilitary forces on the social and commercialinfrastructure in the occupied territories, damageto water supplies, problems with waste disposal, anda reduction in retailing, have had a serious impacton the health status of the Palestinian population,not to mention the ongoing physical and mentalsuffering of the population. Particularly vulnerablesectors of Palestinian society, include refugees,women, children and the elderly. Reports suggestthat immunization coverage in 2002 has been muchlower, especially in remote areas. Almost half ofyoung children (6-59 months) and women of child-bearing age are anaemic. Surveys also reveal theexistence of childhood malnutrition and an overalldeterioration in the nutritional status of the entirechild population when compared with the results ofsurveys undertaken by UNWRA before the currentcrisis. The destruction of both the water networkand sewage pipelines in Balata and Askar refugeecamps resulted in sewage flowing into the waterpipeline.

Recent surveys by CARE, PCBS and the PAMinistry of Health also point to shortages of highprotein foods such as fish, chicken and dairyproducts among wholesalers and retailers in theWest Bank and Gaza Strip due to external andinternal military closure and curfews. Prices forthese products meanwhile are rising even ashousehold income continues to decline. In onesurvey more than half the Palestinian populationreported having to decrease food consumption; theprimary reasons cited were lack of money (65percent) and curfews (33 percent). Fifty-threepercent of households said they had to borrowmoney to purchase food, with Bethlehem, NorthGaza, Jericho and Gaza City containing the mosthouseholds in this category. Roughly seventeenpercent of households had to sell assets to buyfood, with rates highest in Gaza City and KhanYounis. The World Food Programme (WHO) saysthat it will soon deliver food assistance to morethan half a million beneficiaries in addition to theroughly 1 million beneficiaries of UNRWA foodassistance.

al majdal 19

Israel's policies and practices in the occupiedterritories continue to result in an increasing numberof 'new refugees' as Palestinians are displaced dueto deportation, house demolition and landconfiscation. In July 2002 the Israeli authoritiesannounced their intention to forcibly transfer fromthe West Bank to the Gaza Strip relatives of peopleknown or suspected of having organized orparticipated in attacks against Israelis. On 1 Augustthe IDF West Bank Commander signed anamendment to Military Order 378 (of 1970,concerning security regulations), allowing for theforcible transfer of Palestinians from the West Bankto the Gaza Strip. On 3 September the Israeli HighCourt of Justice issued a ruling allowing the forcibletransfer of two Palestinians from their home townof Nablus to the Gaza Strip on the grounds thatthey allegedly assisted their brother to commitattacks against Israelis. The two Palestinians, Intisarand Kifah 'Ajuri, had been in detention since 4 Juneand 18 July, respectively, but had never been chargedand no proceedings have been initiated to bring themto trial.

On internal displacement in the 1967 occupiedterritories, see, Global IDP Database, Profile ofInternal Displacement: Palestinian Territories.Compilation of the information available in theGlobal IDP Database of the Norwegian RefugeeCouncil.Available at, http://www.idpproject.org

www

Deaths and Injuries

During the last month 150 Palestinians were killedby Israeli forces (PRCS). Palestinian childrencontinue to be particularly vulnerable to Israel'smilitary campaign to suppress the al-Aqsa intifada.According to Defense for Children International-Palestine, during the first seven months of 2002,105 Palestinian children were killed by Israeli forcesin the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This numberexceeds the total number of children killed in theentire year (98) of 2001, and is equal to the numberof children killed in the year 2000. Every year since1990, Palestinian children have made up over 20%of total conflict-related Palestinian deaths in theWest Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinian refugeescontinue to comprise a significant proportion ofPalestinians killed by Israeli forces. It is estimatedthat refugees continue to comprise the majority (60percent) of Palestinian fatalities. Camp refugeescontinue to be particularly vulnerable.

Refugee shelter destruction in Balata camp,July, 2002. (electronicintifada)

20 September 2002

Examination of statistics on children killed over the last three years reveals two further alarming trends:

1) Israeli forces are killing significantly younger children. In the first seven months of the year 2002,48% of Palestinian children killed were aged 12 years and under. This number exceeds the proportionin the year 2001, both relatively (48% compared to 34%) and also in quantitative terms (50 childrencompared to 33 children). It should be stressed that the figures for the year 2002 cover the first sevenmonths of the year while those for 2001 include the whole 12-month period.2) Israeli forces are killing Palestinian children using an increasing level of force. In 2002, nearly onehalf of the children killed sustained multiple fatal injuries to more than one part of the body (47%) ascompared to one-third of children in 2001. In other words, the level of deadly force used by Israelisoldiers in 2002 has increased dramatically.

The circumstances surrounding the deaths of Palestinian children indicate that these deaths areoverwhelmingly a result of indiscriminate measures of collective punishment including the arbitrary use ofheavy fire-power against the civilian population. Almost every Palestinian child killed in the year 2002 diedin circumstances where there was no exchange of fire. The majority of children were killed when Israeliforces randomly opened fire or shelled civilian neighborhoods in Palestinian towns and villages. In addition,six children died when they were denied medical treatment due to the closure imposed on Palestinianareas. Other leading causes of death include landmines and unexploded ordinances (11 child deaths) ordeaths during extra-judicial killings (6 child deaths).

(DCI-Palestine, http://www.dci-palestine.org)

Unemployment

UNSCO (June 2002) estimates that the overalladjusted unemployment rate for the West Bank andGaza Strip during the second quarter of 2002increased from roughly 36 percent to approximately50 percent. Unemployment rates among refugeesin camps is likely to be even higher. In December2001, for example, unemployment rates in Gaza Striprefugee camps were already closing in on 50percent. Almost twice as many refugees in campsreported loss of job compared to Palestinians livingoutside camps. (IUED III, December 2001)Unemployment fluctuates greatly according to theextent of curfews. Refugees, camp refugees inparticular, moreover, have experienced even greaterproblems in mobility since the beginning of theuprising. UNSCO estimates that on curfew daysinvolving approximately 600,000 people, the non-Jerusalem West Bank unemployment rises as highas 63.3 percent. Emergency temporary job creationprograms cannot cope with employment needs aslong as Israel's military closure, further entrenchedthrough the imposition of a new permit system andthe construction of fences and barriers aroundPalestinian towns and cities, and re-occupation ofPalestinian population centers remains in place.

Poverty Levels

According to UNSCO (June 2002) the estimatedpoverty rate - based on two dollars or lessconsumption per day - is 70 percent in Gaza and 55percent in the West Bank. These rates exceedearlier forecasts by the World Bank for the end of2002. Again it is likely that rates are higher inrefugee camps, especially in the Gaza Strip.Throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip,Palestinians have run out of money and are unableto work to earn it. They increasingly must rely onhandouts, sale of personal items, credit, etc..Widespread damage, injuries and deaths in therefugee community have reduced even further whatlittle material capital and savings refugees have torely on during periods of economic instability andpolitical crisis.

Damage and Confiscation of Property

Similar to the situation inside Israel, Israeliauthorities continue to demolish Palestinian homesfor both 'administrative' (lack of a building permit)and punitive reasons (collective punishment). On 6August the Israeli High Court ruled that Palestinianhomes belonging to families of persons who are

www

al majdal 21

believed to have carried out attacks against Israeliscould be demolished without the right to judicialreview. According to B'tselem, the Israeli Centerfor Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, Israeliauthorities demolished 36 homes, not includingrefugee shelters, between July and September 2002.Since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada inSeptember 2000, 1,046 Palestinian homes have beendemolished, leaving 7,844 people homeless. (LAW,25 September 2002) Israeli military incursions inthe West Bank in July and August resulted in damageto 1,887 dwellings in refugee camps alone. In theGaza Strip as of the end of August 2002, 542 sheltersaccommodating 758 families (4,232 persons) hadbeen destroyed or damaged beyond repair as aresult of Israeli military activity. A further 417dwellings, home to 509 families (3,419 persons), hadsustained varying degrees of reparable damage.

On 17 July the Israeli military issued an order seizing60 dunums of land located east of the Israeli colonyof Netzarim and south of Gaza city under the pretextof 'military necessity.' The order is to remain in forceuntil 17 July 2007. (PCHR, 20 July 2002) On 11September, the Israeli military issued a confiscationorder for 10 dunums of land located alongside aperipheral road to the north east of Ramallah district(one dunum is 1,000 square meters). The land wasseized on the basis of "military necessity" withoutfurther explanation. The order is to remain in placeuntil 31 August 2003. (ARIJ, 11 September 2002)

UN and International Protection

During the past several months no major initiativeshave been undertaken by the internationalcommunity to rectify the protection gap facingPalestinian refugees in the occupied territories andelsewhere apart from continued assessment studiesof humanitarian conditions. Humanitarian relief hasbecome a substitute for effective internationalpolitical intervention.

PLO Report on Double Standards : The degreeto which the international community has adopteda double standard with regard to theimplementation of international law as a foundationfor resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict wasclearly documented in a report prepared by thePLO Negotiations Affairs Department in lateSeptember. The report, entitled, DoubleStandards, How the International Communityhas Taught Israel that it is Above the Law,documents the record of the internationalcommunity dealing with the implementation of UNresolutions around the world concerning gravehuman rights violations and violations ofhumanitarian law; colonies and demographicmanipulation; the right to return of refugees anddisplaced persons; and the obligation to withdrawfrom territories subjected to armed occupation.The report provides a series of recommendationsto ensure Israel's compliance with UN resolutions

and international law, including, thedeployment of internationalmonitors, the disengagement ofIsraeli occupying forces underinternational supervision,stabalization of the autonomousPalestinian government, insistencethat a final and comprehensiveagreement cannot derogate fromprinciples held to be non-negotiablein all other instances, including theright of refugees and displaced toreturn to their homes, the use ofinternational sanctions for non-compliance, and the establishmentof accountability at the internationallevel for unacceptable practices.

The report is available at:http://www.nad-plo.orgwww

Shelter destruction in Khan Younis refugee camp (PCHR)

22 September 2002

Double Standards, How the International Community has Taught Israel that it isAbove the Law (excerpts)

PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (24 September 2002)

3. The Right to Return of Refugees and Displaced Persons

As was noted in the previous section, the practice of demographic manipulation through coloniesand through the disenfranchisement and partial displacement of the original Palestinian population,has been internationally resisted in all cases other than Israel. In fact, in all of the cases mentionedabove, the right to return of the displaced populations lay at the core of international demands. Inmost of these cases, this demand has been enforced through military action, followed by aninternational security presence to safeguard the process ofrefugee returns.

The right of refugees or the displaced to return lies at the very heart of all of these internationaloperations, and it is a key component of all peace-settlements that have been adopted. The rightto return is a crucial element of the Dayton accords. While this has proved difficult in practice,tremendous international resources have been invested in the attempt to enable those who weresubjected to displacement by design to return to their homes.

Throughout 1998, the return of the displaced and of refugees to Kosovo was also a key demand ofthe Security Council acting under Chapter VII. This demand was followed up in September/Octoberof that year with a threat to use of force. This ultimately led to the Holbrooke agreement thatforesaw an organized return of the displaced and refugees. Similarly, this was a non-negotiablecondition in the Rambouillet talks on Kosovo. The use offorce by NATO in relation to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was only suspended once it hadbeen established that there would be no barriers to returns. When large parts of the ethnic Serbpopulation left the territory in the wake of the success of the NATO campaign, their return becameone of the highest priorities of the newly installed UN interim authority in Kosovo.

Other cases of the demand for return concern Tutsis from Rwanda who had been moved intoZaire. The Security Council authorized the deployment of an international coalition force led byCanada (ultimately not deployed) to achieve this aim. Similarly, the return of Eastern Timoresewho were moved across the boundary into Indonesia has been a mandatory demand of the SecurityCouncil.

This pattern of the demand for the safe and secure return of the displaced and refugees to theirhomes is unbroken, also in other parts of the world. Other examples of such demands include theconflicts in the Caucasus, to which reference was made above, and displacement and refugeecrises in Africa, from Nigeria and the Western Sahara, to the southern tip of the continent - wherethe right of return was realized for those who had sought shelter in the front-line states during thecampaign against apartheid in Namibia and South Africa.

The right of Palestinian refugees to return home to mainland Israel or to the occupied territorieshas been a key demand of the Palestinians since 1948. As can be seen, in 1948 and 1968, Israelfaced demands from the international community to ensure the right of return for refugees whosemovements stemmed from those particular conflicts. However subsequently these internationaldemands have diminished and there have been attempts to declare this as a non-negotiable issuein Israel-Palestine peace negotiations. Such a practice would, however, fly in the face of all otherprecedents.

al majdal 23

Secretary General Report on Jenin: In July theUN Secretary General released his report mandatedunder UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/10,7 May 2002, on the events in Jenin refugee campand throughout the West Bank during Israel'smassive military assault in April. The GeneralAssembly requested the Secretary General toprepare the report following Israeli non-compliancewith and collapse of a Security Council sponsoredinvestigation earlier in the year. The SecretaryGeneral's report was heavily criticized by local andinternational human rights organizations. HumanRights Watch called the UN Jenin report 'flawed.'"The report doesn't move us forward in terms ofestablishing the truth," said Hanny Megally,executive director of the Middle East and NorthAfrica Division of Human Rights Watch. While thereport describes some general allegations that havebeen made about the conduct of the Israeli andPalestinian sides during the Israeli operation, itdraws almost no conclusions on the merits of thoseclaims. It makes only limited reference to theobligations of the parties under international law,makes few clear conclusions about violations of thatlaw, and does not raise the issue of accountabilityfor serious violations that may have been committed,some of which rise to the level of war crimes. "Evenwith what they had, they could have done more,"Megally said. Examples of the report's failingsinclude the following: It refers to the fact thatcivilians died in the operation, without examiningthe circumstances of their deaths. The U.N. reportmentions that missiles were "at times" fired fromhelicopters, minimizing evidence suggesting that theiruse was intense and indiscriminate in Jenin camp,particularly on April 6 when missiles caught manysleeping civilians. It does not discuss what, if any,steps the parties have taken to investigate credibleallegations of violations of international humanitarianlaw raised in the report - such investigations arevital for ensuring accountability and discouragingfuture violations. (Human Rights Watch, 2 August2002)

UNCCP 56th Annual Report: On the eve of thesecond anniversary of the Palestinian uprising theUN Conciliation Commission for Palestine(UNCCP), the UN body established under UNGeneral Assembly Resolution 194 and mandatedto provide international protection for Palestinianrefugees released its 56th Annual Report. The report

covers the period from 1 September 2001 to 31August 2002. In the interests of advancingdiscussion on resolving the protection gap forPalestinian refugees the FULL UNCCP report isreprinted below.

FULL TEXT of the Fifty-sixth REPORT of theUnited Nations Conciliation Commission forPalestine (UNCCP)

"In paragraph 2 of its resolution 56/52 of 10December 2001, the General Assemblyrequested the Commission to report to theAssembly as appropriate, but no later than 1September 2002. The Commission notes itsreport of 31 August 2002 (A/56/290) and observesthat it has nothing new to report since its

submission."

UNHCR and Refugee Protection (BADILBrief No. 7): Between 1948 and 1949 the UnitedNations General Assembly accorded mandatesto two separate UN agencies to provideinternational protection (including durablesolutions) and assistance to Palestinianrefugees. This unique regime is comprised of theUN Conciliation Commission for Palestine(UNCCP), and the UN Relief and Works Agencyfor Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). Palestinianrefugees also have a unique and complexrelationship to a third UN agency - the Office ofthe UN High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR). Over the past two years, BADIL hasexamined the pros and cons of UNHCR steppingin to fill the protection gap for Palestinianrefugees. The initial findings are presented inBADIL Information and Discussion Brief No. 7published in August. The following articleprovides a short summary of the Brief.

Generally, UNHCR has a mandate to provideinternational protection and search for durablesolutions for refugees world-wide, includingpersons defined as 'Convention refugees' underthe 1951 Convention Relating to the Status ofRefugees (Refugee Convention). According tospecial provisions set forth in Article 1D of the1951 Refugee Convention, Palestinian refugeesare entitled to the benefits of the Convention (i.e.,considered as 'Convention Refugees') whenprotection or assistance from other organs oragencies of the United Nations has ceased for

24 September 2002

any reason, without the position of the refugeesbeing definitively settled in accordance withrelevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly.

The collapse of UNCCP protection in the mid-1950s, limited intervention by the UNHCR, andlack of an explicit UNRWA protection mandate,has resulted in severe gaps in internationalprotection for Palestinian refugees. Nointernational agency is currently recognized bythe international community as having an explicitmandate to systematically work for the realizationof the basic human rights of all Palestinianrefugees and search for and implement durablesolutions consistent with international law asaffirmed in UN General Assembly Resolution194(III). Practically this anomaly means that mostof the more than five million Palestinian refugees,or nearly one-third of the world's total refugeepopulation, do not have systematic access tointernational protection. Palestinian refugees facevarying degrees of arbitrary restrictions on therealization of basic human rights, including, forexample, freedom of movement, the right to thehighest attainable standard of physical and mentalhealth, the right to education, the right to anadequate standard of living, and the right to work,as well as access to durable solutions.

The severe gap in international protection forPalestinian refugees requires urgent legalreappraisal and related institutional remedies.UNHCR may provide an 'address' to fill the gapsin international protection for Palestinian refugeesif three primary issues are resolved: clarificationof mandate (including UN Resolution 194),identification of the value-added componentsUNHCR's operational experience would bring tothe Palestinian refugee case, and considerationof potential political problems.

UNHCR does not have an explicit mandate toprovide international protection and seek durablesolutions for all Palestinian refugees. Thetechnical aspects of triggering UNHCRintervention, if and when necessary, are leastproblematic. While Paragraph 7C of the UNHCRStatute does not contain an inclusion clausesimilar to Article 1D of the 1951 RefugeeConvention, both the UN General Assembly andECOSOC could issue policy directives to the High

Commissioner, as they have done in other cases,that would bring Palestinian refugees within thescope of the UNHCR Statute. More problematicare issues related to inter-agency jurisdiction (i.e.,UNRWA) and clarification of the constraintsimposed by UN Resolution 194(III) (i.e., criteriafor the cessation of refugee status and restrictionson resettlement) on an expanded UNHCRmandate.

UNHCR's operational experience in thePalestinian case is limited. At present the Agencyonly provides services to a fraction of thePalestinian refugee population. Indicators ofUNHCR effectiveness in other refugee cases -e.g., knowledge of the people's concerned, strongfield presence, ability to mobilize financialresources, and an established workingrelationship with local NGOs through its fieldpresence - all rank low in the Palestinian refugeecase. At the same time, UNHCR does have along history of providing international protectionand facilitating durable solutions, experiencewhich may be useful in the Palestinian case.

Given the lack of specific operational experiencevis-à-vis Palestinian refugees, but broadexperience with regard to refugees generally,potential expansion of UNHCR's mandate shouldbe considered within the context of a value-addedformula. In other words, in what areas canUNHCR's operational experience serve to fill incurrent protection gaps and/or enhanceoperational activities of existing agencies (suchas UNRWA) involved with Palestinian refugees?The same value-added formula should be appliedin relation to the search and implementation ofdurable solutions.

Finally, careful consideration must be given to thepolit ical environment in which UNHCRoperates. While the issue of mandate andoperational experience are technical issues thatcan be addressed in a relatively straightforwardmanner, the clearest and most accurateinterpretation of mandate and division of rolescan go awry due to untoward political influence.What are the potential implications of UNHCRintervention in light of the fact that the UNHCR'slargest state donor, the United States, remainsopposed to the implementation of those rights

al majdal 25

www

affirmed in UN Resolution 194(III)? CanUNHCR intervention be effective, moreover, inthe absence of sufficient support from Arabstates? Would UNHCR intervention engenderpolitical pressure to dismantle UNRWA?The absence of a resolution to any one of theseissues could have negative consequences forPalestinian refugees if the UNHCR were toafford systematic protection to them.

Recommendations include:

(1) UNHCR, UNRWA and other UN agenciesshould establish a coordination mechanism orsecretariat for the exchange of documents,information, data and reports regarding theirrespective policies and operations. Such amechanism would assist in the identification ofspecific gaps (short-term and durable solutions)in the international protection regime for

Palestinian refugees. Palestinian institutions -official and civil society - should engage UNHCRand other UN agencies in a meaningful discussionregarding Resolution 194(III) in order to clarifythe specific framework for durable solutionsapplicable to the Palestinian case and the statusof Palestinian refugees under the 1951 RefugeeConvention.

(2) UNHCR, UNRWA and Arab host statesshould establish a mechanism for discussion anddebate about the pros and cons of expandingUNHCR's mandate in the Palestinian refugeecase with the aim of finding comprehensivesolutions to the gap in international protection.

A full copy of Brief No. 7 is available by requestfrom BADIL (info@badil.org) or on the BADILwebsite: http://www.badil.org/Publications/Briefs/Brief7.pdf

International civilian protection delegation (PCHR)

26 September 2002

Durable Solutions

Real Property Restitution Update

Under international law as affirmed in UN GeneralAssembly Resolution 194 Palestinian refugees anddisplaced persons have the right to housing andproperty restitution. During the last three months,the Israeli government and High Court adopteddecisions that have significant implications forPalestinian refugees, displaced persons, as well asPalestinian citizens of Israel.

Israeli Cabinet Recommends Restricting LandUse in Israel to Jews : On 7 July 2002, the Israelicabinet, in a vote of 17-2, recommended the adoptionof a new bill to restrict access to 'state land' to Jewsonly. The vast majority of so-called state land wasacquired by Israel through the mass expropriationof refugee properties. The proposed bill by MKHaim Druckman (Mafdal) was formulated as aresponse to a High Court decision on 8 March 2000(See al-Majdal, Issue No. 5), which upheld theright of Adel and Iman Qaadan, a Palestinian couplefrom Baqa al-Gharbiyya in the Galilee to lease aplot of l