Are the Palestinians a real people?

[ForeverYoung436]

My parents were technically "refugees" after WW2. My dad was even in a DP camp in Germany, where he and his first wife had my half-brother. But I never thought of them as refugees, because my dad and mom rebuilt their lives in America long before I was born.

 

[rylah]

My parents were technically "refugees" after WW2. My dad was even in a DP camp in Germany, where he and his first wife had my half-brother. But I never thought of them as refugees, because my dad and mom rebuilt their lives in America long before I was born.

My grandpa used to tell how they with several other families moved to a cave on the hills, while his father went to fight for Tiberias, that the Arab Aboulafia's waited for him down in the town, at the entrance to his home - to stand with us.

Understand one thing - it wan't a big place, everyone already knew about the Iraqi 'relatives' arriving in town, Abulafias could chose a different side.

The house has been entirely destroyed, while their shops stood, and when Tiberias was liberated, that was the only place to live. He didn't go demanding anyone builds him a house, and gives him a salary for what befell, but rather went to Tel-Aviv to write and teach and even hosted immigrants from ma'abarot, who were themselves real refugees.

The refugees in ma'abarot were expelled from the same countries the Arabs came from.

 

[Coyote]

What exactly are they?

They are citizens of the Palestinian Authority living in other countries. Calling them refugees is just a way of continuing the conflict by raising impossible hopes. Not every problem has a good solution.

Link showing they have citizenship.

Why are Palestinians uniquely labeled “fake refugees” but refugees in other camps are not? It looks suspiciously like a double standard.

The Arabs who left Israel during the War of Independence are refugees, but their descendants are not. This is the way it is everywhere else in the world.

Then what are they?

Refugees | United Nations

Descendants of refugees retain refugee status
Under international law and the principle of family unity, the children of refugees and their descendants are also considered refugees until a durable solution is found. Both UNRWA and UNHCR recognize descendants as refugees on this basis, a practice that has been widely accepted by the international community, including both donors and refugee hosting countries.


So why is it you don’t label the refugees of other camps and nationalities “fake”?

Nowhere else in the world are the descendants of refugees considered refugees. This is the only situation in the world in which the UN has called the descendants of refugees refugees. This is one of the ways in which the UN has made itself irrelevant to deal with issues in the ME.

Yes, they are. I just showed you a link. It isn't just Palestininians.

So why are you applying a different standard to Palestinians?

 

[ph3iron]

They speak Arabic, like in 21 other countries. They wear the keffiya and hijab, like in 21 other countries. They eat hummus and shwarma, like in 21 other countries. They celebrate Mohammed's birthday and Abraham's near sacrifice of his son, like in 21 other countries.


In Israel, they speak Hebrew. It's the only country with this national language. In Israel, they wear the kippa and kova temble, like in no other country. In Israel, they eat gefilte fish, kugel, kishke, and cholent, like in no other country. In Israel, the national holidays are Yom Kippur, Passover and Hanukkah. These are no other country's national holidays.

Why does Tinmore want to destroy the only Jewish state in the world to set up a 22nd jihadist state? Is this what the world really needs?

You do know the Palestinians were the only Arab state to be on our side in WWII?
And they had been there for 4000 years until Rothschild / the uk bankers kicked them off and formed Israel?

 

[Coyote]

Ok. I did some more reading on UNHCR and UNRWA.

If I am understanding it correctly, UNRWA allows a refugee who has attained citizenship elsewhere to continue to be counted as a refugee along with his/her children, who also have citizenship through birth. If that is correct, I agree, that is messed up and perpetrates a refugee mess of people who are not really refugees. They all ought to fall under UNHCR.

 

[Shusha]

But it does not apply to ONLY the Palestinian people.

No. It does apply ONLY to the Palestinian people. They have a SPECIAL definition of "refugee" just for them. Only them. No other people. And then they have an entire organization set up just for them. So that they don't fall under the normal UNHCR.

Presumably it was changed because no durable situation was negotiated

Human rights are not negotiated. Durable solutions to human rights crises exist outside of political solutions.

and this is actually a situation becoming more and more common as refugee camps are becoming multi-generational.

This is true. Mostly this is because nations are, more and more, rejecting the idea of resettlement.

Right or wrong - however you feel about it - the definition is applied to all but only the Palestinians are singled out for being "fake".

Well, yes, because you already agreed with me (see below) that 9/10's of the "refugees" of Palestine, aren't, in fact refugees at all. The durable solution has been applied and yet(!) they are still "refugees". Why? Because the special definition of a "Palestinian refugee" creates an unending condition of "refugee" status. They and their descendants will always be refugees.

I would argue that those populations have already been locally integrated in the host country and should be given citizenship by the host country, thus resolving their status as refugees.

Agree.

They are not Palestinian citizens until they are granted citizenship so no, you can not call them Palestinian citizens

Well, legally, of course, its more complicated than that. Mostly because Arab Palestine and the other Arab states are TRYING to keep these people as refugees in horrible conditions as part of a campaign to destroy Israel and thus create laws intentionally to prevent them from becoming citizens of their states. Which, imo, is an egregious breach of human rights by the Arab States.

Now you can argue that Lebanon has no legal obligation to grant citizenship to her Palestinian refugees, but PALESTINE certainly does.


*also, side note, new census data shows that the number of "refugees" in Lebanon may be vastly over-estimated.

 

[Shusha]

Imagine if the world learned that there are only 130,000 real Palestinian refugees in the world, huh?

 

[Coyote]

But it does not apply to ONLY the Palestinian people.

No. It does apply ONLY to the Palestinian people. They have a SPECIAL definition of "refugee" just for them. Only them. No other people. And then they have an entire organization set up just for them. So that they don't fall under the normal UNHCR.

Yes I realized that after reading some more which I should have done sooner). BUT it isn’t true that they have an entire organization set up for them. It was set up for Jewish refugees as well, but Israel patriated the Jewish refugees and took them off the table.

Presumably it was changed because no durable situation was negotiated

Human rights are not negotiated. Durable solutions to human rights crises exist outside of political solutions.

and this is actually a situation becoming more and more common as refugee camps are becoming multi-generational.

This is true. Mostly this is because nations are, more and more, rejecting the idea of resettlement.

Sad but true, though in some cases host nations are ill equipped to take in large number of poor refugees (for example Bangladesh and the Rohinga) and wealthy nations, like mine or some of the Arab states refuse to.

Right or wrong - however you feel about it - the definition is applied to all but only the Palestinians are singled out for being "fake".

Well, yes, because you already agreed with me (see below) that 9/10's of the "refugees" of Palestine, aren't, in fact refugees at all. The durable solution has been applied and yet(!) they are still "refugees". Why? Because the special definition of a "Palestinian refugee" creates an unending condition of "refugee" status. You and your descendants will always be refugees.

I would argue that those populations have already been locally integrated in the host country and should be given citizenship by the host country, thus resolving their status as refugees.

Agree.

They are not Palestinian citizens until they are granted citizenship so no, you can not call them Palestinian citizens

Well, legally, of course, its more complicated than that. Mostly because Arab Palestine and the other Arab states are TRYING to keep these people as refugees in horrible conditions as part of a campaign to destroy Israel and thus create laws intentionally to prevent them from becoming citizens of their states. Which, imo, is an egregious breach of human rights by the Arab States.

Agree.

Now you can argue that Lebanon has no legal obligation to grant citizenship to her Palestinian refugees, but PALESTINE certainly does.


*also, side note, new census data shows that the number of "refugees" in Lebanon may be vastly over-estimated.

 

[Coyote]

Imagine if the world learned that there are only 130,000 real Palestinian refugees in the world, huh?

If it is truely that low. I suspect that just as there is an agenda in magnifying numbers there is likewise one in minimizing.

 

[Shusha]

Sad but true, though in some cases host nations are ill equipped to take in large number of poor refugees (for example Bangladesh and the Rohinga) and wealthy nations, like mine or some of the Arab states refuse to.

There are a lot of reasons and its complicated.

Some countries (like Kenya) would actually economically benefit from integrating multi-generational refugees. Some may not. Many reject the incorporating refugees for fear of introducing "other" or foreign ideas into their countries, which may seem morally unsavoury, but can also be a legitimate concern.

 

[Shusha]

Imagine if the world learned that there are only 130,000 real Palestinian refugees in the world, huh?

If it is truely that low. I suspect that just as there is an agenda in magnifying numbers there is likewise one in minimizing.

174422

According to 2017 census carried out by Lebanon government.

 

[Coyote]

Imagine if the world learned that there are only 130,000 real Palestinian refugees in the world, huh?

If it is truely that low. I suspect that just as there is an agenda in magnifying numbers there is likewise one in minimizing.

174422

According to 2017 census carried out by Lebanon government.

I would still count those who have not been given citizenship in the countries they reside in as refugees including descendants considered refugees under UNHCR rules.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Imagine if the world learned that there are only 130,000 real Palestinian refugees in the world, huh?

If it is truely that low. I suspect that just as there is an agenda in magnifying numbers there is likewise one in minimizing.

174422

According to 2017 census carried out by Lebanon government.

I would still count those who have not been given citizenship in the countries they reside in as refugees including descendants considered refugees under UNHCR rules.

Stop lying. The UNHCR definition of a refugee does not apply to the 1948 Arab refugees who left Israel.

"The Convention also does not apply to those refugees who benefit from the protection or assistance of a United Nations agency other than UNHCR, such as refugees from Palestine who fall under the auspices of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). Nor does the Convention apply to those refugees who have a status equivalent to nationals in their country of asylum."

Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees

All the rules and definitions of the Palestinian refugees come from UNRWA and UNHCR has nothing to do with it. Nowhere else in the world does the UN consider a descendant of a refugee also a refugee. While technically UNRWA means United Nations Relief Works Agency, everyone knows the real meaning is, Fuck Israel.

 

[Shusha]

I would still count those who have not been given citizenship in the countries they reside in as refugees including descendants considered refugees under UNHCR rules.

I disagree. In order to avoid statelessness, people should be granted the citizenship of the state they were born in. There is no reason people who are fully integrated into a society should be denied citizenship in order to keep them as refugees. This just encourages the "not our problem, let's just keep them in camps for three, or four or five generations" until someone else decides what to do with them.

And they SHOULD all have Palestinian citizenship.

 

[Shusha]

Nowhere else in the world does the UN consider a descendant of a refugee also a refugee.

This isn't really strictly true. While I agree that there are "special rules" for the Palestinians, there are other places in the world where descendants carry the status of refugees.

Dadaab camp in Kenya has 330,000 Somali refugees, three generations. Admittedly, this is an unusual case, in that the refugees of Dadaab have not been permitted to leave.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I would still count those who have not been given citizenship in the countries they reside in as refugees including descendants considered refugees under UNHCR rules.

I disagree. In order to avoid statelessness, people should be granted the citizenship of the state they were born in. There is no reason people who are fully integrated into a society should be denied citizenship in order to keep them as refugees. This just encourages the "not our problem, let's just keep them in camps for three, or four or five generations" until someone else decides what to do with them.

And they SHOULD all have Palestinian citizenship.

Why work so hard to avoid statelessness? Why not accommodate it, for example, the UN could define someone who is stateless as a citizen of the world and keep his records, issue an ID and travel documents. After all, half the "citizens" of the world need protection from their own governments, so perhaps statelessness would be a prefered status for them.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Nowhere else in the world does the UN consider a descendant of a refugee also a refugee.

This is really strictly true. While I agree that there are "special rules" for the Palestinians, there are other places in the world where descendants carry the status of refugees.

Dadaab camp in Kenya has 330,000 Somali refugees, three generations. Admittedly, this is an unusual case, in that the refugees of Dadaab have not been permitted to leave.

"A refugee, according to the Convention, is someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion."

Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees

Since the descendants of those who fled Somalia cannot claim Somalia as their country of origin, they cannot qualify as refugees under the rules of UNHCR.

 

[Shusha]

Nowhere else in the world does the UN consider a descendant of a refugee also a refugee.

This is really strictly true. While I agree that there are "special rules" for the Palestinians, there are other places in the world where descendants carry the status of refugees.

Dadaab camp in Kenya has 330,000 Somali refugees, three generations. Admittedly, this is an unusual case, in that the refugees of Dadaab have not been permitted to leave.

"A refugee, according to the Convention, is someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion."

Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees

Since the descendants of those who fled Somalia cannot claim Somalia as their country of origin, they cannot qualify as refugees under the rules of UNHCR.

By that definition, NO ONE who is uprooted due to conflict is, in fact, a refugee. That definition has been overtaken by ICL.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Nowhere else in the world does the UN consider a descendant of a refugee also a refugee.

This is really strictly true. While I agree that there are "special rules" for the Palestinians, there are other places in the world where descendants carry the status of refugees.

Dadaab camp in Kenya has 330,000 Somali refugees, three generations. Admittedly, this is an unusual case, in that the refugees of Dadaab have not been permitted to leave.

"A refugee, according to the Convention, is someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion."

Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees

Since the descendants of those who fled Somalia cannot claim Somalia as their country of origin, they cannot qualify as refugees under the rules of UNHCR.

By that definition, NO ONE who is uprooted due to conflict is, in fact, a refugee. That definition has been overtaken by ICL.

No, by that definition the person who left Somalia is a refugee, but if he had a child in Kenya, that child is not a refugee.




What is ICL?

 

[Shusha]

No, by that definition the person who left Somalia is a refugee, but if he had a child in Kenya, that child is not a refugee.

The definition you quoted specifically excludes people uprooted simply because of war, therefore people fleeing war, including civil war, are not refugees by the 1951 Convention/1967 Protocol definition. Nor are Palestinian refugees. Given that Somalis can return and have been returning, technically, by the 1951 Convention/1967 Protocol definition, they are not refugees.

Under the principle of family unity, children and other family members of a refugee are normally considered refugees themselves. Family members may also qualify as refugees independently, depending on their own national status, which may different from their family members.

One of the ways these laws are changing is in the re-defining of "refugee" as opposed to "asylum-seeker".

Its a hugely complicated section of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international customary law (ICL), and it doesn't translate well to sound bytes.