The other refugees...

[cantwealljustgetalong]

With a modicum of media coverage, the U.S. Congress passed a resolution of historic significance with regard to Middle East refugees. The resolution encompassed not only Arab refugees, but Jewish refugees and their descendents. It demands that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) set out a course of action for the settlement of the descendents of the Palestinian refugees - either in their countries of residence, in Arab countries or third countries that agree to take them in - no later than six months after the passing of the resolution (at the end of October, 2003).

...

As a result of "ethnic cleansing," some 900,000 Jews fled from Arab countries where they had lived for 2,500 years, and were forced to leave "lands, homes, private property, businesses, community assets and thousands of years of Jewish heritage and history," the resolution states. It calls on the international community to officially recognize the distress of these Jewish refugees as part of any solution to the Middle East conflict.

...

Whoever doubts this should read the article by Carol Basri, a lecturer at the Law Faculty of the University of Pennsylvania, in the World Jewish Congress publication, "Gesher" ("The Jews of Iraq: A Forgotten Case of Ethnic Cleansing," winter, 1984). The reader will be shocked at the similarity between the actions of the Iraqi regime, even before the UN decision to partition Palestine, and those of the Nazis toward the Jews of Germany in the 1930s - collective punishments, pogroms, executions, mass firings of Jews from their jobs, denial of civil rights (including two laws similar to the Nuremberg Laws - denial of citizenship to Jews and confiscation of their property).

...

The U.S. Congress' resolution stems not only from political considerations. From every perspective of international law, the Jews from Arab countries that came to Israel or emigrated to western countries are refugees in every sense of the word. No discussion of any measure regarding refugees should be held without correcting this historic injustice, as the U.S. Congress did in its resolution.

Israel gave citizenship to the refugees and absorbed them. They suffered for years in immigrant transit camps, but Israel saw them as its sons and daughters returning from the Diaspora. The Arab countries, on the other hand, imprisoned the Palestinian refugees and, with the exception of Jordan, denied them basic human rights.

Israel's actions toward the refugees it absorbed do not in any way absolve the Arab countries of their responsibility for their crimes, or of their obligation to compensate the refugees and their descendents for the injustice caused them and to restore their families' property.

...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/382320.html

edit - added paragraph

[Jim Sagle]

1. Thank you for posting this.

[Muddleoftheroad]

2. Disparities

The disparities between how Israel dealt with its refugees and how the Arab world dealt with the Palestinians tells all you could ever need to know about which side to be on.

[vierundzwanzig]

4. Sure does.

[Halle]

3. Other very important excerpts:

Congress is right when it says that the problem of Jewish refugees is not on the international agenda today - through our fault as well - and that it involves a most difficult case of ethnic cleansing by Arab countries.

cut

The prophecy came to pass: About one million Jews were forced to flee for their lives - most of them to Israel, and some to western countries - and to abandon their property. Even moderate Tunisia was attacked by a wave of racism and deprivation of civil rights to Jews. These racist actions against law-abiding citizens were strongly condemned by MK Toufiq Toubi in a speech to the Knesset in March 1951, in which he called them "fascist measures" and "part of a campaign of racial persecution."

cut

Israel gave citizenship to the refugees and absorbed them. They suffered for years in immigrant transit camps, but Israel saw them as its sons and daughters returning from the Diaspora. The Arab countries, on the other hand, imprisoned the Palestinian refugees and, with the exception of Jordan, denied them basic human rights.

cut

(thanks to MuddleOfTheRoad for alerting me to my dupe - apologies)

[Jack Rabbit]

5. Thank you

In most Islamic countries, the number of Jews now is in the hundreds. In these same countries in 1948, it was in the tens of thousands. There were 75,000 Jews in Egypt, mostly in Cairo and Alexandria, and 150,000 in Iraq, mostly around Baghdad. The Islamic country with the greatest Jewish population today is Morocco, with about 5700; however, in 1948, Morocco had over a quarter of a million Jews.

In spite of Islamic teaching protecting Jews as "people of the Book", anti-Jewish feeling is traditionally high among Arab populations. Several Arab states sided with Nazi Germany during World War II. During the 1948 war, many Arab countries prohibited Jews from leaving for Israel and riots against Jews were common. Scores of Jews lost their lives in such violence. Zionism was a crime punishable by death in Iraq. In 1950, Jews were permitted to leave Iraq provided they surrendered their citizenship. In Egypt, Jews were arrested during the 1948 war; about 20,000 left Egypt the following year and 25,000 were expelled in 1956. During the 1967 war, Egypt confiscated Jewish-owned property. Today, the Jewish population of Egypt is believed to be less than a hundred. The last Jew living in Libya died two years ago.

Ethnic cleansing? Yes, it is. Even though few of the Jews in Arab countures were forced to leave at gunpoint, living conditions were made intolerable, property was unjustly confiscated and violence against Jews often went unpunished. When a population leaves under such conditions, it is ethnic cleansing.

Do the Jewish refugees from these countries have a right of return? Yes, they do. Furthermore, they should be compensated for losses that came as a result of persecution.

There are many ways to deal with persecution of an entire people. One way is to shame it. Another is to provide a state where the persecuted people can take refuge.

It is doubtful that many Jews who fled Arab lands between 1948 and 1967 would want to return. Many have settled in Israel. Ironically, such official and semi-official anti-Semitism as practiced in Arab countries best justifies Israel's existence as a safe haven for the Jews of the world seeking refuge from persecution.

[GabysPoppy]

6. Wonderful post, thank you

You have to wonder why people have a problem understanding and especially understanding your final paragraph.

I hope your remarks are not sullied by blind hate.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. A question, Mr Rabbit...

My view's always been that regardless of race/ethnicity/religion, people who are forced to leave or flee their homes in times of conflict should be allowed either to return to their homes or be entitled to a just financial compensation for the loss of their homes. I'm assuming you'd hold that view as well, but if I'm wrong, let me know. Not blowing my own trumpet or anything, but I think my view is the only reasonable one that can be held, and I see folk who think that Jews who were expelled or fled from countries in the Middle-East should be entitled to a right of return that translates as financial compensation, yet strongly oppose the same for Palestinian refugees, and visa-versa, are complete hypocrites in my book...

When it comes to some Arab states siding with Nazi Germany during WWII, that would be more due to a distrust and dislike of the Western powers who had carved up the Middle East between them in exactly the same way that former British possessions in SE Asia initially welcomed the Japanese because they saw them as bringing them freedom from the British. The whole 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' thing seems to play a large part in some of the alliances that get made in wars....

There's something in the article that I think may be wrong. "From every perspective of international law, the Jews from Arab countries that came to Israel or emigrated to western countries are refugees in every sense of the word." How I understand it when it comes to international law, a refugee ceases to be a refugee when they become a citizen of a country willing to take them in and grant them citizenship. I've got a close friend who came here from Cambodia as a refugee doing the leaky unseaworthy boat experience with a long interval in a UN camp set up in Indonesia with her family during the 70's. I don't really see how she be described as a refugee now, and especially not using the perspective of international law...

Seeing as how the US Congress is so helpful in demanding that the Palestinian refugees be settled either in their countries of residence, in Arab countries or third countries that agree to take them in, I think it'd be fair that the US agrees to take in any Palestinian refugee who wants to live in the US :)

Violet...

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Response

My view's always been that regardless of race/ethnicity/religion, people who are forced to leave or flee their homes in times of conflict should be allowed either to return to their homes or be entitled to a just financial compensation for the loss of their homes. I'm assuming you'd hold that view as well, but if I'm wrong, let me know. Not blowing my own trumpet or anything, but I think my view is the only reasonable one that can be held, and I see folk who think that Jews who were expelled or fled from countries in the Middle-East should be entitled to a right of return that translates as financial compensation, yet strongly oppose the same for Palestinian refugees, and visa-versa, are complete hypocrites in my book...

That is also my view.

When it comes to some Arab states siding with Nazi Germany during WWII, that would be more due to a distrust and dislike of the Western powers who had carved up the Middle East between them in exactly the same way that former British possessions in SE Asia initially welcomed the Japanese because they saw them as bringing them freedom from the British. The whole 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' thing seems to play a large part in some of the alliances that get made in wars....

It was both a distrust of western colonialism and anti-Semitism. Feelings about the war were complex in Europe's overseas colonies. There was also support for Britain from people who saw through Hitler for what he was. Gandhi, pacifist and anti-imperialist that he was, vowed not to interfere with Britain's war effort. However, there was quite a bit of the "enemy of my enemy" reasoning.

As I said in the earlier post, anti-Semitism was strong in these countries. Admiration for Hitler went beyond thinking him a useful tool in defeating colonial powers. For example, check out Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was every bit as much anti-Semitic as he was anti-colonial. This kind of thinking was common, too.

There's something in the article that I think may be wrong. "From every perspective of international law, the Jews from Arab countries that came to Israel or emigrated to western countries are refugees in every sense of the word." How I understand it when it comes to international law, a refugee ceases to be a refugee when they become a citizen of a country willing to take them in and grant them citizenship. I've got a close friend who came here from Cambodia as a refugee doing the leaky unseaworthy boat experience with a long interval in a UN camp set up in Indonesia with her family during the 70's. I don't really see how she be described as a refugee now, and especially not using the perspective of international law...

I agree with the article's assessment. They are political refugees in the sense that they had to flee persecution in the land of their birth. Resettlement does not change that experience. It does not right the wrong nor change the fact that they are entitled to have that wrong redressed.

The difference between the Jewish refugees from Arab countries and the Palestinian refugees is that the former had a place where they could be resettled. Again, one way of dealing with a widespread problem of persecution of an entire people is to provide a haven for those fleeing such persecution. That is the reason for Israel. It makes a good case for a Palestinian state.

The experience of Palestinian refugees has been a bitter one. While Jordan has been more accommodating to the Palestinians than other Arab countries, the Palestinian experience in Jordan has not been wholly positive. King Abdullah I (great grandfather of the present Jordanian monarch) took efforts to obliterate the Palestinian identity; he absorbed both the people and the land. In addition to annexing the West Bank to Jordan, he prohibited use of the word Palestine (see Kimmerling and Migdal, The Palestinian People: a history (Harvard, 1994, 2003), p. 219). We should also consider the Palestinian experience in Jordan of Black September (1970). Perhaps those who buy into the canard that Jordan is the Palestine state should consider such events as these.

Were there a Palestinian state where Palestinian refugees could resettle there either would have been no Black September or Sabra and Shatila massacre or there would have been a place ready to welcome refugees fleeing for their lives with open arms.

It would be fitting that a Jewish state and a Palestinian state should exist in peace side by side west of the Jordan River as state dedicated to the protection of refugees from persecution. It is a dream that should thought within the realm of possibility.

[Violet_Crumble]

14. Something I'm curious about...

Was there strong anti-semitism in the region before the start of the 20th century? From what I've read about Palestine at least, Palestinians of the time lived a reasonably harmonious existance...

The reason why I think the article is wrong about saying that from the perspective of international law the Jews who were expelled or forced to flee from Arab countries are still refugees is because the UN Convention relating to the Rights of Refugees says this:

"C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

<snip>

3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality"

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm

The difference between the Jewish refugees from Arab countries and the Palestinian refugees is that the former had a place where they could be resettled. Again, one way of dealing with a widespread problem of persecution of an entire people is to provide a haven for those fleeing such persecution. That is the reason for Israel. It makes a good case for a Palestinian state.

It's a very good case for a Palestinian state because for anyone to argue against it, they would have to also argue against the creation of the state of Israel...

Violet...

[Jack Rabbit]

18. Anti-Semitism has always been there

Racism will always be with us. The irrational hate that we call bigotry may be thought of as a person projecting his fears and anxieties on some outside group of people, like Jews, Arabs or blacks. It really isn't that unusual. We can work to minimize the effects, but we will never be fully rid of it.

As for Arab anti-Semitism prior to the twentieth century, I have read an unexpurgated version of Arabian Nights. It is not unusual in the villain of these tales to be a Jew, a Christian or a Persian. So it evidently has been at work for some time.

[bluesoul]

19. Anti-Arabism

anti-Palestinianism is also alive and kickin as we can all see...

[GabysPoppy]

20. Which of course

wasn't part of the discourse above.

[bluesoul]

21. It very much is

:shrug:

[GabysPoppy]

22. Then i missed it

Please give me a discourse on anti-Palestinian discrimination. Start with Black September and then their experiences in Lebanon. We might find some common areas to agree on.

[Jack Rabbit]

23. It is, but

The phenomenon is very much the same. The solution to the refugee problem is very much the same. That much should be acknowledged.

However, this thread is principally about Arab anti-Semitism and its effects. It is a real problem that has caused real pain. Historically, it is part of the overall ugly landscape of the Middle East and a greater one than is often acknowledged.

This is a conflict in which no one really has a moral high road. Today's victims are often tomorrow's criminals and the next day the roles may be reversed again. Somewhere along the line, we'll have to stop trying to figure out who hit who first and just resolve the conflict.

[GabysPoppy]

25. Thank you Jack

I thought I was losing it and missed something that should have been obvious.

[bluesoul]

28. Then i guess will have to open a new thread

about anti-Arab hatred...

[GabysPoppy]

29. Please do

[Gimel]

9. The only trouble, Ms Violet

The trouble with your equation is that those refugees that you refer to, (and I do not deny that those who were in fact forced to leave property should be given compensation), want to inhabit the country that the Jewish refugees from the Moslem counties made with the rights given to them by the international community (the UN) and virtually expel them from their homes by claiming that the land is theirs.

They, who would not allow a Jew to live with human dignity in their land now want to inhabit the country of the Jewish people. Wouldn't that sound a little scary to you, if you were one of a people so treated? They will destroy the Jews right to have a small sliver of a country.

[Lithos]

12. I think the issue is one of reimbursement for all sides is fair

Both those Palestinians and Jews who were made refugees should as a minimum receive fair renumeration for their losses with interest. I think ROR into 1967 Israel (or whatever the boundaries are determined following equitable negotiation, not unilateral action) and ROR of Jews back into Muslim territories is not a practical solution in the short term considering the hostility and disruption it would cause.

That said, I do wish to emphasize that I am NOT for any discussion which considers the need for such reparations a wash because an approximately equal number on both sides suffered. Doing so would only benefit the governments and deny the refugees the financial and moral closures such an action would create.

L-

[Jack Rabbit]

13. Hear, hear

Government thugs do too well enriching themselves at the expense of the common people. It is reprehensible that they should find some formula by which they would enrich themselves at the expense of those who have suffered so much as the refugees of wars and pogroms.

That money is owed to them.

[Muddleoftheroad]

17. Compensation

I think the Israeli refugees would gladly turn down any renumeration for peace. Instead, let the Arab payments for the hundreds of thousands they ethnically cleansed go to the Palestinian people and call it even.

[Lithos]

24. That would of course be an individual decision

Made by the affected people and their families. However, I do agree that many, on both sides, just want to have a chance to live in peace somewhere.

L-

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. Not necessarily

Israel can act as agent for the Israelis involved and, as a matter of national security, agree to forego any payments and that those payments from the Arab world be instead sent to the Palestinians.

That would eliminate the Right of Return as an issue, eliminate compensation as an issue AND force the Arab nations to pay, which they damn well ought to do.

[bluesoul]

27. nope

Israel will have to pay it's due. It wasn't the Arab nations that started the whole thing after WW2, and the exodus of Palestinians from their homes...

[Violet_Crumble]

31. What about the individuals?

Whether or not anyone wishes to forgo compensation is a matter for the individual concerned and not any state. I totally agree with what Lithos said in an earlier post:

That said, I do wish to emphasize that I am NOT for any discussion which considers the need for such reparations a wash because an approximately equal number on both sides suffered. Doing so would only benefit the governments and deny the refugees the financial and moral closures such an action would create.

And it's the financial and moral closure for the individuals concerned that's of importance, not what benefits politicians and the state. And when it comes to compensation, the reason various Arab states should give compensation to any Jews expelled or forced to flee is the exact same reason why Israel should give compensation to any Palestinian that was expelled or forced to flee. Each of those states have benefitted from the acquisition of vacant property that belonged to these people, and if each of these states won't allow the people displaced to return or those people don't wish to return out of fear, then compensation must come from those states that won't allow them to return...

Violet...

[Lurking Dem]

10. I personally have no quarrel with

right of compensation. For both sides.

Right of return, however, presents huge problems.

If Jews were given Right of Return to the numerous Moslem nations that evicted them, they would still be a tiny minority within those countries. The Right of Return the Palestinians are asking for would destroy a Jewish Israel.

Which is, of course, why they keep demanding it rather than compensation.

[meti57b]

11. LD, that's an important point.

Thank you for posting that.

[Violet_Crumble]

15. Then you and I are in agreement...

Compensation for anyone not allowed to return to their homes is the only fair stance to have, in my opinion. And compensation is important because a physical right of return would in both cases create more problems than allowing the returns would solve...

What I disagree with you about is the reason why Palestinian refugees demand a right of return. Put yrself in the shoes of someone who's been expelled or forced to flee their home, then are not allowed to return. Do you really think they should be so much more selfless than any other person and not think about themselves? If it were me, I wouldn't give a toss about demographics or whether I might upset the apple cart if I'm Jewish or not. What I'd care about is my former home and getting it back. Y'know, if the Palestinians had been given the sort of sanctuary that Jewish refugees were given, do you really think they'd want to return if they had a state of their own and hopes that they could build lives for themselves that would make up for the losses they suffered? People have to be given hope before they'll give up on dreams of returning to the past, and the Palestinian refugees haven't been given that hope yet...

Violet...

[Lurking Dem]

16. All I can say is

when the members of my family were kicked out of Middle Eastern countries they didn't feel the way you do. They started over. Their descendants started the Reform movement, formed a shipping business in Jamaica, one became a rather notorious Governor in the South.

When my husband's family was forced out of Russia, they packed up the kids and put them on a boat to America by themselves, listing the youngest son as the child of the oldest (14) daughter. When you see an old movie that has the credit Color By DeLuxe, that was their very next generation.

I was watching a documentary the other day and a Palestinian man was talking about what he lost in 1948. He had 2 factories (stonecutting) that were apparently still standing that he lost. (And, yes, it is sad that happened and, yes, he should be compensated.)

But all he could talk about was what he lost. He had a stonecutting business and a Mercedes dealership in the West Bank. He couldn't look at that and say, "Wow, look at what I accomplished! Under horrible circumstances I have risen up and been very successful. Thank you, G-d for the blessings you have bestowed on me." All he could see was what he lost. Very disheartening.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. But can't you see the difference?

Yr relatives didn't feel that way because they were given hope, citizenship in a very affluent country, and a chance to start over again. Even with that, I doubt there still wouldn't be sadness over the life and all the memories left behind...

That must have been a very old documentary you were watching. My parents were both born during WWII and they're now retired and getting very long in the tooth. But of course all that man could talk about was what he lost. He hasn't been given the future and hope that I was talking about, and giving the Palestinians a viable and independent state is what would do the trick. I can't imagine a Mercedes dealership in a very impoverished part of the world where the economy has been destroyed would be all that successful, and if it were, that the success actually means much at all. That guy had lost everything, wasn't a citizen of any state, as a Palestinian has people claiming that Palestinians don't exist and never have, and was living under an occupation. Of course all he'd talk about was the past...

Violet...

[Lurking Dem]

30. kick

:kick: