Academics, NGOs and Government Officials Discuss Palestinian Refugee Issue 

Between March 22 - 24, academics, representatives of NGOs and government officials met at Warwick University in Britain to discuss the issue of Palestinian refugees. The conference, “Resolving the Palestinian Refugee Problem: What Role for the International Community,” part of the so-called “Ottawa process” (following a similar conference in December 1997 in Ottawa, Canada, see ARTICLE 74/23, March 1998), brought researchers together with government observers to share ideas about current and future research concerning the issue of Palestinian refugees and, through dialogue, to attempt to make research “relevant” to the political process. 

The emphasis of the conference on economic aspects of the refugee issue was perhaps reflective of the international community’s perception of its role in resolving the issue of Palestinian refugees. This is particularly true for the European Union which co-sponsored the conference along with Warwick University. The two workshops on economic aspects of the refugee issue which focused on the “Economic Needs and Constraints of Potential Solutions to the Refugee Problem” ans on “Donor Coordination with Host Countries” generated some specific ideas for the international community. 

However, the conference also illustrated the inability of both academics and government observers to deal substantively with the more political issues like the right of return. While the third workshop on “Compensation and the Right of Return” produced some specific ideas regarding compensation, the discussion summary noted that consensus on the right of return was confined to a “significant return” of refugees to the West Bank. Israeli participants, none of whom represented the government, stressed the fact that most Israelis reject the return of refugees to areas inside Israel. Palestinian and Arab participants, meanwhile, referred the discussion back to UN GA Resolution 194 of 1948 which states that refugees should be allowed to return to their homes, with the proviso that they live in peace with their neighbors. 

The inability of the conference to generate substantive discussion concerning the right of refugees to return to their homes and lands (as opposed to return to a Palestinian entity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip) was due, in part, to the polarized nature of the issue. It was also due to the heavy focus of the conference on economic aspects of resolving the refugee issue and a research framework which was not conducive to a discussion of intractable political issues. While discussion of the economic aspects of the refugee issue does not inherently exclude the right of return - in fact there are significant economic issues relevant to the return of the refugees which were discussed in the context of a return to the West Bank - substantive discussion on the right ofreturn in the context of UN Resolution 194 was precluded by a set of research assumptions based on the current status quo - i.e. that unlimited return is not “practical”. 

A “practical” approach to the refugee issue 

It was not surprising therefore that participants were reminded by several speakers that discussions should focus on “practical” ideas to resolve the refugee issue. This approach has several implications for the rights of refugees. First, the right of return is limited to the 1967 occupied territories, focused predominantly on the West Bank. Most of the discussion and current research dealt with the right of return to the West Bank. During a discussion of the right of return, one of the key conference speakers even stated that due to the political nature of Resolution 194, its legal application should be suspended as as to achieve resolution of the conflict. Apart from the will of the UN Security Council, there is no way to enforce the implementation of Resolution 194. 

Secondly, “practical” considerations suggest that the right of return to the 1967 occupied territories is severely constrained by the economic situation in the territories. A presentation by a representative of the World Bank noted that GNP growth rates in the West Bank would have to be raised to 6% just to prevent a further decline in the living standard in the West Bank. According to International Monetary Fund projections, the estimated GNP growth rate for 1998 is only 2% and that is based on the assumption that there will be no political upheavels. Between 1995 and 1997, the percentage of the population living in the occupied territories considered “absolutely poor” (approximate income of $2 per day per person) grew from 20% to 30%. Around 40% of this population are refugees. Since 1993, per capita income has fallen by a quarter while unemployment has doubled between 1993 and 1997. According to the World Bank, there will need to be extraordinary economic growth, with GNP growth rates above 8-10%, to support the return of large numbers of Palestinian refugees to the West Bank. 

Third, practical considerations mean that UNRWA will have to be re-structured or it will collapse as donor funding remains flat. The current level of aid for services approved by the General Assembly at $315 million is enough only to meet minimum levels, however, at present only $260 million can be counted upon for disbursement. Out of that total there is a further $20 million estimated deficit for 1998 which is about 3-4% of the annual donor assistance to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. At present UNRWA cannot find any more savings in its operations to cover the projected shortfall, unless services are altered significantly. According to the presentation on donor aid, UNRWA must undertake a “constructive managment of change” which strikes a balance between the key audience (i.e. the refugees) and the resource base (i.e. the donor countries). The key speaker noted that any changes made to UNRWA must not disadvantage the refugees while at the same time be able to moblize donors and strengthen Palestinian national capacities. 

Finally, the emphasis on “practical” solutions means that if there is an agreement on compensation, the basic expectations of refugees will not be met. Several academic participants noted that there is not an unlimited pot of money from which to compensate refugees nor is the state of Israel willing to consider compensation on an individual basis. On a per capita basis, Palestinians are receiving one of the highest levels of transitional funds at the international level. However, one participant noted that a comparison between international aid to Palestinians and US aid to Israel, reveals the fact that the level of aid to Israel on a per capita basis is around 1400% greater than that received by Palestinians. 

A call for more research on the refugee issue 

The conference did generate some ideas for resolution of the refugee issue. In terms of research, it was suggested that the European Union finance the completion of an UNRWA database at a cost of $7 million. There were disgreements expressed regarding the applicability of the entire database but a consensus that the database can and should be used as a basic starting point for negotiations. The database documents the history of all refugees registered with UNRWA and includes information such as education, family statistics and land ownership. It was also nothed that there was a need for further study  on the economic costs of return for displaced Palestinians to the West Bank with a suggestion that the World Bank engage in a study of this issue. The Bank was not prepared, however, to engage in a study of the economic costs of return to areas inside Israel. The suggested study would include a projection of the number and socio-economic profile of potential returnees; the impact of various economic scenarios for supporting the returnees; the economic implications of various levels of return for the occupied territories and neighboring economies; and, the identification of particular Palestinian Authority and donor initiatives that might facilitate the return of displaced Palestinians. In general, it was noted that research on the refugee issue should be focused and have policy oriented components; the results should be easily available to researchers; research must not just be a northern donorl-based industry; and, there is a need to account for the opinion of refugees. 

Ideas for the donor community and UNRWA 

As regards the donor community and UNRWA, it was suggested that there should be advanced preparation for the cost of the final resolution of the refugee issue. Bearing in mind that final status negotiations are meant to be concluded by May 1999, participants suggested that a special fund should be created for donor contributions, however, it was also suggested that there needs to be more research and ideas on the mode of dispersal and accountability for the funds. Participants noted that UNRWA planning would also be enhanced if donor countries published their pledges in advance of the upcoming fiscal year while dondors need to be persuaded that their interests are served by supporting UNRWA in both recurrent costs and development. As far as UNRWA is concerned, it was suggested that the agency develop mechanisms for regular monitoring and reporting of socio-economic conditions of the refugees to more accurately assess funding requirements and the effectiveness of UNRWA programs. In terms of funding, one participant suggested that US aid to Israel should be phased out over a period of ten years while aid to Egypt should be replaced with a free trade agreement. US aid would then be re-routed towards resolution of the refugee issue. 

The current political situation 

Conference participants stressed the fact that constraints on the Palestinian economy should be lifted in order to foster the economic conditions necessary to support the return of refugees. It was noted that the single most damaging factor to the Palestinian economy is the permit and border closures. According to the World Bank, the direct (income) and indirect (demand) losses from closure amounted to at least $2.8 billion between 1994 and 1996. This amount is equal to the year’s GDP or about $1500 per each Palestinian in the occupied territories. Due to the severely depressed condition of the Palestinian economy, about 25% of donor disbursements have had to be redirected for emergency budgetary support and employment generation schemes. Apart from the closures, it was also noted that the Gaza airport and seaport need to be opened. The conference summary added that that permits for so-called “latecomers” should be renewed; the possibility of a truth and reconciliation commission should be explored; and that any resolution of the refugee issue is dependent on the establishment of a Palestinian state. 

The role of the refugees? 

While the conference generated numerous ideas about the role of the international community, the role of the refugees themselves was largely ignored despite the efforts of a significant number of conference participants who continually raised the importance of Resolution 194; the fact that compensation cannot be imposed and cannot be implemented without a credible solution to the right of return; that refugees should not be seen simply as an economic burden; and that all refugees should be involved in the process of determining their future. By concentrating so heavily on producing “policy-relevant” research that is “salable” to the international community, and in particular donor countries, the conference by and large missed an opportunity to consider research and share ideas which are relevant, and indeed salable, to the refugees themselves. 

In doing so, the conference seemed to violate one of the key principles of the so-called Ottawa process, a process which is supposed to encourage research and discussion that is free of self-censorship and therefore examines seriously those issues considered to be “taboo” or in the case of the conference, impractical. In this respect, the conference clearly demonstrated the significant gap in research from the perspective of refugees themselves. An appropriate agenda for the next conference might be, “Resolving the Palestinian Refugee Problem: What Role for the Refugees?”