UNRWA Official Urges Palestinians to Prepare Refugees for No Return to Israel

[donsutherland1]

From today's edition of The Jerusalem Post:

Whitley [Andrew Whitley, director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency’s New York Representative Office] also said that Palestinians must start acknowledging that the refugees will almost certainly not be returning to Israel so that they can improve their situation...

“If one doesn’t start a discussion soon with the refugees for them to consider what their own future might be -- for them to start debating their own role in the societies where they are rather than being left in a state of limbo where they are helpless but preserve rather the cruel illusions that perhaps they will return one day to their homes -- then we are storing up trouble for ourselves,” he declared.

Mr. Whitley is an example that the UN still has a number of people who are realistic, dedicated to facilitating peace, and committed to improving human welfare. Unfortunately, most of such officials labor all too quietly, while loud propagandists peddling political agendas such as Mr. Falk, author of a recent anti-Israel screed, steal the headlines, widen and harden divisions, and poison the atmosphere for peacemaking, improving human living conditions, and promoting human rights.

 

[Tashah]

I addressed this very reality in a previous post here somewhere. For decades, the Palestinian leadership has promulgated the narrative promise that no final settlement with Israel would be possible without a physical Palestinian Right of Return. While Israel may agree to compensate refugees monetarily, she would never agree to an influx of numerous generations of Palestinian refugees. This is precisely where Abbas is teetering. He cannot fulfill this Palestinian narrative promise as it has been rendered for decades and also obtain a permanent peace accord with Israel.

If I were the Israeli PM, I would temporarily extend the recently expired settlement freeze. This would force Abbas to contend with the two available options...

1 - Be honest with the Palestinian people and concede the physical Right of Return for a monetary compensation.

2 - Refuse to accept any settlement agreement that features monetary compensation in lieu of the physical Right of Return.

Option 1 is potentially an extremely dangerous internal political position.

Option 2 is potentially a devastating international public relations nightmare.

 

[Degreez]

Mr. Whitley is an example that the UN still has a number of people who are realistic, dedicated to facilitating peace, and committed to improving human welfare. Unfortunately, most of such officials labor all too quietly, while loud propagandists peddling political agendas such as Mr. Falk, author of a recent anti-Israel screed, steal the headlines, widen and harden divisions, and poison the atmosphere for peacemaking, improving human living conditions, and promoting human rights.

ROFL.

The only people who have ever criticised Richard Falk's appointments and reports are either from the United States or Israel. Coincidence? Not really.

In before accusations of Mr. Falk being antisemitic. :roll:

 

[donsutherland1]

I addressed this very reality in a previous post here somewhere. For decades, the Palestinian leadership has promulgated the narrative promise that no final settlement with Israel would be possible without a physical Palestinian Right of Return. While Israel may agree to compensate refugees monetarily, she would never agree to an influx of numerous generations of Palestinian refugees. This is precisely where Abbas is teetering. He cannot fulfill this Palestinian narrative promise as it has been rendered for decades and also obtain a permanent peace accord with Israel.

If I were the Israeli PM, I would temporarily extend the recently expired settlement freeze. This would force Abbas to contend with the two available options...

1 - Be honest with the Palestinian people and concede the physical Right of Return for a monetary compensation.

2 - Refuse to accept any settlement agreement that features monetary compensation in lieu of the physical Right of Return.

Option 1 is potentially an extremely dangerous internal political position.

Option 2 is potentially a devastating international public relations nightmare.

Excellent points, Tashah.