The the Palestinians I Result of the June 1

Home , Palestine, Usama Halabi

Rejilgees,2 the term "displaced persons" (DPs) in the Palestinian context The is defined as follows: United Nations terminology for Palestinians displaced in/from the West Banle and the Gaza Strip in the context of the 1967 Israeli-Arab the Palestinians i conflict and falling within the scope of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 237 (1967) [ ... ] includes persons displaced Result of the June 1 War externally and internally at that time, as well as their descendants. The term is also used by the United Nations Relief and Work[s] Usama Halabi Agency (UNRWA) as a reference to persons falling under its mandate Usama Halabi is a lawyer in private practice and a in accordance with United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) law researcher in Jerusalem. This article is based on a Resolution 2252 (1967). presentation given at the United Nations International Another definition was suggested during the Oslo peace talks by both Conference on Palestine Refugees, UNESCO Head the Jordanian and Palestinian delegations to the Quadripartite Continuing quarters, Paris, April 29-30, 2008. Committee (QCC), which was established to deal with the issue of DPs: 3 Displaced Persons are those individuals and their families and The Palestinian refugees of 1948, as well as those descendants who left their homes in the West Bank and Gaza, or were displaced as a result of the 1967 war, have been unable to return to their homes as a consequence of the 1967 war.4 watching the solution to their protracted suffering A much narrower, minimalist definition of Palestinian DPs was become more elusive with each passing day. This article will highlight suggested by the Israeli delegation to same QCC to refer to Palestinians some points that are essential to a discussion of the issue ofthe Palestinian "who were residents of the West Banle and the Gaza Strip and were displaced refugees, but will focus in particular on the Palestinians displaced as a as a result of the fighting."5 result of the June 1967 war, their legal status and rights as they await ajust In attempting to resolve the question of the definition of "a displaced and durable solution to their problem. The article will also deal with the person," the committee divided the displaced persons into three categories: continued Israeli policies and practices, which frustrate any prospect of 1) Those Palestinians who were out of the West Bank and Gaza on the putting an end to Palestinian displacement and dispossession. eve of the 1967 war, and who were registered in the population registry Who Is a 1967 Palestinian "Displaced Person"? of Jordan and the Gaza Strip. Those include students, businessmen, workers, etc., who could not come back to their homes due to the The term "Palestinian refugees" refers to all Palestinians who since Israeli occupation. 1948 have become displaced outside the area that became the state of 2) Those citizens of the West Banle and Gaza who were displaced Israel,! and those who since the 1967 war have become displaced outside during or in the aftermath of the war. the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories. Another group of displaced 3) Those who left the occupied territories after the census of September Palestinians as yet not referred to as "refugees" is that of the Palestinians 1967 and were prevented from coming back by the Israelis. Most internally who have become displaced either within the 1948 areas or the 2 Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Closing the Gaps: Handbook 1967 occupied Palestinian territories. on the Protection of Palestinian Refugees, in States Signatories, the 1951 Refugee Convention In the "Glossary" to key terms in Badil Resource Center for Palestinian (Bethlehem, Palestine, 2005), p.XXIV (hereinafter: Badil's Handbook). 3 The Committee was established according to article XII of the Declaration of Principles (DOP) to Residency and Refugee Rights' Handbook on the Protection ofPales tin ian "decide by agreement on the modalities of admission of persons displaced from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967." The committee was composed of Jordan, the Palestine National Authority, Egypt and Israel. 1 UNRWA uses the term "Palestine refugees" in its registration system to refer to "any person whose 4 Salim Tamari, "Return, Restitution, Repatriation: The Future of Palestinian Refugees in the Peace normal place of residence was Palestine during the period June 1, 1946 to May 15, 1948 and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict." See UNRWA, Negotiati~ns," Sec. Y, FOFOGNET Digest, April 22, 1966, archived on the website of Palestinian Refugee ResearchNet: www.arts.mcgill.ca. Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instl'llction, Department of Social Relief and Social 5 Ibid. Services, January 2002, pA.

15.4116.1 55 54 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL people in this category belong to the so-called "latecomers" (people 37" and issued its Resolution 2252. . .' whose exit permit was not renewed) and deportees. 6 2 The categories ofPa1estinians referred to m UNGA ResolutIO~ . 1 d . 1) the Palestinian residents of the West Bank, the Gaza Stnp Following strong Israeli objections to categories 1) and 3), the QCC e a~d mc u . saleln who fled mostly to Jordan and some to Lebanon or Syna decided to establish a consensus on categ01y 2) and to continue debating the East Jeru . 48 d' 1967 other two. The Israeli delegation also objected to the inclusion ofthe tenns or the first time; 2) Palestinians who became refugees m. 19 .an III . p "families" and "descendants" to the definition of Palestinian DPs. ~ed from East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza.Stn dunng an? after It is estimated that by the end ofthe 1967 war, 433,500 Palestinians, 1967 for the second time; and 3) Palestinian refugees ~n southern Syna.who i.e., more than one-third of the Palestinian population ofthe 1967 occupied were displaced for the second time when Israel occupIed the Golan HeIghts territories, were displaced; this includes 193,500 and the Quneitra area. . It is estimated that by refugees displaced for the second time, and The Palestinians who were displaced for the secon~ t~m~ have been the end ofthe 1967 war, 7 . t db UNRWA as any other 1948 refugee falling wlthm Its mandate. 240,000 displaced for the first time. An Israeli aSSIS e Y h fl d ~ . th 433,500 Palestinians, source places the number of Palestinians displaced While UNRWA did not maintain records of the 1967 DPs woe .01 . e i.e., more than one as a result of the 1967 war at "about 200,000" who fi t (me the records of the 1948 Palestinian refugees already reglsteled third ofthe Palestinian "were dealt with by UNSC Resolution 237."8 By :i~h ~RWA before 1967 were integrated into its database in the areas popUlation ofthe 1967 2007, the total number of Palestinians displaced they fled to - mainly Jordan. . occupied territories, for the first time in 1967 reached approximately It is worth noting that the General Assembly has on a~ annual baSIS were displaced. 950,222, while the number ofintemally displaced extended UNRWA's mandate as detailed in UNGA ResolutIOn 2252, and was estimated at 115,349.9 "re eatedly called for the return of those displaced as a result of the June The above estimate does not include some 400,000 Palestinians whose 19:7 and subsequent hostilities."!! Yet, as ofJuly 2003, only 23,930 of those legal status remains unclear. The majority of the latter has most likely been displaced for the second time and assisted by UNRWA have returned to the forcibly displaced from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since 1967 and is Gaza Strip or to the West Bank.!2 . . now residing outside the 1967 occupied territories as a result of measures It should be emphasized here that those 1967 displaced Paiestmmns . t d 'thUNRWA or who are registered but for whatever by the occupying powers, mainly the revocation of residency, the denial of who are not regIS ere WI, . . . reason are not receiving its assistance, are and should be eh~Ible fOl the family reunification and deportation.lO y protection of the High Commissioner fo~ Refugees (UNHCR) I.fthe ful.fill The Scope of UN Responsibility towards the 1967 DPs the following criteria stemming from ArtIcle 1D ofthe C~nv~ntIOn Relatmg Pursuant to the above definition of "displaced persons," on June to the Status of Refugees ofthe 1951 Refugee Co.nventIOn : 14, 1967, the UN Security Council issued Resolution 237. Article 1 of * they live outside UNRWA's area of operatIOn.s; . . * they do not fall within Article 1C of the ConventlOn (CessatlOn the resolution calls upon the government of Israel to "ensure the safety, Cla~se), * they do not fall within the scope of the exclusion clauses ofArtIcles welfare and security of inhabitants of the areas where militaty operations '4 have taken place and to facilitate the return ofthose inhabitants who have IE or 1F of the Convention. . Furthermore, current scholars in refugee law WIdely agree that fled the areas since the outbreak of hostilities." On July 4, 1967, the UN Palestinian refugees can qualify for protection under the 1951. Re:ugee General Assembly welcomed "with great satisfaction UNSC Resolution Convention without "need to undergo additional or fresh determmatIOn of 6 Ibid. 7 Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Survey o/Palestinian Refilgees and Jntel'l1ally Displaced Persons 2006-2007 (Bethlehem, Palestine, June 2007), p.15 (hereinafter: Badil's 2007 Survey") citing Lex Takkenberg, The Status o.fPalestinian Refilgees in Jntemational II BadiI's Handbook, p.55 and references cited. . I A bl 12 Ibid P 56 refening to the United Nations secretary-general's annual report to th~I~~nela ssem y, Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press Oxford, 1998), pp.17, 82. ; s~ re' ort included in General Assembly Resolution of July 3, 2003. A/58 . . . 8 See Ruth Lapidot, Legal Aspects o/the Palestinian Rejzlgee QlIestion, Jerusalem Center for Public la e p . "I 189 2545(1954) P 152 The Convention is also repnnted as AppendiX Affairs, Jerusalem Letter/Viewpoints, No. 485, September 1, 2002. 13 UN Treaty Senes, vO • ,no. ,., 9 Badil's 2007 Survey, p.44. 4 in Sadi! 's Handbook, p.3 77. 14 Sadi!'s Handbook, pp.60-61 and references cited. 10 Ibid, p.43. See also the sources cited and referred to in footnote 4, p.72.

15.4/16.1 57 56 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL continued to debate the status of the 1948 refugees, since the issue of

DPs is discussed in the context of the QCC, which is a purely Arab 0' refugee. . status. "15 It is the cessatIOn. of fu f f part .of Its area of operation and/or th . nc 0 UNRWA either in all or ~~n Israeli committee. receive the assistance of UNRWA th e mablhty of Palestinian refugees t * Avoids overloading the work of the final status negotiations if the under the 195 J Convention. '" at counts and establishes their c1igibili~ following categories of people are transferred to their committee, namely, people who lost their residency but who are technically DPsThe Failure of Is rae. r1- Pl'a estlman . Negotiations on Refugees and neither refugees nor DPs: a) deportees and b) citizens who lost their permanent IDs?O Except for some progress in the area of family reunification,21 . It is no secret that the Israeli- . . ~atled to yield the desired results re p:~estil1la.n negotiations to date have expectations and the reality concerning the main iss"," ti,e refugee problem, ll1cluding the 1967 DPs D" gar mg the Issue of Palestinian refu never converged _ which was not surprising, considering Israel's denial th 0 1 . Ul1l1g the Madrid 1 gees, e s 0 peace talks, there wa peace ta ks, and later durin ofresponsibility for the creation of the refugee problem. Nonetheless, there was one positive outcome to the Oslo Accords and the between the J 94R refugees and t:e ~ ;~~;~Sful attempt to di Iferenti at~ was negotiated within the R fl . s. While the issue of refugee 1995 Taba Agreement: the reduction in and ncar-elimination ofthe forcible Con tinnin g Corumi ttee for Group (R W G) (1992)," th: displacement of Palestinians residing in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip D:';!~~d~~rkJflg through the revocation of residency status by the Israeli military govemment. and reestablIshed in March 1995 18 I rsons was established later in 1993 between the two categories of refu t would seem likely that the separation That said, Israel continues to treat the West Bank and Gaza as two separate of the Palestinian side from the gees .was an attempt to divelt the attention entities, including with regard to residency. Thus, Palestinians are not es keep it busy with the smaller prob~~re Is~~e of the refugee problem and to permitted to change their domiciles and addrcss trom one area to another. etc. ms 0 atecomers, family reunifications In addition, the reunification of Palestinian families in the West Bank and the 19 Gaza Strip has been subject to arbitrary Israeli consent and, since the outbreak However, some Palestinian ne . ' of the Palestinians. found the separation was to the of the second intifada, the whole application procedure has come to a complete advant~ge Sali;*13tot:~ 1l11an delegatIOn to both the RWG d amaIi- a member ofthe Palest' . stop. Finally, the whole issue of Jerusalem, including its future legal status this procedure'*. . an the Continuing Committee - argue d that and that of its Palestinian inhabitants, has not been decided. Israel continues to extend its laws and administration to East Jerusalem, which it unilaterally Preempts the claims that the set 1 annexed in June 1967. Using its laws as political tools, Israel considers We.st Bank and Gaza is part of a ~:~~ent of displaced persons in the clatms on their rights insid I' 1 .p~ckage that precludes further the Palestinians, including the refugees and the displaced, as "permanent st t fD e srae. ThIS IS patti 1 1 residents" whose residency rights can be and have been revoked. a us 0 Ps who are also 1948 . .c, cu ar y relevant to the * Benefit th lelugees ~ e Palestinians from the ar···· . commumty (in particular UN . P . tiCl?atIOn of the mternational Ongoing Displacement of Palestinians Olgal1lZatIOns) if the multi laterals Israel has not only opposed any attempt at implementing the right of retum of Palestinian refugees and DPs and considered the limited family ,;"B a d'l'I s Handbook, pp.83-85. reunifications as "accomplishing the right of retum through the back door"; Takkenberg, p.123. 17TheRWG18 . was establIshed.. 111 the Arab-l" . it has also imposed on the Palestinians who remained in the 1967 occupied S~e Article XU of tbe Declaration of :Jaeh ;nUItIlateral peace negotiation ill 1992 rUcle XXXVII of the 1995 Israeli nncIp es on Interim-Self Govemment o' . Palestinian territories various legal and administrative measures that have The committee is known al -Palestlt1Ian Agreement on the West BIt 1993. See also led to continued forcible displacement and dispossession. These measures Egypt and Israel so as the Quadripartite Committee c ~1 ( and the Gaza Strip. 19 For example: the' issue of the 1967 d' ' ompose of Jordan, the PNA, ~ommittee as one unit. In n ~ Isplaced persons was not dealt wi I . . 20 Tamari, Op.Cit, Sec. IX. 1I1 the committee. Instead thact, the Issue of real displaced persons was t ~ 1I1 the Quadnpartite 21 An agreementto approve 2,000 cases offamily reunification (or 6,000 persons) annually \Vas reached West Bank and Gaza ' e Issue of70,000-80,000 "late comer" . no s~n.ously dealt with between the two parties. Yet, much ofthe procedures involving eligibility, application procedures had expired, and the ~~s:~~ ~~ W~~k and ':stayed" in Jordan beca~s~~h:i:.l~s~mJa,:l(s who left the and implementation of the said quota remained outstanding for a long time. significant success. amI y reul1lfication" took most of th e commIttee's~Isas tIme~Xlt permits)with no 15.4/16.1 59

58 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL include deportation, the revocation of residency rights, house demolitions the Israeli Supreme Court. and large-scale land confiscation - before and after the construction of the Land Confiscation and Settlement Building separation wall. 22 Additionally, Israel has been imposing severe limitations * on the freedom of movement within the West Bank and between the West Since 1967, Israel has confiscated more than 3,350 square kilometers Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem. And consequently, the limitations on the right from the West Bank and has built there no less than 120 "legal" to work and the tight to receive education and public services should be settlements and 100 outposts, with over 440,000 Jewish settlers. In added to the list of measures used by Israel, which cause despair among addition, Israel has been building a highway network connecting the the Palestinian population, leading to repeated displacement, both inside settlements with each other and with IsraelY Israel has been carrying the 1967 occupied territories and across regional borders. 23 out its colonial activity in the West Bank using various military orders; * House Demolitions in East Jerusalem, Israel has used its "land laws" to confiscate more than one-third of Palestinian land there. More than 12,000 Palestinian homes, built without permits, have been The Separation Wall demolished in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. In * addition, 400 families were displaced after the April 2002 attack on It is estimated that 70,000-100,000 Palestinians, among them 11,000 and siege of the Jenin refugee camp. This does not include the 10,000 refugees from the Shu'fat Refugee Camp, are currently isolated or refugee shelters destroyed in the 1970s and 1980s, which affected about to be isolated by the wall Israel has started building in 2002. over 62,000 refugees in the Gaza Strip, and the demolition of 2,521 By May 2005, some 15,000 persons had been forcibly displaced.28 A refugee shelters between 2000 and 2005, which left 24,151 persons joint survey conducted by Badil and the Palestinian Central Bureau of homeless and displaced. As of November 2006,294 families have had Statistics, published on July 4,2006, found that 17.3% ofthe population their homes demolished and more than 5,100 persons were displaced had changed their previous place of residence due to "the wall and during the Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip in June and its consequences" - e.g., to keep their Jerusalem IDs - and 63.8% July of 2006. Finally, around 700 houses were demolished between persons 16 years old and over were thinking of changing their current 24 1994 and 2006. place of residence because of its location relative to the wall,29 * Deportation * Nationality and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) of 2003 30 Israel has deported more than 6,500 Palestinians from the occupied This law was enacted to limit the possibility of family reunification Palestinian territories since 1967.25 During the height of the second for Palestinian Jerusalemites and their Palestinian spouses from the intifada, in 2002-2004, Israel deported around 50 Palestinians from West Bank and Gaza Strip, even if this leads - and is leading - to the West Bank to the Gaza Strip.26 This procedure was approved by the break-up of "mixed families." This temporary law disallows the minister ofthe interior to issue permanent or even temporary residency 22 See: Usama Halabi, "The Legal Status of Palestinians in Jerusalem," The Palestine-Israel J01t1'1lal, Vo1.4 No.1, 1997, p. 79. See also Usama Halabi, "Revoking Permanent Residency: A Legal Review visas to those considered to be "residents of the territories," i.e., ofIsraeli Policy," Jerusalem Quarterly, Institute of Jerusalem Studies, Summer 2000, pAO (http:// residents of the West Bank or Gaza. In addition, this law prevents the www.ierusalemquarterly.orgLiqf.php). See also Usama HaJabi, "Israeli Laws and Judiciary System as Tools for Accomplishing Political Objectives in Jerusalem," the Civic Coalitionfol' Defending the Palestinians' Rights ill Jerusalem, Jerusalem, June 2007, pp. 18-22. 27 Badil's 2007 Survey, p.18 and references cited. 23 Badil's 2007 Survey, p.l7 & pp.119-120. 28 Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Survey ofPalestinian Rejzlgees 24 Ibid, pp. 17-18 and references cited including: Meir Margalit, "No Place Like Home, House Demolition and Inte/'J1ally Displaced Persons 2004-2005 (Bethlehem, Palestine, June 2007), p.27. See also in East Jerusalem," The Israeli Committee Against House Demolition, March 2007, pp.5, 28. Badil's 2007 Survey, p. 21. 25 Ibid, p.17. 29 The survey summary was published in a press release on July 4,2006. For more details, see Forced 26 See: The Annual Reportfor 2004, Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, May 2005, Displacement as a Result of tile Construction ofthe Wafl and Its Associated Regime in Occupied pAO cited in Badil's 2007 Survey, p.37, note 97. See also: Israel's Deportation alld Forcible East Jerusalem, A pilot study of Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Transfers ofPalestinians out ofthe West Bank During the Second Intifada, Occasional Paper 15, Rights in cooperation with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), July 4,2006. Ramallah, April 2006, p.3 3U Published in the Compilation ofIsraeli Laws, 2003, Volume 1901, p.544.

60 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL 15.4/16.1 61 1 f 'right' of return and like most Security Council resolutions, it upgrading ofthe status of the non-Jerusalemite spouse, and it has been J10t speal( 0 a - . , .' h "[]h . 1 ture ofa recommendation."34 She dId admIt, however, t at t e applied retroactively.3! In t le na .' hid . y include a right to return to the new Palestmlan orne an , The law came as a replacement to Government Decision No. 1813, issued solutlOn ma . b) d on May 12, 2002, which provided for the suspension of all decisions :,,:ettlernt;;JJl and integration in various other states (Arab and non-~la ,an regarding family reunification and for the closing of all doors to any new ossible return to Israel if compelling humanitarian reasons are mvolved, application, including the registration of babies born outside Jerusalem psuch as fami'l'fi y um ca t' IOn. "35 . . . . . or in Jerusalem to a Jerusalemite mother and a West Bank or Gaza father. On the other hand, one finds tremendous ambigmty m the. PalestIman It is not coincidental that the title of the aforementioned government position regardi~g tl~e exa~t meaning of "right of return." Is It the return decision was "Policy of family reunification regarding the Palestinian to historic Palestme mcludmg Israel? Or only . . Authority population and foreigners of Palestinian origin." t the areas occupied in 1967, always with For many Palestl1~wns o I 11' agreement? For many Palestinians intellectuals and offiCials, a Finally, it was reported that between 2002 and 2006, 561 families an srae' ., . (about 2,800 persons) lost their residency rights in Arab East intellectuals and officials, a Palestinian right Palestmum nght ofretum Jerusalem.32 These people can be arrested and deported from Jerusalem of return would be understood to mean a return would be understo~d to for "illegally staying in Israel." to national soil in the West Bank and Gaza, mean a return to natIOnal rather than a return to their 1948 homes. Ziad soil in the West Bank and The Feasibility of Implementing the 1967 DPs' Right ofRetum AbuZayyad, for example, suggests that "one Gaza, rather than a retum As Israel has rejected the Palestinian right of return and denied its must distinguish between [ ... ] the 'right of to their 1948 homes. responsibility in creating the Palestinian refugee problem, its official return' as a principle and [ ... J exercising that representatives have opposed basing any negotiations with the Palestine right by literally returning to Palestine as a national ho~elal~d ....3:,. . Prof. Rashid Khalidi emphasizes what he terms attamable lather Liberation Organization (PLO) and Palestinian National Authority (PNA) than "absolute" justice and suggests that, while "it must be accepted on the principles ofUN GA Resolution 194. One reason stated repeatedly is th~t all Palestinian refugees and their descendants have a right to to that accepting the right of the Palestinians to return to their original homes retur~ ~helr in Israel would cause a substantial change in the demographic balance of homes in principle ... ," it must be "equally accepted that i~ pra~tIc~ jOl::3~ majeure will prevent most ofthem from being able to exerCIse tIns the state and in its Jewish character. As Prof. Ruth Lapidot, a leading Israeli n~?t. Abbas Shiblaq, a member of the Palestinian RWG team, has that [t]he legal scholar and former legal advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ~oted right of return for Palestinian refugees will be basically applied to the argued, if Israel were to allow all of the refugees to return to its territory, fut~re Palestinian state in areas occupied in 1967."38 Shaml Ne'vvsletter it would be an act of suicide on its part, and no state can be expected to (of~hlch destroy itself. 33 Shiblaq is editor) states, however, that "a return to Palestinian NatIOnal Authority areas is not a substitute to the right of return .of the refugees of Prof. Lapidot supports her argument with the fact that "[n Jone of 1948"; while also acknowledging that "it would be naive to that the agreements between Israel and Egypt, the Palestinians, and Jordan assun~e political considerations and developments of the last fifty years will not respectively, has granted the refugees a right of return to Israel. She denied have an impact on the way that this right might be implemented."39 the existence of a legal right ofreturn even for the 1967 displaced persons to the 1967 occupied territories, emphasizing that UNSC Resolution 237 "does 3" Ibid, p.6. 35 Ibid. . . A h " P Ire Israel 36 Ziad AbuZayyad, "The Palestinian Right of Return: A RealIstiC pproac, a es III - , 31 For example, those whose application for family reunification was approved and obtained a visa for a stay in Israel (B), will not obtain - after the required 27 months - a permit for temporary JOll/'lla/ (Spring 1994), p.77. . .. resi~ency (NS), which, in addition to the right to work in Israel, is accompanied by the right to 37 Rashid K'halidi, "Toward a Solution," in Center for Policy Analysis on Palestme, Palest1/7/G11 receIVe allowances from the social security agency under the social security law and the right to Rejilgees: Their Problem and Future (Washington, DC: C~AP, 1994). . . receive health services under the official health law. 38 Se~ "Palestinian Refugees and Final Status: Key Issues, views expressed by the Palestmtan Refugee ResearchNet (PRRN) site coordinator: www.arts.mcgill.ca. The coordmator referred to 32 Badil's 2007 SlIIvey, p. 21, citing Ilan Shahar, "You Win Some Residents, You Lose Some Residents," Haaretz, April 4, 2007. "Commentary," Shaml Newsletter 3 (June 1996), p.4. 33 Lapidot, Op.Cit., p.S. 39 Ibid.

15.4/16.1 63 62 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL Closing Remarks One might agree or disagree with the "practical approach" of some Israeli and Palestinian scholars as to the solution to the refugee problem as a whole. Yet, it is worth noting that a central assumption of these more flexible interpretations of the Palestinian right of return is the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. Such a Palestinian state is an essential component of any future - even partial-solution, e.g., ending the 1967 displacement by allowing the DPs and their descendents to return to the territories occupied in 1967 and from whence they fled. But such a Palestinian state does not seem much more accessible than the achievement of the right of return itself. Nonetheless, the 1948 Palestinian refugees and the 1967 Palestinian DPs have a moral and a legal right to return to their places of origin. Until a just solution to the refugee problem is reached, Israel must stop creating more forced displacement of the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, including Palestinian rejilgees crossing the bridge into Jordan. East Jerusalem.

64 PALESTINE-ISRAEL JOURNAL