A History of the Future of Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon 1993-2000

In the Presence of Absence: A History of the Future of Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon 1993-2000 Sana Saeed Institute of Islamic Studies McGill University, Montréal August 2011 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts. © Sana Saeed, 2011 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………….. I Résumé………………………………………………………………………………… II Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………. III Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Chapter One: Forgotten at Oslo…………………………………………………….. 9 Mincing Words: The Road to Oslo through the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference The Palestinians at Madrid The Refugee Working Group and Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon The PLO’s Betrayal at Oslo: Palestinian Refugees and Arafat’s Deal with Israel The Declaration of Principles and Implications for Palestinian Refugees Chapter Two: Discussing Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon………………………. 43 Starting the Conversation: The 1996 “Palestinians in Lebanon” Conference The 1995 Core-Group Meeting The Palestinians in Lebanon Conference: Attendance, Reception and Obstacles Results from the Conference and the Fourth Phase The 1997 Stocktaking Conference on Palestinian Refugee Research Conference Structure and Key Findings Reception and Restrictions The 1998 Warwick Conference: What Role for the International Community? European Interest in the Question of Palestinian Refugees Conference Program and Discussions The Role of the Refugees and Understanding the Interim Period Discussions Chapter Three: Lebanon During the Oslo Interim Years…………………………. 84 Rebuilding on Ruins: Post-Civil War Reconstruction Efforts and the Palestinians Perceiving Palestinians: Lebanese Fear of Resettlement and Violence Relationships Views on Naturalization Palestinian Resettlement in Lebanon Domestic Implications of Resettlement and Resistance Without Refuge: Betrayal, Representation and Arms in the Refugee Camps Betrayal at Oslo Palestinian Representation and ‘Security Islands’ Reconstructing Rhetoric: The Lebanese Political Elite’s Response A Decade of Allegiance to the Right of Return Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………. 114 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….. 121 ! Abstract When Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin met in Washington D.C to sign the Oslo Accords on September 13th 1993, it was a monumental occasion. While the international community applauded the agreement, many within the Palestinian camp felt betrayed. The parameters set by the Declaration of Principles gave preference to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories over the millions of Palestinians living in the diaspora. Thus the Palestinian refugees outside the Occupied Territories felt marginalized. This sense of marginalization was intensified by the fact that the final status arrangements, that included the issue of the refugees, had been put aside for discussion following the five- year interim period. Of all the Palestinian refugees living outside the Occupied Territories those in Lebanon felt the most vulnerable. The Palestinian refugees in Lebanon as well as many segments of the Lebanese population feared that the Oslo process would lead to the resettlement of the refugees in the country. While the official process, however, put the question of the refugees and their Right of Return on the shelf, there was a significant conversation happening on the so-called 'third-track.' This dissertation examines this track, which was comprised of three major conferences that took place during the Oslo interim period. Drawing on the papers and reports that were generated by these conferences, in addition to interviews with some of the participants, the dissertation tells the story of how third-track participants thought about the future of the Palestinian refugees during the Oslo process. ! I Résumé Lorsque Yasser Arafat et Yitzhak Rabin se sont rencontrés à Washington DC afin de signer les Accords d’Oslo le 13 septembre 1993, c’était un évènement monumental. Pour la première fois depuis le début du conflit, les Israëliens et les Palestiniens se rencontraient face à face, et se sont mis d’accord de franchir les premiers pas vers la résolution du conflit. Pendant que la communauté internationale saluait ce geste, plusieurs du camps Palestiniens se sentaient trahis. Il semblait que les critères décidés par la Déclaration des principes favorisaient les Palestiniens des Territoires Occupés Palestiniens, plutôt que les millions des Palestiniens vivant dans la diaspora. En particulier, les réfugiés Palestiniens hors des Territoires Occupés Palestiniens se sentaient mis à l’écart. Ce sens de la marginalisation a été intensifié par le fait que les arrangements du statut final, qui incluaient le point sur les réfugiés, ont été repoussés en discussion après une période d’intérim de cinq ans. De tous les réfugiés Palestiniens vivant hors des Territoires Occupés Palestiniens, ceux du Liban se sentaient les plus vulnerables. Les réfugiés Palestiniens du Liban ainsi que plusieurs parties de la population Libanaise craignaient que le processus d’Oslo provoqueraient la relocalisation des réfugiés du pays. Pendant que la procedure officielle sur les réfugiés et leur droit au retour était mis de côté, il y avait un dialogue important en parallèle, dans ce qui est prénommé le « third-track ». Cette dissertation examine ce canal d’échange en parallèle, qui consiste en trios conférences majeures qui ont eu lieu pendant la période intérim d’Oslo. En utilisant les essais et rapports qui ont été faits suite à ces conférences, en plus d’entretiens avec certains des participants, la dissertation raconte comment les participants en parallèle (« third-track participants ») pensaient l’avenir des réfugiés Palestiniens pendant le processus d’Oslo. ! II Acknowledgments The importance of the question of the Palestinian refugees, in Lebanon and elsewhere, is one that goes beyond any geographic constraint. It is ultimately a question that forms the basis of how we view, treat and understand our fellow human beings in the context of citizenship, the nation and the state. While the situation and experience of the Palestinian refugees is greatly unique, it also significantly shares much in common with the situations and experiences of so many others forcibly displaced. I hope that this dissertation is able to add another layer of nuance to our approach and discussions on refugees. Often, those of us in academia, policy-making, diplomacy and governance find it easier to make decisions, form opinions and construct policies on statistics and abstracts. It is harder to move forward, in any direction, when we see the human faces and lives that will be affected by our choices. This dissertation is thus first and foremost dedicated to those caught between homelands and nations; those who despite being present, have been kept absent. I would further like to acknowledge my supervisor, Dr. Laila Parsons, whose help and academic mentorship has proven to be incomparable. I am truly grateful to her for her academic discipline and rigor as well as her boundless kindness. I like to think I am leaving her supervision a little better at constructing short and precise sentences. I would also like to acknowledge the McGill Islamic Studies Library, which proved to be an amazing resource in finding unanticipated hidden historical materials. And I would like to thank Dr. Rex Brynen and Mr. Nadim Shehadi for their assistance in giving invaluable insight. Additionally, special acknowledgements go to the following organizations: The Jerusalem Fund, The Institute for Palestine Studies, BADIL, ICAMES, PRRN and Forced Migration. There has been an innumerable amount of people who have helped me in various ways. Whether through locating resources, keeping my morale above the bare minimum or encouraging me to think outside constraints – their support and influence has been valuable. To them, in no particular order, I would like to extend my gratitude: Dr. A. Uner Turgay, Dr. Setrag Manoukian, Dr. Hudson Meadwell, Dr. Jason Scott Ferrell, Merouan Mekouar, Giulia El-Dardiry, Andrew Dalack, Ragheb Abdo, Usman Hamid, Heather Empey, Christopher Anzalone, William Youmans, Elahe Hosseini, Fadia Bahgat, ! III Sumayya Daghar, Isra Jeelani Wani, Noha Mahdi, Meriem Boudjarane and Mushq’Ali Zaidi. Finally, I would like to acknowledge and thank my family: my brother, for teaching me priorities; my mother, for teaching me the weight of empathy and my father for just teaching me. ! ! IV Introduction “Exile, which is a misunderstanding between existence and the borders.” – Mahmoud Darwish In 1917, towards the end of the First World War, British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour sent a letter to a leading British Zionist by the name of Baron Walter Rothschild. The Baron had worked on a declaration of establishing a Jewish homeland in what was then known as Palestine. The letter from Balfour, later known as the Balfour Declaration of 1917, read that the government viewed “with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of the object.”1 Balfour added that it should also be “clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious' rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” The declaration would later become a part of the Treaty of Sèvres, which in effect dismantled the Ottoman Empire and designated its territories as mandates for European powers. Of these mandates, Palestine fell

Load more