Palestinian Academic Khalil
Shikaki, in consultation with the
Palestinian Authority (PA), set out to gauge Palestinian refugees'
reactions to the solutions to the refugee problem offered at the
Taba talks in 2001. The idea, most
likely, was to give the PA a sense of their bargaining position.
Unfortunately, many people have taken the results of this poll out
of context, and deemed it the final judgement on what Palestinian
refugees want. It is no such thing and was never meant to be.
In Taba representatives of the
PA and the Israeli government of Ehud
Barak developed the idea of offering to
Palestinian refugees a range of options from which they could choose in
order to end their stateless existence and exercise their right of return.
Since Barak cut short the negotiations to
concentrate on the Israeli elections, and the Sharon government has never
restarted them, the point reached by the negotiators at
Taba, no matter how imperfect, is still the
starting point for any subsequent talks.
Shikaki began his survey by
asking the refugee families - from Lebanon, Jordan and
the Palestinian Territories - if they thought that the Israel of today
would ever actually agree to the options offered at
Taba. A majority said no. Nevertheless, the refugees were told to
assume that the Taba options were offered to
them and then select the one they would prefer. Already we can see that
whatever answers are given, they will only represent a choice between
several different options - options that those being polled don't even
believe Israel would ever agree to. This is a far cry from a free and
open poll of the refugees' opinions. Their choices were circumscribed, but
nevertheless their preferences out of those meager and perhaps
unsatisfactory options should be examined fully.
To begin with, 95 percent of those polled believed that
the right of return was a "sacred" right that must be recognized by
Israel. Many commentators have seized on the figure of 10 percent who said
they would return to their homes in what is now Israel, but have
deliberately ignored the fact that almost every single refugee polled
demanded the recognition of the right of return. As outlined in UN General
Assembly resolution 194, the right of return does not
require the refugees to
return, it only demands that they be allowed to. To summarize the results
of this poll by saying "only 10 percent of Palestinian refugees would
exercise their right of return" is deliberately deceptive. It would be
more accurate to say that "only 10 percent of the small sample of
Palestinian refugees polled, after having received from the government of
Israel unconditional recognition of their right of return, would choose
the first option outlined in the Taba
proposal, although they do not believe Israel ever intends to honor such a
proposal."
But moving on, the 10 percent figure itself is deceptive.
A further 13 percent of refugees polled said that they would return to
areas of what is now Israel which would eventually be transferred to the
control of the Palestinian state. This is no different than choosing to
return to Israel, because the areas these refugees would choose to return
to are still a part of Israel. Now it appears that we would most honestly
summarize the poll results by saying that "23 percent of the small sample
of Palestinian refugees polled, after having received from the government
of Israel unconditional recognition of their right of return, would choose
to accept one of the Taba options which would
allow them to return to their homes in what is now Israel (even if it
might subsequently become part of a Palestinian state.)"
Striking also is the fact that 18 percent of those polled
would either refuse all options or gave no opinion. This is almost twice
the number who said they would accept that first Taba
option, namely returning to their homes in what is now Israel and taking
Israeli citizenship. This signifies that many refugees polled were not
happy with the circumscribed choices offered and, even after having been
asked to suspend disbelief and assume that Israel was willing to recognize
their right of return and implement the Taba
proposals, rejected the format of the questions altogether. A more nuanced
picture of the views of the refugees polled is beginning to emerge.
Some critics of the poll have pointed out that the
refugees were not offered all the choices that should be available to them
under the law. This is correct. But the poll never pretended to include
all of those options - it only focussed on the options presented at
Taba. As long as it is only interpreted with
this fact in mind it can be seen as accurate.
Despite the best efforts of Zionist apologists and
Israel's expert propagandists to paint the poll as a blow to advocates of
refugees' human rights, the results, as they have been portrayed, are
devastating to Israel's racist right wing. These Zionist ideologues have
always attempted to frighten the Israeli public with stories of millions
of dirty Arabs returning to swamp them and undermine their ethnically pure
state if the right of return were ever to be recognized. Leaving aside the
pervasive racism of Israeli society that the success of these scare
tactics exposes, what the poll shows - if it indeed shows anything
concrete - is that only a portion
of the refugees would choose to return to their former homes.
Almost certainly a higher percentage than the 23 percent we discussed
above would choose repatriation. But those Zionist apologists who point
out the 10 percent figure as some kind of club to be wielded against
supporters of the right of return only end up dropping it on their own
foot since it undermines all of their objections to the implementation of
that right!
The reaction to this poll among both supporters and
detractors of the right of return is instructive. Clearly the assault on
Shikaki and his offices demonstrates that many
refugees will go to any lengths to defend their rights. These are not
people for whom the right of return can be ignored or negotiated away. But
the widespread ignorant and de-contextualized manipulation of the data
only shows that those Zionists whose prejudices have always militated
against allowing Palestinians to return home are eager to make fools of
themselves. They have convinced each other,
and are trying to convince anyone else who will listen, that what they've
wanted all along is really exactly what the victims of their hatred and
prejudice want too. Although this might be a therapeutic coping mechanism
which allows them to deal with pushing a racist ultra right-wing agenda
(an ethincally pure state, free from the
imagined pollution of its native inhabitants) while still considering
themselves morally superior, the facts of the poll simply do not support
their interpretation.
Casey Patrick Reilly
is a Research
Assistant of the Palestine Center.