This is the fourth in a five-part series about the final status issues in the Israel-Palestinian conflict
Among the five “final status” issues, none is as cynically manipulated as the question of refugees. Borders and security are about maps. Refugees are about people: millions whose identities have been shaped by a conflict that began more than seventy-seven years ago and, thanks to deliberate choices by Arab leaders and international enablers, has been kept alive ever since.
For Palestinians, the refugee narrative remains central to their political identity. They are the only refugee population on earth that is maintained as “refugees” generation after generation for political games. For Israelis, the Palestinian demand for an Arab “right of return” is existential: accepting millions of Palestinians into Israel would erase the Jewish majority and the very purpose of a Jewish homeland. That clash of absolutes is why the refugee file has blocked every attempt at peace.
The Origins of the Refugee Question
On November 29, 1947, when the United Nations passed Resolution 181 to create one Jewish and one Arab state in what was then Palestine, the Arab world erupted. They refused to allow the establishment of a Jewish state in their midst, and attacks against the Jewish community began. When Israel was established on May 14, 1948, seven Arab states launched what would become the War of Independence to destroy it.
From November 1947 until the end of the war in January 1949, some 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled. Those Arabs who opted to remain peaceful residents of the Jewish State, were granted Israeli citizenship and remain Israeli today (along with their descendants). Many Arabs however opted to flee the fighting, encouraged to do so by their own leaders. Some left thinking that they would return back home after Israel was destroyed. And yes, some were forced out by Israel if they posed a threat to the new state.
But rather than absorbing those Palestinian Arab refugees, who had fled to Egypt, Egyptian-occupied Gaza, Jordan, the Jordanian-occupied West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere, Arab governments parked them in camps, denied them citizenship, would not allow their full participation in civil society, and weaponized their plight against Israel. Today, their descendants number in the millions: in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and beyond. Those refugees are pawns in a geopolitical game of chess designed to delegitimize Israel.
The refugee lawyer in me finds it necessary to point out that every other refugee population in the world only lasts one generation: when a refugee, for example, from Afghanistan, flees to Canada, they can be granted refugee status per international treaties, then they become permanent residents of Canada, and then Canadian citizens. Thus, their children or grandchildren would no longer be considered refugees. Not so with the Palestinians, however, who are not granted citizenship in their neighbour countries, as they are far more potent a public-relations weapon against Israel as refugees, than as citizens of Syria, Lebanon, or Egypt.
Palestinians sometimes point to UN General Assembly Resolution 194, passed in 1948, intended to end the War of Independence as proof of a “right of return.” But Israel argues, accurately, that the resolution was non-binding and has been willfully distorted by anti-Israel critics. It never created a mass immigration right that would undo Israel’s existence.
Lausanne Conference
At the Lausanne Conference of 1949, convened by the UN to address issues related to the fallout from the War of Independence, there was some talk about Israel admitting a token number of Arab refugees back into Israel, with some compensation offered to others, but nothing material came of this. The Israeli position remained that, “the exodus [of Palestinian refugees] is a direct consequence of [the Arab states’] criminal invasion.”
This last statement is relevant because it was not only Palestinian refugees that were created during the War of Independence. After Israel’s establishment, approximately 850,000 Jews were chased out of their homes in Arab lands where they had lived for generations - from across North Africa, Iraq, Yemen, etc. - making their way to Israel. As far as Israel was concerned, they swapped refugee populations with the surrounding Arab States. However, unlike the Palestinian refugees who were never absorbed into their host countries, the Jewish refugees became Israeli citizens. In 1950, Israel passed the “Law of Return” allowing any Jewish person to immigrate to Israel and become a citizen.
1990s Oslo: Deferred Yet Again
Like Jerusalem, borders, and security, the refugee issue was kicked down the road at Oslo. Both sides agreed it was too sensitive to resolve early. Decades later, it remains unsolved, to the extent that the Palestinians insist that it be addressed in any sort of final status negotiations, whereas Israel will always remain adamant that they will never re-admit a significant number of Palestinian refugees to Israel.
Camp David 2000: First Real Attempt
At Camp David, Israel drew a red line: no general right of return for Palestinians into Israel. Barak’s government was willing to discuss limited family reunification and contributions to an international compensation fund. Arafat refused. He insisted on recognition of the right of return, knowing full well it was a non-starter. The talks collapsed, and the Second Intifada followed.
The Clinton Parameters
Clinton’s December 2000 proposal outlined five possible places of resettlement for Palestinian refugees (by now with refugee-children and refugee-grandchildren of their own): the new Palestinian state, swapped Israeli land, third countries, host countries, and Israel in limited humanitarian cases. Israel accepted the idea in principle. The Palestinians hesitated, fearful of renouncing the unlimited right of return. Again, to paraphrase the fictional Palestinian Chairman Farad from the West Wing, “We will not formalize our dispossession!”
Taba 2001 and Annapolis 2008: Numbers on the Table
At Taba, Israel floated some symbolic figures - tens of thousands over a few years - but insisted the majority resettle elsewhere with international help. The Palestinians would not agree.
At Annapolis in 2008, Prime Minister Olmert offered to admit 5,000 refugees over five years. Mahmoud Abbas acknowledged the seriousness of the offer again, but rejected it outright. Once again, no counter-offer.
Why Refugees Are So Hard to Resolve
It bears noting that to the Israelis, this issue is not hard to resolve. There is no universe in which Israel is willing to admit any meaningful number of Palestinian refugees into Israel proper, and it is remains wholly unreasonable for the Palestinian leadership to claim they are entitled to return. If there’s a Palestinian state, the Palestinian refugees should go to Palestine, not Israel.
The Palestinians claim now more than five million “refugees”, a hugely inflated number that counts descendants indefinitely, a unique status that no other refugee population in the world enjoys. Insisting on this Palestinian right of return, with no precedent in human history, and no willingness to admit them to a future Palestinian state (insisting that they only be admitted to Israel) is an artificial red line the Palestinians maintain to keep the parties from getting to yes.
The Palestinians may state that their right of return is about erasing the “Nakba” (Arabic for “catastrophe” which is how they refer to Israel’s establishment), but to Israel, it is a demand for national suicide, plain and simple. The idea for the Palestinians is to have more Palestinians in Israel to then erode the Jewish nature of the state, and then use Israel’s democracy against it. It won’t work.
The Role of UNRWA: Manufacturing Perpetual Refugees
At the end of the War of Independence, rather than grouping in Palestinian refugees with every other refugee population in the world, the UN created its own distinct agency to only deal with Palestinians: the UN Relief and Works Agency (distinct from the UN High Commission of Refugees - UNHCR).
As Einat Wilf and Adi Schwartz argue in War of Return, UNRWA is not a humanitarian agency but a political one. Instead of resettling refugees, it has kept millions of Palestinians locked in dependency, teaching them that return to Israel - and not a Palestinian state - is their destiny. By defining refugee status as hereditary, UNRWA has turned a temporary tragedy into a permanent weapon.
UNRWA schools and services are steeped in anti-Israel indoctrination. Worse, many of their facilities in Gaza were co-opted by Hamas for weapons storage, tunnels, and planning, which we subsequently learned directly contributed to the October 7 massacre. Far from solving the refugee issue, UNRWA has entrenched it, radicalized generations, and turned “return” into a rallying cry for Israel’s destruction. Many hundreds of UNRWA employees directly participated in the crimes of October 7.
Israel’s Position on Refugees
Israel’s stance is clear and consistent:
No general right of return of Palestinian refugees into Israel.
Limited humanitarian admissions possible.
Compensation and resettlement through an international fund if at all.
Refugees should be resettled in a future Palestinian state, host countries (like every other refugee population in history), or third countries, just as Jewish refugees from Arab lands were absorbed into Israel after 1948 without international support.
The Palestinian Position on Refugees
Palestinians continue to insist on recognition of the right of return. Even when negotiators hint at flexibility - some sort of symbolic return plus compensation - their leaders refuse to give up the principle knowing full-well that this is not necessary for achieving a Palestinian state. It remains the ultimate nonsensical trump card in their arsenal: a demand designed not to reach compromise, but to perpetuate grievance.
Conclusion
The refugee question is not just humanitarian. It is the beating heart of Palestinian rejectionism. As long as millions are told they are “returning” to Haifa, Jaffa, and Lod, there is no solution to the conflict.
This is why refugees remain the hardest of all final status issues: Palestinian obstinacy. Until Palestinians abandon the fantasy of return, and until UNRWA is dismantled or fundamentally reformed, the refugee issue will continue to fuel conflict, not resolve it. Recognition of a Palestinian state without addressing this issue isn’t peacemaking, but rather rewarding the machinery of permanent war.
On Friday, we will deal with the last issue, that of Settlements.
Gmar chatima tova and have an easy and meaningful fast.
