Right of Return

May 14, 2004 Off By leigh

After the Bush administration revealed it’s full credentials to be the U.S. wing of the Likud party in cancelling the historic U.S. policy towards the Israel/Palestine issue, and attempting to condone occupation of the West Bank, the condemnation has been widespread, although downplayed within the U.S by the jellyfish.


After the Bush administration revealed it’s full credentials to be the U.S. wing of the Likud party in cancelling the historic U.S. policy towards the Israel/Palestine issue, and attempting to condone occupation of the West Bank, the condemnation has been widespread, although downplayed within the U.S by the jellyfish.

One particular issue is the right of return of Palestinian refugees forcibly ejected from their land after Israeli occupation. This issue is addressed by Right of Return Congress who are calling for signatories. While indeed it may be that many refugees may not ever receive their land back due to the changing environment over 56 years, Israel is bound under the U.N charter which upheld that country’s creation to honour such rights. In replacement of actual return, financial reparation for loss is a well established alternative, long adopted by other countries (such as the Libyan payments after Lockerbe) to settle disputes.

Some on the right have argued that Cuba is not held to account to pay reparation costs to those who chose to leave Cuba after the agrarian land reform of 1959. This is then used as an argument that Israel should not be pressured to pay costs. This conveniently ignores the fact that all wealthy landowners were offered an equal plot of land and opportunity the same as all other citizens after redistribution. Many (but not all) chose instead to move to the U.S, some then to engage in terrorism on Cuba. In contrast, Israel has never offered a place to those Palestinian refugees expelled from some 400 villages within the claim of Israel in 1947.

If anyone doubts the Bush administrations Likud party credentials, one should note that many individuals in the Vice-Presidents office and the Office of Special Plans under Under Secretary of Defence Policy Douglas Feith were drawn from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a strong pro-Likudist thinktank. Other notables include Dan Senor, C.P.A spokesperson was involved with the American Israel Enterprise Institute.