Canadians Might Understand Now

February 22, 2001

Speaking last week to Geoffrey York, the veteran Globe and Mail reporter, Hussum Khader, "head of the largest Palestinian Fatah militia in Nablus," told Canadians: "If Canada is serious about resettlement you could expect military attacks in Ottawa or Montreal. Resettlement would be a catastrophe for the Palestinian nation. This is the issue we've been fighting for 50 years."

There, in a hard-core, jagged-edged nutshell on page 1 of the Globe and Mail of Feb. 16, was the eye-opening, but sad capsule of the tragedy of the Palestinian people, the harsh recurring elements of that tragedy laid bare for all Canadians to read if not understand.

• You could expect military attacks in Ottawa or Montreal. Violence - the mayhem, the suffering, the sorrow - is not repugnant to Khader. On the contrary, he predicts its use as casually as if he were predicting bad weather. Violence has been the Palestinian trademark.

• Fatah militia. Khader belongs to the Fatah militia, the so-called mainstream of the Palestinian people, the largest constituency group under the large PLO umbrella. It is not Hamas, Islamic Jihad or any of the myriad other radical organizations. What does this say about the leadership of the Palestinian people, the example it sets and the values it inculcates, if even the "moderate," mainstream leadership so readily advocates and relies upon the use of violence?

In truth, ever since it became apparent more than 52 years ago, that compromise would be necessary between Jews and Arabs, the Palestinians have been betrayed time and again by their own leaders. If these leaders had only loved their own people as much as they hated the Jews, or been concerned for the well-being of their own people as much as they have been obsessed with the annihilation of the Jews, they would long ago have relieved the Palestinian people's suffering.

• Resettlement would be a catastrophe... This is the issue we've been fighting for 50 years. Palestinian leaders have perpetuated one theme and one theme only for Palestinian history, namely, catastrophe, or nakba, as they refer to the creation of the State of Israel. Between 1948 and 1967, Palestinian life could have been rebuilt in the West Bank and Gaza. Jordan, Egypt and the then-nascent PLO leadership preferred to foster dreams of displacement among Palestinians rather than acts of resettlement for them. The sheer, plain humanitarianism of trying to relieve suffering has never been an option. Now two entire generations of Palestinians have been raised on the false promise and the false hope of the right of return,which, in its true, unembellished, practical applications means the expulsion of the Jews.

But this will simply never happen.

©2001; Canadian Jewish News


Canada Offers to Resettle Palestinian Refugees

January 11, 2001 - Associated Press

TORONTO - Canada went public Wednesday with an offer to accept Palestinian refugees as part of a negotiated Middle East peace plan. Jennifer Sloan, director of communications for Foreign Affairs Minister John Manley, said Canada made the offer in a series of recent telephone calls involving Manley, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the United States. She called it a reaffirmation of previously stated Canadian government policy to contribute in any way possible to any peace treaty negotiated in the Middle East.

"We reconfirmed that Canada would play its part in ensuring a successful peace agreement," Sloan said Wednesday. The Canadian offer, first reported in a front-page story Wednesday in The Toronto Star newspaper, goes against the long-held Palestinian demand for the right to return to their homes or ancestral homeland in what is now Israel. It is one of the most contentious issues of the Middle East conflict, with almost 4 million Palestinian refugees living in the West Bank and Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.

The official policy of Lebanon, Syria and Jordan demands the right of Palestinians to return to their homeland. Israel has flatly rejected this possibility, saying that an influx of Palestinian refugees would destabilize the country by upsetting the balance between Jews and Arabs. Resettling refugees in Europe, Canada and elsewhere was believed to be part of the protracted peace negotiations in the past two years, and was included in the recent plan proposed by outgoing U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The Foreign Affairs department confirmed the accuracy of the quotes attributed to Manley by The Star. In the interview, Manley said the numbers of refugees that Canada would be willing to accept had yet to be discussed. "We are prepared to receive refugees; we are prepared to contribute to an international fund to assist with resettlement in support of a peace agreement," Manley said, adding that other countries were also expected to accept Palestinian refugees. "We have just assumed that we would be one of several countries involved, Sloan said in a telephone interview. "We haven't had discussions with anyone."

In addition to telephone calls to and from Manley, Prime Minister Jean Chretien called Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat on Christmas Day to talk about the peace process, Chretien's office confirmed Tuesday. Manley said, "Chretien made the call after it appeared that there were the fundamentals for an agreement there, both to say that we would be willing to play our role on the refugee resettlement issues as well as to encourage them to try to find a way to strike an agreement."

Manley was unwilling to offer an evaluation of the Clinton peace plan, but said it involved both sides making concessions. "What's implicit is a trade-off between that dream [of right of return] and greater control over holy sites and the introduction of an international security force to replace the Israeli army [in the occupied territories]," Manley told The Star. "Canada would be willing to contribute troops to an international force created to oversee implementation of a peace accord," Manley said. "All of these things are meant to balance different concerns that are there on the table," he said. "The question will be whether they can arrive at something that enough people on both sides are going to say, 'It's probably the best we're going to do, and it saves lives, so let's end this'".

Recommended Links
 
 
Powered By:NuvioTemplates.com