[lbo-talk] Adam Hanieh, "Canadian Union Takes Important Step against Israeli Apartheid"

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 6/3/06, Angelus Novus <fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Yoshie Furuhashi <critical.montages at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >it's generally no fun being stateless.
> > Imagine trying to
> > travel when no government issues you travel identity
> > documents that
> > other governments accept.
>
> This is a valid point, but what does it have to do
> with the demand that Palestinians have a right to
> return to the territories obtained by Israel as a
> result of the 1948 war?

Refugees have a right to return to their homes or receive restitution.
 All refugees (including internally displaced persons), not just
Palestinian refugees, have that right.  The right to return home isn't
just refugees' right either.  In general, "[e]veryone has the right to
leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country,"
as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights puts it.  Otherwise, you
can't risk traveling abroad for fear of being unable to come back
home.

> Presumably the problem of Palestinian statelessness
> can be satisfied within the territories occupied in
> 1967 (leaving aside for the moment the problem of
> Israeli occupation, obstructionism,
> settlement-building, all of which we agree are bad
> things).

It is theoretically possible that all Palestinians want to resettle in
Gaza or the West Bank as soon as "a Palestinian state" gets
established there.  But that is not likely: some want to go back to
their home towns inside the Green Line; others want to go back to
their home towns in the West Bank and Gaza; yet others want to become
citizens of other states (such as Jordan and the United States, to
take just two examples).  Each refugee should be able to decide his or
her own destiny as he or she pleases.

> Now, if one wants to make an argument that such a
> Palestinian state would not be viable, that's an
> argument deserving of consideration, but from my
> ultra-left perspective, that should call into question
> the very notion of statehood as a demand for a
> revolutionary movement.
>
> After all, the call for a Palestinian right of return
> to 1948 territories is just as unviable and
> unrealistic.  There does not exist a majority in
> Israel to support such a demand.

If you want to call "the very notion of statehood" into question, why
should you care if a majority in Israel support a demand of
Palestinian refugees to resettle inside the Green Line?

Besides, your questioning of "the very notion of statehood" is just a
matter of your whimsy.  In reality, you are a citizen of a state
(Germany?), which issues you a passport, guarantees your rights and
privileges as a citizen, and defines your duties (such as the duty to
pay taxes).  You can't give them up even if you wanted to.  That being
the case, you have no business demanding that Palestinians give up
what you haven't given up yourself.

> When CUPE calls for open Canadian borders and the
> dissolution of the Canadian state, I'll revise my
> opinion.

That's a category mistake.  CUPE is not demanding that Israel open its
borders to ALL comers, including those who are neither Jewish nor
Palestinian.  CUPE is merely demanding that Tel Aviv not prevent
Palestinians from returning to their homes of origin.
-- 
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>