Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (23952)	4/8/2002 5:24:54 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The Palestinians will take monetary compensation in lieu of physical return. They have hinted that over and over again. Really? Where? Don't you think this was offered at Camp David? Then why are they fighting for 'right of return'?

To: KyrosL who wrote (23952)	4/8/2002 6:20:57 PM
From: LLLefty	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

As I understand from the Taba talks on the return of the displaced, Israel agreed to a first slice of 100,00O, all for family reunification. While the Israeli non-paper never was made public, to best of my knowledge, they would come from Lebanon. I think your figures on the number of Israelis in settlements is considerrably higher than the commonly-used figure. in the neighborhood of 200,000 and most live in annexed neighborhoods that are contiguous to Israel proper: Gilo is an example and that's where much of the tensions arise when Arab Beit Jala (?) is used for snipers who fire into the windows of the residents. Don't believe there are "300,000 settler housing units ready for occupancy by Palestinians." Many of the settlers have families almost as large as their Palestinian neighbors. Rather than try to do the match without reproduction rates in front of me, I do believe the number of housing units is considerably fewer, perhaps in the range of 40,000 or fewer. In any event, if indeed, payments were to be given, the Arab countries are more than reluctant to take any Palestinians as citizens. I recall a short piece in the New Republic some time ago. Three ranking Saudis were asked how many Palestinians lived in Saudi Arabia. The answers ranged from 15,000 to 25,000. Asked why so few, one commented that he didnt want many Palestinians there because they cause too much trouble. Saudi Arabia accepts only Palestinians married to Saudi men, he said, some teachers and doctors. BTW, a question that hasn't been asked for some years:is a Palestinian state viable without open borders with Israel or would it became another of the world's basket case. I haven't seen any studies of late.

To: KyrosL who wrote (23952)	4/8/2002 8:01:56 PM
From: Gabriel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

haaretzdaily.com 3. Refugees Non-papers were exchanged, which were regarded as a good basis for the talks. Both sides stated that the issue of the Palestinian refugees is central to the Israeli-Palestinian relations and that a comprehensive and just solution is essential to creating a lasting and morally scrupulous peace. Both sides agreed to adopt the principles and references with could facilitate the adoption of an agreement. Both sides suggested, as a basis, that the parties should agree that a just settlement of the refugee problem in accordance with the UN Security Council Resolution 242 must lead to the implementation of UN General Assembly Resolution 194. 3.1 Narrative The Israeli side put forward a suggested joint narrative for the tragedy of the Palestinian refugees. The Palestinian side discussed the proposed narrative and there was much progress, although no agreement was reached in an attempt to develop and historical narrative in the general text. 3.2 Return, repatriation and relocation and rehabilitation Both sides engaged in a discussion of the practicalities of resolving the refugee issue. The Palestinian side reiterated that the Palestinian refugees should have the right of return to their homes in accordance with the interpretation of UNGAR 194. The Israeli side expressed its understanding that the wish to return as per wording of UNGAR 194 shall be implemented within the framework of one of the following programs: A. Return and repatriation 1. to Israel 2. to Israel swapped territory 3. to the Palestine state. B. Rehabilitation and relocation 1. Rehabilitation in host country. 2. Relocation to third country. Preference in all these programs shall be accorded to the Palestinian refugee population in Lebanon. The Palestinian side stressed that the above shall be subject to the individual free choice of the refugees, and shall not prejudice their right to their homes in accordance with its interpretation of UNGAR 194. The Israeli side, informally, suggested a three-track 15-year absorption program, which was discussed but not agreed upon. The first track referred to the absorption to Israel. No numbers were agreed upon, but with a non-paper referring to 25,000 in the first three years of this program (40,000 in the first five years of this program did not appear in the non-paper but was raised verbally). The second track referred to the absorption of Palestinian refugees into the Israeli territory, that shall be transferred to Palestinian sovereignty, and the third track referring to the absorption of refugees in the context of family reunification scheme. The Palestinian side did not present a number, but stated that the negotiations could not start without an Israeli opening position. It maintained that Israel's acceptance of the return of refugees should not prejudice existing programs within Israel such as family reunification. 3.3 Compensation Both sides agreed to the establishment of an International Commission and an International Fund as a mechanism for dealing with compensation in all its aspects. Both sides agreed that "small-sum" compensation shall be paid to the refugees in the "fast-track" procedure, claims of compensation for property losses below certain amount shall be subject to "fast-track" procedures. There was also progress on Israeli compensation for material losses, land and assets expropriated, including agreement on a payment from an Israeli lump sum or proper amount to be agreed upon that would feed into the International Fund. According to the Israeli side the calculation of this payment would be based on a macro-economic survey to evaluate the assets in order to reach a fair value. The Palestinian side, however, said that this sum would be calculated on the records of the UNCCP, the Custodian for Absentee Property and other relevant data with a multiplier to reach a fair value. 3.4 UNRWA Both sides agreed that UNRWA should be phased out in accordance with an agreed timetable of five years, as a targeted period. The Palestinian side added a possible adjustment of that period to make sure that this will be subject to the implementation of the other aspects of the agreement dealing with refugees, and with termination of Palestinian refugee status in the various locations. 3.5 Former Jewish refugees The Israeli side requested that the issue of compensation to former Jewish refugees from Arab countries be recognized, while accepting that it was not a Palestinian responsibility or a bilateral issue. The Palestinian side maintained that this is not a subject for a bilateral Palestinian-Israeli agreement. 3.6 Restitution The Palestinian side raised the issue of restitution of refugee property. The Israeli side rejected this. 3.7 End of claims The issue of the end of claims was discussed, and it was suggested that the implementation of the agreement shall constitute a complete and final implementation of UNGAR 194 and therefore ends all claims.