BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee

174
Survey of Palestinian Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (2006-2007)
Meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Palestinian President of the Palestinian Authority
Mahmoud Abbas, Ramallah, occupied West Bank, September 2006. © Anne Paq/Activestills.
5.3.5 The United Nations
This letter, which reflects the official
position of the Bush administration,
also recognizes as a fait accompli
the colonial regime in the occupied
West Bank and its implications for
a future Palestinian state. It states
that “in light of new realities on the
ground, including already existing
major Israeli population centers, it is
unrealistic to expect that the outcome
of final status negotiations will be
a full and complete return to the
armistice lines of 1949.” 59
The United Nations has long been a “divided house” over the issue of Palestinian refugees and IDPs. 60 On the
one hand, the UN General Assembly has taken a rights-based approach, reiterating the right of return, as well
as rights to restitution and compensation of Palestinian refugees numerous times since it first passed Resolution
194 in December 1948. 61 It has emphasized Israel’s obligation to facilitate the return of all refugee women and
children to their homes and properties, 62 and expresses annual regret that the repatriation of Palestinian refugees
has still not occurred. In 2006, the General Assembly also condemned the ongoing internal displacement of
civilians in the OPT. 63
On the other hand, the UN Security Council has never passed a resolution outlining its position on what a
solution to the question of 1948 Palestinian refugees should entail. With regard to the 1967 Palestinian refugees,
Resolution 237 called upon Israel to “facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the
outbreak of hostilities.” 64 However, this Resolution has been overshadowed by UN Security Council Resolution
242, which serves as the major reference for peace efforts between Israel, the Arab States, and the PLO. Resolution
242 simply calls for a “just settlement of the refugee problem”, 65 without providing further details. So in contrast
to the General Assembly, within the Security Council and as a member of the Quartet, the UN seems to have
adopted by default a politically-driven approach to resolving the Palestinian refugee question.
5.3.6 The European Union
The European Union has not formulated a clear policy regarding Palestinian refugees and IDPs, nor has it explicitly
recognized the right of return, or rights to restitution and compensation of Palestinian refugees in accordance with
UN Resolution 194. 66 In the 2002 Seville Declaration, the European Union stated that “a just, viable, and agreed
solution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees” should be found. 67 However, the concrete terms of such a
solution were not defined.
As a member of the Quartet, the European Union upholds the need to implement the Road Map in order to engage
in meaningful final status negotiations, with the goal of achieving a two-state solution. The European Council has
meanwhile stressed its concern about Israeli activities that contravene international law, including the construction of
the Wall and the establishment of colonies (settlements). 68 The European Union has moreover stated that it will not
recognize changes to Israel’s pre-1967 borders unless these are agreed to by both parties. 69 The European Parliament
has “take[n] an extremely critical view of the European Council’s inability to take appropriate action” towards moving
the peace process away from total political and diplomatic deadlock, 70 but has also passed resolutions that ignore
the right of return of the 1948 Palestinian refugees. 71