Als je in een discussie over het vraagstuk van de Palestijnse vluchtelingen en het recht op terugkeer het voorbeeld van de Sudetenduitsers aanhaalt, wordt soms geschokt of verontwaardigd gereageerd: onschuldige Palestijnse slachtoffers vergelijken met Nazi-sympatisanten is 'not done' in politiek correct (lees: progressief) Nederland.
Dat is onjuist: noch zijn de Palestijnen collectief zonder blaam voor de oorlog waarbij zij verdreven werden of gevlucht zijn, noch zijn de Sudetenduitsers collectief medeverantwoordelijk voor de Nazi-misdaden. Beide groepen kozen in meerderheid partij voor hun 'volksgenoten' dan wel tegen de andere groepen met wie ze in één land leefden, en beide groepen hadden op het verkeerde paard gewed, immers zij verloren, waardoor zij huis en haard moesten verlaten. De Sudetenduitsers hadden evengoed legitieme grieven tegen de Tsjechische meerderheid als de Palestijnse Arabieren hadden tegen de groeiende Joodse gemeenschap (de Zionisten), maar dat ontslaat hen niet van de verantwoordelijkheid om de consequenties van hun keuze te accepteren.
Abby
__________________________________________________
June 21, 2007 Edition 24 Volume 5
| | | |
 |
| The German-Czech declaration as precedent Hillel Shuval Israel's leaders have stated that they see many positive elements in the Riyadh declaration of March 29, 2007 (the Arab peace initiative) that could serve as a starting point for serious negotiations leading to a two-state solution. Most Israelis today recognize that a two-state solution is achievable. Many believe that if there are serious negotiations with flexibility and good will and readiness for painful compromises on both sides it will be possible to close the gaps on most issues, including assuring viable and contiguous areas for Palestine and a solution to the status of Jerusalem as capital for both nations. However, all Israelis from left to right reject the "return" of refugees.
For Israelis, the meaning of the return of millions of Palestinian refugees would be the elimination of the state of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people and would conflict with their right to self-determination. Most Israelis today accept the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in a state of their own, but not their right to destroy Israel as the dedicated Jewish state by inundating it with hostile refugees who have grown to hate Israel and who pray for its destruction. There will be no two-state solution if "return" remains a "sacred" precondition.
Palestinians today find it difficult, if not impossible, to accept the view of many independent historians that the "catastrophe" (naqba) of 1948 was to a great extent a result of the war declared by the leadership of the Arab nations and the Palestinians themselves, against the fulfillment of UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947 that partitioned Mandatory Palestine between an Arab state and a Jewish state. The Palestinians missed their historic opportunity of founding an independent state in 1948 by rejecting the UN-approved partition plan. Many Palestinians, following their civil and religious leaders, began to flee the country on their own initiative, particularly after the Deir Yassin massacre by Israeli paramilitary groups. I know that most Palestinians totally reject this interpretation of the events of 1948, but these tragic historic facts hover over the conscience of many knowledgeable Palestinians who are fully cognizant of the disastrous mistakes made by their leaders at the time, that led them into their national tragedy.
Can we find an historic precedent that will help guide us toward a just and humane resolution of this seemingly irresolvable problem? Let us look at the case of the tragic flight and deportation of three million ethnic Germans from formerly German-occupied Sudetenland after World War II and the historic "German-Czech Declaration" of reconciliation that was finally signed in January 1997 after years of bitterness and tension between the two countries.
The joint declaration states: "The German side acknowledges Germany's responsibility...[and] regrets the suffering and injustice inflicted upon the Czech people. . . [and] is also conscious of the fact that the National Socialist policy of violence toward the Czech people helped to prepare the ground for post-war flight, forcible expulsion and forced resettlement" of Germans after the war. "The Czech side regrets that, by the forcible expulsion and forced resettlement of Sudeten Germans from the former Czechoslovakia after the war. . . much suffering and injustice was inflicted upon innocent people. . . . Both sides agree that the injustice inflicted in the past belongs in the past, and will therefore orient their relations toward the future." It was agreed that there can be no "return" and there has been no return.
I suggest that, drawing on the above precedent, Israel should clearly declare its deep remorse, misgivings and regrets for its part in the terrible tragedy that befell the Palestinian refugees as a result of the 1948 war and the years of severe suffering and deprivations that they have gone through ever since. Ways must be found for the final resettlement in permanent homes of those refugees who are still in camps, along with honorable and just compensation for all refugees for their losses and suffering.
The Palestinian president and the PLO in the name of the Palestinian nation and all displaced persons and refugees must be prepared to offer clear public recognition that it is now impossible to turn back the hands of the clock of history and that there can be no "return". Both sides must be prepared to declare together, as did the Germans and Czechs, that they "agree that the injustice inflicted in the past belongs in the past, and will therefore orient their relations toward the future."
Today the only just solution is for there to be two states, side by side, living in peace, and cooperating with each other in all areas. The Riyadh initiative provides a promising starting point for negotiations to achieve an honorable peace agreement. Professor Sari Nusseibeh, president of al-Quds University and at one time Chairman Yasser Arafat's official representative in Jerusalem, has stated that the state of Palestine must become the dedicated Palestinian homeland to which its refugees can return. Israelis insist that the state of Israel must remain the dedicated Jewish homeland to which Jewish refugees can return. Israel is their only homeland, their only safe-haven, their only hope for refuge.- Published 21/6/2007 © bitterlemons-international.org Hillel Shuval, professor emeritus at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, is a veteran Peace Now activist who has initiated numerous track II dialogues between Israeli and Palestinian scientists on shared environmental and water issues. | |
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten