The 'Big Lie' Tactic (the refugees)
By Evelyn Gordon

(January 16) - One of the most surprising developments of the 
past few weeks has been the support expressed by many ordinary 
Americans and Europeans for the "right of return" of 
Palestinian refugees to Israel. What is surprising about this 
proposition, put forth in numerous letters and opinion pieces 
published in the press recently, is that it accords 
Palestinians a "right" enjoyed by virtually no other refugees 
in history. 

Most of the writers are unaware of this. But that so many 
well-meaning people can mindlessly parrot the canard that 
the repatriation of refugees is an "inalienable right" is 
yet another proof of the efficacy of the well-known tactic 
of the "big lie" - that any lie, however outrageous, will 
eventually be believed if repeated often enough. Certainly, 
it would be hard to think of many lies as easily disprovable 
as the idea that refugees have a "right of return" to their 
former homes. 

The history of the 20th century is one long lesson in the 
falsity of this claim. To cite just a few examples: 

* Millions of Moslems fled India for Pakistan following the 
bloody riots of 1947. India not only stripped them of 
citizenship, but barred them, in its constitution, from 
ever returning. No one ever suggested that these Moslems had 
a "right of return." 

* After World War II, Czechoslovakia expelled all its German 
citizens. Yet no one suggested that the millions of Sudeten 
Germans had a "right of return." In 1997, Germany even signed 
a treaty acknowledging the irrevocability of the expulsion. 

* When the communists took power in Vietnam, millions of 
"boat people" fled to the United States and various Asian 
countries. No one has ever suggested that these people have 
a "right of return." 

* In the five years after its establishment in 1948, Israel 
absorbed close to 500,000 Jewish refugees - about half from 
the wreckage of the Holocaust and the remainder from Arab 
countries. 

A similar number poured in over the next three years. 
As a result, the new state's population had doubled by 1953 
and tripled by 1956. Yet no one has ever suggested that these 
refugees have a "right of return" to their countries of origin. 

In fact, none of these refugees were even granted monetary 
compensation - another "inalienable right" claimed for the 
Palestinians. Nor is there any lack of other examples that 
fit this pattern. Why, then, are the Palestinian refugees 
so unquestionably awarded a "right" enjoyed by virtually no 
other refugees in history? 

The best explanation lies in a circumstance that is also 
virtually unique to the Palestinians: Unlike most of history's 
refugees, the countries to which the Palestinians fled refused 
to absorb them - preferring to leave them in squalid refugee 
camps for the sake of encouraging anti-Israel sentiment. 

The Moslems who fled India became full-fledged citizens of 
Pakistan. The Sudeten Germans were fully absorbed in Germany. 
The Vietnamese boat people are now productive citizens of the 
US. Jewish refugees from the Arab world have been fully 
integrated into Israel. 

Yet the Palestinians - whose Arab hosts bear direct 
responsibility for their flight - through their decision 
to declare war on Israel rather than accepting the UN 
partition plan - still languish in refugee camps after 
52 years. 

Jordan, at least, granted its Palestinian refugees citizenship, 
but made no effort to get them out of the camps. This is why 
refugee camps were still flourishing when Israel conquered 
the West Bank in 1967, after 19 years of Jordanian rule. 

Yet the refugees who fled to Jordanian-controlled territory 
were lucky: Those who went to Lebanon, for instance, not only 
were not made citizens, but were also deprived of basic civil 
rights, such as the right to work in over 70 different 
professions. 

Ironically, the one country that did try to improve the 
situation of the refugees was Israel. 

In Gaza, for instance, some 36,000 refugees had been moved 
into better housing by 1973, before international pressure 
and PLO threats against the refugees put a stop to the project. 

The most astonishing element in this tale of neglect, however, 
is the role of the Palestinians themselves. 

Most of the refugees have been under autonomous Palestinian 
rule for the last five years - yet the Palestinian Authority 
has spent not one cent of the millions of dollars it received 
in foreign aid to improve their living conditions. Apparently, 
it, too, prefers to let its people suffer for propaganda purposes. 

It is impossible not to pity refugees who, thanks to the callous 
unconcern of their fellow Arabs, have been living in misery for 
the last 50 years. But that does not entitle them to a "right of 
return" accorded no other refugees in history. 

The only just solution to their problem is for the Arab world, 
and particularly the Palestinian state-to-be, to absorb them 
- just as Israel has absorbed Jewish refugees the world over 
since 1948.