URNWA - Hamas investigation. Thread 2

[EasterIssland]

Hi.
The previous thread finished on the weekend and a new one hasn’t been opened yet so thought I’d open it finished after some information released by idf about Hamas data center being under urnwa hq

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/4995041-to-find-the-silence-about-unrwa-being-hamas-hypocritical

https://www.memri.org/tv/fmr-unrwa-official-ahmad-oueidat-schools-rise-palestinian-leadership-hamas-ismail-haniyeh-pflp-talal-naji

Although I do very much agree with this at the present moment in time.

@RoastSquash
Hmmmm
Copious pinch of salt needed here before consumption
Wikipedia tells me “The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), officially the Middle East Media and Research Institute,[1] is an American non-profit press monitoring and analysis organization that was co-founded by Israeli ex-intelligence officer Yigal Carmon and Israeli-American political scientist Meyrav Wurmser in 1997. “
Israeli intelligence sources have a bad track record for accuracy and objectivity

@Kindatired Do you believe this account of Ahmad Oueidat's words is incorrect? That he didn't say Ismail Haniyeh and Talal Naji taught in UNWRA schools? I doubt the co-founders actually translated that themselves and their researchers might not choose to jeopardise their reputation as a source of translation, information and analysis for over 20 years with deliberate mistranslation, as this is publicly available.

MEMRI has quite a large and varied Board of Advisors and Directors, including prior intelligence agents from multiple organisations and figures from government, media, law and academia. They're also pretty transparent about their objectives.
https://www.memri.org/about

Wouldn't most intelligence sources have a bad track record for accuracy and objectivity, as they're mostly working in the interests of the country, government or organisation they represent? I can't imagine many of them are known for their impartiality.

They would say that though wouldn’t they?They wouldn’t quote wikipedia and say “Critics describe MEMRI as a strongly pro-Israel advocacy group that, in spite of describing itself as being "independent" and "non-partisan" in nature,[6][7][8] aims to portray the Arab world and the Muslim world in a negative light by producing and disseminating incomplete or inaccurate translations of the original versions of the media reports that it re-publishes.[9][10] It has also been accused of selectively focusing on the views of Islamic extremists while de-emphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions.[11]” would they?

I am fascinated. I wonder how long Haniyeh was teaching for? He seems to have been a lecturer in literature before he became a full time terrorist. I wonder how that happened?

Haniyeh’s ancestral home was taken over by Israel- it had been allocated to the Arab state in the United Nations partition state but it was appropriated by Israel and so his parents became refugees in a refugee camp where he was born. He was active in the first intifada and was imprisoned three times as a young man, one of at least 57,000 Palestinians arrested for taking part. It’s possible the killing of 1000+ Palestinians in this intifada was a factor- about a quarter were children .About 20,000-30,000 children were beaten up by the Israelis.

Looking at his biography it would seem that these were seminal events. He was well on his way to being a leader of 30,000 ruthless terrorist fighters and a millionaire smuggler before any of his family were actually killed by the IDF. In fact it would seem that his rise to power was actually facilitated by the IDF who systematically and conveniently picked off the Hamas leaders in the ranks above him without making any meaningful political concessions on the ground. . I don’t think he spent too much time as a teacher- anyone have dates, locations?

My own grandfather was a primary school teacher who trained 150 men to fight the British in the Irish struggle for independence and then went back to teaching and growing tomatoes so I am genuinely fascinated by how someone could go from teacher to terrorist/ millionaire smuggler under the noses of the IDF. You start with a humble literature teacher and a few years later you have a terrorist overlord- how wrong have they got it and now they say they know how to deal with Hamas….

You are mixing up the Law of Return made by Israel - a sovereign country - and the so called ‘right’ of return. The Palestinians possess no such right.

The evidence of the UNWRA employees participating in the October 7th massacre was given to OIOS not the Colonna review. To be clear, at a press conference Colonna said;

“ allegations regarding individuals, a difficult one are in the scope of the OIOS mission. It is not the scope of our mandate. And by the way it is no surprise that Israel did not provide evidence to UNWRA because it doesn’t owe this evidence during the investigation to UNWRA, but to the OIOS.”

The article is incorrect.

The evidence of the UNWRA employees participating in the October 7th massacre was given to OIOS not the Colonna review. To be clear Colonna said;

“ allegations regarding individuals, a difficult one are in the scope of the OIOS mission. It is not the scope of our mandate. And by the way it is no surprise that Israel did not provide evidence to UNWRA because it doesn’t owe this evidence during the investigation to UNWRA, but to the OIOS.”

Thank you for acknowledging that the Palestinians have no legal right to return.

Has OIOS provided evidence or still investigating?

do those Ukrainians that have been displaced and hosted in the uk have a right to return to their houses once the war is over or are they refugees forever and no right to return to their homes ?

With this kind of attitude so prevalent , no wonder the settlers are so brazen. And no wonder Israel has been dancing its little peace dance for decades with no meaningful concessions to draw support away from Hamas and toward a workable peace solution .

The Palestinian right of return was enshrined in UNGA resolution 194 and UNSC resolution 237 which called upon Israel "to facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas [occupied by Israel] since the outbreak of hostilities".

Israel said it “unreservedly accepts the obligations of the UN Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a member of the UN." When it became a member under UN resolution 273.

The UN Charter article 25 requires members to accept and agree to carry out UNSC resolutions.

Israel has picked and chosen which UNSC resolutions to accept, thereby violating the UN Charter it signed up to.

The view that resolution 194 created a Palestinian right of return mischaracterises the resolution’s legal status. The UN General Assembly’s powers are limited, it cannot confer legal or binding rights. Therefore, the resolution is purely advisory it does not and cannot create a ‘right’ to anything including ‘return’.

The Security Council resolution 237 was issued in 1967 after the Six-Day War. It deals with the conflict in 1967, nowhere does it mention the refugees from the 1947-49 conflict. Furthermore, Security Council resolutions cannot be used retroactively.

It is a bit odd to find advocates for the Palestinians citing after-the-fact Security Council resolutions from different conflicts which contain directives about return that the Security Council specifically chose not to issue regarding Israel and the Palestinians.

In short the Palestinians do NOT possess a ‘right’ to return.

UNWRA currently registers 5.9 million refugees. No one comes off the list.

The vast majority of those registered with UNWRA have never fled their homes.
UNWRA has registered millions of people as refugees, over the decades, who do not meet the basic criteria applied to EVERY other group of refugees in the world.

UNWRA ensures that the conflict with Israel will continue and remain intractable.
This is why UNWRA should be dismantled/defunded.

“The Security Council resolution 237 was issued in 1967 after the Six-Day War. It deals with the conflict in 1967, nowhere does it mention the refugees from the 1947-49 conflict. Furthermore, Security Council resolutions cannot be used retroactively.”

Nowhere does it limit itself to the refugees in the 1967 six day war. In fact it doesn’t even mention the six day war or the war of 1967 or any date at all.

In fact it states “since the outbreak of hostilities” so it can be read as inclusive. The UN 1951 Refugee Convention that Israel signed and agreed to also defines the Palestinians as refugees and gives refugees a right of return, which Israel has also chosen to ignore. The UN has Palestinian families registered as refugees from the nakba of 1947-49, so the United Nations says they are refugees with right of return. This isn’t a fringe opinion.

Secondly, it’s not being used retroactively, the point made was the UNSC issued a binding resolution in 1967 reminding Israel specifically of their obligations towards the refugees in the areas they had seized, which Israel ignored in 1967 and every year after so here we are.

Just like they are currently ignoring the UNSC 2728 calling for an immediate ceasefire.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147951

If in 2050, someone were to list past and future ignoring of the UNSC, UN Charter and any UN conventions lip service agreed to but never implemented by Israel, it won’t be asking for “retroactive implementation” of a resolution either, it is asking for an overdue implementation.

“UNWRA currently registers 5.9 million refugees. No one comes off the list.”
They do when they die and their descendents have the right to be registered.

“The vast majority of those registered with UNWRA have never fled their homes.”
Because this is the longest running conflict ever in UN history and Israel has repeatedly refused to implement resolutions to allow the refugees to return since 1951.

“UNWRA has registered millions of people as refugees, over the decades, who do not meet the basic criteria applied to EVERY other group of refugees in the world.”
They do meet the criteria. The displacement of Palestinians to West Bank and Gaza has been a continuous trickle.

“UNWRA ensures that the conflict with Israel will continue and remain intractable. This is why UNWRA should be dismantled/defunded.”
Why it almost sounds like you think the UN is a front for Hamas. You could not reveal your conspiracy theory and propaganda informed viewpoint any better.

The vast majority of those registered with UNWRA have never fled their homes.
“Because this is the longest running conflict ever in UN history and Israel has repeatedly refused to implement resolutions to allow the refugees to return since 1951.”

Refugee status in itself does not entail a right to return to ones original country.

The major treaty on refugees, the Refugee Convention (1951) and its 1967 UN protocol relating to the status of refugees does not even address the issue of repatriation.
It is primarily concerned with preventing the forced return of refugees to their state of origin and guaranteeing their rights in the state to which they fled.
The convention promised its signatories the right to decide which refugees, if any, would be allowed to settle in their territories.

UNWRA has registered millions of people as refugees, over the decades, who do not meet the basic criteria applied to EVERY other group of refugees in the world.
“They do meet the criteria. The displacement of Palestinians to West Bank and Gaza has been a continuous trickle.”

They may meet UNWRA’s unique registration criteria. Eligibility requirements to be recognised as a Palestinian refugee changed in 1965 to include third generation descendants. In 1982 eligibility changed again to include ALL descendants of Palestinian males. The Result?
The creation of a permanent and perpetually growing population of Palestinian refugees.
They do not meet UNHCR’s criteria of a refugee which applies to every other group of refugees in the world.

This is because 2.2 million refugees are citizens of Jordan.

The Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank consider themselves to be living in Palestine. They engage in efforts to have Palestine recognised as an existing state on International forums. So 1 million Palestinians in Gaza and 870,000 in the West Bank registered as refugees are actually living in what they themselves claim (and seek recognition of) as Palestine.
So what Palestine are these refugees from?
The Palestine that will one day replace Israel?

The rest are in Lebanon and Syria 2/3 have left and have become citizens of other countries.

Civil war in Syria highlighted even further the paradoxes inherent in the UNIQUE manner in which Palestinian refugees are classified and treated differently from every other refugee.
Millions of Syrians have been forced to flee including Palestinian refugees living in Syria. Palestinian refugees who have managed to flee to Europe and become citizens of Germany remain on UNWRA’s books in Syria as registered refugees, whilst Syrian refugees that have become citizens of Germany are (quite rightly) no longer considered refugees.

UNWRA doesn’t operate under any International standards when registering refugees.

With regards to the 2.2 million registered refugees in Jordan; nowhere in the world are there citizens of a country, born in that country, never been displaced by war, are refugees from another country in which they have NEVER LIVED.

In fact it states “since the outbreak of hostilities” so it can be read as inclusive.
No it can’t be read as inclusive but nice try.

The UN 1951 Refugee Convention that Israel signed and agreed to also defines the Palestinians as refugees and gives refugees a right of return, which Israel has also chosen to ignore.

Refugee status in itself does not entail a right to return to ones original country.

The major treaty on refugees, the Refugee Convention (1951) and its 1967 UN protocol relating to the status of refugees does not even address the issue of repatriation.
It is primarily concerned with preventing the forced return of refugees to their state of origin and guaranteeing their rights in the state to which they fled.
The convention promised its signatories the right to decide which refugees, if any, would be allowed to settle in their territories.

The UN has Palestinian families registered as refugees from the nakba of 1947-49, so the United Nations says they are refugees with right of return.

UNRWA refuses to divulge how many registered refugees meets its own original definition ' of having lived in Mandatory Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948'.
A calculation based on life expectancy produces an estimate that a few tens of thousands at the most 100,000.

@Alwayslookonthe
I fundamentally disagree with you. There is every reason for the definition of “refugee” to be updated to reflect a conflict that endures far longer, decades longer, than originally anticipated and far longer than every other ongoing conflict since the creation of the UN.

The UN definition while it seems unique and just for Palestinians, is written to apply to any other refugees in the world with the same circumstances. The fact that no other ones currently exist that have been refugees for as long as the Palestinians shows how much better all other refugees are supported, it doesn’t show Palestinians being treated better.

You ask about the refugees in Gaza and West Bank and ask what are they refugees from if they are in territory that is generally regarded as originally Palestinian (1947 Partition)? Look at the time sequenced maps and read the reports that show constant displacement of thousands of Palestinians from their homes every year since the foundation of Israel. The Palestinians are fleeing repeatedly into smaller and smaller bits of land while Israel then occupies, settles and in some cases annexes it.

UNWRA doesn’t operate under any International standards when registering refugees.

I think this is a bit silly. UNWRA is an arm of the United Nations- the top international standard setting entity- so there is no higher international standard in existence.

@BabaBarrio
I fundamentally disagree with you. There is every reason for the definition of “refugee” to be updated to reflect a conflict that endures far longer, decades longer, than originally anticipated and far longer than every other ongoing conflict since the creation of the UN.

The UN definition while it seems unique and just for Palestinians, is written to apply to any other refugees in the world with the same circumstances. The fact that no other ones currently exist that have been refugees for as long as the Palestinians shows how much better all other refugees are supported, it doesn’t show Palestinians being treated better.

There are no valid reasons why UNWRA should change the definition of a refugee as defined by the permanent refugee agency UNHCR (United Nations High Commission of Refugees) that deals with all the other refugees in the world and ratified by the 1951 UN Convention and Protocol.
Relating to the status of refugees. Under Article 1(c)(3) a person is no longer a refugee if, for example, he or she has “acquired a new nationality.” UNWRA’s definition of a Palestinian refugee, which is not anchored in treaty includes no such provision.

UNHCR has settled millions of refugees, UNWRA hasn’t settled one refugee and registers 2.2 million citizens of a Jordan as refugees who have been born in Jordan, never having fled from anywhere.

Even a former UNWRA employee James Lindsay, who was employed with UNWRA from 2000 to 2007, advocated for reform. One of those reforms were to ‘End the oxymoronic policy of providing refugee aid to “citizens refugees”. A great number of UNWRA aid recipients are not refugees in any conventional meaning of the term, including the definition used by the office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the body that coordinates worldwide action to protect all other refugees around the world. These “refugees” are citizens of a country and thereby have a claim on that country’s protection and services.’

Throughout the world in the 1940s and 1950s (when the Palestinians became refugees) millions and millions of refugees were rehabilitated in the countries that had given them shelter.

600,000 Chinese fled to Hong Kong in 1949
It was tough, it was tragic, but they moved on.

14 million Hindu and Muslim refugees found shelter in India and Pakistan, respectively, following partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947.
It was tough, it was tragic, but they moved on.

3.1 million fled North Korea to South Korea in the 1950-1953 conflict.
It was tough, it was tragic, but they moved on.

800,000 Jews had to flee or were expelled from the Arab countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia.
It was tough, it was tragic, but they moved on.

10 million ethnic Germans were brutally expelled from Eastern Europe when the borders were redrawn, not because they were Nazis, just because they belonged to the ethnic group that had lost the war. They had lived there for centuries.
These ethnic German refugees also wanted to return to their birthplaces much like the Palestinians. They did not want to return under foreign rule meaning they wanted Germany to recapture these territories forcefully.
All of Germany’s political leaders paid lip service to the refugee’s demands and publically supported them but, in reality, did nothing to advance them. Germany focussed on the refugee’s full integration into Germany and pursued wealth redistribution to achieve this. By the early 1960s, the voices demanding a return had all but disappeared.
The German Government realised that to pursue the refugee’s desire to return to their birthplace would have resulted in FURTHER CONFLICT AND WAR.
It was tough, it was tragic, but they moved on.

700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from the Mandate in 1948.
It was tough, it was tragic but it is time to MOVE ON.

UNRWA is the ideological backbone that gives birth (decade after decade, generation after generation) to the idea of return. They possess no ‘right’ to return.

Had the rest of the world been recognised as refugees in the same way as UNWRA does for the Palestinians the (relative) peace that has marked much of the world since WW2 would have been replaced by constant war.

This is the reason why UNWRA should be defunded/dismantled.

Interesting analysis.

@Alwayslookonthe fantastic analysis.

Hmm . The Palestinians should just suck it up and move on . I see. I wonder how that will work
I have an idea- how about the illegal settlers move out of the West Bank and give their houses to the Gazan whose homes were blown up.
Would that work?

@Alwayslookonthe I can see your argument to some extent, but how would it work in practice in the current situation? Gaza is more than half destroyed. The West Bank is occupied and being aggressively settled. Are the surrounding countries that host many of the Palestinian refugees just supposed to absorb them without support, even though a huge proportion of their population are already refugees from various conflicts with dwindling international support, and they are experiencing huge unemployment and structural collapse? Any realistic settlement requires the establishment of a safe and autonomous Palestinian state (and I'm aware both sides have been responsible for derailing past attempts) as well as support and a realistic plan for surrounding host countries.