Why do Palestinian refugees have a separate refugee agency?

[Oodiks]

Why is it that all other refugees come under the protection of the UNCHR and are resettled in another country if they cannot return home, but UNWRA keeps Palestinians in camps all over the Middle East and they are never offered the chance to resettle in their host countries?

It could be absorbed into the UNHCR; I’m not suggesting getting rid of it without putting something in its place.

If UNRWA were absorbed into UNHCR, it would make no difference to the refugee status of Palestinians or result in settled status in host foreign countries. The UNHCR has also had refugees with intergenerational protracted refugee status in various countries. The UN regulations are clear that voluntary repatriation back to the country of origin is the preference in all refugee cases and it is up to the states involved to create safe conditions to and allow refugees to return. This explainer is from 2011, but the regulations it is based on have not changed so it is still relevant:
https://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/features/exploding-myths-unrwa-unhcr-and-palestine-refugees

“It is argued that if UNRWA was disbanded and responsibility for Palestinian refugees handed over to UNHCR they would be resettled out of Israel and give up the right of return. Is this the case and if not, what would UNHCR’s role be?
Gunness: This is not the case. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight.”

”It is often said that UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian refugee problem by granting refugee status through the generations and that handing the refugees over to UNHCR would not allow this. Is this the case?
This is not the case. As I have already noted, Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and pending the realisation of such a solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees will remain. Questions raised about the passing of refugee status through generations stem from a lack of understanding of the international protection regime. These questions serve only to distract from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely the absence of negotiated solution to the underlying political issues.”

It points out that “2008 UNHCR document, Protracted Refugee Situations: A discussion paper prepared for the High Commissioner’s dialogue on Protection Challenges. Paragraph 7 of the document observes that "Protracted refugee situations are usually created and sustained by the failure to resolve … differences in a peaceful manner and in a way that respects human rights."

“Can you give real historical examples of where this is the case with UNHCR refugees?
As made clear in the criteria for derivative status above, in all cases, refugees and their descendants retain the status of refugees until that status lapses through the achievement of a just and lasting solution….

During a meeting of its Standing Committee in March 2008, UNHCR informed that "at the end of 2006, over half of the 9.9 million refugees worldwide were living in exile in protracted situations." It noted that "The 10 largest populations living in protracted situations were: 1. Over 1 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan, 2. Nearly 1 million Afghan refugees in the Islamic Republic of Iran, 3. 350,000 Burundians in the United Republic of Tanzania, 4. 215,000 Sudanese in Uganda, 5. 174,000 Somalis in Kenya, 6. 157,000 Eritreans in Sudan, 7. 132,000 Angolans in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 8. 132,000 refugees from Myanmar in Thailand, 9. 128,000 Congolese (DRC) in the United Republic of Tanzania, 10. 107,000 Bhutanese in Nepal."

In my opinion, the primary reason UNRWA is administratively separated is because Israel is highly involved in the day to day operations of UNRWA. They security check every employee, they control and audit all the aid money UNRWA receives to ensure Hamas and other terrorist groups cannot benefit. No other country demands this kind of finger in the pie with how the UN manages refugees they have created. If they did, then UNHCR would likely spin off another UNRWA type mini agency for other large refugee populations. It’s like a seperate profit centre in a business- you split it out to keep the accounting clean and transparent.

If it were, then Israel would lose all of its powers to vet UN employees and process/monitor/audit the UN aid funds being spent in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

@SummerFeverVenice
If UNRWA were absorbed into UNHCR, it would make no difference to the refugee status of Palestinians or result in settled status in host foreign countries.
Incorrect. Most would not be considered refugees under the UNHCR definition.

Yes they would still be considered refugees under UNHCR. Please read the entirety of my post and the link.

Plus the Palestinians don’t possess a ‘right to return’.

According to the UN, and this includes the UNHCR, they do. Pls read the explainer I linked which references the applicable legal documents.

Here is where the sleight of hand comes in, UNRWA omits crucial details from its site.
Of course it is possible for there to be multiple generations of refugees by UNHCR, IF the multiple generations all fit the primary 1951 definition of a refugee. For example, if the granddaughter of a refugee is also outside the country of her nationality due to a well founded fear of being persecuted, she too is a primary refugee. But she is NOT a refugee due to descent, because there is no provision for refugee status based on descent in the 1951 refugee convention or in internationally accepted practices for refugees who are not Palestinian refugees.

Almost all of Jordan’s 2.2 million UNRWA-designated refugees would lose their status under UNHCR criteria, as would most of Syria’s 560,000 and just under half of Lebanon’s 521,000. All 2.17 million UNRWA-designated refugees in Gaza, the West Bank would lose that status were those areas to become parts of a sovereign Palestinian state.

Perhaps you should read the entirety of this thread.
To be clear, Palestinians do NOT have a ‘right of return’ into the sovereign state of Israel under any kind of International law. There is no precedent of a country being forced to accept a group of people against its will, and Palestinians, despite impressive efforts, cannot make up laws that gives them something that does not exist.

Thank you, but I'm not madly convinced by the Head of UNWRA defending the existence of UNWRA. Seems a little like putting a fox in charge of a chicken coop and then believing the fox when it says the chickens are safe and they don't need the protection that other chickens need.

The UNHCR did not exist when the UNRWA was established.

The UNRWA has a specific mandate, established under a specific UN resolution ….. but has been ongoing ever since

The UNHCR has a wider mandate regarding refugees from anywhere rather than establishing other single mandates

I did giggle that UNRWA was being justified by quoting from the UNRWA website. 😂

There is no sleight of hand going on. The issue is that Israel refuses to recognise the UN authority in regards to the Palestinians refugee status and right of return.

I am afraid I trust the UN website and UN official on their definitions and regulations more than I do you.

He’s not defending its existence, he is stating accurately that UNHCR taking over the Palestinian refugee population would not result in them losing refugee status or their right of return.

Show me something that gives the Palestinians a ‘right to return’ to Israel.

If that’s your take away from it, then I’m afraid you are even less convincing.

You have to read the link. Have you been giggling too much to read?

”Established principles and practice – as well as realities on the ground - clearly refute the argument that the right of return of Palestine refugees would disappear or be abandoned if UNHCR were responsible for these refugees.”

Again.

What's your point?

Can you tell me why UNWRA has not been absorbed into the UNHCR's wider mandate?

So you can’t actually point to anything.

My point is that is the answer to your question

I suspect you'd believe the fox was 'accurate' in his assessment of the chickens' safety and not simply defending his own existence as their guardian.

But it isn't, is it. It's simply stating that UNWRA has a different remit, but not, crucially, why.

Interesting how invested some posters are in arguing for the removal of rights from Palestinians.

You should probably at least do a surface read on the right of return before posting so confidently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_194