Alerts

Has Mahmoud Abbas Really Accepted the Clinton Parameters on the Refugee Problem?

Abbas’ position on the refugee issue is not consistent with the Clinton Parameters.
Share this
Clinton

Table of Contents

An analysis of Mahmoud Abbas’ speech to the Fatah Revolutionary Council before he met with President Barack Obama in Washington on March 17 reveals that his claim to have accepted the Clinton Parameters on the refugee issue is not consistent with his demand for recognition of the personal right of return of each individual refugee.

In his speech to the Revolutionary Council on March 12, 2014, Abbas, who carries the titles of “president of the state of Palestine,” head of the PLO, and leader of Fatah, set forth the basic tenets of the Palestinian stance on the negotiations with Israel for a permanent settlement. On the refugee issue, Abbas said the following (translated from Arabic):1

The second point: the refugee issue. You know that [UN] Resolution 194 speaks of providing compensation to whoever does not desire to return. President [Bill] Clinton presented ideas [on this issue] that we accepted as a single package, and we find that they include four principles [for solving the refugee problem].

The first principle – a Palestinian who wants to remain where he is living will be able to do so and will receive compensation.

[The second principle] – a Palestinian who wants to move to another country must obtain the agreement of the two countries and will receive compensation.

The third principle – a Palestinian who wants [to live] in the state of Palestine will be able to return to it.

The fourth principle – a Palestinian who wants [to live] in the state of Israel will be able to return to it in keeping with the right of return.

Everyone must receive compensation, and the countries that have hosted [the refugees], Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, must also receive compensation. These countries took in the Palestinians in 1948 and have a right to compensation for the burden they have borne and for their efforts during this period, which now comes to sixty-six years.

The Clinton Parameters for a permanent settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, which were presented on December 23, 2000, state that:2

The solution [to the refugee problem] will have to be consistent with the two-state approach…the state of Palestine as the homeland of the Palestinian people and the state of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people.

Under the two-state solution, the guiding principle should be that the Palestinian state would be the focal point for Palestinians who choose to return to the area without ruling out that Israel will accept some of these refugees.

I believe that we need to adopt a formulation on the right of return that will make clear that there is no specific right of return to Israel itself but that does not negate the aspiration of the Palestinian people to return to the area.

In light of the above, I propose two alternatives:

1. Both sides recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return to historic Palestine, or,
2. Both sides recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland.

The agreement will define the implementation of this general right in a way that is consistent with the two-state solution. It would list the five possible homes for the refugees:

1. The state of Palestine.
2. Areas in Israel being transferred to Palestine in the land swap.
3. Rehabilitation in host country.
4. Resettlement in third country.
5. Admission to Israel.

In listing these options, the agreement will make clear that the return to the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and areas acquired in the land swap would be the right of all Palestinian refugees, while rehabilitation in host countries, resettlement in third countries and absorption into Israel will depend upon the policies of those countries.

Israel could indicate in the agreement that it intends to establish a policy so that some of the refugees would be absorbed into Israel consistent with Israel’s sovereign decision.

I believe that priority should be given to the refugee population in Lebanon.

The parties would agree that this implements Resolution 194.

Abbas’ position on the refugee issue is not consistent with the Clinton Parameters. Abbas in no way restricts the “right of return” to the state of Israel for the refugees and their descendants (now numbering five to seven million people according to the Palestinians), except according to the choice of the refugees themselves.

The Clinton Parameters, in contrast, explicitly state that the Palestinian refugees’ settlement in Israel would require a sovereign Israeli decision, and must accord with the principle that Palestine is the Palestinian homeland and Israel is the Jewish homeland.

Abbas’ claim that the Palestinians have accepted the Clinton Parameters contradicts the position he presented on the implementation of the “right of return,” which shows that he and the Palestinian leadership adhere to the view that this “right” is personal and inalienable. In other words, it is a means to destroy Israel by altering the demographic balance and forcing the evacuation of millions of Jews so that Palestinians can be settled in their place.

Abbas’ position does accord with the “Right of Return Law” that he signed in 2008, which states:3

The right of return is a natural, personal, collective, civil, political right passed on from father to son and is not annulled by the passage of time or by the signing of any agreement, and it cannot be abolished or waived in any way….

The Palestinians have the right to sue the Zionist occupation and all who inflicted suffering on the Palestinian people and to demand compensation for the physical and emotional damages that were caused to them.

The Palestinian refugees shall not be resettled or displaced as an alternative to the right of return.

Anyone who violates the provisions of this Act will be considered guilty of the crime of treason and will be subject to all criminal and civil penalties prescribed for this crime.

Abbas’ real attitude is evident from one of the concluding sentences of his speech to the Revolutionary Council:

I swear to Allah, if you knew what pressures I have endured for the past three or four years you would take pity on me. I strive for the good of my homeland and I want nothing for myself. I am seventy-nine years old and I am not about to end my life with an act of treason.

*     *     * 

Notes

1. https://wafa.ps/arabic/index.php?action=detail&id=170086

2. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/Peace%20Puzzle/10_Clinton%20Parameters.pdf

3. https://www.jcfa.org.il

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs. He is a co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd.
Share this

Invest in JCFA

Subscribe to Daily Alert

The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Related Items

Stay Informed, Always

Get the latest news, insights, and updates directly in your inbox—be the first to know!

Subscribe to Jerusalem Issue Briefs
The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Notifications

The Jerusalem Center
The Failures of French Diplomacy in Lebanon

Does Macron have such a short memory that he can forget the presence of Yasser Arafat and his terrorists in Beirut? Khomeini’s hateful propaganda in Neauphle-le-Château, near Paris?

12:07pm
The Jerusalem Center
This is How Hamas Opened a Front in Europe

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood identified Europe’s weak point. In a naivety mixed with stupidity, the continent’s leaders do not understand the principles of fundamentalist Islam – and we are paying the price for it. 

12:06pm
The Jerusalem Center
The Digital Panopticon: How Iran’s Central Bank Aims for Financial Legitimacy and Absolute State Control

The Digital Rial transitions the financial landscape from one where transactions can occasionally be tracked to one where they are always monitored, always recorded, and always subject to state intervention.

12:05pm
The Jerusalem Center
Why Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Is “Slow-Walking” Normalization With Israel

Trump seeks a historic achievement, but Riyadh is not willing to pay the price without a genuine settlement ensuring the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

12:05pm
The Jerusalem Center
Between Hitler and Hamas: The Dangers of Appeasement and Genocidal Aggression
The past is never far away. The study of Hitler’s “whole method of political and military undermining” and today’s methods of Hamas raises an open question.
10:32am
The Jerusalem Center
Mamdani’s Triumph Is Likely to Embolden Leftists in the West
For European observers, in particular, the success of the Red-Green alliance in the New York City mayoral race should be a wake-up call.
 
10:31am
The Jerusalem Center
Christian Zionists: Civilization’s Defense Force in an Era of Existential Threat

The 700 million Christian Zionists worldwide constitute a force multiplier for Israel’s international security and diplomatic standing, and a powerful counterweight to delegitimization and defamation campaigns targeting the Jewish state.

10:30am
The Jerusalem Center
Tehran Under Pressure: Nuclear Escalation, Economic Strain, and a Deepening Crisis of Confidence

The Iranian leadership is struggling to stabilize its grip both internally and externally.

10:28am
The Jerusalem Center
The Black-Market Drain: How Illegal Crypto Mining Cripples Iran’s Electricity and Economy

The illegal crypto mining phenomenon in Iran is not merely a few isolated cases of law-breaking; it is an organized, large-scale black market enabled by highly subsidized energy prices.

10:26am
The Jerusalem Center
The Gaza Flotilla Is a Fraud

Far from a humanitarian mission, the latest 70-vessel spectacle on its way to Gaza from Italy is a costly act of political theater @FiammaNirenste1 @JNS_org

11:28am
The Jerusalem Center
The Assassination of Abu Obeida – Why Is Hamas Remaining Silent?

Senior Israeli security officials note that such silence is not new; Hamas often delays its statements following targeted Israeli assassinations, raising questions whether this stems from attempts to verify the information or from a deliberate strategy of ambiguity https://x.com/jerusalemcenter

11:25am
The Jerusalem Center
The Impact of Radical Legal Ideology: From the Classroom to the International Forum

Massive funding of Critical Legal Studies-style academic and extracurricular programs promotes anti-Western ideas and undermines international community institutions and legal conventions https://x.com/jerusalemcenter

11:23am

Close