A Palestinian woman stands outside UNRWA headquarters in Gaza City. (AP/Khalil Hamra)
Tsvi Bisk – The Refugee Racket
The War of Return: How Western Indulgence of the Palestinian Dream Has Obstructed the Path to Peace, by Adi Schwartz & Einat Wilf, (All Points Press, 2020)
The War of Return should be on every Jewish bookshelf. You should buy it, read it, give it to your friends as a present, and reread it when you are about to go to an event where you know the question of Israel/Palestine will inevitably come up. You should especially give it to Jewish friends and relatives, as well as sympathetic gentile friends, who are expressing doubts about Israel’s incursion into Gaza following October 7th and are inclined to favor the “poor oppressed” Palestinians over bullyboy Israel. The War of Return is the proper antidote to such sentimental naivete.
In some of my own previous writing, I had debunked the claim that Gaza is an open-air prison and pointed out, amongst other things, that its Human Development Index (HDI), before October 7th was higher than over 90 member states of the United Nations, including all of sub-Saharan Africa, half the countries in the Arab League, half the countries in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the entire Indian Sub-Continent (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) and dozens of other countries.
Schwartz and Wilf, on the other hand, address the entire historical conflict through the filter of the Refugee Racket and demonstrate, with numerous supporting references, that UNRWA has been, from the outset, an integral institutional representative of hostile Arab countries dedicated to the destruction of Israel (as was the Palestinian “cause” itself). Their analysis is especially trenchant given that both authors identify with Israel’s pragmatic left, have supported previous Israeli peace initiatives, and are not counted amongst settler crazies.
Ironically, UNRWA has been the only functioning institution that the Palestinians have ever had, given that they have never succeeded in creating sustained national institutions of their own. UNRWA has been, in effect, the educational and welfare ministries of “Palestine”, teaching openly a brand of antisemitism not equaled since Hitler. Antisemitism, not anti-Zionism. The authors’ research demonstrates that there was no way the Arabs were going to recognize that the lowly perverse Jew had triumphed over the great and noble Arab peoples. The Jewish state was to be destroyed, no matter what the cost. They show that the refugee “problem” was created as an integral part of the original Arab Grand Strategy to wipe the Jewish state off the map. In this, it was similar to the Arab Boycott. Thankfully, almost every Arab state has since forsworn this position and accepts the de facto reality of Israel – except the Palestinians.
We know this because the Palestinians tell us openly and consistently, and for some reason persons of goodwill don’t take them seriously or believe they are really sincere. The fact is dear humanists is that the aim of the Palestinians is not a state of their own, it is to destroy the Jewish state and UNRWA has been an integral part of this ambition. That those of our friends again calling for the very tired two-state solution don’t seem to take the Palestinians seriously is distressing and even condescending to the Palestinians. Israelis, on the other hand, think the Palestinians are serious and sincere in their belief that their mission on this earth is to destroy the Jewish state rather than create a state of their own.
Most UN institutions have as their declared mission to mitigate, ameliorate, or resolve problems. UNRWA has been the only UN institutions dedicated, de facto, to preserving and actually exacerbating a problem. As the authors clearly document, UNRWA has become a factory creating refugees wholesale, as well as a propaganda arm of terrorist organizations by propagating the “Right of Return”. A right, as the authors point out, does not exist anywhere in international law. No other refugee problem claimed or was given that right and all were resettled in countries that had an ethnic and religious majority similar to the refugees. The list includes 12 million Germans in various central and east European countries expelled after WWII, the millions of Hindus and Muslims uprooted as a consequence of Indian independence, the million Greeks kicked out of Turkey and half a million Turks kicked out of Greece after WWI, as well as other refugee situations. The only refugee problem the UN has de facto dedicated itself to preserving and expanding is that of the Palestinians, preserving it as a weapon to eventually destroy the Jewish state. The Palestinians themselves have, to their credit, been very open about how the right of return is really a weapon to create a fifth column in the ongoing war to destroy the Jewish state.
What is most satisfying is that the authors go back to the very root of the problem. The undeniable fact is that the Palestinian refugee problem was created as a result of Arabs refusing to recognize a Jewish state or honor the United Nations partition decision. If they had accepted the plan Israel would have been much smaller than the pre-1967 borders with a much larger Arab minority. Ironically, in my opinion, the Palestinians would probably have had a much better chance of eventually destroying Israel if the Arab world had accepted the plan. But Palestinian hatred has blinded them to reality, and despite their provisional popularity in world opinion every time war breaks out with Israel, their overall position and leverage just grows weaker with time and Israel just grows stronger. That will be the result this time around also.
For despite the present global outburst of antisemitism and anti-Israel vitriol, when all is said and done and the present war in Gaza comes to an end, the Arab countries standing in line to have diplomatic relations with Israel (Sec. Blinken’s words) will eventually have embassies in Tel Aviv, develop trade and joint infrastructure projects with Israel, and reciprocal defense pacts (given the Iranian threat). Africa will have performed the ritual genuflection to the Muslim world by condemning us but will continue to work with Israeli companies and NGOs because it is beneficial to their own development. And the Palestinians will be left with infinitely less leverage than they had in 2000 when they were offered a state, rejected the offer, and started the 2nd Intifada.
60% of Jewish Israel supported that offer (95% of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and East Jerusalem as capital with Israel swapping some of its sovereign territories to make up for the 5% of the West Bank we wanted to keep). I doubt that even 5% of Jewish Israel would support such an undertaking today. Indeed, East Jerusalem and land swaps are certainly off the table. No Israeli government would last 10 minutes if it renewed such an offer. Today 600,000 Jews are now living in the West Bank as opposed to 200,000 in 2000, 95% of the West Bank is also de facto off the table. Plus they will still be burdened with corrupt, incompetent, and authoritarian governance.
In any case, I repeat my opening declaration. Buy this book, read and reread this book, and give it as a present to friends and family. The War of Return is one of the very few books capable of changing even the most intransigent minds; minds that are not allergic to facts.
