The return of the intellectual
By Meron Benvenisti
Haaretz, 15 November 2001
Sari Nusseibeh's remarks on the "right of return" generated tremendous interest that seemingly was self-evident: A Palestinian leader and thinker bravely dared to challenge the sacrosanct precept of his people, a Palestinian demand that is perceived by Israelis as a call for the destruction of their state.
The Israeli echo in response to his remarks was only intensified by the angry criticism heard on the Palestinian side, including the calls to remove Nusseibeh from his position as the PLO's representative in Jerusalem. If that was the response, it's a sign that his statement "it is "impossible to return 4 million refugees to Israel" means forgoing the individual right of return, and that indeed seems a refreshing innovation.
But it wouldn't hurt to consider the reasons for the interest in his remarks and admit that it is mostly because since the failure of the Camp David summit and the outbreak of the intifada, the slogan "right of return" has become an article of faith on the Israeli side. It is cited as proof that there's no chance of reconciliation with the Palestinians and when all the arguments about "occupation" and "settlements" are exhausted, the damning proof is produced: "But they want to go back to Jaffa and that means our destruction."
Nusseibeh's remarks, therefore, "are the extraordinary that prove the ordinary," as Danny Rubinstein wrote in these pages on November 12. Leave it to the Palestinians to make sure that Nusseibeh's views will remain a curiosity that won't change the Israeli "nightmare of the return." Nusseibeh no doubt wanted to throw a rational stone into the emotional, paranoid swamp, but paradoxically, the Palestinian reaction served to reconfirm the Israeli nightmare.
"The timing, not the substance, is problematic," said Jibril Rajoub, who "likes Nusseibeh and supports him." Indeed, if Nusseibeh had issued his call at another time - for example, in the mid-1990s and in effect until the failure of the Taba talks - they would not have been viewed as anything new or unusual.
After the signing of the Oslo agreements, the Palestinians were forced to grapple with a new approach to the problem of the refugees of 1948, because "mutual recognition" no longer allowed them to stick to the old, radical formulas. But that approach could not have been clearly enunciated because Yasser Arafat was unable to admit to the refugees in the diaspora that he doesn't have a solution to their problem.
The Palestinians began debating solutions that would "satisfy enough Palestinians but be acceptable to enough Israelis," and began formulating a "right of return" in collective terms, rather than personal ones. The principle of return would be a return to the Palestinian state, and not necessarily to the actual homes in the state of Israel. Zayyad Abu Zayyad wrote, "(Palestinian suffering) imposed on many to perceive the return (in terms of) achieving national independence and peace, and not necessarily (in terms of) an actual return."
But that rational process crashed on the shoals of the catastrophic demand by Ehud Barak that the Palestinians sign an "end to all the demands" agreement, including "the right of return." The haste to reach "an end to the conflict now - or nothing," closed the way to finding a formula that would implement a right of return in ways that would "satisfy enough Palestinians and enough Israelis." Efforts by Yossi Beilin and Nabil Sha'ath at Taba drowned in the bloodshed of the intifada.
Now Nusseibeh is trying to revive that dialogue, but he doesn't have much of a chance. His audience isn't ready to listen to a rational argument and seek a solution that isn't shackled to a concept of absolute justice, while the Israelis grasp the angry Palestinian reaction because if they lose hold of their argument about the "right of return," they will be faced with the immediate reasons for the conflict: the occupation and the settlements.
Thus, Nusseibeh's remarks will remain "the extraordinary that prove the ordinary" for Israelis and Palestinians alike. But that, after all, is the intellectual's role - to ignore the timing and political correctness, and to express only the truth as he or she sees it. Indeed, characteristically, Nusseibeh signed the petition calling for his own removal from his post.
