A
Stocktaking Conference on Palestinian Refugee
Research
13h30-15h00
Tuesday, 9 December 1997
Discussion
Session: Interim Measures
What sort of interim measures ought to be adopted to deal
with the Palestinian refugee problem? What are the
challenges, opportunities, constraints of the current phase?
The nature of the interim period
At the outset, it was noted that the interim period was
problematic in several essential respects. First, it was
period when final status arrangements for the refugees had
not yet been agreed to, and when it was therefore essential
that initiatives undertaken to meet their social and
economic needs not in any way prejudice their long-term
political rights. Second, the interim period was one
characterized by substantial change. In the West Bank and
Gaza, the coming to power of the Palestinian Authority and
the (re)creation of the PLO Department of Refugee Affairs
create a new situation in which institutional linkages have
become more complex. Another indication of the changing
environment is the establishment of the PA's new Higher
Committee for Refugees. Finally, the interim period is
characterized by substantial uncertainty and indeterminacy,
making program planning even more difficult.
Refugees in the West Bank and Gaza
Several issues emerged with respect to the situation of
refugees in the West Bank/Gaza. Participants focused on the
institutional relations between the various donor agencies
and Palestinian representatives, on the needs of refugees at
this stage, and on the obstacles impeding the planning and
effective delivery of assistance to the Palestinian
refugees.
Donor efforts are sometimes cast in a negative light and
perceived as a means of normalizing the issue of refugees.
This is especially sensitive in the interim period when camp
dwellers want improved provisional services yet they are
concerned about maintaining the social landscape of the
camps lest their "provisional" refugee status be put into
question. One participant asserted that refugees were thus
merely trying to protect themselves in the political
negotiations. However, participants underlined that the
needs of the refugee and non-refugee populations of the West
Bank/Gaza were quite similar. Existing tensions
between the two groups could be heightened and present a
political risk. The conclusion was that status-centered
assistance ought not to be confused with the protection of
rights.
Institutional relations are also significantly more
complex in this period. Whereas UNRWA used to be the
primary agency responsible for coordinating donor efforts,
the establishment and involvement of other agencies (UNSCO
and UNDP) in the process created a situation where donor
competition has brought to the fore the need to devise a
more disciplined structure for coordination. It was
suggested by one speaker that the demarcation of the
Palestinian refugee issue as a sectoral working group (SWG)
within the current Local Aid Coordination Committee
framework could be of assistance in the matter. However,
this raised concerns among others about the kind of tensions
that such distinctions may trigger within the Palestinian
community.
More specific concerns were raised about the nature of
the international assistance to the refugee population.
One participant criticized the current focus on
specific projects rather than more funding to maintain
UNRWA's core programs. One consequence of this focus in the
area of education has been to increase the quality gap
between UNRWA-provided education and public education in the
West Bank and Gaza. Another speaker expressed doubt as to
the existence of a clear plan of purpose and desired outcome
of development shared by all the donor agencies.
Refugees in the diaspora
Discussion of interim measures in the diaspora focussed
on Lebanon, an area that all participants identified as
being of the most pressing need. In the case of Lebanon, the
political context was identified as one of the main
differences influencing the challenges and constraints of
the interim period. Sensitivities to the Palestinian
refugee issue in the country raise the dual question about
the nature and appropriate mechanisms for the delivery of
assistance to this population. Participants agreed on the
fact that the only point of agreement between the Lebanese
and Palestinian representatives is the consensus on the
interim nature of the period. As a consequence, one speaker
suggested that the funding of UNRWA ought to be channelled
heavily toward the Palestinian refugee population of
Lebanon.
Factors in effective programming
A final discussion revolved around the recognition that
effective developmental assistance requires the
participation of beneficiaries. One participant underlined
the need for participation rather than mere consultation.
Another highlighted the importance of close consultation
with the host governments and the acceptance of the
legitimacy of the views expounded by their representatives.
However, two obstacles were identified in this respect: the
labor-intensive nature of such consultative processes and
the burdens that they impose on the limited resources and
staff of donor agencies; and the need to create new kinds of
partnerships that include old and new actors. Though this
approach was favoured by the Refugee Working Group, the fact
remains that donor nations are also constrained by the
political conditions in the field as well as by domestic
political considerations.
The PRRN/IDRC compensation workshop was funded
by IDRC and the Canadian
International Development Agency thrrough the
Expert and Advisory Services Fund. PRRN is a project of the Interuniversity
Consortium for Arab Studies (Montréal).
Last modified 15/12/97. Rex Brynen/info@prrn.org