(September 2011) Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine Memo Refuting Arguments Regarding PLO...

8/4/2019 (September 2011) Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine Memo Refuting Arguments Regarding PLO Status and …

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/september-2011-permanent-observer-mission-of-palestine-memo-refuting-arguments 1/7

of&alestui&

to they « S cil/ofhs V l f U i i J j J.

Memorandum prepared by the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine

to the United Nations - New York

September 2011

Response to Arguments that the "September Initiative" regarding Statehood will harm th e

Status of the Palestine Liberation Organizat ion (PLO ) and the rights of the Palestine Refugees:

T h e Palestinian people are recognized worldwide as a nation o f people with a distinct history,

heritage, culture and society. T h e right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and freedom

is an inalienable right, enshrined in the United Nations Charter, international law and United Nations

resolutions and also recognized worldwide. This right to self-determination and freedom includes

the right to an independent State where th e Palestinian people can live as a free and dignified people

without external interference. This is among th e legitimate national aspirations of the Palestinian

people, f o r which they have been striving fo r decades.

As all peoples in the world, th e Palestinian people must struggle with national crises, problems and

difficult and sensitive issues. Primary among th e crises that the Palestinian people an d their national

movement and leadership have faced over th e decades are the plight of the Palestine refugees since

the 1948 Al-Nakba and the Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian Territory, including East

Jerusalem, since 1967, and al l of the crimes and violations perpetrated against o ur people by the

occupying Power with the continuation o f this conflict and the obstruction o f peace and justice fo r

ou r people.

T h e continuing national effort to resolve th e conflict in all its aspects, including th e achievement of

just solutions for the core final status issues - the Palestine refugees, Jerusalem, the settlements,

borders, security, water an d prisoners - does not contradict or negate our right to be a free people,

like al l other peoples of the world. W e have an inalienable right to freedom and to an independent

homeland fo r our people as we continue this journey to justly and completely resolve th e conflict

and achieve all of the rights of our people, including their right to return, in accordance with th e

relevant United Nations resolutions and provisions o f international l aw, including humanitarian and

human rights l aw.

This is the core of the "September Initiative" fo r Palestinian Statehood: affirmation of the right of

the Palestinian people to self-determination and to Statehood and recognition of the State o f

Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on the basis of the pre-June 1967 borders, existing as a

Foreword:

115 East 65th Street Ne w York, NY 10065 Tel. (212) 288-8500 Fax (212) 517-2377



reality in the international community and as an equal member of the community of nations, with

equal rights and sovereignty under international la w that must b e respected.

T h e right to self-determination an d freedom and other human rights, including th e right of refugees

to return, are not mutually exclusive and t he achievement of one does no t negate the other. A n y

other interpretation is baseless an d ignores th e international human rights covenants, including th e

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms th e rights to which al l peoples of the worldare entitled.

Accordingly, th e current arguments circulating about potential dangers and harm that could b e

caused to the status of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole legitimate

representative of the Palestinian people as a whole and the legal status, rights and representation o f

th e Palestine refuge es are distorted arguments, based on faulty assumptions that ignore th e extensive

national, regional and international legislation that exists in this regard . Such national, regional and

international legislation safeguards th e rights of the refugees, including their right to return and to

just compensation on the basis of UN General Assembly resolution 194 (III) (11 December 1948)

an d safeguards th e status and role of t he PLO.

Moreover, such arguments ignore th e historical and ongoing functioning of the PLO a t the national,regional and international levels on behalf of the Palestinian people in their entirety, both th e

Palestinian civilian population living under th e Israeli occupation in the Occupied Palestinian

Territory (namely th e West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip) and the Palestinian

refugees in the Diaspora, including in the refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and t he OPT

itself. Lastly, th e arguments being made reflect either a serious lack o f understanding or total

dismissal of the essence of the right to self-determination, th e inalienable right of all peoples to be

free and live in dignity, determining their o w n political status and destiny, enjoying their human

rights and developing and prospering without external interference.

Facts a n d Explanation:

1. The Statehood initiative being pursued at the United Nations ( U N ) revolves around th e right o f

th e Palestinian people to self-determination and the exercise o f that right in an independent

homeland, in accordance with the UN Charter, th e Universal Declaration of Human Rights and

the 1970 UNGA "Declaration on Principles o f International L aw concerning Friendly Relations

and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations", and all

relevant U N resolutions regarding th e question of Palestine that have been adopted over th e

decades an d continue to be adopted.

2 . The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to an independent State h as been

repeatedly reaffirmed by the international community in numerous U N resolutions, by the ICJ in

it s 2004 advisory opinion, and via the bilateral recognitions accorded to Palestine by 126countries, th e majority o f which recognized th e State o f Palestine post Declaration o f

Independence in 1988 by the Palestinian National Council (PNC). Such reaff irmations of this

right are based on the above international legal instruments as well as on the two-State solution

for a peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of the pre-June 1967

borders, on which th e Declaration o f Independence by t he PNC/PLO w as explicitly based in

1988 . The two-State solution thus became th e official position of the Palestinian national

movement in 1988, long before th e advent of the Palestinian National Authority ( P A ) . This



position was of course adopted without prejudice to the legitimate rights of the Palestine refugees

wherever they may be , including to return and to just compensation, and to the status o f

Occupied East Jerusalem, which by then Israel, th e occupying Power, had imposed it s so-called

basic law on in attempted d e facto annexation o f East Jerusalem, which was in 1988 declared th e

capital of the State o f Palestine.

3. The exercise b y a people o f their right to self-determination is precisely their pursuit freely,without an y external interference, o f their political status, i .e. to determine how to govern

themselves and to determine their destiny. Thus, th e political structures o f governance are

determined freely b y that people. If it is the choice of the Palestinian people and their leadership

to maintain t he PLO as their supreme governing body, or executive body, or ultimate decision-

making body then that is their right and their decision. Through th e various stages of the

contemporary Palestinian national struggle this h as been th e case and remains so until n o w . T h e

P L O remains th e most authoritative Palestinian governing body, overseeing th e national efforts

to achieve th e legitimate rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people and representing th e

Palestinian people in their entirety, both th e Palestinian civilian population living under Israeli

occupation in the Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the Palestine refugees in

th e Diaspora, including in the refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and in the OccupiedPalestinian Territory itself, in all international forums.

4. No initiative in the UN regarding recognition of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian

people and the independence of the State o f Palestine on the basis of the pre-1967 borders and its

acceptance among th e community o f nations would "terminate" t he PLO. That is the sovereign

decision of the Palestinian people and their leadership and they only. W e cannot b e told by

anyone that: as you are recognized as a State, n o w y o u cannot have the PLO . If we want to

maintain the PLO as a governing body, then that is our decision and that of no one else. This is

th e essence of sovereignty: th e right to decide your fate and to govern yourself accordingly. W e

maintained and preserved th e status and role of t he PLO, including via specific U N resolutions,

even after the Palestine National Council declared th e independence o f Palestine in 1988 andeven after establishment of the PNA in 1994 and so forth, and such would be the case with th e

undertaking of the current Statehood initiative.

5. The proponents of the arguments against th e Statehood initiative seem to deliberately ignore th e

relevant national, regional and international legislation on this issue of PLO status and

representation of the Palestinian people as a whole, wherever they may be and whatever their

legal status, whether refugees or civilians living under foreign occupation.

6 . The national legislation in this regard includes, inter alia, t he PLO Charter, t he PNC Declaration

of Independence o f Palestine, e tc and the establishment of the PNA as a subsidiary body to the

PLO, in addition to the dual role played b y President Abbas as Chairman of the PLO ExecutiveCommittee and President of the PNA and the repeated proclamation and fact that the PLO is the

ultimate authority and representative for the Palestinian people as a whole, whether inside th e

Occupied Palestinian Territory (including th e nearly 2 million registered refugees in the OPT

itself between th e West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip) or in the Diaspora.

7. The international legislation in this regard includes, inter alia, th e relevant U N resolutions b y

which t he PLO (1974-1988)/Palestine (1988-Present) gained observer status and by which it



functions in the UN and on the international stage, both bilaterally and multilaterally ( N A M ,

O I C , Arab League, etc.) with Member States throughout th e world. This legislation also includes

th e relevant resolutions regarding th e right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and

regarding al l aspects of the plight an d rights of the Palestine refugees, which w e have strived

year after year to reaffirm and to gain overwhelming support fo r by t he international community

at the UN as well as in other international forums, and the 2004 1CJ Advisory Opinion. It also

includes t he PLO relationship with UNRWA and the agreement signed between the two and thePLO-Palestine's role as a member of the Advisory Commission o f UNRWA advocating on

behalf of t he Palestine refugees. And, i t includes th e Oslo Accords (Declaration of Principles on

Interim Self-Govemment Arrangements), which specified th e role and status of the PLO as the

representative of the Palestinian people and the letters o f mutual recognition between the two

sides.

8. In addition, w e must look at the relevant regional legislation that is also being ignored by

proponents of the faulty arguments against th e Statehood initiative. This includes regional

legislation in the form of positions taken by t he League o f Arab States, in which Palestine is a

full Memb er State. Within th e Arab League, th e role, function and representative status of the

PLO and t he positions regarding th e rights of the Palestine refugees and the two-state solutionbased on the pre-1967 borders a re clear. In this connection, it must b e stressed that th e 2002

Arab Peace Initiative, which is predicated on the two-State solution, also calls for a just solution

to the Palestine refugee problem on the basis o f UNGA resolution 194.

9. As for the claim that such an initiative would abrogate th e right of t he Palestine refugees to

return and/or to just compensation in accordance with international law and UNGA resolution

194 and subsequent relevant resolutions, this too is unfounded and not based in legal fact. T h e

refugee issue is a core issue, a final status issue, and a political issue that requires a just and

compr ehens ive political solution. Addres sing th e issue of the State and the right to self-

determination does not negate the rights, status or claims of the Palestine refugees. N o r does it

negate th e requirement for a just and comprehensive solution addressing this refugee issue as aprimary national issue for the Palestinian people, which is also a priority regional issue

concerning th e countries neighboring Palestine that have been hosting Palestine refugees fo r over

six decades, namely Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

10. Th e Palestinian leadership h as repeatedly stated that w e must negotiate just solutions for al l of

th e final status issues, including th e refugee issue, on the basis o f clear parameters based on

international l aw and UN resolutions and within a specified ti meframe, before, during and after

o u r Statehood push. Regardless of the Statehood initiative, it is understood that th e plight of the

Palestine refugees must b e politically, definitively and justly resolved.

11. In this regard, w e reaffirm that th e Palestine refuge e issue is a national, regional and internationalissue and any solution would have to be comprehensive and just in nature in order to be a lasting

solution that address al l aspects of the question, including th e rights of the Palestine refugees to

return and compensation, compensation issues in terms of the host countries, international

responsibility and role with regard to any solution arrived at, and mechanisms fo r

implementation. T h e Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN has drafted, negotiated

and lobbied for the adoption by the widest majority o f Member States of countless UN

resolutions that preserve th e legal status and rights of the Palestine refugees and the role of the



international community in this regard, including in terms of the assistance provided to the

refuge e population by the UNRWA. Indeed, th e PLO-Palestine at the UN have done everything

possible to preserve th e rights of t he Palestine refugees - to return, to compensation, to their

properties and revenues - year after year on the international stage and to ensure fo r them th e

humanitarian and socio-economic assistance they need to survive - for all the refugees in Jordan,

Lebanon, Syria and al l of the OPT. This is factual and fully documented in official U N records.

T h e adoption of all these resolutions has been, and continues to be, pursued by Palestine'srepresentatives a t the UN.

12. The claim that pursuing this initiative - which aims at consecrating th e right of the Palestinian

people to self-determination and to their independent State o f Palestine, with East Jerusalem as

it s capital, on the basis of the pre-1967 borders - would negate th e rights of the refugees is to

give credence to the harmful and rhetorical Israeli arguments in this regard. This argument is

baseless, because even in the context o f negotiations and the peace process, and even in the

context of the infamous Roadmap, i t has been repeatedly stated that a just, agreed, fair solution

for the refugees must b e arrived at. Such an Israeli position negating th e rights of the refugees is

neither just, n o r would it ever b e agreed to by Palestine and it is an internationally, regionally

and nationally known fact this issue must b e resolved for an end of al l claims in the conflict.

13. In sum, opposition to the Statehood initiative at this point in time, under arguments revolving

around th e status of the PLO and particularly th e rights of the Palestine refugees, is misguided

and predicated on faulty premises at best, or at worst is mal-intended and taking advantage of the

high sensitivity o f this issue among th e Palestinian people. These arguments have no basis in the

actual national, regional an d international legislation and underst andings that exist. Such

arguments seem clearly centered on opposition to the two-State solution and in turn support fo r

t he one - State solution. This is a position held b y a segment of the Palestinian people, and it is

their legitimate right to have a different position and opinion, but that does not justif y attempts to

undermine, with misinformation and faulty legal arguments, an initiative aimed at promoting th e

rights of the Palestinian people as a whole to self-determination and freedom to their humanrights and dignity at this point in the history of our struggle as a nation o f people.

14 . Further, these misguided arguments reflect a lack o f understanding about the UN and about it s

longstanding resolutions regarding th e question o f Palestine, namely th e international legislation

on the question, from 181, 194 and onwards. The UN is not a non-govemmental organization; it

is the world body representing th e international community, in which the Palestinian people have

been represented b y their sole legitimate representative, t h e P L O , since 1974. There h as never

been a so-called bifurcation of representation of the Palestinian people in this world body; we a re

one , both th e Palestine refugees in the Diaspora and Palestinian civilian population living under

occupation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. A ll segments of our

people - under occupation, in the refugee camps, and living in exile are represented as onepeople with a just and noble cause.

15. Of course, in this context, the necessary attention is accorded to the specific plight of the

Palestine refugees and their legitimate rights and needs, as reflected in the numerous resolutions

adopted yearly and the efforts exerted to ensure th e continuity and requisite support fo r UNRWA

to serve the Palestine in all areas of the region, all of which a re officially documented in the

resolutions adopted by t he General Assembly (again, al l drafted, presented and negotiated by



Palestine a t the UN) and the statements of the delegation o f Palestine, whether at the General

Assembly, Security Council, Human Rights Council, Economic and Social Council, ICJ, etc. At

th e same time, th e necessary attention is accorded to the plight of the Palestinian civilians under

Israel's military occupation and the gross violation of all of their human rights by the occupying

Power, including t he wa r crimes perpetrated against them. This too is fully and officially

documented in UN records, whether in resolutions or statements in all of its organs and bodies.

16 . This is the essence an d core of Palestine's representation of all the Palestinian people in the UN,

namely in the international community. This h as been th e case since t he PLO gained observer

status in the organization in 1974 and thereafter, including after th e change o f title/ designation at

the UN from PLO t o Palestine in 1988 following th e PNC's Declaration o f Independence. In

resolution 43/177 (1 5 December 1988), b y which t he GA changed th e designation (by sovereign

decision by the Palestinian leadership and not externally imposed), th e status of the PLO as the

representative of the Palestinian people and the rights and privileges it attained in the UN on

behalf of this people were preserved. It has remained so thereafter, even after Oslo and the

establishment of the PA, and this is precisely because i t was the decision of the PLO to maintain

it as such because it is a people and their leadership w h o determine their representation and

governing bodies and not any external force.

17. In addition, in 1998, the General Assembly adopted resolution 52/250 (7 July 1998) regarding

th e "Participation o f Palestine in the work of the United Nations", upgraded th e observer status

of Palestine in the UN, without prejudice to existing rights and privileges attained by the PLO in

previous resolutions that are also recalled in the said resolution. This upgrade did not harm or

alter th e status of t he PLO as representative of al l of the Palestinian people in the international

arena. Moreover, in this regard, it is relevant to point out that even th e official letters sent by

Palestine to the UN Secretary-General and the Security Council, which a re also official U N

records, always refer to the "Palestinian leadership" in deference to the dichotomy in our

structures, with the PLO and PA playing different roles, but clearly with t he PLO being th e

parent body and the ultimate authority.

18 . Another matter that seems to not be understood is the status of the Palestinian people's

representation in other international, regional and political organizations. A s mentioned earlier,

Palestine is a full member in the Arab League and its representation in this body is of all

Palestinians. Palestine is also a full member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), th e

Organization o f Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Group of 77 and China and in these bodies it

represents all of the Palestinian people. They, their rights and their plight - as refugees and as

civilians under foreign occupation - are fully addressed and represented by Palestine in these

bodies. This too is fully an d officially documented in the declarations of t he NAM Summits and

Ministerial Conferences, including th e Declarations of t he NAM Committee on Palestine, with

al l paragraphs of the larger declarations of the Movement and of the Committee on Palestinedrafted and negotiated and secured by t he delegation of Palestine to the UN in NY and

addressing al l aspects of the question o f Palestine, without exception. T h e same is applicable to

th e declarations and communiques adopted by t he OIC Group i n NY. Palestine is also a full

member of the ESCWA (Economic and Social Commission o f Western Asia) and represents th e

whole of the Palestinian people in this body.



19 . Lastly, references to "citizenship" in connection with th e September initiative are misguided,

misplaced and dangerous. Again, this is about th e inalienable right of our people to self-

determination, independence an d freedom. The day after, barring any unforeseen miracle, there

will still be the Israeli occupation that w e must continue to strive to bring to an end and all the

core final status issues remain to be resolved, including th e plight of the refugees, Jerusalem, th e

settlements, borders, security, water and, I would add, the prisoners as well. Citizenship and

other related issues a re internal issues that will have to be dealt with by the leadership, b ut this isnot an issue to be at all dealt with at the UN in the context September initiative. Again, th e focus

o f this initiative is aimed at consecrating o u r right to be free and to have an independent State in

th e West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip based on the pre- June 1967

borders, i .e. the two-State solution, thus making these both unquestionable, recognized

worldwide, and inevitable.

2 0 . Furthermore, th e question o f "citizenship" in the State o f Palestine for any Palestinian th e world

over does not negate th e need for a just solution to the refugee issue. These tw o matters exist in

tandem and separately on their o w n merits. Further, as noted earlier, th e Palestine refugee issue

is also a regional issue an d cannot be so simply discarded following adoption o f a resolution

recognizing th e State in the pre-1967 territory o r upgrading Palestine to a non-member State int he UN system. These are all assumptions that have no substantive political or legal basis. In

this regard, a contemporary issue of can be easily referred to as an example: with regard to

Sudan. South Sudan's independence and admission as a full Member State in the UN in no way

abrogates th e rights of its refugees, an issue that must b e resolved among several other

"outstanding issues", including th e border issue, which must all be fully and justly resolved.

2 1 . Thus, whether th e two-State solution is achieved or not, in all circumstances, th e refugee issue is

a core political issue requiring just political solution. This is undeniable and would even be the

case in the event that this last ditch effort to achieve t he t wo- State solution fails and we are

forced to turn to other alternative solutions, such as the one-State, in which case w e would still

need to find a just an d internationally-supported (particularly in terms of any ultimatecompensation mechanism) solution for the plight of the Palestine refugees. Nothing about a

September initiative on Statehood would negate this and nor would it negate th e role and status

of the PLO so long as it is the decision of the people and their leadership to maintain it as the

sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, and that is indeed the current and long-

held position.

•klcic-k-k-klfkJfk

Date post:	07-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	harlanw
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

(September 2011) Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine Memo Refuting Arguments Regarding PLO...

Documents