Reply #30: Really?

[shaayecanaan]

NO WAY IN HELL will Israelis even begin to entertain the idea of right of return (unless it is very limited). The right of return will be to the new Palestinian state.

So other countries should be forced to absorb a refugee problem that Israel created? And Israel should not be required to at least some of those refugees? And a population almost twice the size of Israel's should be forced to survive on less than one-quarter of the land?

Here's a handy quiz for you. Read till the end and see how you score:-

1.

Its 1988. Armenian forces attack Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan in response to Azeri pogroms against Armenian residents there. Armenians have long faced persecution at the hands of various Turkic peoples in the region. Fighting ensues, the Armenians overcome the Azeris and declare Nagorno-Karabakh to be an independent republic. 200,000 Azeri residents of Karabakh are expelled or flee. The international community, including Israel and the United States, insists that Karabakh remains Azeri territory and that the Azeri refugees be entitled to return. Is this a legitimate position? Yes/No

2.

Kosovo, 1999. NATO forces attack Serbia in response to actions by the Serb government against Kosovar Albanians. In the aftermath of the NATO campaign, 200,000 Serb refugees are forced to flee. Should they be allowed to return?

3.

Rwanda, 1994. Hutu militias kill staggering amounts of Tutsi Rwandans while the world watches in silence. Tutsi rebels eventually seize the country and prompt hundreds of thousands of Hutus to flee. Hutu refugees are now starving in squalid refugee camps dotted along the border. The international community has requested Rwanda attempt to reintegrate the 2 million Hutu refugees that have fled episodes of ethnic violence since 1959. Is this a legitimate position? Yes/no