Johnny Kairouz, a Lebanese living in Canada, has contributed this article to The Beirut Spring.
The issue tackled here does not imply that the crisis in Lebanon today is solely a Palestinian one. In fact, the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon are far from being held responsible for the recent events. Determining the actual culprits is a totally different subject which is anyhow far from being mysterious.
The Palestinian predicament in Lebanon mainly involves the refugees themselves, the Lebanese state, Israel and the Arab countries. All of the concerned parties, except Israel, long for their return to their homeland. Obviously, every faction has its own reasons.
The Palestinian refugees have been in constant dismay and dissatisfaction since their arrival to Lebanon more than five decades ago. The idea of being expelled from their homeland was their first and foremost consternation. Then came the meddling of their paramilitary groups in the maze of Lebanese internal – and external – politics: this era could be denoted as their rise and fall in Lebanon.
The rise was represented by the strong financial and military support they were receiving from international, regional and local actors. While the Soviet Union was provided them with the weapons and the logistics, the Arab countries offered them financial, political and media coverage. Most importantly, a big part of the Lebanese people sided with them.
Their decline started when they were opposed by another big part of the Lebanese people and when consequently Lebanon’s two neighboring countries intervened. This is when the Palestinian civilians started to pay the price of their armed groups’ adventures. Many civilians became victims of atrocious massacres – many of which were a reaction to what their armed groups had committed to other parties.
As a result of their contribution to the civil war, the Palestinians were severely reprimanded by almost everyone in Lebanon. Ever since the Taef Agreements, they were virtually condemned to stagnate in their camps.
The human rights and humanitarian situation they are undergoing is certainly undesirable. They are subject to many restrictions such as building and reconstruction in the twelve overpopulated camps they are confined to. Furthermore, while education is practically out of reach, they are prohibited from practicing more than 72 professions. In other words, their situation is not viable.
Although most of the Lebanese people are against nationalizing them, every group has its own reason. The first opinion, which is also upheld by most of the Arab countries, advocates their “right of return” to their homeland. This staunch Arab nationalist stance views the integration of the Palestinians – into the Lebanese society – as an admission of defeat in their ongoing conflict with Israel.
The second opinion views the settlement of the Palestinians in Lebanon as a destabilizing factor: it would threaten – the already shaky – demographic balance among the different religious communities in Lebanon. This opinion is mainly shared by the Christian and the Shia groups but also by the Sunnis who view them as potential rivals within their own community.
The Lebanese people also view the Palestinian camps as an imminent threat to their national sovereignty. Ever since the Arab-sponsored 1969 Cairo Agreement, the camps’ security is exclusively maintained by their armed element. The absence of the Lebanese Army in these areas has come to be known as “Security Isles” within the Lebanese territory.
The lack of the state’s full control over its territory has allowed several foreign powers to use these “Security Isles” for arms smuggling as well as hindering Lebanon’s internal security. The loose security surrounding some of the camps can allow, for instance, cars to be loaded with explosives in these areas and be sent to potential targets all over Lebanon.
The paramilitary groups in these camps can burst at any moment by reacting to a regional event thus create turmoil in Lebanon. Furthermore, the camps are allegedly being used to recruit and train terrorists who are later on sent on missions to Iraq. By harboring recruit camps, Lebanon is certainly attracting the entire nuisance that comes with it on an international and regional level.
Lebanon has many security deficiencies and not all of them are due to the Palestinian camps. Blaming all of Lebanon’s perils on the Palestinians would be excessively unjust. However the presence of the Palestinian camps does impede the process of building a better future for Lebanon.
For the three reasons stated above – the right of return; the demographic issue and; the security aspect – a solution certainly needs to be fostered. Without any doubt, the Palestinian civilians must have more rights and benefit from social welfare. The only problem is that Lebanon has – literally – other fish to fry.
Because unfortunately Lebanon cannot afford to grant the Palestinian refugees the treatment they deserve, because unluckily they have been used as scapegoats more than often and because their situation has been increasingly unbearable to them and to Lebanon, a radical decision is needed.
The matter has been procrastinated for years and maybe today is an auspicious time to deal with it once and for all. Lebanon has offered them shelter for more than half a century. Lebanon has also contributed its considerable share in the Arab-Israeli conflict. It’s now time for other Arab countries to offer the deprived refugees what Lebanon could not afford but that they sure can: Land, rights and money.
The resettlement of the Palestinians to other Arab countries will be a win-win situation. Lebanon will get rid of one of the major obstacles that are impeding the implementation of a strong sovereign state and the Palestinian civilians will have a better prospect in obtaining a brighter future pending to their hopeful return to their land.
