by Fady Noun

Political and confessional considerations are behind the split. Some Lebanese are willing to grant Palestinians the right to own property, work freely and enjoy welfare benefits; others are opposed to Palestinians setting roots because that would encourage them not to go back and would play in the hands of Israel.

Beirut (AsiaNews) – The issue of the social and political rights of the more than 300,000 Palestinians living in Lebanon is again on the front burner, and as usual, it is proving quite divisive. A recently draft bill submitted by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt on the issue has divided Lebanon’s political class along confessional lines. If implemented it would affect Palestinians’ right to own property, work and enjoy welfare benefits. Muslims are in favour of the proposal; Christians are not.

Even though they are split on almost all issues, Christians are united against the draft. Kataeb (Phalange) and the Lebanese Forces on the one hand and the Free Democratic Movement on the other are equally opposed to the proposal, the more so since it was presented as doubly urgent.

After the initial split along confessional lines, the debate eventually moved to a more political plane. Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s Future Movement appealed for a more rational discussion of the hot issue, urging everyone to step back from the brink.

What makes the issue difficult to handle is the fact that presence of armed Palestinians was one of the trigger of the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990), a wound that has not yet completely healed and one that opens every time the issue of Palestinian rights is raised.

In their camps and in a few bases they run on Lebanese soil, Palestinians remained armed, especially in south Beirut. As much as all Lebanese want to see them disarmed, Palestinians refuse to give up their weapons.

The ethics of what is at stake is at odds with the raison d’état. Living conditions in Palestinian camps are unacceptable, but the size of the refugee community in Lebanon in relation to the local population is the highest in the Arab world. Discussions on their status thus raise existential, economic and political questions about Lebanon itself. If Palestinians set roots in Lebanon, the country’s confessional balance would be tilted, something which that the country’s constitution cannot envisage.

The issue is surrounded by confusion at various levels among Lebanese and Palestinians alike. Some groups among the latter, especially those close to Hamas, speak of “civil rights” and demand the right for Palestinians to own their house. This might seem an elementary point, but it does raise major problems.

Palestinians cannot exercise civil rights in a country in which they are not citizens, this according Lebanon’s Labour Minister Boutros Harb. “Speaking about civil rights is a mistake to the extent that the term denotes the political notion of citizenship, which is exclusively for Lebanese,” he said. It is thus preferable to speak about “humanitarian and social rights” to avoid misunderstandings.

As to property rights, “the right to lease a property gives Palestinians the right to the same social service that comes with ownership rights, whilst protecting them from the temptation of assimilating into the host society where they are temporarily living and thus run the risk of forgetting their own nationality.”

In this sense, all Lebanese authorities are doing is show respect for the Palestinian right of return, acknowledged by the United Nations, which the temptation to assimilate would do away with simply and purely. Not to mention the fact that Israel is betting on the passage of time to solve its Palestinian problem because of it is own unwillingness to let any Palestinian return to Israeli territory.

According to former Lebanese President and current Kataeb leader Amin Gemayel, the right to own property is the first step anyone takes before setting roots in any country. To the extent that Palestinian refugees would become residents, then “permanent residents”, they would acquire the right to apply for Lebanese citizenship.

As for the right to work, Harb said that 70 professions are now open to Palestinians in accordance with Ministerial Order 1-10, which he signed on 3 February of this year. As for jobs that require membership in professional orders, that would need prior agreement of each.

Working without a work permit raises the same problem as that of property rights, namely the danger of assimilation. However, the need to obtain a permit protects Palestinians because it forces employers to offer them a contract, register them with the National Welfare Office, and sign a health insurance policy that also covers workplace accidents. Abolishing the work permit would do more harm than good.

As for welfare benefits, Harb said, “It would be wrong to exempt the international community of its responsibilities towards Palestinian refugees, which the United Nations helped create. For this reason, it should continue to pay for their health and schooling.”

In his view, “Israel and parts of the international community are trying to get international organisations out of the picture in a deliberate attempt to encourage Palestinian settlement in host countries. This,” in Arab political terms, “would mean betraying the Palestinian cause”.

Even if Jumblatt did not intent to play into the hands of others, Harb believes that the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party “has not adequately studied the file” and should “realise the error of his way”.

• lebanon
• palestinians
• confessional
• divisions
• civil
• war
• christians
• muslims