Lebanon's treatment of Palestinians is self-destructive
The Daily Star - Beirut
6 November 2003
The Lebanese government is once again grappling with the bogeyman of how to deal with Palestinian refugees on its soil -- and as has been the case for more than two generations now, Beirut continues to miss the point. The obsession is with preventing anything that smacks of "resettling" the Palestinians in Lebanon. The priority should be to ensure that for however long it lasts, the Palestinian presence is never again allowed to be as disruptive as it was in the years leading up the Lebanese civil war. The yawning gap between what is and what should be has made an already weak country even more vulnerable.
Like those of several other Arab capitals, much of Beirut's policy on this subject is drawn on decisions reached by the Arab League in the wake of the 1948 war that produced the first wave of Palestinian refugees. But the measures designed to keep the dispossessed from putting down roots in neighboring countries, and so from abandoning hope of returning to their homeland, were intended as temporary steps. They were expected to be required for two or three years, maybe five or even 10 -- but not 55. Now that the restrictions are well into their second half-century, they are exacerbating what has always been a difficult situation.
The limitations in question amount to far more than benign neglect and constitute instead an aggressive program that both prevents Palestinians from leading normal lives in Lebanon and throws up obstacles to their leaving for more accommodating shores. The basics of human development are denied to the vast majority of the refugees, as is any basis for hope that their children might know a better future. The result is a chain of camps that breed nothing so much as trouble. Being treated like vermin is hardening the hearts of their inhabitants, and who can blame them? Increasingly they view the Lebanese with contempt, seeing them as yet another tormentor trying to take advantage of their misfortune. Such pervasive disillusionment and resentment are the building blocks of radicalism, which explains why recruiters for extremist groups have had so much success in the camps.
There is no questioning Beirut's inability to play permanent host to any significant number of Palestinians: Demographics, economics, geography and history simply do not allow Lebanon the capacity to absorb a new community without reviving the worst sort of tensions. That is no excuse, however, for the blind enthusiasm with which Lebanese officialdom sticks to the failed approaches of the past. Lebanon cannot be the Palestinians' new home, but nor should it be their prison. One's devotion to (or antipathy for) the Palestinian cause is irrelevant to this issue. All that should matter is the stability of the Lebanese state and the welfare of its citizens. This is where Beirut's handling of the Palestinian presence has been at its most counter-productive: Creating and alienating a foreign underclass flies in the face of self-preservation.
