To What Extent Should the United States Deliver Humanitarian Aid to

UNRWA to Support Palestinian Refugees?

Written By: Robert Youch

Professor Kochis & Professor Walsh

BIS 403—Washington DC Seminar on Human Rights

Autumn, 2014

Introduction

The recent escalation of the conflict in the Gaza Strip between the Palestinian and Israeli

militaries has garnered media attention worldwide, especially in the United States. Air Strikes

conducted by both Hamas—a militaristic Palestinian political group often accused of terrorism

and fervent anti-Semitism—and the Israeli military have converted Gaza to rubble. The war has

internally displaced 540,000 Gazans, and left thousands wounded, maimed, or killed (IRUSA).

Civilians that are not internally displaced or subsisting in refugee camps have fled Gaza seeking

asylum or refugee status in neighboring countries. Most do not have sufficient access to shelter,

food, clean water, healthcare, or education. Floods devastating and “…exacerbating the already

poor humanitarian situation for refugees and non-refugees in Gaza” have prompted the UN to

declare a state of emergency (UN Declares Emergency). Those that enter refugee camps seeking

respite and support from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in

the Near East (UNRWA) desperately need better medical aid, nourishment, and a reliable

support system given their dire circumstances. They also require additional resources if they are

to re-establish their livelihoods where they choose. Refugees are too often forgotten, alienated,

or exiled completely from countries not willing to accept their religious or national differences

and the financial burdens that accompany them. The ongoing violence in Israel and Palestine

impacts people worldwide and will increasingly impact those affected indirectly as Western

foreign policies become further interlinked and entrenched as escalating crises flare throughout

the Middle East. However, regardless of national or religious allegiance, those with no hand in

violence who are forced to flee to safer lands deserve asylum and aid, which is why specific

measures to protect refugees must be taken by the United States and its allies.

R. Youch 1

The State Department is limited regarding how much humanitarian aid and financial

resources it can allocate to the crisis in Gaza because they have committed resources to Iraq and

Syria, which are both consumed by war and political turmoil. The Syrian Civil War and the

spread of ISIL’s terror have created mayhem in the Middle East, forcing millions of civilians to

flee Syria and Iraq as refugees. Lending aid to Syrian and Iraqi internally displaced persons and

refugees has become a major priority for NGOs, the EU, the UNHCR, and the United States.

Regrettably, the World Food Program (WFP) and UNHCR have “run out of money,” and no

longer possess the financial means to support the millions suffering in Syria, Iraq, and

neighboring countries. This leaves UNRWA isolated in its plight to deliver aid to Palestinian

refugees thrust between a volatile conflict of their own and the wars in Syria and Iraq (UN Runs

Out). Although Gaza may have recently taken a back seat to the aforementioned ISIL crisis in

U.S. news media, Secretary of State Kerry and the Obama Administration have not forgotten the

plight of Palestinians.

In Secretary Kerry’s October 12th remarks at the Gaza Donors Conference in Cairo, he

discussed the United States’ dedication to helping civilians and refugees affected by the conflict.

He proclaimed, “The people of Gaza do need our help desperately – not tomorrow, not next

week, but they need it now…” (John Kerry). Kerry backed up the urgency of his words through

his pledge to provide additional aid. “We [the United States] provided $118 million in

immediate humanitarian assistance…” at the height of the crisis, plus an additional, “$84

million…to UNRWA for operations. Today, I’m pleased to announce an additional immediate

$212 million in assistance to the Palestinian people.” This massive sum “…will mean immediate

relief and reconstruction…and help meet the Palestinian Authority’s budget needs.” If the PA

and UNRWA use this money effectively, it has the potential to catalyze community-rebuilding

R. Youch 2

efforts and address the food, medical, and security needs of Palestinians throughout the Gaza

Strip and Syria.

There is no doubt that Gaza has countless short-term needs that must be addressed so

refugees can live with dignity and overcome unfavorable odds. However, if Palestinians in

Gaza, the West Bank, or neighboring countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, or Syria, have

ambitions to develop long-term socio-economic institutions, major political reforms must take

place at a grass-roots level. A two-state solution is the ultimate goal for Palestinians, Israelis,

and the rest of the world. This objective cannot be achieved without mutual tolerance. The bulk

of this essay will not directly address peace talks between the Palestinian Authority (PA) and

Israel or a two-state solution because those objectives can only be achieved once pressing

matters on the ground have been dealt with. Neither will succeed until social and economic

stability exists for Palestinians. Instead, this essay will answer how the United States can

pressure political institutions throughout the Near East that possess major influence over the

current and future livelihood of Palestinian internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees,

namely UNRWA, so that the interests of voiceless Palestinians are represented in the future.

In order for the U.S. to bolster effective reform, the State Department will need to work

collaboratively with UNRWA, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the PA and other

regional governments and political organizations, and non-state actors that specialize in

humanitarian endeavors. A multilateral effort to increase and reallocate funding for programs

aimed to protect and aid refugees fleeing violence and destitution in Gaza, Israel, the West Bank,

or Syria is paramount to U.S. geopolitical interests in the Middle East. Reducing violence and

civilian persecution amid the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will not only create an environment

conducive to development and tolerance, but will establish conditions that will make peace

R. Youch 3

attainable. Moreover, if Palestinians and Israelis do not live in fear, the right to security of

person established in Article III of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) may

not remain a foreign dream. Ultimately, creating conditions where both Palestinians and Israelis

respect the human dignity of the other is ideal, but that will not be possible if the rights of

refugees and IDPs are insufficiently upheld or either nation is marginalized or portrayed as

terrorists or thieves.

Before further addressing the issues and questions raised above and providing policy

recommendations for the United States and UNRWA it is necessary to provide historical

background about how the Palestinian refugee problem began; define and discuss U.S. interests

in the region and assess how these interests align with other parties; acknowledge the interests of

Palestinian women and children that suffer most; analyze the relationship between the U.S. and

UNRWA; and evaluate the role UNRWA has played and continues to play in the lives of

Palestinian refugees.

Historical Background

On November 19, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly divided Palestine into

three parts: the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and a new and independent state of Israel. Jordan

annexed the West Bank and Gaza became Egyptian territory, which left Palestinians irate and

deprived of a nation-state of their own (Lindsay, 1). The events that followed U.N. General

Assembly Resolution 181 (II), commonly known as the Partition Plan, spurred a violent ongoing

conflict. The three-year war between Israel and Palestine, coupled with the latters newfound

statelessness, resulted in millions of displaced Palestinian refugees in dire need of international

support. Refugees lacked shelter, food and water, medical care, educational and infrastructural

resources, employment opportunity, and most importantly, political rights in a war-torn country

R. Youch 4

which they no longer had a voice. In response to this crisis, the UN Relief for Palestine

Refugees (UNRPR) was established, “…to relieve the desperate plight of Palestine refugees of

all communities” (Lindsay, 4). However, after it became clear that the Palestinian refugee crisis

would be a long-term problem that needed greater supervision, UNRWA was founded in

December of 1949 to assume the role of the UNRPR (Lindsay, 4). UNRWA’s original mandate,

established by General Assembly Resolution 302, was: “To provide ‘direct relief and works

programmes’ to Palestine refugees, in order to ‘prevent conditions of starvation and distress…

and to further conditions of peace and stability’” (UNRWA). They are also expected to “work

with governments on interim measures and to provide relief and assistance to Palestine refugees

‘pending the just resolution’ of the Palestine refugee question” (UNRWA). Like all

organizations, UNRWA’s role has evolved to satisfy the needs of refugees, and their mandate

has expanded over time to address social, cultural, political, and economic events in the Near

East.

UNRWA has five programs that demand budgetary resources: Education, Health, Relief

and Social Services, Microfinance and Microenterprise, and Infrastructure and Camp

Improvement (Lindsay, 5). The first three programs are the oldest and require the most financial

resources. The latter two programs were created to address needs that became increasingly

prevalent in the 1990s and 2000s. In total, UNRWA manages an annual budget exceeding $500

million and employs approximately 29,000 people, the vast majority of whom are refugees

(Lindsay, 5). As is glaringly apparent in 2014, if Palestinian refugees, IDPs, or civilians do not

possess the resources to start small businesses or earn an internationally respected “living wage”

then it will be extremely difficult for them to make socio-economic progress. By strengthening

infrastructure in camps and cities and giving refugees the opportunity to obtain employment as

R. Youch 5

camp staff, UNRWA has fostered economic development by redistributing money throughout

Palestinian refugee communities.

UNRWA operations in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria have always

been financed on a voluntary basis. Funding comes predominantly from the United States and

European Union, but UNRWA also receives assistance from NGOs such as Islamic Relief USA

(UNRWA). Due to the fact that the U.S. has always been UNRWA’s single largest financier, the

State Department can influence UNRWA policies in a direction that appeals to U.S. interests in

the region. Despite this ability, the U.S. has historically not interfered with UNRWA’s

sovereignty and generally supported their policy decisions and programs insofar as they do not

endanger Israel, engender anti-Israel sentiments, or employ or serve any terrorists. Evidence that

UNRWA has not upheld its obligations to maintain impartiality in its schools and camps is

becoming increasingly evident. In 2004, the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and

Information (IPCRI) issued a report on the anti-Israel bias in Palestinian curricula and textbooks

in UNRWA primary schools. The report states, “Palestinian text books have confused messages,

and it is not difficult to come to the understanding that the main political theme imparted to the

students is that Israel should not exist, and that is essentially the Palestinian goal” (Lindsay, 43).

There is no doubt that an educational system that delegitimizes Israel opposes U.S. interests, and

action must by taken to reform Palestinian and UNRWA schools if Palestinians and Israelis are

to peacefully coexist. Clearly, numerous issues exist that must be resolved, and this essay will

address them, but if entire generations of Palestinian youth view Israel as a purveyor of their

troubles, the conflict will not end peacefully. Israel and Palestine each possess ancient historical

attachment to the same land; an attachment that extends back to the Old Testament. Both believe

they have a divine right to the “promised land” that supersedes the other. This divine right has

R. Youch 6

perpetuated and entrenched a stubborn inability to compromise over territorial disputes by both

cultures. In order for the U.S. to diplomatically encourage conditions that reduce racism and

negative stigmas throughout Palestinian refugee communities, it is paramount that U.S. political

leaders make it clear to American citizens how U.S. interests are furthered by lending aid to

refugees thousands of miles away.

U.S. Interests and Foreign Policy Involvement in Humanitarian or Refugee Issues

As Israel’s strongest ally, the U.S. has a major role to play in advancing the geopolitical

climate in Israel and Palestine towards stability. Articulating a clear reasoning for why the U.S.

should further involve itself is essential. As taxpayers, U.S. citizens have a right to know what

can be gained and lost by lending additional humanitarian aid to UNRWA and the Palestinian

Authority. Constituents musk ask questions and political intentions must remain transparent.

The ability for U.S. citizens to understand which allies and stakeholders merit the most

consideration given the short and long-term effects that lending humanitarian aid to refugees will

have in the U.S., Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the Middle East at-large is

critical. Answers to the previous questions are not objective and by no means simple or easily

agreed upon, yet a proper justification must be provided by the U.S. government to ensure

majority public support.

The United States’ foreign policy doctrine has been historically decided by defining

whether an international issue affects our interests domestically and abroad, and if it is within our

international sphere of influence. However, deciding what actually affects our interests is rarely

agreed upon. The federal government, policy makers, private corporations, lobbyists, citizens,

international allies, and miscellaneous stakeholders are typically unable to compromise their own

respective interests for the interests of others who do not appear to “directly” affect them.

R. Youch 7

Policies that advocate advancing human rights as a U.S. prerogative in foreign affairs are

possibly the most controversial because they require reallocating resources that could be spent

domestically. Nevertheless, humanitarian missions in war-torn countries have become vogue

since the Cold Wars’ culmination because U.S. allies or ideals have been “threatened” by radical

regimes violating the sacred rights of others. The classification of what can be deemed a “threat”

has broadened to include human rights abuses because they oppose, “…ideals that are considered

important to the United States” (Kaufman, 13). Regardless of the growing trend to support the

rights of marginalized or oppressed peoples, convincing Americans that providing millions if not

billions of dollars to refugees or victims of war crimes has not been done without receiving

serious criticism from U.S. citizens that would much rather see that money allocated to

alleviating poverty, tackling economic disparity, and improving education, healthcare, and the

justice system within our own borders.

The U.S. has loyally supported the affairs of Israel since being the first to recognize its

statehood in 1948. While President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry maintain their official

support of Israel, the back and forth atrocities committed by the Israeli military and Hamas—

especially the abductions and unwarranted deaths of young civilians—has established dissenting

viewpoints in the media and general public about how the U.S. should proceed with their

military support of Israel while cease-fire and/or peace negotiations continue. President Obama

has not hidden his disapproval of how Israel has handled certain aspects of the conflict, and

Republicans and Democrats alike have shared their opinions on how the U.S. should respond to

the fragility of the Gaza conflict, and whether it merits additional financial resources at all.

A prevailing complaint in Washington D.C. is that an “interventionist bias” has become

increasingly prevalent in foreign affairs as America perpetuates Woodrow Wilson’s idealist

R. Youch 8

position that the world must be made “safe for democracy” (Kaufman, 19). Chris Preble, the

Vice President for Defense and Foreign Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, a Libertarian think

tank in D.C., echoed this opinion. While meeting with Preble he claimed that although Cato

prefers a strategy of limited government in international humanitarian issues, non-intervention

does not mean avoiding intervention in foreign affairs altogether if becoming involved furthers

U.S. interests without compromising domestic and international human liberties. Preble, similar

to Joyce Kaufman, author of A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy, echoed that it remains

critical to decide which issues represent our foreign interests enough to justify political,

economic, humanitarian, or military intervention. Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has

faithfully adhered to a strategy of “internationalism” or “engagement,” which supports

becoming, “…actively engaged in all aspects of international relations” (Kaufman, 17). Both the

Bush and Obama administrations have struggled to remain selective when choosing which

international conflicts to engage in. However, the chief difference between the two has been

their choice of tactics. Bush relied heavily on “hard power” because his administration focused

primarily on strategic military and economic interests, whereas Obama has predominantly relied

on the usage of “soft power” by advocating for diplomacy and collaboration to solve conflicts.

Regardless of power strategy, U.S. citizens are often frustrated that the State Department

and Executive Branch choose to reactively intervene in nearly all crises, instead of demonstrating

restraint. The Cato Institute prefers when private bodies, NGOs, and other political stakeholders

take the lead on international strategic measures aimed at influencing or changing the actions and

policies of other governments, rather than when the U.S. government fervently pushes to the fore

to intervene in the affairs of other countries because in doing so we overextend our sphere of

influence (Chris Preble). The argument behind this line of thinking is that because the sole

R. Youch 9

mission of NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International is to address human rights

or humanitarian aid issues, they can do it more effectively than state governments whose powers

and resources are limited by alliances, international legal obligations, and domestic duties.

Congress and the Obama Administration are opposed to a resolution between Israel and

Palestine dictated by the UNSC. The United Nations Security Counsel has historically favored

the Palestinian perspective and cause, which opposes the U.S.-Israeli alliance. Secretary General

Ban Ki-Moon has not been shy about criticizing or altogether condemning Israeli military

responses to airstrikes from Hamas or other Palestinian militants. The United States’ interests

are better served if Israel and Palestine can create a bilateral peace resolution without depending

on hegemonic external bodies to dictate terms that place their own political interests above the

human and civil rights of Israelis and Palestinians that are suffering from the ongoing conflict.

Moreover, as mentioned by Stephen Moody of the State Department, “quiet diplomacy” remains

the official preference of the United States when developing international human rights policies

because if the U.S. takes too strong a stance it can upset political allies, influential stakeholders,

or make human rights abuses worse. The common fear within the State Department is that

certain oppressive groups who detest the U.S. will commit further atrocities against innocent

people to spite the U.S. for meddling in their affairs. Nevertheless, the Obama administration

has refused to allow fear of enemy retribution to dictate or sway his Administration’s

commitment to improving human rights through foreign policy.

In a 2009 speech in Cairo, the “heart of the Muslim world,” Obama stated that, “No

system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by another” because

governments should, “…reflect the will…and traditions of its own people” (Kaufman, 159).

President Obama also iterated his “unyielding belief” that,

R. Youch 10

“All people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from its people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere” (Kaufman, 159).

Obama’s words are inspirational, but if the Middle East is to achieve stability, it will have to

come from within. Similarly, no matter how brilliant a plan to stabilize any given country may

be, the U.S. government cannot prepare to mitigate all potential consequences from the policies

it implements because, “…foreign policy decisions often have unintended consequences” that

cannot always be anticipated (Kaufman, 25). Decisions are made based on assumptions, and are

limited by bounded rationality—knowledge possessed in the moment and influenced by the

amount of time an individual or group has to weigh the consequences and benefits of a particular

decision. The Palestinian refugee crisis in Gaza accompanied by the even larger crisis in Syria

and Iraq needs to be acted upon immediately because time is binding.

Kevin Sullivan of the Washington Post describes the dire nature of the crisis in an article

that addresses the impact that the tumultuous war in Syria is having on the entire region. “The

massive influx of refugees into neighboring countries—especially Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey

—is crippling fragile economies and damaging delicate political and religious balances in the

region” (Sullivan). The erratic nature of the war between Israel and Palestine has only

heightened regional instability. Palestinian civil society is in ruin, and refugees, IDPs, and

civilians possess limited resources to either rebuild their lives or communicate to higher

authorities that possess the resources they desperately need. High Commissioner for Human

Rights, Navi Pillay, recently described how civilians have suffered the most from the conflict.

“Israel, Hamas, and Palestinian armed groups in Gaza have been down this road before, and it has led only to death, destruction, distrust and a painful prolongation of the conflict. Once again, civilians are bearing the brunt of the

R. Youch 11

conflict. I urge all sides to steadfastly respect their obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law to protect civilians” (OHCHR).

If Israel and Palestine are to ever enjoy stable relations and mutually respected peace, the U.S.

and the EU need to become committed to providing additional resources for the PA and

UNRWA that can be allocated towards restructuring Palestinian institutions and strengthening

civil society. The Palestinian Authority and UNRWA have clearly demonstrated an inability to

responsibly redistribute monetary aid thus far, which is why heedlessly entrusting them to

allocate it responsibly going forward would be a complete disservice to suffering Palestinians

throughout the region. The United States and European Union have an ongoing prerogative to

oversee changes within Palestine, and it needs to begin with UNRWA because the welfare of

Palestinian refugees and the strength of the alliance between Israel and the U.S. demands it.

UNRWA’s Interests versus Palestinian Interests

Before delving in to how the U.S. and other donors can pressure UNRWA to improve its

policies by allocating their resources in an increasingly responsible manner, understanding the

specific needs of Palestinian refugees is essential to serve their interests. UNRWA’s fifty-five

camps spread throughout the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria support over five

million Palestinian refugees (UNRWA). However, of that five million, a sizable proportion

could live reasonably well without UNRWA’s financial distributions or other resources.

Nevertheless, UNRWA keeps all registered refugees on its books and does not remain

particularly cognizant towards the costs of doing so. For instance, citizen-refugees in Jordan

receive UNRWA aid in addition to financial support from the Jordanian government (Lindsay,

53). This money should be spent in Gaza, the West Bank or Syria where refugee needs are far

greater.

R. Youch 12

The growth of civil society is essential in Palestinian communities. A stronger civil

society will ideally foster conditions that allow infrastructural rebuilding to progress efficiently,

and it will directly improve primary education, strengthen the role of women, nurture economic

growth, and reduce crime and poverty. Moreover, if Palestinians and Israelis are to overcome

social divisions and ideological differences, then the free transmission and exchange of ideas

need an environment where communication is not judged or oppressed, but rather encouraged.

The most effective way to improve communication and create a knowledgeable society

equipped with a mentality for progress is through education. Unfortunately, the ongoing conflict

has hit women and school children the hardest. “Children form over half of Gaza's

population...and are the first to be psychologically distressed, the most in need of medical

support and the most exposed to injuries among civilians in times of conflict” (Humanitarian

Crisis in Gaza). Al Jazeera recently reported that re-opening schools had been delayed because

over 200 schools were damaged during the conflict and another 90 UN educational facilities

were providing shelter for “tens of thousands of internally displaced Palestinians” (Gaza

Children). However, there remains room for optimism because UNRWA has maximized their

efforts in recent months. “At least half a million children returned to their schools in the Gaza

strip on Sunday, where many will be given special attention and psychological counseling…” to

address trauma or any other issues that occurred as a result of the bombardment in Gaza (Gaza

Children). UNRWA has established itself as a leader in this effort by employing, “…over 200

counselors who will work with as much as 240,000 students in its schools” (Gaza Children).

UNRWA’s efforts are essential to re-establishing a sense of normality in Gaza as winter

approaches.

R. Youch 13

Although there remains room for optimism as women and children receive the medical

care they need, schools are no longer a safe haven. According to Gaza’s deputy education

minister, Zeyad Thabet, “26 schools in the territory have been destroyed…” and another, “…232

schools have been damaged during the war” (Gaza Children). Immediate social and

infrastructural reconstruction is paramount, but cannot be properly addressed because there is a

severe water shortage throughout Gaza. Worse yet, much of the remaining water sources are

contaminated. The combination of a chaotic school environment, community ruin, and a

dwindling water supply could spell the downfall for many Gazans. The hundreds of millions of

dollars that the U.S. and other countries have provided the PA and UNRWA is enough to quell

Gaza’s immediate struggles, but leadership from the two former organizations will need

revamping to better serve civilian and refugee interests.

Similar to Gazans, Palestinian refugees in Syria have been displaced by war. UNRWA

reports estimate that the Syrian Civil War and growing presence of ISIL has displaced over 50

percent of Palestinians within the country (UNRWA-Syria Crisis). To support IDP’s, UNRWA

has provided ongoing food distribution and two rounds of cash assistance to approximately

458,000 refugees (UNRWA-Syria Crisis). However, UNRWA has reported that, “…there are

not sufficient funds to complete a full third round and there are no funds for a fourth round”,

which falls short of the six rounds originally planned (UNRWA-Syria Crisis). Refugee families

tightly budget their lives, living check to check because each family member is awarded $64

every two months (UNRWA-Syria Crisis). Families are given an additional $100 for housing,

but that amount is more discretionary based upon the funds UNRWA has available (UNRWA-

Response 78). Although the bulk of families maintain additional revenue streams, for those

suffering the greatest hardship this is not nearly enough money for a family to live on. For

R. Youch 14

Palestinian refugees, the Syrian crises have not only exacerbated previous hardships and

broadened the scope of displacement, but led to an, “…unraveling of their social structure and

support networks in Syria. Palestine refugees’ coping mechanisms are stretched by

unemployment, inflation and lack of access to goods and services,” making them tremendously

vulnerable (UNRWA-Syria Crisis). Although UNRWA is attempting to support refugees in

Gaza and Syria, their resources are strained and their methods have not proven particularly

successful. They are continuing to maintain the principle of “no detention, no deportation”

which encourages host countries to act hospitabliy towards refugees, and provide legal advice to

refugees that ask for it, but these measures simply do not suffice because they are not accessable

to the refugee masses (UNRWA-Response 78). The $84 million provided by the U.S.

government may briefly relieve UNRWA’s budgetary shortfalls, but for noticeable progress to

be made within the growing refugee community, the Palestinian Authority must legitimize its

claim as true leaders by undertaking expansive measures to work multilaterally with UNRWA

and NGOs. These measures need to address how to improve legal empowerment within refugee

camps and the civilian population, and rebuild communities so that resettlement can begin and

civil society can voice its needs. To do so will require innovating outdated policies and

allocating financial support to communities and refugees that most need humanitarian aid.

Addressing Civil Society and the Individual Rights of Palestinian Youth and Women

Israel has an unquestionable right to protect its state sovereignty and citizens. Although

the blockade of Gaza intended to prevent the importation of military weapons and supplies

destined for Hamas or other terrorist affiliated groups is legal, it is hindering efforts directed

towards rebuilding and resettling Gaza. Unintentionally, the blockade has restricted the ability

for humanitarian aid to find its way to suffering Gazans. This has slowed aid distribution and the

R. Youch 15

rebuilding process by making it difficult for UNRWA and other relief groups to assess what is

needed most and how to allocate their respective resources most efficiently. Any effort by the

U.S. to encourage Israel to ease certain aspects of the blockade to improve the flow of necessary

rebuilding and medical materials would be ideal.

The Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority need to address and improve how

individual rights are being protected on the ground in Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem.

Palestinians and Israeils need to feel safe and legally empowered in their daily life so that the

inclination to resort to violence as a medium for expressing their frustration subsides. A second

problem that needs addressing concerns ongoing measures on the ground by UNRWA and other

entities to teach refugees, internally displaced persons, or other Palestinians their legal rights.

An NGO that specializes in improving legal knowledge at the community level is Namati. They

serve communities in the global south by teaching local leaders and families how they can

realize their rights and become legally empowered. Their techniques adhere to the belief that,

“People need to view the law as a tool that works in their favor, and not something that needs to

be overcome” (Bin Talal). Furthermore, as noted by Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in a

speech published by Namati, “Legal empowerment must be promoted as a tool of conflict

resistance and resilience—and not as a catalyst for revolution.” Prince Talal’s statement is

especially pertinent to Palestine because political and civil unrest is so prevalent within their

society. Their lack of statehood severely inhibits political stability and the development of civil

society. Yet, because such a great number of Palestinians still delegitimize Israel’s claim to

statehood, influential countries including the United States, United Kingdom, and much of the

European Union are hesitant to completely support Palestinian statehood until a long-term peace

agreement is brokered between Israel and Palestine. International doubts concerning the extent

R. Youch 16

to which Palestinians support the PA perpetuate the crisis because there are fears of a political

coup d’etat from Hamas or a separate militant group. Moreover, it certainly does not help

opponents of the PA that the U.S. will utilize its hegemonic clout in the region to prevent a

Palestinian government that opposes Israel to ever hold legitimate power. This conundrum leads

back to legal empowerment.

Later in Prince Talal’s speech he pinpointed glaring truths within Palestinian civil society

as it currently stands, and provided insight which could address the disconnect between civilians

and political groups in Palestine. He eloquently stated, “Legal empowerment is too large a

problem to be left to government alone. Civil society must be brought into development

discussions to gain insights into the challenges faced by the marginalized and develop truly

meaningful strategies” (Bin Talal). Refugees and civilians are underrepresented and the conflict

with Israel is stealing government attention that could be directed toward repairing destroyed

infrastructure, addressing civilian violence, and quelling rampant unemployment and poverty

especially among the youngest generation.

Unemployment in Palestinian youth is stifling economic growth and must be addressed

before another generation is lost, angry, and searching for an outlet to place blame. Poverty,

poor education, and growing up in a broken household hits young, impassioned men the hardest,

making them exceedingly impressionable. Terrorist organizations target and recruit unemployed

men, furthering violence and instability, and perpetuating anti-Semitic feelings among

Palestinians. Luckily, most young, unemployed men have no serious terrorist ties, particularly in

UNRWA camps. Nevertheless, they still suffer the typical struggle of those in poverty, with

minimal access to healthcare or jobs that pay a living wage. Those that are employed are

R. Youch 17

typically a part of the informal economy, where insurance, social security, and reasonable pay

are hard to come by. Minimum wages are rare, leading to unfair labor practices for workers.

Refugees and IDPs need to have a chain of contacts so that they know who can help them.

Currently, many Palestinians are unaware of the options available to them. Civil society in the

Occupied Palestinian Territories needs to be involved in political decision-making, community

rebuilding, and economic development, which is where UNRWA, the Palestinian Authority, and

NGOs such as Namati need to make a greater difference.

Programs that support women financially and empower them will engender positive

social conditions for peace and community development. Women shape the beliefs of children

in most cultures. If women do not have a strong voice at home due to male oppression or fear

retribution for teaching children ideas that encourage coexistence with “enemies”, then positive

change will be nearly impossible. NGOs and UNRWA need to place greater impetus on

empowering women so that they feel safe teaching their children non-discriminatory values.

Greater emphasis must also go towards family reunification. If families are split, communication

is improbable. Children, especially boys without a positive male or female role model are

susceptible to impression and unable to discern right from wrong. Similar to unemployed men,

abandoned or orphaned children are often recruited by radical groups and taught to deplore their

perceived “enemy.” Israelis and Palestinians that are taught that the other is evil from a young

age will find changing their worldview toward the other incredibly challenging. Lucy Kurtzer-

Ellenbogen of the U.S. Institute of Peace described the current pessimistic perspective held by

Palestinians and Israelis alike. “The reality on the ground dictates that the parties will either

"triumph" in mutual loss, or will need to find a formula for peaceful co-existence in a region

fraught with resource and security challenges from which no one—Israeli or Palestinian—is

R. Youch 18

exempt” (Kurtzer-Ellenbogen). As President Obama, Secretary of State Kerry, and Prince Talal

of Jordan have made abundantly clear in their respective speeches on the prospect of peace and

social and institutional growth within the Occupied Palestinian Territories, policy change must

be led from within Palestine by Palestinians, not by international political bodies. To address

this sensitive problem, UNRWA must play an integral role by remaining politically impartial and

racially tolerant of Israel.

Change UNRWA, Change the Future of Palestine

In an increasingly globalized world where political alliances trump progressive policy

initiatives, institutional development in developing countries is best achieved at a grass roots

level beneath the complexities of political gridlock. As an organization under the United Nations

umbrella, UNRWA possesses a unique ability to steer the future of Palestinian refugees without

obstructive international interference. Yet, as they currently operate, many of their policies are

overly inclusive and politically driven, which has impeded the repatriation and social

reintegration of generations of refugees. In order to alter their current trajectory and reverse past

decisions, two policy changes should be made within the next five years. First, UNRWA should

change the anti-Israel tone earlier described by ICPRI found within its school textbooks because

it perpetuates negative feelings towards Israelis and engenders the perception held by numerous

Palestinians that they have a “right of return” to Israel, which is an unrealistic goal. Second,

UNRWA should go back to its original mandate of providing need-based aid by supporting

refugees until they have the means to support themselves, at which point aid should be reduced.

UNRWA staff and refugees currently view distributions as “an acquired right,” based upon

“status” which cannot be taken from them while they are on UNRWA’s rolls (Lindsay, 16). The

problem with the current scale of distribution is that UNRWA is in a budgetary shortfall making

R. Youch 19

them completely reliant on its donors. UNRWA is facing a dilemma, and the U.S. needs to

leverage its influence as the most influential donor of the former, to press the hand of UNRWA

so that they implement policy changes that are not only in the best interests of Palestinian

refugees, but all of Palestine.

A political solution to decrease the necessity of humanitarian aid for citizen-refugees

must be achieved because the current level of reliance by status-based refugees on UNRWA is

not financially sustainable. The reliance by millions of refugees who possess the individual

capital to provide for themselves makes providing urgent need-based aid to other refugees

challenging because it overextends already strained resources.

In 2009, Ex-URNWA general counsel James Lindsay published a report on how UNRWA can

be “fixed.” This report is the first ever written by a senior staff member that has knowledge of

the inner workings of UNRWA; it has served as a linchpin to this essay by providing

unparalleled insight. Lindsay argues that because the U.S. is still UNRWA’s most prominent

donor, its policies can “exert a significant influence on UNRWA’s future. The agency’s

activities can in turn affect the likelihood of an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, a major U.S.

policy goal” (Lindsay, 2). In addition to peace, the aforementioned “influence” can address

other inconsistencies within UNRWA that detract from their mandate.

UNRWA has developed a reputation for its pro-Palestinian political beliefs and anti-

Israel mantra, which contradict its legal obligation to remain neutral towards political issues as

required by the UN. “UNRWA staff are required to ‘avoid any action and in particular any kind

of public pronouncement which may adversely reflect on their status, or on the integrity,

independence and impartiality which are required by that status’” as United Nations employees

(Lindsay, 29). Staff may maintain political and religious beliefs that align with their nationality,

R. Youch 20

but they are not supposed to outwardly endorse any party, faction, or “side” while working that

would implicate their duty to remain neutral. It is completely logical that an agency that is

predominantly employed by Palestinians would favor their cause over Israel’s, yet UNRWA’s,

“…propensity to echo Hamas views” is unacceptable. It remains paramount for U.S. and Israel’s

interests that UNRWA maintains a neutral position in their programs, especially education.

UNRWA has always relied upon textbooks provided by host countries that are not reviewed by

the UN to ensure political and religious impartiality. Currently, UNRWA from a disciplinary

standpoint has not gone out of its way to supervise its employees and ensure that they are

maintaining their obligations as UN staff. If UNRWA intends to continue receiving U.S.

financial assistance at its current level, then they should make representing the political interests

of its chief donors—namely the United States and European Union—a far greater priority than

they currently do, insofar as their ability to serve the needs of refugees is not compromised by

doing so.

The number one priority of the United States in regard to their continued relationship

with UNRWA is encouraging the latter to reassess the number of beneficiaries it supports, and

reallocate its resources to refugees that have the greatest need. UNRWA’s original mandate was

to temporarily support refugees financially until they could resettle their previous home or

community, or possessed the means to support themselves after they had become economically

integrated within a host country (Lindsay, 13). However, “…UNRWA’s sympathies are not with

resettlement or ‘repatriation’ to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, but with

‘repatriation’ to Israel” (Lindsay, 23). By holding on to the popular political notion that

returning to Israel will somehow occur, UNRWA has maintained an impractical level of aid that

is not sustainable. Extending services to all registered refugees—including citizen-refugees in

R. Youch 21

Jordan that are eligible to receive assistance from the Jordanian government—is foolish because

it wastes precious money that should be dedicated to regions that desperately need it.

Furthermore, extending services to all descendants of previous aid recipients regardless of need

is irresponsible and insulting to families in Syria and Gaza that are struggling to survive.

The fact that refugee status has been prolonged for countless Palestinians has less to do

with refugee needs, and more to do with political motivation. James Lindsay argues that

resettlement and the discontinuation of aid to less needy refugees has not occurred because, “…a

just and durable solution to the problem that reflects the desire of refugees”—namely a two state

solution or a “right to return” to Israel—has not been accomplished (Lindsay, 36). Inflating the

number of Palestinian refugees increases the number of people that are entitled to reparations if

Palestine is to ever have its own sovereign state—a political outcome sought by countless

supporters of the Palestinian cause. The previous statement is partially conjecture, but if it

contains truth, then it is certainly in the best interests of the United States to pressure UNRWA to

reduce its beneficiary rolls to focus on refugees that unquestionably need financial support. This

does not mean that UNRWA should no longer offer a portion of its health or education services

to those that cannot receive it elsewhere. For instance, certain families may not require regular

financial support, but there are certainly women and children that may need access to UNRWA’s

psychological support centers and hospitals as they rehabilitate from traumatic experiences. The

previous recommendations are likely to receive considerable opposition. Refugees that are

secure in camps are hesitant to resettle areas that are surrounded by violence, a completely

logical rationale. Refugees have an unquestionable right to security of person, but UNRWA

needs to facilitate resettlement and/or reintegration to some degree so that communities can

rebuild and civil society can grow, especially Gaza. Hopefully, if the above policy changes are

R. Youch 22

adopted, they will establish conditions on the ground that supply Palestinian refugees, IDP’s, and

civilians with the humanitarian aid they need to rebuild civil society and overcome their ongoing

struggle for peace and statehood.

Conclusion

The objective of this essay has been four-fold: first, to demonstrate that the Palestinian

refugee crisis is interlinked with U.S. interests; second, to illustrate the plight and hopeless

struggle of Palestinian refugees as they attempt to retain a semblance of security in a war-torn

world; third, to propose that there are political and cultural measures that can be embraced by

UNRWA, the Palestinian Authority, and NGO’s to improve legal empowerment, economic and

educational institutions, and civil society throughout the region; and fourth, to prove that if

UNRWA and Palestinian leadership become increasingly invested in reducing the daily struggles

endured by refugees, IDPs, and Palestinian civilians alike, the conditions for peace and security

will spread from Aleppo to Amman, from Amman to Gaza City, and from Gaza City to

Jerusalem, thus proving that peace is indeed possible with Israel as a neighbor. Yet, as Chris

Preble preached, “Peace is a principle, not a mantra.” Peace cannot be achieved unless

Palestinians and Israelis are willing to cooperate bilaterally and collaborate multilaterally. To

echo the United States Institute of Peace, “It will require the U.S. and other international actors

to play an active role in enabling positive developments on the ground and fostering conditions

conducive to the leaders taking bold steps in support of peace” (Kurtzer-Ellenbogen).

Serious efforts directed at reducing racism and ancient animosity between both nations

remains paramount. In UNRWA schools, “…infusing curricula and the classroom experience

with values germane to a culture of peace and tolerance” will hopefully reduce animosity and

teach children that their perceived political enemies desire peace as much as they do (Kurtzer-

R. Youch 23

Ellenbogen). As Karen Grisez of Fried Frank maintains, “Direct representation is essential to

properly assess real situations and create policies that can lead to widespread positive progress.”

Palestinian refugees and civilians that have been forgotten and omitted from political

participation in civil society must have that ability in the future because it is their right as

humans. If people without a country are the bastards of humanity, then bastards without a voice

are not people at all. The dehumanizing hatred reciprocated by Israelis and Palestinians must

end for peace to become a reality, not an irrational dream. This dream is possible, but the United

States cannot aimlessly throw money towards UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority and hope

justice, equal opportunity, regional security, and peace will be restored without actively

supervising their affairs. Perhaps this time around the United States’ propensity for international

intervention will stand to uphold the right to free expression, peace, and prosperity for

Palestinian civil society, rather than advancing geopolitical interests alone.

R. Youch 24

References

Borger, J., & Black, I. (2014, August 5). Palestinian leaders poised to join ICC in order to pursue

Israel for war crimes. Retrieved September 10, 2014, from

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/05/palestinian-leaders-icc-israel-war-

crimes

Bin Talal, H. (2014, May 8). "Stop Making Excuses” - Justice post-2015 and the Arab World.

Retrieved November 26, 2014, from http://www.namati.org/entry/stop-making-excuses-

justice-post-2015-and-the-arab-world/

DeChaine, D. (2005). The Crafting of a New Global Community. In Global Humanitarianism:

NGOs and the Crafting of Community (pp. 56-59). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Forsythe, D. (2012). Human Rights in International Relations (3rd ed.). Cambridge, England:

Cambridge University Press.

Gaza children back to school after 50-day war. (2014, September 14). Retrieved September 15,

2014. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/09/gaza-children-back-school-

after-50-day-war-2014914144413583723.html

Hooper, S. (2009, January 29). U.N. Chief Launches $600M Gaza Aid Appeal. Retrieved

September 4, 2014, from

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/29/davos.wef.ban.gaza/index.html

Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza. (2009, January 7). Retrieved September 6, 2014, from

http://www.rescue.org/news/humanitarian-crisis-gaza-4438

IRUSA. (2014). Palestine Humanitarian Crisis. Retrieved December 5, 2014, from

http://www.irusa.org/emergencies/palestine-humanitarian-crisis-2/

R. Youch 25

Kaufman, J. (2010). A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy (2nd ed.). Lanham, Md.: Rowman

& Littlefield.

Kerry, J. (2014, October 12). Remarks at the Gaza Donors Conference. Retrieved November 18,

2014, from http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/10/232896.htm

Khadder, K., Botelho, G., & Levs, J. (2014, July 3). Palestinian teen's abduction, killing

intensifies tensions in Mideast. Retrieved September 5, 2014, from

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/02/world/meast/mideast-tensions/index.html

Kurtzer-Ellenbogen, L. (2013, December 23). What Might Persuade Israelis, Palestinians to

Back Peace? Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http://www.usip.org/olivebranch/what-

might-persuade-israelis-palestinians-back-peace

Kurtzer-Ellenbogen, L. (2014, July 25). Amid Israel-Hamas War: Is Peacebuilding a Dream or

Reality? Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http://www.usip.org/publications/amid-

israel-hamas-war-peacebuilding-dream-or-reality

Lindsay, J. (2009, January 1). Fixing UNRWA: Repairing the UN’s Troubled System of Aid to

Palestinian Refugees. Retrieved October 10, 2014, from

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/PolicyFocus91.pdf

Macovei, M. (2002). The Right to Liberty and Security of the Person. Germany: Council of

Europe.

OHCHR. (2014, July 11). Alarmed at rising death toll in Gaza, UN rights chief appeals to all

sides to protect civilians. Retrieved December 4, 2014, from

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/newyork/Stories/Pages/AlarmedatrisingdeathtollinGazatoprote

ctcivilians.aspx

Satloff, R., Ross, D., Herzog, M., & Pollock, D. (2014, July 11). The Gaza Crisis: Why Now?

R. Youch 26

What Does it Mean? How Will It End? Retrieved December 4, 2014, from

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-gaza-crisis-why-now-what-

does-it-mean-how-will-it-end

Sullivan, K. (2013, December 3). Changing region, changing lives. Retrieved September 3, 2014,

from http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/syrian-refugees/2013/12/03/refuge-stories-

from-the-syrian-exodus/

UN declares emergency in Gaza over floods. (2014, November 28). Retrieved November 28,

2014, from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/11/un-declares-emergency-

gaza-over-floods-2014112801026355872.html

UN runs out of money to feed Syrian refugees. (2014, December 2). Retrieved December 2,

2014, from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/12/un-runs-out-money-feed-

syrian-refugees-2014121132622433675.html

UNRWA. (2014, January 1). Resolution 302. Retrieved October 4, 2014, from

http://www.unrwa.org/content/resolution-302

UNRWA. (2014, January 1). Syria Regional Crisis Response 78 | UNRWA. Retrieved

November 25, 2014, from http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/emergency-reports/syria-

regional-crisis-response-78

UNRWA. (2014, January 1). Syria Crisis UNRWA. Retrieved November 12, 2014, from

http://www.unrwa.org/syria-crisis

R. Youch 27

R. Youch 28