💾 Archived View for gemini.quux.org › h › Government › Israeli%20-%20Palestinian%20War › fafo › repo… captured on 2024-08-19 at 00:05:45.

View Raw

More Information

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

<html>
<head>
<title>FAFO Report 177</title>

<map name = pager>
<area shape = rect coords = "0,0,464,20" href="index.html">
<area shape = rect coords = "464,0,482,20" href="4_2.html">
<area shape = rect coords = "482,0,496,20" href="index.html">
<area shape = rect coords = "494,0,514,20" href="4_4.html">
</map>
</head>

<body  bgcolor="#ffffff">

<center>

<table width = 528 cols = 1 border = 0 cellpadding = 5>

<tr valign = top>
<td>
<a href="../../../../../../../_._.html"><img src="http://almashriq.hiof.no/sys/almashriq-fafo-page.gif" border = 0 usemap="#pager"></a>
</td>
</tr>

</td>
</tr>

<tr valign = top width=528>
<td>

<H2>Social ties between refugees and hosts</H2>
Although we have described the camps as &quot;places apart&quot;, there
are marked differences in the relation between the host population and the
refugees. An important factor is whether the refugees had previous contact
with the inhabitants of the area to which they fled, or whether refugees
were strangers in their new environments. When the latter was the case,
refugees regrouped themselves in camps where they recreated new social communities
among themselves. However, social ties were established with inhabitants
in the host-society, mainly through economic activities.<BR>
<BR>
Maher, for instance, was employed as a driver for a rich Palestinian in
Nablus who was himself not a refugee. With time, the relationship evolved
into one of patron-client in which Maher became an indispensable worker
who helped the rich man in all practical matters, especially since the rich
man did not have children. Maher was thus &quot;treated as a son&quot; by
the rich man who granted Maher the sum of 35,000 JD (56,000 USD) which enabled
him to buy the apartment outside the camp. Having a peasant-background and
being a 1948-refugee in the West-Bank, Maher was not able to bolster his
economic ties by establishing closer social relations, such as marriage,
with the rich man's family in Nablus. Different social class backgrounds
clearly prevented the constitution of stronger social ties, maintaining
the relationship on a lower social level.<BR>
<BR>
The case of Omar, presented in chapter four, illustrates however, how closer
social bonds were established through marriage between a 1948-refugee and
a native Arab Israeli, precisely because both had common social class-backgrounds.
Through his work in Israel, Omar was presented to the niece of a fellow
construction worker who himself was a native inhabitant of Israel resulting
in an engagement between the Arab Israeli's niece and Omar was concluded.
Economic bonds initially established as a result of refugee and native inhabitant
working together were thereby bolstered and transformed into strong social
ties.<BR>
<BR>
In Lebanon, the relationship between Lebanese and Palestinians living in
the south has been one of both peaceful and hostile relationship. The common
socio-economic lower-class rural background, and until the beginning of
the 1980s, mutual objectives in Arab political issues in general, and in
their struggle against Israel in particular, constituted basic elements
in the relationship between Palestinians and the Lebanese Shi'a in south
Lebanon. The political and military growth of the PLO caused escalation
of conflict between the two communities resulted, however, in a deteriorated
relationship between Palestinians and the population in south Lebanon. The
Shi'a accused the Palestinians of exploiting their hospitality and turning
the &quot;Palestinian revolution (into) a Palestinian business in Lebanon&quot;
as one contemptuous mukhtar (village leader) indicated (Norton 1987:60).
What was long perceived as a &quot;natural alliance&quot; between the two
communities was severely deteriorated following the Camps War in 1986/87
when Rashidiyya and other Palestinian camps were besieged for six months
by the Shiite Amal milits. <BR>
<BR>
The case of the Palestinians in Lebanon indicate that common social-class
background as well as political objectives between the refugee population
and the host-society was not enough to prevent military confrontation between
the two communities. There are several external political factors which
explain the evolving of hostile relationships between the two groups which
we do not need to enter into here. Suffice it to indicate that socio-economic
and political commonalties between the two groups eventually developed into
a competitive relationship whereby the host-community, the south Lebanese,
reached a point where it did not accept the development of an independent
Palestinian military organisation, and resented that Palestinians had access
to an elaborate welfare and health system offered by UNRWA which were denied
to Lebanese. It is not unusual to hear Lebanese complaining about Palestinians
who receive international assistance, while nobody is concerned about the
Lebanese. This imbalance was obvious in the late 1970s and during the 1980s.
The case suggest therefore that the economic and social advantages which
the refugee community enjoys, have had a long term disintegrating effect
on the social relation between refugees and the host population. However,
the change in attitude from welcome to mistrust is well documented from
studies of refugee situations in other parts of the world (Kibreab 1991).<BR>

</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td align = center>

<a href="_._.html"><img src="../../../../../../../sys/almashriq-bottom-line.gif"alt = "----------------" border= 0></a><p><pre>
<a href="../../../../../../../base/mailpage.html">al@mashriq</a>                       960428/960613</pre>

</table>

</center>

</body>
</html>