RSS
There Is No International Law Demanding a Palestinian ‘Right of Return’
US President Joe Biden addresses the 79th United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York, US, Sept. 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Segar
The so-called “right of return” has been a fundamental Palestinian demand ever since the initial effort to eliminate the nascent state of Israel failed 76 years ago.
In recent days, however, the Associated Press (AP) upgraded the unfulfilled aspiration into international law.
In their Oct. 31 article, “Banning UNRWA will lead to a vacuum and more suffering for Palestinians, the agency’s chief says,” AP’s Baraa Anwer and Sara El Deeb invented: “International law gives Palestinian refugees and their descendants the right to return to their homes.”
An Oct. 29 AP article by Joseph Krauss, Julia Frankel, and Melanie Lidman also erred, citing a non-existent Palestinian right under international law to return to their 1948 homes: “Palestinians say refugees and their descendants, who now number nearly 6 million, should be allowed to exercise their right under international law to return home” (“Israel approves two bills that could halt UNRWA’s aid delivery to Gaza . . .”)
In fact, there is nothing in international law which gives Palestinian refugees and their descendants “the right to return to their homes.”
The non-binding UN Resolution 194, passed by the United Nations General Assembly, does not “give” Palestinians “the right to return to their homes.” Moreover, its language — “should be permitted” — denotes a suggestion, not a guarantee. The section of the resolution dealing with refugees states:
RESOLVES that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;
INSTRUCTS the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
As CAMERA’s Alex Safian has previously detailed, the resolution conditions the return of refugees (Palestinian refugees are not specified, and therefore the resolution equally applies to Jewish refugees from Arab countries) on their willingness to “live at peace with their neighbors,” a condition that was not accepted by the Palestinian leadership or the vast majority of the refugees themselves who invoked Resolution 194.
Furthermore, the resolution placed repatriation, resettlement, and compensation on equal footing; meaning that return is one of several possible options.
Finally, the main part of the resolution called for the establishment of a Conciliation Commission, which convened in Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1949. While both the Arab states and Israel attended, the former declined to negotiate directly with the Jewish State and rejected any agreements.
In the past, the AP has accurately reported that Palestinians demand a right of return, or that they believe they have a right of return.
Examples of accurate AP coverage careful not to misreport that Palestinians have a right of return include:
Aug. 29, 2024: “Palestinians believe they have the right to return to their pre-1948 homes.”
Jan. 29, 2024: “The Palestinians say the refugees and their descendants, who now number nearly 6 million across the Middle East, have the right to return to their homes.”
Nov. 30, 2021: “The Palestinians say the refugees and their descendants have a ‘right of return’ to their homes in what is now Israel, a position supported by host countries.”
June 3, 2019: “Symbolically, Palestinians see UNRWA as sustaining their core demand that refugees have the ‘right of return’ to their lost homes in what is now Israel – a prospect that Israel rejects.”
Oct. 8, 2018: “It accuses the agency of perpetuating the conflict by helping promote what it considers an unrealistic Palestinian demand that refugees have the “right of return” to long-lost homes in what is now Israel.”
[emphasis added in all]
In short, while it’s entirely accurate to state that Palestinians demand a “right of return,” or Palestinians believe they have a “right of return,” it is completely false to say that international law gives Palestinians a “right of return” to homes some of them had in 1948.
CAMERA contacted AP to request a correction. As of this writing, no correction has yet appeared, suggesting a commitment to factual accuracy somewhat lagging behind the steadfast Palestinian insistence on the “right of return.” Stay tuned for any updates.
Tamar Sternthal is the director of CAMERA’s Israel Office. A version of this article previously appeared on the CAMERA website.
The post There Is No International Law Demanding a Palestinian ‘Right of Return’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New York Democrats Hesitate to Endorse Far-Left Zohran Mamdani Following Stunning NYC Primary Victory
Zohran Mamdani. Photo: Ron Adar / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
Multiple moderate New York Democrats are hesitating to endorse Zohran Mamdani following his victory Tuesday in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary, citing concerns over his alleged antisemitism and socialist policies.
Mamdani, the 33‑year‑old state assemblyman and proud democratic socialist, toppled former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in a lopsided first‑round win in the Democratic primary for mayor, notching approximately 43.5 percent of first‑choice votes compared to Cuomo’s 36.4%.
Voters in New York City rank their choices in order of their preference. While Mamdani declared victory and Cuomo conceded defeat, the race’s ultimate outcome will technically be decided when every vote is tallied, taking into account the ranked choice count. Mamdani’s victory is all but assured.
Some observers have speculated that Mamdani’s win over an older, high-profile Democrat signifies growing frustration with the party’s status quo and represents a generational change
US Rep. Laura Gillen (D-NY), a freshman lawmaker representing a swing-district in Nassau County, slammed Mamdani for his far-left economic agenda and repeated “antisemitism.”
“Socialist Zohran Mamdani is too extreme to lead New York City. His entire campaign has been built on unachievable promises and higher taxes,” Gillen said in a statement. “Beyond that, Mr. Mamdani has called to defund the police and has demonstrated a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is skyrocketing.”
Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY), a moderate lawmaker representing the Empire State’s 3rd district, also declined to endorse Mamdani, citing “serious concerns.”
“I had serious concerns about Assemblyman Mamdani before yesterday, and that is one of the reasons I endorsed his opponent. Those concerns remain,” Suozzi posted on X.
High-profile Democratic leaders in New York such as Sen. Chuck Schumer, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries have congratulated and complemented Mamdani, but have not yet issued an explicit endorsement. Each lawmaker has indicated interest in meeting with the presumptive Democratic mayoral nominee in New York City to hold discussions prior to making a decision on a formal endorsement.
The progressive representative in the New York State Assembly has also sparked outrage after engaging in a series of provocative actions, such as appearing on the podcast of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas influencer Hasan Piker and vowing to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York.
During an event hosted by the UJA-Federation of New York last month, Mamdani also declined to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
“I believe that Israel has a right to exist with equal rights for all,” Mamdani said in a carefully worded response when asked, sidestepping the issue of Israel’s existence specifically as a “Jewish state” and seemingly suggesting Israeli citizens do not enjoy equal rights.
Then during a New York City Democratic mayoral debate, he once again refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, sparking immediate backlash among the other candidates.
In 2023, while speaking at a Democratic Socialists of America convention in New York, Mamdani encouraged the audience to applaud for Palestinian American community activist Khader El-Yateem, saying “If you don’t clap for El-Yateem, you’re a Zionist.”
During that same speech, Mamdani touted his longstanding anti-Israel activism.
“I was somebody who began my journey in organizing and in politics by co-founding my school’s first Students for Justice in Palestine. The struggle for Palestinian liberation was at the core of my politics and continues to be,” Mamdani said.
Students for Justice in Palestine has been at the forefront of the wave of pro-Hamas demonstrations that have engulfed college campuses during the Gaza war.
Jewish leaders in New York, the broader US, and even abroad have expressed alarm over Mamdani’s primary victory, with many accusing him of antisemitism and noting he has made anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his political career.
The post New York Democrats Hesitate to Endorse Far-Left Zohran Mamdani Following Stunning NYC Primary Victory first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Sweden Democrats Apologize for Past Nazi Links, Antisemitism as Election Nears
Mattias Karlsson, Sweden Democrats politicians, addresses party members after election in Stockholm, Sweden, Sept. 9, 2018. Photo: REUTERS/Ints Kalnins
The anti-immigration Sweden Democrats apologized on Thursday for the party’s past Nazi links and antisemitism, part of efforts to present a more moderate, mainstream image to voters ahead of a national election next year.
The Sweden Democrats were presenting the results of a specially commissioned study that found Nazi and antisemitic views to have been common at party functions and in its printed materials in the 1980s and 1990s.
“That there have been clear expressions of antisemitism and support for National Socialist ideas in my party’s history I think is disgusting and reprehensible,” Mattias Karlsson, a member of parliament often described as the party’s chief ideologist, told a news conference.
“I would like to reiterate the party’s apology, above all to Swedish citizens of Jewish descent who may have felt a strong sense of insecurity and fear for good reasons.”
The commissioning of the study sought to acknowledge and break with a past that has long hindered its cooperation with Sweden‘s mainstream political parties. The Sweden Democrats hope to join a future coalition government after the 2026 election.
The party first entered parliament in 2010 and currently supports Sweden‘s governing right-wing coalition government but has no members in the cabinet.
Tony Gustafsson, the historian hired by the party to write the book, said the party had emerged in the 1980s out of neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations and that it had continued to cooperate with them into the 1990s.
“The collaboration seems to have involved using these groups to help distribute election materials,” Gustafsson said, adding there were strong indications that one such group, the “White Aryan Resistance,” had served as security guards at party gatherings.
Gustafsson said there had been a clear connection to Nazism until 1995, the year that current party leader Jimmie Akesson joined the Sweden Democrats, but that the Sweden Democrats had begun distancing itself from such links thereafter.
The post Sweden Democrats Apologize for Past Nazi Links, Antisemitism as Election Nears first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Supreme Leader, in First Appearance Since Ceasefire, Says Iran Would Strike Back if Attacked
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks in a televised message, after the ceasefire between Iran and Israel, in Tehran, Iran, June 26, 2025. Photo: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
Iran would respond to any future US attack by striking American military bases in the Middle East, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday, in his first televised remarks since a ceasefire was reached between Iran and Israel.
Khamenei, 86, claimed victory after 12 days of war, culminating in an Iranian attack on the largest US base in the region, located in Qatar, after Washington joined the Israeli strikes. No casualties were reported in the Iranian attack, which was coordinated with both US and Qatari authorities beforehand in an apparent effort to show a symbolic display of force without triggering retaliation.
“The Islamic Republic slapped America in the face. It attacked one of the important American bases in the region,” Khamenei said.
As in his last comments, released more than a week ago during the Israeli bombardment, he spoke from an undisclosed indoor location in front of a brown curtain, between an Iranian flag and a portrait of his predecessor Ruhollah Khomeini.
In his pre-recorded remarks, aired on state television, Khamenei promised that Iran would not surrender despite US President Donald Trump’s calls.
“The US President Trump unveiled the truth and made it clear that Americans won’t be satisfied with anything less than surrender… such an event will never happen,” Khamenei said.
“The fact that the Islamic Republic has access to important American centers in the region and can take action against them whenever it deems necessary is not a small incident, it is a major incident, and this incident can be repeated in the future if an attack is made,” he added.
Trump said “sure” on Wednesday when asked if the United States would strike again if Iran rebuilt its nuclear enrichment program.
Tehran has for decades denied accusations by Western leaders that it is seeking nuclear arms.
NO GAIN
Khamenei said the US “gained no achievement” after it attacked Iranian nuclear sites, but that it entered the war to “save” Israel after some of Tehran’s missiles broke through Israel’s multi-layered defense system.
“The US directly entered the war as it felt that if it did not get involved, the Zionist regime [Israel] would be fully destroyed. It entered the war to save it,” he said.
“The US attacked our nuclear facilities, but couldn’t do any important deed … The US president did abnormal showmanship and needed to do so,” he added.
Trump said over the weekend that the US deployment of 30,000-pound bombs had “obliterated” Iran‘s nuclear program. Officials and experts are still probing the extent of the damage.
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also declared “a historic victory” on Tuesday, after the fragile ceasefire took effect, saying Israel had achieved its goal of removing Tehran’s nuclear and ballistic missile threat.
Shortly after Khamenei’s speech, Netanyahu posted a message with a picture of himself and Trump holding hands with the message: “We will continue to work together to defeat our common enemies.”
The post Supreme Leader, in First Appearance Since Ceasefire, Says Iran Would Strike Back if Attacked first appeared on Algemeiner.com.