At the end of [the Second World War], Poland was given a chunk of eastern Germany. This chunk was ethnically cleansed by expelling the millions of Germans who were living there. Many of these Germans claim a Right of Return (ROR), which they have, according to the Geneva Conventions, which specifies that no country can acquire territories from another country as a result of war. Displacement of the local population is considered a war crime. But Poland was on the side of those who won the war against Germany. So ROR for those Germans was not given a serious hearing. It is now as good as dead.

ROR for the Palestinian refugees is not only supported by the Geneva Conventions but has been affirmed in a number of UN decisions. And still, 57 years after the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their native land, and in spite of the UN decisions, ROR remains disregarded, not implemented. Obviously, demonstration regarding the Palestinian ROR is not enough. Agitating for it, writing for it, claiming it on all occasions in all circumstances is helpful, but not enough.

The real problem that Palestinians must address is that the Israeli people stand steadfast against the ROR of the Palestinian refugees, and its overwhelming military superiority allows the Israeli people to impose its will. Of course, when mention is made of Israeli military power, US support for Israel is being taken into account.

Now negotiations are being considered between Sharon and Abbas. Not only can we be certain that this will not result in implementation of the ROR, but we can bet, without risk, that it will not bring about total Israeli evacuation from the West Bank and return of boundaries to the Green Line.

Optimistically, the best that could be achieved through negotiations with an Israeli expansionist establishment is that Israel's intrusion in the West Bank will be confined to all the Jewish settlements which are contiguous to Israel. Added to that will be a number of disjointed Jewish settlements which will be part of the Palestinian State and whose settlers would be required to abide by Palestinian laws and jurisdiction. As for the refugees, they would have to settle in the Palestinian State or wherever they can be accepted.

To this will be added a security agreement, whereby the sovereignty of Palestine over its sky, its coastline, its boundaries, will be severely curtailed.

It is obvious that the Geneva Accord is a much better settlement for the Palestinians. Unless Mahmoud Abbas hopes to get more, he should play the Geneva card. Playing the Geneva card seriously, underlining that the Palestinians will accept nothing less, will sow dissension in the Israeli society. The Accord has been written so that it satisfies the main concern of the Israeli population, which is their subjective perception of their security needs. But the expansionists are absolutely against it. They do not care for security as much as for expansion.

Such a stand by the Palestinians would facilitate the toppling of the Israeli expansionist establishment. Signed with an Israeli leadership devoid of expansionist ambitions, it can lead to peace, security and prosperity for the two peoples.

Ten years of good relations between the two peoples, and the building of an exemplary secular democratic and tolerant Palestinian State will motivate and help the democratization of Israel. As a result, the Geneva Accord, which caters to the fears of the Israeli people, will become obsolete. All dreams then become possible.