{"id":136657,"date":"2018-05-18T17:01:46","date_gmt":"2018-05-18T17:01:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?post_type=document&p=136657"},"modified":"2020-07-22T00:52:31","modified_gmt":"2020-07-22T04:52:31","slug":"un-forum-on-the-question-of-palestine-day-2-press-release-gapal1409-press-release","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/un-forum-on-the-question-of-palestine-day-2-press-release-gapal1409-press-release\/","title":{"rendered":"UN Forum on the Question of Palestine \u2013 Day 2 Press Release (GA\/PAL\/1409) – Press Release"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
GA\/PAL\/1409<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
18 MAY 2018<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n
FORUM ON QUESTION OF PALESTINE,<\/span>\u00a0AM & PM MEETINGS<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n

fran\u00e7ais<\/a><\/h4>\n

3rd Meeting<\/a><\/p>\n

4th Meeting<\/a><\/p>\n

We Shall Never Abandon Struggle for Peace, Freedom, Self-Determination, Vows Permanent Observer, as Â鶹APP Forum on Question of Palestine Ends<\/strong><\/h2>\n

State of Palestine Designated to Lead \u2018Group of 77\u2019 and China in 2019, Palestinian Rights Committee Chair Announces<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Despite the increasingly dire circumstances in the territory occupied by Israel and in exile abroad, the Palestinian people would never abandon their struggle for peace, freedom and self-determination, the Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine stressed in closing remarks as the United Nation Forum on the Question of Palestine concluded today.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have a monumental task before us,\u201d said Riyad Mansour, who is also a Member of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Central Committee.\u00a0 To say the Palestinian people were going through an extremely difficult time would be an understatement, he said, calling upon the entire international community to stand with them in solidarity. \u00a0In particular, urgent efforts were needed to end the blockade on the Gaza Strip and to open new avenues for advancing peace.<\/p>\n

He expressed gratitude to the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian people for hosting the Forum in the midst of a turbulent week that had seen deadly violence against protesters at the Gaza border, bringing the Palestinian cause into focus in both the Security Council and the Human Rights Council. \u00a0The anger and frustration expressed by some participants in the Forum was both understandable and justified, he added.\u00a0 The Palestinian observer delegation was already taking action, he said, noting that the Human Rights Council had voted just hours ago to deploy a fact-finding mission charged with examining the violence in Gaza.\u00a0 In addition, it was drafting a Security Council resolution aimed at securing international protection for Palestinian civilians.<\/p>\n

Turning to the discussions held during the two-day Forum, he welcomed the creative and innovative thinking of the participants, declaring: \u201cWe will look into all practical ideas to help us move forward to advance the cause of the Palestinian people.\u201d\u00a0 He said they were eager to put 70 years of displacement and more than five decades of Israeli occupation behind them. \u00a0He went on to ask the international community not to abandon them in that struggle, stressing: \u201cThe march will continue, the Palestinian people will not vanish.\u201d \u00a0Among other contributions that Member States could make was to ensure that the decision by the United States to move its embassy to Jerusalem remained an isolated incident.<\/p>\n

Fod\u00e9 Seck (Senegal), Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, also delivered brief closing remarks, highlighting the severe funding shortfall currently faced by the Â鶹APP Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). \u00a0Noting that the State of Palestine had been designated as the next Chair of the \u201cGroup of 77\u201d developing countries and China, he called for the international community\u2019s support. \u00a0It was time to be pragmatic and efficient, he emphasized.<\/p>\n

Earlier in the day, the Forum convened two interactive discussions featuring high-level panellists from across academia, Governments and civil society.\u00a0 The first, on the theme \u201cRefugees and the Resolution of the Question of Palestine\u201d, was moderated by Mouin Rabbani, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Palestinian Studies.\u00a0 Panellists responded to questions about the historic events of 1948 and the resulting legal and psycho-social ramifications for the Palestinians expelled from their homeland, as well as several generations of their descendants.\u00a0 Panellists with experience in the field of transitional justice emphasized the potentially powerful benefit of establishing a system of truth, reparations and reconciliation in Palestine.<\/p>\n

The second panel discussion, held in the afternoon, was moderated by Fateh Azzam, Policy Adviser at the Al-Shabaka Palestinian Policy Network.\u00a0 Panellists stressed the importance of building partnerships with civil society and youth, while continuing to exert economic and diplomatic pressure on the Government of Israel. \u00a0Responding to questions concerning\u00a0human rights violations and statehood, they said it was important to fight for\u00a0equality alongside the struggle for self-determination.<\/p>\n

Panel III<\/u><\/p>\n

The Forum held the third panel discussion of its two-day session this morning, focusing on the theme \u201cRefugees and the Resolution of the Question of Palestine\u201d.\u00a0 Moderated by Mouin Rabbani, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Palestinian Studies, it featured four panellists:\u00a0 Susan Akram, Clinical Professor of Law, Boston University; Lubnah Shomali, Executive Director, BADIL Resource Centre for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights; Jessica Nevo, Founder, \u201cJust in Case\u201d Toolbox for Justice in Transition; and Francesca Albanese, Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University.<\/p>\n

Prior to the discussion, participants viewed a video clip from the documentary\u00a0Voices from Across the Divide<\/em>, which chronicles personal narratives of Palestinians expelled from their homeland in 1948.<\/p>\n

Mr. RABBANI, opening the session, noted that it would build on yesterday\u2019s panel discussions, which focused on the historic events of 1948 and their legal implications.\u00a0 It would also explore the lives of today\u2019s Palestinian refugees, he said, asking the panellists to consider how their situation was relevant to the question of Palestine as a whole.<\/p>\n

Ms. ALBANESE said that some Palestinian refugees, first displaced into neighbouring Jordan and Syria, had later moved further afield across the region as well as into Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas.\u00a0 Noting that the question of Palestinian refugees reflected a historic breach of international law \u2014 and that it remained a divisive and central issue in the longstanding conflict with Israel \u2014 she said those questions must ultimately be resolved from within the framework of those initial violations.\u00a0 Citing a 1920s law which established that repayment was due for any illegally seized property, she said Palestinian refugees today suffered limitations to the enjoyment of their rights wherever they lived as well as discrimination in their host countries.\u00a0 \u201cThey are stuck between a rock and a hard place,\u201d she said, stressing that Middle East peace negotiations must address their right to return, among other issues.<\/p>\n

Ms. AKRAM recalled an intervention delivered yesterday in which the representative of Namibia had drawn parallels between her own country\u2019s situation and that of Palestine, noting that the international community had initially addressed the status of Palestine and the then South-West Africa in a similar manner.\u00a0 The early decolonization process at the Â鶹APP had placed territories under different types of mandates and classifications, she said, noting that Palestine was placed under the United Kingdom\u2019s mandate.\u00a0 Meanwhile, some African colonies were placed under direct Â鶹APP trusteeship and given a specific legal status with independence as the ultimate goal.\u00a0 In contrast, Palestine suffered from inconsistencies in the United Kingdom\u2019s mandate, and no foundation for its statehood was established, she said.\u00a0 The Security Council\u2019s actions on Palestine were also inconsistent as the organ failed to legally frame such issues as the inalienable right of Palestinians to self-determination and statehood.\u00a0 Instead, the Council addressed the situation through the lens of a political \u201cland-for-peace\u201d formula, she said.\u00a0 Citing lessons learned from Namibia\u2019s experience, she underlined the crucial need to determine who was defined as a Palestinian national and how to put a uniform legal system in place.<\/p>\n

Ms. NEVO said she had lived under Argentina\u2019s military dictatorship in the 1970s and 1980s, during which time that country\u2019s citizens were marked as traitors if they dared to make art, read prohibited books or ask questions.\u00a0 A similar situation was taking place in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, with Israeli authorities trying to erase Palestinian culture as well as the historical fact of Al-Nakba.\u00a0 Advocating for the application of a transitional justice model \u2014 employed in such countries as Argentina, Chile and South Africa \u2014 she said that model should also apply in situations focused on reconciliation and reparations, where political transition was not on the table.\u00a0 Those included the situations of formerly colonized or enslaved persons in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean, she said, also spotlighting the potential usefulness of such a model in the case of Palestine.<\/p>\n

Ms. SHOMALI, underscoring Israel\u2019s continued denial of reconciliation and reparations models \u2014 or to address Palestinian refugees\u2019 right of return \u2014 said the principle of reparations had originally been established to prevent States from allowing conditions that would lead to the displacement or dispossession of their people.\u00a0 A reparations model reduced the financial burden on the international community and on refugees themselves, she said, also emphasizing the importance of acknowledgement, accountability and acceptance; the issuance of apology; and reform of social and political institutions.\u00a0 In the case of Palestine, she said, the implementation of a successful reparations model would involve such elements as the voluntary physical return of refugees, compensation for lost properties, and guarantees to the victims of non-repetition.\u00a0 It would also require a strong political agreement; the repeal or amendment of discriminatory legislation practices and policies; the means for enforcement; participation on the part of the victims; international support and political backing; a comprehensive legislative framework; a system of return and restitution, rooted in international law; and the fair redistribution of land.<\/p>\n

In the ensuing discussion, delegates, civil society representatives and others commented on the historical and legal dimensions of the displacement of Palestinian refugees.\u00a0 Several speakers posed questions to the panellists, including about civil society\u2019s role in exerting pressure on international actors and about the role and limitations of the Â鶹APP Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), whose mandate was intended to be temporary but whose work had in effect become permanent.\u00a0 Some asked how the international community could circumvent the veto-wielding power of the United States in the Security Council, which had often been used to shield Israel from accountability for its actions.\u00a0 Others called for the immediate closure of the new United States Embassy in Jerusalem, warning that its move there from Tel Aviv had added fuel to sectarian fires already escalating around the globe.<\/p>\n

Ms. AKRAM, responding to a question about the role of nationality in historical attempts to establish separate Jewish and Palestinian States, drew a distinction between \u201cPalestinian nationality\u201d \u2014 officially established under the 1924 Treaty of Lausanne \u2014 and \u201cJewish nationality\u201d.\u00a0 Noting that Israeli laws depriving Palestinians of citizenship due to their ethnicity were illegal under customary international law, she said that while General Assembly resolution 181 called for equal rights for the citizens of both an Arab State and a Jewish State, there was no legal support for religion-based States.<\/p>\n

Several speakers sought more information about the colonial and dictatorial regimes to which the panellists had called attention, asking what challenges and opportunities were presented by the transitional justice model.<\/p>\n

Ms. NEVO, describing the implementation of such a model as a kind of \u201cparadigm shift\u201d, recalled that the Human Rights Council had appointed a Special Rapporteur on that issue.\u00a0 Special mandate holders and relevant Â鶹APP entities could support national intuitions, including truth and reconciliation commissions tasked with collecting testimony from both victims and perpetrators, she said, noting that such processes could help in advancing acknowledgement and acceptance of historical events and spark a shift in perspective among those involved.\u00a0 She also described a pilot transitional justice project recently conducted among Palestinians and Israelis.\u00a0 Both she and Ms. Shomali agreed that it was not necessary to wait for a viable political agreement in the Middle East to begin planning for transitional justice mechanisms, the provision of reparations and the return of refugees.<\/p>\n

Ms. SHOMALI, on a similarly challenging issue, raised the question of equitable redistribution of Palestinian lands, saying it was likely that returning refugees would be the fourth and fifth generation descendants of those initially displaced.<\/p>\n

The Permanent Observer for the\u00a0State of Palestine<\/u>\u00a0at the Â鶹APP, addressing Ms. Akram\u2019s initial presentation, said the United Kingdom\u2019s historic decision not to grant independence to Palestine had been intentional because statehood would have prevented the establishment of a Jewish homeland.\u00a0 Disagreeing with her assessment that the lessons learned from the Namibian experience were not being utilized in the Palestinians\u2019 case, he emphasized: \u201cYou cannot compare apples and oranges to begin with.\u201d\u00a0 Efforts to bring the Palestinian cause before the Â鶹APP were indeed under way, including attempts to become a full Member State.\u00a0 Any suggestion that Palestine \u2014 unlike Namibia \u2014 had failed to shoulder its responsibilities at the Â鶹APP was incorrect.\u00a0 He noted that his observer delegation was in the process of drafting a Security Council resolution aimed at providing international protection for Palestinian civilians in light of Israel\u2019s abdication of that critical responsibility.<\/p>\n

Ms. AKRAM, responding, recognized the important legal steps taken by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), including its engagement with the International Criminal Court.\u00a0 She said that while not everyone should follow Namibia\u2019s model, she had attempted to distil lessons from that case which could be useful in the Palestinian situation.\u00a0 As for the role and limitations of UNRWA, she said the Agency \u2014 which enjoyed no authority over a durable and permanent solution \u2014 had nevertheless developed a deep and singular experience in supporting the unique needs of Palestinian refugees.\u00a0 Meanwhile, those refugees, and all \u201cstateless persons\u201d, remained explicitly excluded from the statute of the Office of the Â鶹APP High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), she pointed out.<\/p>\n

The representative of\u00a0Namibia<\/u>, welcoming the discussion of her country\u2019s history, recalled that many Namibians who had stood up for equal rights and statehood had been forced into exile.\u00a0 She went on to reject the notion that a person could be made a citizen of a country purely on the basis of race or religion, saying that idea had been misused and propagandized to an astounding extent in the Middle East.<\/p>\n

Panel IV<\/u><\/p>\n

The afternoon session opened with the screening of a short video clip from the documentary\u00a0Voices Across the Divide<\/em>.\u00a0 The Forum then held a panel discussion on \u201cWays Forward to Achieve a Sustainable Peace\u201d.\u00a0 Fateh Azzam, Policy Adviser, Al-Shabaka, moderated the discussion, which featured four panellists: Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer, Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the Â鶹APP; Yossi Beilin, former Justice Minister and former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Israel; Phyllis Bennis, Director, New Internationalism Project, Institute for Policy Studies; and Obada Shtaya, Regional Director, OneVoice Movement.<\/p>\n

Mr. AZZAM opened the discussion by noting that the current political climate, both internationally and regionally, seemed to have shifted away from Â鶹APP principles.\u00a0 While the big question was whether the two-State formula was dead, it was also worthwhile to think about its different permutations.\u00a0 The recognition of historical realities must be balanced against the framework of international law.<\/p>\n

Ms. BENNIS said that \u201cas a Jewish girl from California\u201d, it was not up to her to say how many States there should be.\u00a0 At the moment, there was one piece of land with one governing Power, and the Government of Israel and its military were in control.\u00a0 There were two legal structures within that territory and the legal system to which you were accountable depended on ethnicity and religion.\u00a0 That, by definition, was apartheid and it was in violation of international norms, she pointed out.\u00a0 The current tragic moment of crisis was a reminder of the human price paid repeatedly for Israel\u2019s lack of accountability.\u00a0 The leadership and energy needed to continue the fight must look beyond the Â鶹APP towards civil society, she emphasized.\u00a0 Civil society had changed the discourse on that issue, and the word \u201cNakba\u201d had become commonplace in talking about the Palestinian issue, whether at the Â鶹APP or in\u00a0The New York Times<\/em>.\u00a0 Furthermore, the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement had played a huge role in how people across the globe viewed the crisis.<\/p>\n

Mr. SHTAYA noted that youth constituted the majority of the Palestinian population and had historically been leading the struggle against the occupation.\u00a0 However, that generational pattern of young people leading the rebellion meant that Palestinian youth did not have the opportunities available to young people around the world.\u00a0 The cost of the second intifada, in particular, had been very high, he said, adding that Palestinian youth now living in a globalized world had very different aspirations from those of their parents and grandparents.\u00a0 Polls showed that young people were non-partisan, even when committed to the national goal of ending the occupation.\u00a0 However, it was time to organize better, he said, stressing that Palestinians must go beyond tactics to a timeline and a strategy.\u00a0 It was crucial that the young people of Israel realized that self-determination was for everyone, not just some.<\/p>\n

Mr. BEILIN said that \u201cthe world, by and large, is sick and tired of us\u201d.\u00a0 It was not a coincidence that \u201cthe big earthquake of [the] Oslo [Accords] had happened due to secret talks\u201d between Israel and the Palestinians without anybody knowing about it.\u00a0 The charismatic leadership of the Palestinians, the commitment on the part of the Israeli leadership and a young United States President had made Oslo possible, he recalled, adding that the big mistake of Oslo was that \u201cwe did not go directly towards a permanent agreement\u201d.\u00a0 But the Palestinians had not been ready while the Israelis had been worried that if the permanent agreement failed, it would be hard to go back.<\/p>\n

Noting that the current rift between Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) made it difficult to reach a solution, he said General Assembly resolution\u00a0181 had been important and imaginative in envisioning a high level of cooperation between the two sides.\u00a0 \u201cMy translation\u201d of that was a kind of confederation, he said; for Palestinians, it would mean full self-determination while Israel would have a recognized border after many years.\u00a0 As for the issue of settlements, he said that for a Prime Minister of Israel, that issue was more difficult than the question of Jerusalem or the issue of refugees.\u00a0 However, it would be easier to resolve that in the framework of a confederation, because settlers could be given a choice to live in the Palestinian territory or leave and be compensated.<\/p>\n

Mr. MANSOUR said the most important thing for Palestinians was \u201cto put our house in order\u201d.\u00a0 Palestine must be united, he said, recalling that that Palestinians had been negotiating with Israel even before the division.\u00a0 Furthermore, the Palestinian political platform had achieved something of historic magnitude.\u00a0 For a long time, Palestinians had depended on the Arab countries hosting Palestine refugees to speak for them, but now the PLO was speaking for Palestinians.\u00a0 \u201cWe are not going back to the state of not having representation,\u201d he said, adding that the platform remained the end of occupation and an independent Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital.\u00a0 There was no reason to seek a new political platform, he stressed.<\/p>\n

Referring to Mr. Beilin\u2019s words, he said: \u201cIf you find a magical way of ending the occupation, then we can have the luxury of deciding whether or not to have a confederation.\u201d\u00a0 However, the conversation should not start with confederation before ending the occupation, he emphasized.\u00a0 While some political opportunities had been wasted, Palestinians had in recent years followed a new policy of convincing 138 countries to recognize their State.\u00a0 As a result, it had been able to change its status to that of observer State.\u00a0 That had allowed Palestine to join the International Criminal Court and various human rights treaties, he said.\u00a0 Noting that the current United States Administration had lost its role as the broker of the peace process, he said that when the State of Palestine was elected Chair of the \u201cGroup of 77\u201d developing countries and China in 2019, it would further strengthen its position.<\/p>\n

In the ensuing discussion, delegates and civil society representatives asked about the revocation of the residency of thousands of Palestinians in Jerusalem and the settlements.<\/p>\n

Ms. BENNIS said that when General Assembly resolution\u00a0181 had provided 55\u00a0per\u00a0cent of the land to what had then been 30\u00a0per\u00a0cent of the population, it had not reflected reality, let alone democracy.\u00a0 While the international community was getting caught up in the idea of a two-State solution, what existed today was one State, he pointed out, underling that those supporting the two-State formula must also consider how exactly to divide the territory in such a way as to ensure equality between two States.<\/p>\n

Mr. MANSOUR said the notion of statehood had not been invented by Palestinians, adding that the Â鶹APP Legal Department had scrutinized the definition of statehood according to the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, when Palestine had applied to become an observer State.\u00a0 The General Assembly had, through voting, recognized Palestine as a State, he said, comparing that event to birth by caesarean section.<\/p>\n

Mr. BEILIN said many \u201cidiotic\u201d debates had been held, recalling that in Oslo, the Palestinians had asked for the leader to be referred to as President, while Israel had insisted that the Palestinian leader should be referred to as the Chairman.\u00a0 Eventually, they had settled on the Arabic word that meant both.\u00a0 There was no shame in having a confederation, he said, emphasizing that he had been against settlements \u201cfrom day one\u201d.\u00a0 However, they were a reality with which any future Israeli Prime Minister would have to deal.<\/p>\n

Participants raised further questions about human rights violations, General Assembly resolution\u00a0181, and the status of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n

Mr. SHTAYA said that as a Palestinian born and raised in Palestine, he wished to see an amalgamation of realpolitik and the creative.<\/p>\n

Mr. MANSOUR pointed out that resolution 181 had given Jerusalem a special status.\u00a0 He went on to note that the assassinations of Yitzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat had contributed to the expiry of Oslo, adding that Benjamin Netanyahu had spent all his life fighting against the Accords.\u00a0 Turning to resolution\u00a0181, he said it had provided borders and maps, but ironically, the State known as the Jewish State was almost half Jewish and half Palestinian.\u00a0 What they wished to call themselves in Israel was their business, but equality was a concern for everyone, he emphasized.<\/p>\n

Ms. BENNIS said she agreed that Palestine was under occupation, and she was not judging Palestinians for demanding statehood, but everyone knew that any future Palestinian State would have neither arms nor control over its air space.\u00a0 Turning to the question of Palestinian rights, she said that, increasingly, young people on American campuses, including Jewish youth, were asking how to support Palestinian rights and how American aid to the Israeli military was linked to police brutality within the United States.\u00a0 It was an exciting time for Palestinian activists, she noted.<\/p>\n

MR. BEILIN said he had no nostalgia for Oslo, adding that the contents of the accords were not revolutionary.\u00a0 However, it was not dead, he stressed.\u00a0 Regarding equality in Israel, he said that, regrettably, there was no real equality, and both Jews and Arabs in Israel should fight for Arab equality.\u00a0 However, it would not help the Palestinian cause to question whether Israel should be a Jewish State or not, he added.<\/p>\n

Responding to further questions about statehood, Zionism, and non-governmental diplomatic efforts, he said that it seemed Palestine did not need its neighbour since the entire international community as well as Jewish organizations and the whole Arab world was with Palestine.<\/p>\n

Ms. BENNIS emphasized the importance of bringing all kinds of non-violent pressure, including economic and diplomatic pressure, to bear on Israel.\u00a0 It was necessary to recognize that it was not simply a border issue, but a question of occupation with an occupier in possession of nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n

Mr. MANSOUR said that he saw a hard struggle ahead, both for those on the ground and those in other places.\u00a0 However, Palestinians lived in hope of a sustainable peace, he added.<\/p>\n

Mr. SHTAYA said he had three words: \u201cInvest in Palestine.\u201d<\/p>\n

Representatives of Ecuador and Malta also spoke.<\/p>\n

For information media. Not an official record.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

GA\/PAL\/1409 18 MAY 2018 FORUM ON QUESTION OF PALESTINE,\u00a0AM & PM MEETINGS fran\u00e7ais 3rd Meeting 4th Meeting We Shall Never Abandon Struggle for Peace, Freedom, Self-Determination, Vows Permanent Observer, as Â鶹APP Forum on Question of Palestine Ends State of Palestine Designated to Lead \u2018Group of 77\u2019 and China in 2019, Palestinian Rights Committee Chair […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":172,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[],"document-category":[2433,1329],"document-source":[1753,2173,1897],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[1801,1749,1797,1745,3689],"entity":[1729],"document-language":[6542,6541],"class_list":["post-136657","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","document-category-french-text","document-category-press-release","document-source-ceirpp","document-source-division-for-palestinian-rights-dpr","document-source-united-nations-department-of-public-information-dpi","document-subject-inalienable-rights-of-the-palestinian-people","document-subject-palestine-question","document-subject-peace-process","document-subject-refugees-and-displaced-persons","document-subject-right-of-return","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english","document-language-french"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/136657","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/172"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/136657\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=136657"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=136657"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=136657"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}