No other subject has featured so prominently in the work of the United Nations since its establishment as the Question of Palestine, and this continues to be the case up to the start of the current war on Gaza. Hundreds of resolutions on different aspects of the Palestine question have been adopted since the late 1940s by the UN General Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council, and, more recently, the Human Rights Council. Despite frequent criticisms of its role and its inability to bring about a lasting resolution of the unfulfilled right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, the UN remains a critical actor in the pursuit of humanity, justice, and peace. 

This note provides a brief overview of the involvement of different UN bodies (other than the UN principal organs) with the Question of Palestine since 1947.  It focuses on the UN’s evolving responsibility for the Question of Palestine as well as the UN’s involvement with the Palestinian refugee issue. The paper is deliberately kept succinct; the various bodies and organizations are discussed in greater detail and with reference to the relevant sources in the books mentioned in the final section. 

United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP)

In early 1947, the British ‘returned’ the Mandate to the successor of the organization that had originally granted it: the newly created UN. A special session of the UN General Assembly, on 28 April 1947, established the UNSCOP, made up of eleven member states, with a mandate to investigate all questions relevant to the problem of Palestine and to recommend solutions.

After a three-month investigation throughout the region, UNSCOP members had reached an agreement about terminating the Mandate, the principle of independence, and the role of the UN. A majority of the Committee (Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, and Uruguay) recommended that Palestine be partitioned into three entities linked in an economic union: an Arab state, a Jewish state, and Jerusalem as a corpus separatum under the administrative authority of the UN. India, Iran, and Yugoslavia submitted a minority plan proposing an independent federal structure comprising an Arab state and a Jewish state, with Jerusalem as the capital of the federation. Australia, the remaining member of the Committee, abstained from voting.

On 29 November 1947, after an intense two-month-long debate, the General Assembly adopted resolution 181 (II) (hereinafter ‘resolution 181’ or ‘Partition Plan’), recommending the partition of Palestine according to the plan proposed by the majority of UNSCOP with some minor changes. Resolution 181 called for the termination of the Mandate, the progressive withdrawal of British armed forces, and for the creation of separate Arab and Jewish states. The plan proposed an Arab state comprising a considerably larger area than today’s West Bank, a significantly elongated L-shaped Gaza Strip, and the land west and northwest of the Sea of Galilee up to the Lebanese border, as well as Jaffa, which was to remain an Arab enclave within the Jewish state. This corresponded to between forty-three and forty-five percent of Mandate Palestine (excluding Jerusalem), an area where the majority of the 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine were concentrated. The remainder of Mandate Palestine would become the Jewish state and accommodate almost the entirety of the 650,000 Jews, in addition to an almost equal number of Arabs. Jerusalem, with Bethlehem, would have international status under UN Trusteeship. The land area proposed for the future Jewish state was much higher than the six percent of Palestine’s territory owned by Jews at the time.

United Nations Mediator for Palestine (including UNDRP and UNRPR)

The history of UN attempts at solving the question of Palestinian refugees begins on 14 May 1948, with the decision to designate a UN Mediator for Palestine. Six days later, Count Folke Bernadotte, a Swedish diplomat and vice president of the Swedish Red Cross, was appointed to the post. The Mediator’s primary mandate was to conciliate the parties, promote a truce, and attend to the safety and wellbeing of the population of Palestine. Between 14 May and 1 August, as he was trying to mediate the first truce, the Mediator saw the refugee population continuing to grow by the tens of thousands. His attempt to convince Israel to allow a limited number of refugees to return, without prejudice to the return of the others, met with refusal. In July 1948, the Mediator set up a sixty- day UN Disaster Relief Project (UNDRP) to coordinate international governmental and non-governmental aid for the refugees. Lack of funds and other operational challenges pushed the General Assembly to set up the UNRPR, a special fund to finance relief activities implemented by the ICRC, the LRCS, and the AFSC. As the number of refugees displaced by the ongoing military operations in various parts of Israel continued to grow, in his progress report to the Security Council of 16 September 1948 on the issues of refugees, the Mediator wrote:

It is not yet known what the policy of the Provisional Government of Israel with regard to the return of Arab refugees will be when the final terms of settlement are reached. It is, however, undeniable that no settlement can be just and complete if recognition is not accorded to the right of the Arab refugee to return to the home from which he has been dislodged by the hazards and strategy of the armed conflict between Arabs and Jews in Palestine. The majority of these refugees have come from territory which, under the General Assembly resolution of 29 November, was to be included in the Jewish State. The exodus of Palestine Arabs resulted from panic created by fighting in their communities, by rumors concerning real or alleged acts of terrorism, or expulsion. It would be an offense against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes while Jewish immigrants flow into Palestine, and, indeed, at least offer the threat of permanent replacement of the Arab refugees who have been rooted in the land for centuries.

This led the Mediator to recommend that:

The right of the Arab refugees to return to their homes in Jewish-controlled territory at the earliest possible date should be affirmed by the United Nations, and their repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation, and payment of adequate compensation for the property of those choosing not to return, should be supervised and assisted by the United Nations.

Bernadotte was assassinated by a member of the Zionist paramilitary group Lehi, which opposed his mediation efforts, on 17 September 1948, one day after he submitted the above progress report.

United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP)

Following Bernadotte’s death, and pursuant to his recommendations, on 11 December 1948, the General Assembly adopted resolution 194 (III) (‘resolution 194’) establishing the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP), which took over the main functions of the Mediator, particularly to assist the Governments and authorities concerned to achieve a final settlement of all questions outstanding between them. With regard to the refugees, one of the most pressing outstanding issues, the General Assembly:

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.

From the outset, and in addition to working on other aspects of its mandate, the UNCCP – comprised of the US as its chair, as well as France and Turkey – made extensive efforts to advance the implementation of paragraph 11 of resolution 194. Among other initiatives, this included the convening of several international conferences.

At the Lausanne Conference (27 April–12 September 1949), the first international summit convened to resolve disputes arising from the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the focus was on the questions of the refugees and territory. Representatives of Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the Arab Higher Committee participated. Refugee delegations were in attendance as well, without formal representation. The main advocates for the Palestinians, including the refugees, were the Arab states, which refused to interact directly with Israel, forcing the UNCCP to engage in intense and lengthy shuttle diplomacy. The Arab states wanted to negotiate en bloc and settle the dispute based on UN resolutions 181 and 194. They also demanded a halt to Israel’s seizure of Palestinian homes and property; freeing of sequestered waqf (charitable property); release of Arab bank accounts frozen by Israel; and repatriation of refugee orange grove owners and their workers. They claimed recognition of the areas slated for the Arab State under the Partition Plan and the immediate return of the refugees coming from the areas that were conquered by Israel. In turn, Israel wanted to settle all problems at once as part of a general settlement but refused to negotiate with Arab states en bloc. 

As part of an overall settlement of the conflict, Israel was initially willing to accept the return of 100,000 refugees, annex Gaza (which would have implied acquisition of Israeli citizenship to all its inhabitants including the 200,000 refugees), and make a modest financial contribution towards the resolution of the refugee crisis under the guise of compensation for ‘abandoned’ property (i.e. only a subset of the totality of the losses and damages), if Arab countries accepted to resettle the majority of the refugees. The UNCCP, and in particular the US government as its chair, expected Israel to repatriate 250,000 refugees, given Israel’s acceptance of the UN Partition Plan, which provided for inclusion of a population of over 400,000 Palestine Arabs in the Jewish state. In response Israel offered to repatriate approximately 100,000 refugees (in fact 75,000, as 25,000 had already returned to their homes), on condition that their repatriation would be to ‘specific places’ so as to fit with Israel’s security needs and economic development plan and funded by the international community. The proposed annexation of Gaza would have also seen the situation of the refugees residing there resolved. The Arab representatives rejected the Israeli proposal, as it was deemed inadequate to meet refugee claims and as the proposed annexation of the Gaza Strip was seen as further ‘land grabbing’.

By August 1949 the Arab states indicated to be in favor of a solution that would repatriate the refugees to Israeli-controlled territory or to the parts of British Mandate Palestine not under Israeli control, and involve the resettlement of those not repatriated in Arab countries. Jordan and Syria offered to resettle any refugees unwilling to return and live under Israel’s control. The Israeli reply confirmed earlier positions and underlined that the preferred solution would be to resettle the refugees in Arab territories – i.e. the Gaza Strip and the West Bank – and in Arab countries. Any financial assistance to aid the refugees should also extend to the resettlement of Jewish refugees from Arab-controlled areas of Palestine.

The UNCCP convened a second international conference in Geneva (30 January–15 July 1950). No advancement was made as the positions of Israel and the Arab states had become more rigid. The UNCCP held a final round of talks in Paris (13 September–19 November 1951). This time the UNCCP called for resolution of the refugee problem by repatriating some of the refugees to Israel and resettling others in Arab countries. Both Israel and the Arab states rejected this proposal, citing security, political, and economic considerations (Israel) and the proposed limitations on the number of returnees (the Arab states).

After the failure of the international conferences and the creation of UNRWA (see below), the UNCCP shifted its approach towards compensation: lost refugee property needed to be identified and valued, and archives had to be consulted and preserved. Until the mid-1960s, the UNCCP meticulously documented and valued the properties left behind by the Palestinian refugees. However, Israel never implemented its compensation commitment; it raised claims for Jewish property lost during the 1948 war and insisted that all issues of compensation be dealt with at the same time. Since 1964, the UNCCP has made no more substantial contributions towards the implementation of paragraph 11 of resolution 194, although it nominally continues to exist. In its annual reports to the General Assembly the Commission continues to draw attention to the fact that its efforts to advance matters towards the implementation of resolution 194 depend on substantial changes in the attitudes of the parties.

United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

As the 1950 Lausanne Conference was winding down and the chances for a rapid repatriation of the refugees began to fade, US officials, in their capacity as chair of the UNCCP, decided to try another approach to the question of the refugees, including economic reintegration, resettlement and compensation. Formally invited by the UNCCP, a delegation headed by Gordon Clapp, then-president of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), visited the Near East in September 1949 to explore whether the United States solution to the drought of the 1930s and 1940s in the Tennessee Valley, a region particularly impacted by the Great Depression, could be replicated in the Jordan Valley and beyond. The Economic Survey Mission (ESM), as the Clapp Mission was officially known, was charged with examining the economic situation in the countries affected by the hostilities in Palestine and with making recommendations to the UNCCP for an integrated program which would facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and reintegration of the refugees in a way that was conducive to peace and stability in the area.

The ESM recommended the establishment of an agency under the auspices of the UN that should lead the large-scale development effort it envisaged by directing a ‘program of public works, calculated to improve the productivity of the area.’ The agency would also take over the relief effort. Countries hosting refugees from Palestine cautiously welcomed Clapp’s mission, although much suspicion and skepticism remained. This was triggered, in part, by the omission of reference to Palestine refugees and UNGA resolution 194 from the initial draft resolution sponsored by the US, France, and Turkey, which incorporated the ESM recommendations. In response to host country and broader Arab criticism, the draft was amended to accommodate these concerns and subsequently adopted without dissent as resolution 302 (IV) on 8 December 1949 called ‘Assistance to Palestine Refugees’. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was established by a vote of 49–0–6. Five communist governments and South Africa abstained. All of the Arab governments and Israel voted in support of the resolution. At paragraph 7, resolution 302 established UNRWA, with the mandate to:

(a) To carry out in collaboration with local governments the direct relief and works pro- grammes as recommended by the Economic Survey Mission;

(b) To consult with the interested Near Eastern Governments concerning measures to be taken by them preparatory to the time when international assistance for relief and works projects is no longer available.

Effectively the establishment of UNRWA represented a shift in the international community’s approach toward a resolution of the Palestinian refugee question from return—as required by international law and demanded by the UN General Assembly in late 1948—to integration into Arab host countries (an limited resettlement in third countries).

UNRWA commenced operations on 1 May 1950, focusing on continued relief operations for the nearly one million registered persons (including refugees and other recipients of aid that it inherited from its predecessors), and on the large-scale development schemes envisioned by the ESM. In December 1950, UNRWA was provided with a USD 200 million Reintegration Fund. However, as early as the spring of 1951, agency officials recognized that the expensive projects foreseen were unlikely to resolve the economic difficulties facing the refugees. By 1956, when the Suez Crisis broke out, only some USD 27.5 million of the USD 200 million had been used (most were pledges). From then on, the large-scale development effort was shelved. Meanwhile, the refugees remained in need of international support; hence UNRWA’s mandate has been repeatedly extended, mostly for three-year periods.

From the mid-1950s onward, UNRWA’s relief mandate shifted from continuing the emergency assistance previously provided by its predecessor – food, shelter, clothing, and basic health care – to more comprehensive support for social development of the Palestine refugee population. Education rapidly replaced relief as UNRWA’s central program, with the agency establishing a strategic partnership with United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), adopting the host country curriculum to its schools and successfully introducing vocational and technical training in addition to its basic education program. A similar partnership with WHO formed the basis for UNRWA’s highly cost-effective primary health-care program. As the refugees gradually attained self-sufficiency, dependence on direct relief dropped so drastically that, by the mid-1980s, UNRWA was able to replace its general ration program with a much more selective program targeting families in special hardship.

UNRWA’s pioneering human development strategy has proved to be a success as millions of refugees over the 75 years of its existence have benefitted from its education, health and other services. Refugees have also looked to UNRWA when crises strike, and the agency has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to respond timely and appropriately to recurrent emergencies, as has been the case during the current war in Gaza.

United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO)

On 29 May 1948, the Security Council, in resolution 50 (1948), called for a cessation of hostilities in Palestine and decided that the truce should be supervised by the UN Mediator, with the assistance of a group of military observers. The first group of military observers, became known as the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO), established in 1949 to supervise implementation of the Israel-Arab Armistice Agreements. UNTSO Military Observers have been in the Middle East to monitor ceasefires, supervise armistice agreements, prevent isolated incidents from escalating and assist other United Nations peacekeeping operations in the region.

Following the wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973, the functions of the observers changed in the light of changing circumstances, but they remained in the area, acting as go-betweens for the hostile parties and as the means by which isolated incidents could be contained and prevented from escalating into major conflicts. 

UNTSO personnel have also been available at short notice to form the nucleus of other peacekeeping operations on a temporary basis. The ability of UNTSO military observers to deploy after the Security Council acted to establish a new operation has been an important factor contributing to the initial effectiveness of such missions. 

In the Middle East, groups of UNTSO military observers are today attached to the peacekeeping forces in the area: the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) on the Golan and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). In addition, UNTSO maintains its headquarters (HQ) in Jerusalem and its liaison offices in Beirut (Lebanon), Cairo (Egypt) and Damascus (Syria). The liaison offices for Israel and Jordan are based at the HQ in Jerusalem. The Liaison Offices Beirut, Damascus, Cairo and Amman/Tel Aviv engage regularly with national officers in the respective countries to review stability/security trends and effects, as well as with troop-contributing countries, international representatives, and regional UN organizations. Liaison Office Cairo also conducts patrols on the Sinai Peninsula.

Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People

In 1975, by its resolution 3376, the UN General Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) and requested it to recommend a program of implementation to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their inalienable rights to self-determination without external interference, national independence and sovereignty; and to return to their homes and property from which they had been displaced. The Committee’s recommendations were endorsed by the General Assembly, to which the Committee reports annually. The Assembly established the Division for Palestinian Rights as its secretariat and, throughout the years, has gradually expanded the Committee’s mandate.

Assisted by the Division for Palestinian Rights at the UN Secretariat, the Committee organizes international meetings and conferences, conducts an annual training program at UN Headquarters and several other capacity-building activities, cooperates with civil society organizations worldwide, maintains publications and an information program, and holds each year on or around 29 November, a special meeting in observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.

United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO)

The Office of the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO), based in Jerusalem, Ramallah and Gaza, is a field mission of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs that supports peace negotiations and the implementation of political agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. UNSCO represents the Secretary-General and leads the UN system in all political and diplomatic efforts related to the peace process, including in the Middle East Quartet. UNSCO also coordinates the humanitarian and development work of UN agencies and program in the occupied Palestinian territory, in support of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people.

The first United Nations Special Coordinator was appointed and the office of UNSCO established in June 1994 following the signing of the Oslo Accord. The aim was to enhance the involvement of the United Nations during the transition process, and to strengthen UN inter-agency cooperation to respond to the needs of the Palestinian people, mobilizing financial, technical, economic and other assistance.

In 1999, UNSCO's mandate was enhanced. It became the Office of the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, as well as the Personal Representative of the Secretary-General to the PLO and the Palestinian Authority. The Special Coordinator was charged with boosting United Nations development assistance in support of the peace process. Additionally, the Special Coordinator represented the Secretary-General in discussions relating to the peace process with the parties and the international community. Since 2002, the Special Coordinator has been the Secretary-General’s envoy in the Middle East Quartet, comprising the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the United States of America, the European Union and the Russian Federation. The Quartet launched the Road Map in 2003.

The integration of UN work was further strengthened in 2006, when a Deputy Special Coordinator, Humanitarian and Resident Coordinator was appointed to lead the United Nations country team, consisting of 21 UN organizations providing humanitarian and development assistance to Palestinians.

UN Human Rights monitoring, reporting and accountability mechanisms

Since Israel’s occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, the UN, including the Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), has been carefully documenting human rights violations over many years with recommendations for de-escalation, end to occupation, accountability and justice which have generally not been taken up – not only in Israel and the OPT, but by States with influence on the parties to the unresolved Question of Palestine. The UN also regularly provides analysis and data for example on the number of persons in arbitrary detention, out of education, or on the level of destruction.

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the OPT, including East Jerusalem, and Israel (COI) was established in May 2021 by the UN Human Rights Council (an intergovernmental body). It is composed of three experts and mandated “to investigate, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in Israel, all alleged violations of international humanitarian law and abuses of international human rights law leading up and since 13 April 2021”. The COI reports to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly on an annual basis.

The Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council comprise independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a thematic (e.g., the freedom of expression or the right to education) angle and there are a few country mandates including that of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 who has issued a last report in March 2024 and numerous press statements.

OHCHR also acts as the UN secretariat for the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, which was established by the General Assembly in 1968.

For further reading

Francesca P. Albanese and Lex Takkenberg, Palestinian Refugees in International Law, Oxford University Press, 2020.

Ardi Imseis, The United Nations and the Question of Palestine: Rule by Law and the Structure of International Legal Subalternity, Cambridge University Press, 2023.

Key Online Resources

The following online resources provide access to a wealth of documentation and information on Palestinian refugees and the Question of Palestine.

BADIL Resource Center http://www.badil.org/en/

Institute for Palestine Studies https://www.palestine-studies.org/ 

UNISPAL https://www.un.org/unispal/data-collection/

UNRWA https://www.unrwa.org/