The Israeli side proposed the following:
The return of 1,000 refugees to Israel annually and for a period of five years. These would return for humanitarian reasons.
Return to the State of Palestine would be an internal Palestinian affair.
An international compensation fund would be established, on which Israel would be a member.
Israel rejected to bear any liability for the calamity caused to the Palestinian refugees.
Israel would bear a special liability for the compensation of refugees
the Palestinian side stated the following:
Solutions for the refugees properties would be discussed.
The right to return is safeguarded by the international law and UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
The return of 15,000 refugees to Israel on an annual basis for a period of ten renewable years.
Return to the State of Palestine shall be subject to the Palestinian law only.
An international compensation fund shall be incorporated, whereby all refugees would be compensated regardless of their choice. The right is to return, not to either return or receive compensation.
Host countries would be compensated.
The differences of opinion is not just negotiation posture and maneuvering for room to lose or gain but a fundamental and ideological chasm.
This is not peace. Or an intention for peace.
And, by the way, where is the agenda item of Jewish refugees?