They believe that Israel would like to drive out the refugees and seize their land, essentially putting an end to Palestinians in Israel. They believe that's what happened when Israel was founded and subsequently - there are still refugee camps, and a priority of Palestinians is the 'right of return' to their former lands - and with recent Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and specifically with Israeli actions in the West Bank since Oct 7.
Essentially, they think refugees will never be allowed back.
That doesn't mean they care, but without that issue resolved, they won't accept refugees. Also, probably they don't want to take on care and feeding of millions, and to simultaneously relieve Israel, their enemy, of that burden.
I agree with you that they have reason to believe that accepting refugees would play into Israel's hands. However, that fact alone is telling: they consider it more important to hurt Israel than to help Palestinians. If Arab nations actually care about Palestinian life as much as they say they do, they would prevent Palestinians from dying.
By way of contrast: Poland took over 1.5 million Ukrainian refugees, despite the fact that most probably won't go back to Ukraine, and that depopulating eastern Ukraine helps Russia.
They say they wouldn't be helping the Palestinians, creating yet more permanent refugees and the loss of their land. However, I will say that it's hard to say that the foreign government's choices should outweigh the self-determination of the Palestinians who could actually choose whetehr to leave or stay.
I don't think they care nearly as much as they say they do. I think Hamas doubts it too; one reason for the attack was to stop Arab reconciliation with Israel that may have left Palestinians in the cold.
The idea that they would care seems like a bit of prejudice - Americans and Europeans don't care about every refugee either, no matter where they're from or what they've done, especially these days.
If Polish utmost priority was saving as many Ukrainian lives as possible, they would block the supply of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine and pressure it to surrender. It doesn't seem to me that Polish (Western) intentions are purely humanitarian, but there's also a sense of justice at play (plus geopolitics).
> Essentially, they think refugees will never be allowed back.
> That doesn't mean they care, but without that issue resolved, they won't accept refugees.
I find this dubious. Under any reasonable humanitarian perspective, a Gazan would benefit by immigrating to most other countries.
The Arab nations around Israel (with the sort of exception of Jordan) can't even bother allowing 3rd generation Palestinian descendants to naturalize. In some, such as Lebanon, this not only precludes political rights, but results in all sorts of benefit losses relative to what others born and raised in the country would receive.
That's a pretty strong sign of "not caring" from a humanitarian perspective.
You may want to do some research on alternative reasons for Muslim countries not take in Palestinian refugees. Such as, for example, not wanting to repeat the fate of Lebanon and, partly, Jordan, which did - resulting Lebanon devolving into a failed state, and Jordan just barely escaping full scale civil war.
You also declare that Israel is the enemy of Muslim nations, which it is not, unless forced by hostilities explicitly declared by the other side.
Also, don't forget that Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, who assassinated Anwar Sadat. That might make Egypt think twice about welcoming refugees.
In any case, if Arab states are (understandably) refusing Palestinian refugees due to concerns of political stability, why not just say so, instead of blaming solely Israel?
> You also declare that Israel is the enemy of Muslim nations, which it is not, unless forced by hostilities explicitly declared by the other side.
If you mean 'enemy in warfare' then no, they aren't fighting a war directly. But by any other definition of enemy .... In addition, there's Iran (Persian, not Arab).
If they aren't enemies, what do you call them? Allies? Friendly neighbors?
How would the Palestinians leave? Via the continual carpet bombing of every building and the people? We see the videos of the bombing & the aftermath. We see the photo today of mass execution by the IDF. You cram what’s left of 2 million people in a tiny section of Gaza and now bomb them there.
The US quashed a ceasefire vote in the UN, so that the carnage can continue. It is monstrous evil. The US is now providing bunker buster bombs as well, which are being used. We see the videos and photos today of that.
Gaza shares a border with Egypt; Egypt keeps that border closed.
> It is monstrous evil.
I agree, Israel is doing horrible things. That doesn't excuse the hypocrisy of the Arab states that are using the suffering of the Palestinians as a political tool against Israel. There's plenty of blame to go around.
> none of them are taking Palestinian refugees
They believe that Israel would like to drive out the refugees and seize their land, essentially putting an end to Palestinians in Israel. They believe that's what happened when Israel was founded and subsequently - there are still refugee camps, and a priority of Palestinians is the 'right of return' to their former lands - and with recent Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and specifically with Israeli actions in the West Bank since Oct 7.
Essentially, they think refugees will never be allowed back.
That doesn't mean they care, but without that issue resolved, they won't accept refugees. Also, probably they don't want to take on care and feeding of millions, and to simultaneously relieve Israel, their enemy, of that burden.
I agree with you that they have reason to believe that accepting refugees would play into Israel's hands. However, that fact alone is telling: they consider it more important to hurt Israel than to help Palestinians. If Arab nations actually care about Palestinian life as much as they say they do, they would prevent Palestinians from dying.
By way of contrast: Poland took over 1.5 million Ukrainian refugees, despite the fact that most probably won't go back to Ukraine, and that depopulating eastern Ukraine helps Russia.
It’s actually 4 millions: https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/private-sector-for-ref...
They say they wouldn't be helping the Palestinians, creating yet more permanent refugees and the loss of their land. However, I will say that it's hard to say that the foreign government's choices should outweigh the self-determination of the Palestinians who could actually choose whetehr to leave or stay.
I don't think they care nearly as much as they say they do. I think Hamas doubts it too; one reason for the attack was to stop Arab reconciliation with Israel that may have left Palestinians in the cold.
The idea that they would care seems like a bit of prejudice - Americans and Europeans don't care about every refugee either, no matter where they're from or what they've done, especially these days.
If Polish utmost priority was saving as many Ukrainian lives as possible, they would block the supply of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine and pressure it to surrender. It doesn't seem to me that Polish (Western) intentions are purely humanitarian, but there's also a sense of justice at play (plus geopolitics).
2 replies →
> Essentially, they think refugees will never be allowed back.
> That doesn't mean they care, but without that issue resolved, they won't accept refugees.
I find this dubious. Under any reasonable humanitarian perspective, a Gazan would benefit by immigrating to most other countries.
The Arab nations around Israel (with the sort of exception of Jordan) can't even bother allowing 3rd generation Palestinian descendants to naturalize. In some, such as Lebanon, this not only precludes political rights, but results in all sorts of benefit losses relative to what others born and raised in the country would receive.
That's a pretty strong sign of "not caring" from a humanitarian perspective.
You may want to do some research on alternative reasons for Muslim countries not take in Palestinian refugees. Such as, for example, not wanting to repeat the fate of Lebanon and, partly, Jordan, which did - resulting Lebanon devolving into a failed state, and Jordan just barely escaping full scale civil war.
You also declare that Israel is the enemy of Muslim nations, which it is not, unless forced by hostilities explicitly declared by the other side.
Also, don't forget that Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, who assassinated Anwar Sadat. That might make Egypt think twice about welcoming refugees.
In any case, if Arab states are (understandably) refusing Palestinian refugees due to concerns of political stability, why not just say so, instead of blaming solely Israel?
> You also declare that Israel is the enemy of Muslim nations, which it is not, unless forced by hostilities explicitly declared by the other side.
If you mean 'enemy in warfare' then no, they aren't fighting a war directly. But by any other definition of enemy .... In addition, there's Iran (Persian, not Arab).
If they aren't enemies, what do you call them? Allies? Friendly neighbors?
1 reply →
How would the Palestinians leave? Via the continual carpet bombing of every building and the people? We see the videos of the bombing & the aftermath. We see the photo today of mass execution by the IDF. You cram what’s left of 2 million people in a tiny section of Gaza and now bomb them there.
The US quashed a ceasefire vote in the UN, so that the carnage can continue. It is monstrous evil. The US is now providing bunker buster bombs as well, which are being used. We see the videos and photos today of that.
> How would the Palestinians leave?
Gaza shares a border with Egypt; Egypt keeps that border closed.
> It is monstrous evil.
I agree, Israel is doing horrible things. That doesn't excuse the hypocrisy of the Arab states that are using the suffering of the Palestinians as a political tool against Israel. There's plenty of blame to go around.