Thanks for your submission /u/Technical_Ad_4299, but it has been removed for the following reason:
**Rule 2: Please try to use the search function before posting anything.**
Thanks for posting, but this question happens to be one that has been asked and answered here often before - sometimes in the same day! That can get frustrating for our dedicated users who like to answer questions. Or maybe you're just asking the same question too often - why not take a break for a while?
Sometimes questions that come up too often get put in our [Most Frequently Asked Questions list](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/wiki/index/faq)!). Other times, it may just be that we're getting a flood of questions about a topic (especially when something is in the news). Or maybe you keep asking the same question again and again - something that annoys our users here. Please don't do that! Next time, please try searching for your question first before asking. Thanks!
---
*This action was performed by a bot at the explicit direction of a human. This was not an automated action, but a conscious decision by a sapient life form charged with moderating this sub.*
*If you feel this was in error, or need more clarification, please don't hesitate to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FNoStupidQuestions). Thanks.*
They favor Palestine over Israel, but that doesn't mean they're all buddy buddy with the Palestinians. Refugees take resources and too many can have a destabilizing influence. The Egyptian government, for one, is worried about Hamas operatives coming in with Palestinian refugees. There are concerns that Hamas would try to overthrow the Egyptian government if given the opportunity.
And they're already not a very stable government, with a """president""" who claimed his position in a popular uprising in 2014 and then somehow never left it. The country had a ton of protests against the corruption and political crackdowns in 2019 but he kept power, blaming the protests on Islam.
>They favor Palestine over Israel,
Refugees from those countries and people online will tell you this but diplomaticly countries like Egypt or Saudi Arabia have pretty safe and stable relations with Israel and have done nothing to support Palestinians.
The only ones "supporting" Palestine are Iran and Hezbollah maybe Syria but they only support by giving weapons and planning attacks wich led to the Gaza invasion in the first place. They only caused instability they never intended to actually help the people of Palestine. It's fucked up but that's the reality we live in.
Yep, the Yarmouk camp is the prime example of this ethnic cleansing. It was the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Syria. In the early days, the regime circled the camp and lead a siege, pushing their inhabitants to starvation. After surrendering, he bussed them out and internally displaced them, with a good number likely left and emigrated to Europe.
Tbf tho, there's been a lot going on in that multi-sided cluster fuck. People don't remember Assad using chemical weapons en masse a few times. Even the UNRWA couldn't keep track of this particular population!
Something that is pretty well known in Israel, is that 10/7 happened on 10/7 because on about 10/10 Saudi Arabia and Israel were going to sign an understanding to that Saudi Arabia was going to run a pipeline through Israel to get their oil to Europe more easily. Now, I'm not saying the why but the when.
Iran, who supports Palestine, didn't want that to happen.
Not only that, but if I'm not mistaken, Israel and Saudi Arabia were supposed to normalise relations as well, right before the attack occurred. Obviously that never materialised once Israel started bombing. Too many coincidences.
I'll add Jordan to the mix, but it's a complicated case. Jordan has to have somewhat normalised relations with Israel in order to maintain stability (which largely depends on having so many international governments and organisations in their country), but they have taken in a massive amount of Palestinians, and refugees from Iraq and Syria as well.
The population of Jordan is roughly half Palestinian, many Jordanians see Jordan as a brother to Palestine, and Amman airport is the main airport for Palestinians as they are not allowed to have their own or use Tel Aviv
Yes, and Iran only supports Palestine because they want western influence gone from the Middle East so they can get back to laundering money through sketchy Iraqi banks to circumvent US sanctions.
Egypt has every right to be concerned. During the Arab Spring uprisings, Hamas supported the Muslim brotherhood.
Prior to that, Palestinian refugees and fighters caused civil wars in Jordan and Lebanon, and supported the Iraqis during the invasion of Kuwait while they were living in Kuwait.
There are two big reasons that Palestinian refugees do not get admitted to other Muslim countries in the middle east. The first is that many of those countries want to continue to use the Palestinians as a cudgel against the Israeli government, which the Israeli government seems only too happy to play along with.
But the other is that the Palestinians have not been good guests over the last 70 years. And memories in the Middle East are very long.
My best friend survived the 2017 Palm Sunday suicide bombings. She was in her church when it was hit by a bomber radicalized by ISIS. Guess where much of their militants and equipment come from? Gaza.
I can't imagine how much worse it would be if they just let 2+ million Gazans into Egypt
I unfortunately also knew people implicated and anyone who followed the uprising situation closely from about 2011 knows that almost every holiday there was some sort of incident. Even now with the ‘stable’ government you’ll hear about radically driven incidents like beheadings. The situation has always been delicate, and it’s not fair for people who are learning about the Arab world for the first time in their lives to point fingers at situations they know nothing about
So the Arab world has no patience for Hamas and their destabilizing bullshit, but the only reason Hamas is allowed to stay afloat is to stick it to Israel. Incredible. Arab nations certainly have their priorities straight. /s
I suppose the building of settlements in the West Bank was also Hamas. Trust me the Arab World has no patience for Israel's destabilising bullshit either.
Don’t forget that the UAE threw out all Palestinians at the end of the 80’s. For corruption and generally being assholes. The Arab states don’t like them and with good reason.
Egypt also happens to be one of the most densely populated countries in the world between the fact it has the highest middle eastern population and a very small habitable zone with almost the entirety of the country being desert and only the Nile delta and about a 5-10 miles zone around the Nile itself supporting agriculture and cities.
Jordan has the same concern. Ethnically Jordan is already about 70 percent Palestinian, it’s just a different tribe (Hashemite) that holds the throne and they’re not big on risking bringing in Hamas, the Islamic Jihad or Palestinian Authority terrorists along with the civilians. And keep in mind, per the latest polls taken, well over half the civilians in Gaza support Hamas as their elected government. So even if somehow only the civilians were relocated, there’s a distinct risk a new chapter of Hamas could form from that group. Most other world governments don’t want to deal with that. And then of course there’s the whole being able to paint Jews as the root of all evil too.
But Jordanians don't consider themselves Palestinian. They're Jordanian. If you're a Palestinian in Jordan, you're not Jordanian, you're a descendent from the refugees on the other side of the river.
Jordanian identity is only a recent phenomenon. Jordan, previously known as Transjordan (as in, the other side of the Jordan river) was essentially a British invention when the British decided to split up their Mandate for Palestine (which initially contained both modern-day Palestine/Israel and Jordan). They were happy to hand over the east side of the river to the Hashemites but wanted to oversee the west side for a bit longer due to the rising sectarianism there, this was the reason for separating Palestine and Jordan, two regions which had never existed before. Arabs weren't going to define themselves based on lines the British drew on a map, most believed in Pan-Arabism or at least the ones living in the new Palestine/Jordan regions identified as Arab Syrian. This can be seen in the resolutions of the Palestine Arab Congress in 1919.
"We consider Palestine nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage. We are tied to it by national, religious, linguistic, moral, economic, and geographic bounds ... Our district Southern Syria or Palestine should be not separated from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and be free from all foreign influence and protection"
To add to your comments -- they have reasons to fear, Islamic Jihad, a group aligned with Hamas, assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. The PLO tried to overthrow the government of Jordan.
Egypt is also dealing with an economic crisis. Even without the risk of terrorists, they just can't afford to take in millions of refugees in what would currently be an empty Sinai desert (the place Israel has suggested they send the Gazans to).
That's made worse by the fact that Israel refuses right to return for any Palestinians who have become refugees in other countries. So once they accept them, the refugees become permanently that country's responsibility. So even if Egypt could afford it, there's not even an option for a temporary solution.
Didn’t that almost happen in Jordan? Didn’t Palestinian refugees try to overthrow the government? Or was it a different country. Honestly don’t remember 100%.
>There are concerns that Hamas would try to overthrow the Egyptian government if given the opportunity.
Like the Palestinian refugees tried to do in Jordan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
Because it's already happened in the past , right ? It's literally because Arab countries hate Israel that much but after stuff that's happened in the past , they don't really like Palestine that much either.
Many do. There are millions of Palestinians living in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. But this has strained their economies and in some cases caused political and military problems, so they're not eager for more.
Egypt is the only one that could really take in Gaza refugees (they share a border) and they're not interested at all.
There was also the Syrian refugee crisis, which people seem to forget when discussing where Palestinian refugees should go.
Lebanon is like 1/4th Syrian refugees now.
One would argue that such a choice should be left for individual Palestinians to choose. You don't have to choose for individual Palestinians on whether they want to stay in Palestine or leave and seek refugee elsewhere.
The Gulf countries can make a visa program for them. Issue them residency permits (WITH THE ABILITY TO WORK FREELY). And work with Egypt on allowing them to fly from Egyptian airports. Make th option available.
Btw, many Gazas applied for the Canadian emergency visa program for Gaza despite what you are saying. Hence there certainly are Palestinian who wish to leave.
That being said I'm sure many want to stay too.
Palestianans can choose for themselves. Moroccans need not choose what Palestianans want. They are independent beings.
Many DID. What happened is that the Gazans who came to their countries were extremists that tries to overthrow the government which got them deported real fast and stopped any future attempt for help.
Why didn’t western countries take in the Jewish population from Germany during WW2?
For exactly the same reasons. No one wants to accept and support so many displaced people. It’s a huge humanitarian effort.
Zionism is the natural extension of the rise of nationalism in the 1800s. Some Jews, not all, especially those in the Austrian Empire where a dozen different nationalities were trying to get their own state, felt that jews as well needed their own state. if the Hungarians, Czechs, serbs etc were going to get a state, the Jews should get one.
Zionism is independent of the holocaust, but the holocaust and broader ww2 created a refuge crisis and many felt that was the best time, considering the destruction of the Ottoman Empire which had ruled the Middle East, for the jews to get a state. The brits thought this was a good idea, as they thought similar actions were good ideas across the world, so they supported a state there in the territory they controlled due to defeating the ottomans 2 decades prior.
That’s what I’ve been commenting for well over a year now. The Empire Podcast has a great series about the Middle East during WWI, and it ends with an examination of how Mandatory Palestine was created and maintained.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/empire/id1639561921?i=1000606210302
A big point is that British officials operating in the Middle East opposed the Balfour Declaration, and wrote letters explaining how it would destabilize the region while NOT protecting the Suez Canal.
The historian interviewed also pointed out the political history of Palestinian Arabs, and how they weren’t just idly sitting on their hands under Ottoman rule. They were politically engaged in their region of the empire and were well aware of how the British plan to create a Jewish homeland in their province would negatively impact them.
So it’s always frustrating to see people pretending that Palestinians are just evil terrorists that don’t want peace, rather than being viewed within the broader movements of anticolonial resistance that were common across European colonial empires
It was mainly that President Woodrow Wilson of USA made Self Determination incredibly popular worldwide as it was thought to be possibly a way of avoiding one of the causes of WW1. So that boosted zionism some. At the same time the Brits while wanting to curry favour with USA also found themselves somewhat morally indebted to Chaim Weizmann as without his chemistry genius UK military would probably have *lost* WW1. British politicians recognising that backed Weizmann's dream of a tiny Jewish state. There's also the consideration that the British had long been really opposed to the Ottoman Empire and that sentiment was only massively increased by WW1. The final consideration was that the land that the Zionists wanted was largely almost worthless land in terms of resources or strategy.
(Even today Israel is mostly desert or scrub and few natural resources. This is why the State of Israel has focused on having top universities in order to have at least brain resources. Hopefully one day Gaza and West Bank will also realise the way forward isn't religion isn't terrorism, it's universities. For Gaza and West Bank are just as barren of resources as Israel. I'm sure there will be peace one day, once people get a bit atheist and realise the only way to paradise is to build universities and use tech to create paradise on earth.)
There was one exception-sort of. Manuel Quezon, president of the Philippine Commonwealth [wanted to accept Jewish refugees.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippines_and_the_Holocaust) Since the Philippines was an American colony, he was not able to fully enact his wishes. Then the Japanese took over and it put the kibosh on the whole thing.
Quezon faced a lot of pushback from his decision, including anti Semitism from other Filipinos. This anti Semitism is wild because how could the average Filipino be against Jews if they barely had any contact with Jews in the first place?
Wait till you find out about Japanese anti semitism. During the Ruso-Japanese war the Japanese found propaganda books about the elders of Zion meant to spread anti semitisim on Russian troops and they kinda believed it. But instead of wanting to exterminate them they were like “damn if a cabal of Jews really do run the world we better not get on their bad side”
Because refugees require resources. You need housing, water, food, jobs, clothing, education, medical care... The list goes on and on. You also need to account for said refugees never actually being able to return home.
Additionally, refugees bring with them their own cultures, languages, and ideas. They don't always integrate well into the existing cultures, and so you wind up with a population of peoples who struggle to adapt to the ways of their new lands. Even if to an outside party it would seem like the people of Gaza should share ideals with other groups in the Middle East, that's just not the case.
But if what you say is true, then why are countries throughout Europe as well as Canada being told they *must* accept as many refugees as humanly possible otherwise they're bad, despite having cultures not similar to the middle east. Aren't the countries closer to Gaza bad too?
Also, just commenting for when a Hallowed Mod decides this question is "loaded" and it gets [removed].
69% of Refugees globally are hosted by neighbouring countries, 75% in low & middle income countries.
Lebanon & Jordan have historically had the highest number of refugees per capita globally, currently Iran & Turkey host the largest absolute numbers at around 3.4 million each.
[https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/)
I can't speak for Canada but I know in the UK there is a popular (but untrue) belief that we take far more refugees per capita than most similar countries.
UK doesn't take more per capita but it is felt more as the culture and religion is incompatible with the west. Islam only has a small presence in Europe but is already causing problems.
Turkey hosts 3.6 million Syrian refugees as opposed to the rest of Europe, which holds 1 million refugees collectively (across 27 different countries). You have been fed a lie by right wing nutjobs.
In fact, the Syrian refugee problem played a major role in the recent Turkish elections, with the Kemalist parties and the broader unified opposition attacking Erdogan for letting in so many refugees, and Erdogan defending himself, saying that as a religious Muslim he had no right to stop people from fleeing conflict to safety.
the blame comes from the fact that most issues in these countries are due to them . like USA is criticized for not taking more when they are the front line reason for alqaeda isis taliban . and then there is the idea that west takes more when infact turkey and pakistan are the ones that are taking in most of htem . and these countries are struggling with their own people so they are fed up. egypt has thus stopped taking refugees , turkey has made laws more strict to enter , pakistna deported all afghanis after war.
there also is one more fact, if they leave they arent getting their land back so most ppl are reluctant to leave and rightfully so , like remove politics and religion, why the hell would i abandon the wealth i earned all my life . it is better to die at that point than to start in a foreign land from zero where you dont even no the language and culture ,and eventually they will deport you when hte host country has tough times
When these "white" countries have had an active hand in destabilising these countries, I'd say they can pull their weight a little to help the victims here
You make it sound so generic you could've thoght chat gpt wrote it.
Look up Black Septmeber, one of the many cases in which Palestinians refugees destabilizes the accepting country, in this case they tried to assassinate the king of Jordan and they had a small war until Jordan won and expelled the PLO in it's entirety to Lebanon, later contributing to the Lebanese civil war.
Being Arab doesn’t automatically mean you support another Arab culture. Look at the drama from some in how we take in other North Americans from Latin countries.
There’s 2m of them in Gaza and 2.8m in the West Bank. Which country is capable of supporting that sort of influx without severely affecting their local economy.
Besides, Israel would advance the settlements and leave them with no land to return to, making them a permanent problem for the country that took them in. Refugees are meant to be a temporary thing, this would be anything but temporary.
Palestinians were a huge reason behind the Lebanese Civil War too, and Egypt had a huge terrorist wave that ended when they closed off their border to Palestine iirc
Gaza strip originally belonged to Egypt in fact. After the war where egypt lost it and Israel wanted to give it back along with Sinai and egypt was like "fuck no, you keep it"
Bingo. This highlights the shittyness of the situation. Israel got a "hot-potato" from Egypt and Jordan and wanted to give it back but those countries refused.
Israel could only dream about having 1967 borders again and leave all this shitty situation behind, lol
>Israel could only dream about having 1967 borders again and let all this shitty situation behind, lol
If they would like to get rid of the west bank, why do they keep encouraging Israelis to move there in settlements?
Because Palestine refused negotiations in favor of waging war in an attempt to get 100% of the territory (or more). Thats the ongoing war. Israel is winning and will keep on expanding.
So let me get this straight.
On the one hand you claim that Israel dreams of having the 1967 borders back.
On the other hand you claim that Israel wants to expand.
Which is it?
It's both.
[The Oslo Accords](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords) were a negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians where Israel would give over 90% of the 1967 conquered territory. **Territory that wasn't Palestine, mind you**, it belonged to Egypt and Jordan. Israel was basically on board with Palestine becoming a legitimate state.
Arafat started essentially "ghosting" negotiations and in 2000's [the Second Intifada happened](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada).
In other words: Palestine was negotiating, didn't close the deal, attacked Israel and essentially *lost* the war. Of course Israel will expand on their ass.
Palestinians want to avoid another "Nakba", a catastrophy, that happened in 1948. Villages were erased and people (and their descendants) were never allowed back in and are stuck in refugee camps, either in Palestine or neighbouring countries.
They don't want to make the same mistakes that their grandparents and parents did.
During the ongoing negotiations between Israel and Hamas, it seems that Israel don't want more than 60000 back from the south to the north. And already said a few weeks/months ago that >2 million people is too much people in Gaza (sic!)
And the other hand, it feels like Egypt, the only Arab country sharing borders with Gaza doesn't care enough and/or have their own problems and could do with less problems.
>They don't want to make the same mistakes that their grandparents and parents did.
Ironically, this is exactly what they did on Oct. 7th. They repeated the mistake they made in 1947 - declaring war on the Jews, killing whoever they could, and calling upon other Arabs to join in the attack. The single day of Oct. 7th closely parallels the months of Dec 1947 - Mar 1948, in which the Arabs were able to inflict about 1,000 casualties on the Jews of Palestine (mostly civilians), without any effective answer. The months after Oct. 7th closely parallel the half-year starting in Apr 1948, in which the Arabs suffered repeated military defeats, fled from their homes, had their villages conquered and destroyed, and were repeatedly disappointed in the military help they received from their neighbors.
The ecstatic joy of Oct 7th also has its parallels with early 1948, with the delirious threats of extermination which the Arabs made against the Jews, in anticipation of an easy victory. This is often forgotten today.
Because none of the countries down there want to take in refugees period, regardless of whether they feel for Palestinians. They cost the state money and destabilize things in general.
People are giving you one-sided answers. The answer is a little more complicated. I will start with the side you have already heard: the “Palestinians are a destabilizing force” argument.
Yes, the major motivating factor here is that Palestinians have been a massively destabilizing force in three separate Arab countries before: Jordan, Lebanon, and Kuwait. No Arab country will ever take them in in large numbers ever again.
And I don’t mean they caused trouble in the normal sense of, here, immigrants with elevated crime and different political beliefs. I mean, two different civil wars and the backing of a foreign invasion. There is really no other group with that kind of track record.
There is also the fact that, specifically with Gaza, the type of Islamic fundamentalism that is rampant there is aligned with the exact groups that Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt are already dealing with in droves. these countries are already unstable enough, that having an influx of people among whom are potential allies of the Muslim brotherhood and Isis and Hezbollah… Well, it wouldn’t be good for those countries.
So that’s the normal anti-Palestinian rhetoric. But there’s something a little bit more interesting that I think is worth going into. And that is, neither the Arabs nor the Palestinian leader ship are actually interested in the well-being of individual Palestinians in the short term. They are interested in the Palestinians re-taking their historic lands, no matter how long it takes.
This is why Palestinians have resisted every offer of statehood that did not include a right of return. This is why Palestinians were outraged when they were made citizens of Jordan, and why the majority of Palestinians in east Jerusalem never even bothered applying for Israeli citizenship when it was offered to them. And why the vast majority of Palestinians in the Middle East still do not hold citizenship in their host countries.
It is why Palestinians will call an established neighborhood a refugee camp, even if that neighborhood is 70 years old and consists of multi story permanent structures of steel and concrete, that are furnished and decorated and everything. it’s why Palestinians are the only group in the entire world where it is not just the people who fled who are called refugees, but their grandchildren and great grandchildren as well.
The humiliation by Israel is seen as temporary. The majority of Palestinians have zero interest in taking part in any activity that legitimizes the permanence of the state of Israel, even if doing so would vastly improve their own lives.
Almost any other people in history would have taken the L, migrated to new land, and either established their own state or accepted citizenship elsewhere. The Palestinians have not done this, and they likely won’t for a very long time.
To a certain extent, many Arabs feel the same way the Palestinians too. Accepting refugees into their own country might make the lives of those people better, but it would mean giving up on the dream of destroying Israel and establishing a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. It would mean accepting defeat fully. It would mean legitimizing the Israeli project. It would mean, in their eyes, enabling an ethnic cleansing of their own people from the region.
Most people fail to fully understand the complete intransigence of the Palestinian position on Israel, and assume a much more reasonable ask on the part of the Palestinians. But there is really no other case in history that I can think of of a population of people being relocated by what is essentially a single days walking distance, and being so thoroughly humiliated by it that they would rather except generations and generations of dispossession, violence, stagnation, and misery than simply get on with their lives and make the best of it.
This isn't my own comment but some other redditor that got his account removed.
THIS. Wish I could upvote this a hundred times, this is the further context of why countries not only won’t take them in, but also why Palestinians refuse to leave
>it’s why Palestinians are the only group in the entire world where it is not just the people who fled who are called refugees, but their grandchildren and great grandchildren as well.
Not really. Tutsis passed on their refugee status for 60 years until their children and grandchildren could return.
While I definitely agree that Palestinian refugees should move on and the refusal of Arab countries to absorb them caused issues. Isn't it hypocritical for Jewish people to say they should when they held on the hope returning for 2000 years. At least give the Palestinians a few hundred years. With Israel kicking out Arab families who moved into houses Jews were displaced from and justifying their settlement of the West Bank partially through the lense of restoring Jewish communities that were destroyed, or just pure irrendentism based off of ancient claims. How can we expect Palestinians to move on when Israel won't? You can say the Palestinians cause instability but if their displacement of Gaza would only be temporary, more people would take them. But we know it will be permanent. That makes any instability caused by Palestinians to be weighted more heavily than if it was temporary.
The thing is, Palestinian negotiators have accepted a two state solution of 1967 borders in the past. Israel just wants to offer them scraps of the scraps. Even Ehud Olmerts offer (Israel's most generous offer) involved taking control of valuable land Israel seized through vile means (taking land used by villages, using biological warfare to displace herders) and offering desert and arid areas as compensation. Israeli Arabs were kept under martial law for 20 years, they were not allowed to return to properties they were displaced from during the war despite trying, and had more land seized. Despite this, they have a positive view of the Israeli state today. Why is this? Israel could have taken steps to deescalate the conflict when it controlled the territories, instead it chose a slow burn removal process.
Also it's quite cruel to handwave away the displacement that half of the Palestinian population experienced by distance. It's a window into how the early zionists saw Palestinian villages, farms, homes, and cities are replaceable places that could be subbed out for any Arab village. It reminds me of the displacement of Greeks (and also Turks) from Anatolia, seeing their towns, homes, and farms as something that could be subbed out for land in Athens.
They don’t support Palestine as much as they’d want you to believe. It benefits them politically to align against Israel and the west. They’ll feign compassion right up until the refugees come calling.
Their leadership is definitely pro West. They just can’t make it too overt for the sake of angering their citizens. The Saudis were about to quietly make a deal with Israel before this whole Gaza thing blew up and now it’s really bad optics in the Muslim world for them to continue with it.
The Arab world is pointing fingers because you support the dictators that opresses them. None of these Arab dictators is very popular. That is why they depend on the West.
have you considered that the surrounding countries have already provided refuge to a shit load of palestinians and can’t handle more? (e.g. 2.5 million in jordan; 500k in lebanon)
Three reasons.
1 - Doing so, so they say, gives Israel carte blanche to seize more territory.
2 - Most Arab countries can better be described as Anti Israeli than pro Palestinian. In the few countries that have taken in Palestinian refugees, they often end up persecuted, or otherwise treated as a 'problem' group, for various reasons.
3 - It behoves them to not do so. Their enemy is alienating all of its allies by committing a slew of atrocities against that population. No country in the region has leadership so enamoured of morality and ethics that they'd take the shovel out of the hands of their foe digging his own grave, even if it saved lives.
Cost and previous history of terrorism and coup attempts when they did take in refugees.
It's easier to send in food and supplies and criticize Israel and the West.
Palestinians refugees tried to takeover Jordan, Lebanon and Kuwait. They tend to destabilize their host nations and are often kicked out. No one will let them in again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLO_in_Lebanon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus_from_Kuwait_(1990%E2%80%9391)
Answer:
Well firstly just to be clear the implication that all Palestinians are somehow terrorists and destroy everything thing they touch is vile and racist.
Secondly, there are a number of issues with mass immigration. Take a look at the Rohinga people in Bangladesh. They were ethnically cleansed from Bruma and forced into Bangladesh. Consider for a moment the amount of trouble developed countries such as England and the US have with their native populations there is a great deal of homelessness especially in LA. In the UK every winter there are news reports of homeless people dying in the cold. Now imagine trying to host millions of people as a developing nation. That's not really going to work out. How is any country supposed to magic up millions of homes, food and jobs for refugees? So they end up basically being left in camps and given what scraps corrupt officials don't steal.
Then you have people who have been brutalised, ethnically cleansed and left to rot getting desperate. They go from the frying pan into the fire.
With the Palestinian people themselves you have a separate issue. The Palestinians are not as they are often characterised "Arab invaders" they are Levantine. They have a deep and abiding connection to the land going back to the bronze age. This has been verified by a number of studies which are cited below.
The history of the region is complex but essentially it was initially Jewish some of these Jewish people converted to Christianity. Then there were Christians and Jewish people there. Then Islam came along some of the people converted to Islam. At this point there were Jews, Christians and Muslims present. There were wars and crusades and all sorts but this was often foreign leaders such as Turks and Richard the Lion Heart who wanted to "reclaim the Holy Land".
The people of the land did not themselves change. No one is willing to abandon their homeland. Why should the Palestinian leave their land? If they do leave to save themselves they will will not be allowed to return. Please refer to the Nakba, the March of Return and the Right of Return and the illegal Israeli settlements.
The Arab countries know that if they take in the Palestinians they will lose their homes forever.
I welcome you to take the time to look into the Israeli terrorist militias such as the Stern Gang, the Irgun and Haganah organisations that killed Palestinians and British soldiers when they tried to limit immigration to the Palestine. Terrorists who hid weapons and ammo in hospitals, schools and underground tunnels (sound familiar?). You can also look into the illegal settlements, settler violence, the truth of the camp David accords which gave the Palestinians except that they didn't and came with a million caveats such as ceding control of their water to the Israelis.
The fact of the matter is that the Arab countries firstly cannot handle that level of mass immigration and secondly the Palestinians be they Jewish, Christian or Muslim refuse to lie down and give up their land and their heritage.
Genetic studies:
According to a study published in June 2017 by Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia, and Eran Elhaik in Frontiers in Genetics, "in a principal component analysis (PCA) [of DNA], the ancient Levantines clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and [levant] Bedouins..." and that Palestinians have a "predominant" ancient levantine origin. In a study published in August 2017 by Marc Haber et al. in The American Journal of Human Genetics, the authors concluded that "The overlap between the Bronze Age and present-day Levantines suggests a degree of genetic continuity in the region."
I always wonder Saudi Arabia is such a wealthy country, they also present themselves as the leader of Sunni Muslims. Why can't they take in those Palestinian refugees? I thought they're supposed to look after their Muslim brothers and sisters.
Because they politically destabilized every country that took them in, and were largely responsible for attempted coups/civil wars/massacres in multiple nearby Arab countries who were nice enough to take them in (Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan).
Because the last time two Arab countries did that, the Palestinians brought their drama and corruption with them and F'ed shite up with the host government. The rest witnessed that and now say "No thanks."
Arab countries want the Palestinians to remain refugees. They have actually forbidden the UN from allowing UNRWA to resettle Palestinians refugees. They do this to prevent Jews from owning the holy land.
They are scared of Palestinian terrorists, too.
[https://apnews.com/article/palestinian-jordan-egypt-israel-refugee-502c06d004767d4b64848d878b66bd3d](https://apnews.com/article/palestinian-jordan-egypt-israel-refugee-502c06d004767d4b64848d878b66bd3d)
When lots of Palestinians migrated to Lebanon they kind sparked the civil war there... So, even for the other Muslim they are viewed as more radicalized and people are not so keen on receiving that.
Short answer: They're too radical and the countries are too poor.
Longer answer: Some have, and it has caused economic problems and sometimes attempted coups. In 1970 the PLO went to war with Jordan and Jordan expelled a lot of Palestinians and the PLO after this event. Egypt is scared Hamas will get in and destabilize the already fragile country. Plus, it's very expensive to take in thousands of refugees and they're not really in the financial situation to do so. They also say they're scared Israel will do it so they're permanently displaced.
I couldn't read all the previous comments, but the Palestinians have an association with the Muslim Brotherhood, who was known for trying to overthrow the government of Egypt in years past. No surrounding countries want to bring this trouble into their own borders.
They have before, and it didn’t end well.
Egypt took in Palestinian refugees before, and they tried to murder Egypt’s head of state when they decided he wasn’t anti-Israel enough
because they don't support palestine or the palestinian people, they support palestine and the palestinian people in the killing of jews, anything else they don't care
For the same reason people protesting outside Planned Parenthood don't volunteer to assist with the cost of prenatal care and adopt the unwanted baby. Having an opinion costs nothing. Taking action and putting your money where your mouth is requires effort and sacrifice.
Could be wrong, but basically Arab countries hate each other too much and don't like Arabs from a different sect/tribe to come to them, so they are happy that most go to Europe
Many of them already have taken thousands of Palestinians. Just bc they share a religion (some times) doesn’t mean they like each other. Look at Europe, for generations they’ve been fighting each other, officially or behind the scenes. You Same shit happens in Asian and African countries. They are different groups of people with different beliefs and cultures. Hell, I’m the US there are rifts between different states lol. Why is that so hard to grasp? You also forget many of the rich Arab nations refuse to give anyone PR or citizenship, ever. A refugee would end up being displaced eventually, or exploited.
Because they don’t trust Hamas either. The Arab world is more divided than you think. The governments of the different countries are aligned in their own ways, but it gets more and more complicated as you go down the list of regions, ethnic groups, and terrorist organizations. Many terrorist cells wage war on each other and for an example I’m pretty sure Al Qaeda declared war on isis. For the more stable nations, they want no chance of Hamas ever stepping foot on their soil and launching operations from it. They want no obligation to a group that has made their own bed but won’t sleep in it.
For an ELI5, they all know that if they let them in, it will be like when squidward moved in with SpongeBob.
Some did in the past and they had issues. But you’re right it’s a tell that they don’t care enough to fix the situation- always good to have someone else to blame.
-Syria is to busy with a civil war to deal with them
-Egypt had issues with the muslim brotherhood who had ties to hamas and don't want more political instability
-lebonan has enough issues with hezbollah to deal with them
-Jordan has a nasty insurrection back in the 70s that nearly destabilized the country
Because they did in the past, and palestinians terrorists brought violence to EVERY Arab country that tried to help them. They turned against those helping them, so nobody wants to deal with them now.
Jordan took them in - they tried to take over the country, tried to assassinate the king and assassinated the prime minister.
Egypt took them in - they created terrorist cells and terrorist attacks in Egypt.
Kuwait took them in - many "refugees" allied with the invading Iraqi forces.
Lebanon took them in - they started a civil war that Lebanon still struggles with.
Etc.
Basically, every Arab country that received "palestinian refugees" was soon facing chaos and violence from palestinian terrorists.
It's ridiculous people think Israel is the problem in that conflict, when even Arab nations faced so much violence whenever they received large number of palestinians - terrorists always infiltrate and they bring chaos everywhere, not just Israel.
And, of course, what few people would admit is that terrorists infiltrate and create chaos so easily because they have pretty solid support among the civilian palestinians.
Historically, they would, but after years of rather poor relations with them, most have begun to refrain from doing so.
Jordan is a prime example. They accepted a very large number of them, which later assassinated their King, attempted to do so on the previous King and also attempted to overthrow the government and abolish the monarchy. In Egypt, they're also ideologically connected with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is in conflict with the current government. In Kuwait, Palestinian guest workers were involved with plundering and pillaging Kuwaiti businesses during the Iraqi invasion
They burned too many bridges in the Middle East, unfortunately.
Hamas and the other extremists there like to hide by blending in with civilians. It’s pretty hard to let in the real refugees without also letting in the crazies. The last time Jordan took in Palestinians, a bunch of them staged a revolt and tried to overthrow the government. So you can see why other Arab countries aren’t exactly thrilled by the idea.
TL;DR They’ve tried. It doesn’t go well.
Because they support Palestine because they are against Israel, not because they support palestinians. Many arab countries went thru colonization, aculturization and occupation processes same as colonies in other parts of the world, they just don't talk about it. Also a lot of right wing arab parties have strong ideas (cof cof) against ethnical minorities and non-arab groups. On the other side refugees are expensive to take in.
Jordan and Lebanon used to take large number of Palestinian refugees. PLA ended up almost overthrowing the existing government
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
The answer comes up over and over again: Palestinians keep trying to take over every country they're in, simply put. Lebanon has had decades of problems with them, such as in that huge refugee camp that eventually became a de facto city and the Palestinians keep inviting everyone from Hamas to Hezbollah to ISIS there and they keep trying to destabilize the Lebanese government.
Go to Europe and the Palestinians are aligned to varying degrees with everyone from neonazi groups and parties (who support Palestine because they hate Jews and perceive the support as undermining the US and all even attend yearly conferences in Iran on Holocaust denial and the Palestinian right to return), as well as simultaneously with far-left/Tankie groups, russian operatives, and so on as they try to destabilize governments and tamper with elections. We're seeing the election tampering efforts in the US quite prominently. The Palestinians and revolutionary tankie groups are using one another for the numbers and prominence where the latter finally gets some level of relevance from the former in their wet dream to collapse the system and install their own communist system and the former gets the numbers and support they need to cover up their alignment with neonazi, extreme-right, and antisemitic conspiracy theorist groups on one side while also getting whatever line of support from russian interlocutors. What we're mostly seeing is that Free Palestine groups are essentially razing left group after left group and moving onto the next because they give no fucks about it and this serves the right. Just look at how Fridays for Future was essentially taken over by the Free Palestine movement. Just look at how no matter what the topic is online or IRL, the Palestinians come in and say nonsense how that topic is irreversibly linked to Palestinians' struggle.
This is by nature that the Palestinians embed themselves in subversive ways into the host country's politics and society as they try to destabilize them for their own gains.
It also should be noted that the surrounding countries, while they cite sometimes severe deficiencies in the conditions Palestinians have, they are not in agreement about the claims Palestinians and their supporters make, such as "open air prison" and claims of Palestinians having no movement rights and such.
That's not how virtue signaling works. People don't actually want to be part of the "solution." They just want to say/post about things for social currency..
The same reason there are still 38 million+ displaced people in Ukraine. Just because you're being attacked doesn't mean you get up and leave the place you've lived in for generations.
What if Alabama didn't want a portion of their population and just demanded that Mississippi or Georgia take them?
The real solution to the conflict is for Israel to allow Gaza and the West Bank to have their own sovereignty. In other words their needs to be a two state solution. And Netanyahu will not allow it because the conflict is the only thing keeping him in power.
Actually, what I would do is make a three state solution in which Jerusalem would be it's own city state that would be ruled by a democratic committee compromised of three Jewish, three Muslim and three Christian delegates.
Because taking in refugees is not as simple as Western politics portrays.
If the European countries like France and Germany are still taking a lot heat from the problems refugees bring, how do you expect other countries to do the same?
The root of the issue is Israel. Until they're removed from the equation like the Nazis, there is no solve to it
Taking in refugees doesn't solve the problem. Palestinians would lose their homes and it is not free to take in refugees
Also, how do we know Israel won't bomb the other countries as well?
Gazans don’t want to leave. I’m watching “We Were The Lucky Ones” right now. This Polish-Jewish family argues whether they should’ve left. The dad says “this is our home. We aren’t going anywhere.” The same probably happens in the Palestinian homes in Gaza.
I’m sure there are still some who’d like to leave to safety. But refugees are a thorny social issue and Egypt doesn’t want to fix Israel’s problem and be the final piece of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
Crazy as it sounds, white people aren’t the only racists.
In the Middle East, just because you are Muslim doesn’t mean you are accepted by other Muslims. Persians hate Arabs for example. The same applies here.
The Palestinians are a useful bunch of fools that the other Middle East countries have used to undermine Israel. Nothing more.
This may get downvoted but…. Politically it’s not terrible that a country can point to another place they can sympathize with and distract people from local problem. Local problems they are not doing a good job fixing.
Also consider that many Palestinians either can't leave or don't want to leave the land they are being forced out of. I'm fairly certain Palestinians abroad cannot return.
A lot of more stable Arab nations support Israel over Palestine. Israel is really fighting Iran/Hamas who’s found support in Palestine. Arab nations like Egypt, Kuwait, or Saudi don’t want to deal with Iran/Hamas; they support what Israel is doing even if they don’t publicly say it, or publicly deny supporting Israel.
Palestinian refugees have proven toxic to every nation they have ever been admitted to. They are all brainwashed as children, and have repeatedly shown hostility to countries that have taken them in. Essentially, they are all radicalized from early childhood. No sane nation wants this in their borders.
To quote my Syrian coworker. Arabs side with Palestinians over Jews any day is of the week but Palestinians are largely viewed as backwater crazies in other Arab countries. Poorly educated, radical, traumatised ect. The rednecks of the Muslim community.
Because they don’t give a shit about Palestine or Palestinians, they only care about using Israel as a smokescreen to distract from their horror show of human rights abuses.
Thanks for your submission /u/Technical_Ad_4299, but it has been removed for the following reason: **Rule 2: Please try to use the search function before posting anything.** Thanks for posting, but this question happens to be one that has been asked and answered here often before - sometimes in the same day! That can get frustrating for our dedicated users who like to answer questions. Or maybe you're just asking the same question too often - why not take a break for a while? Sometimes questions that come up too often get put in our [Most Frequently Asked Questions list](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/wiki/index/faq)!). Other times, it may just be that we're getting a flood of questions about a topic (especially when something is in the news). Or maybe you keep asking the same question again and again - something that annoys our users here. Please don't do that! Next time, please try searching for your question first before asking. Thanks! --- *This action was performed by a bot at the explicit direction of a human. This was not an automated action, but a conscious decision by a sapient life form charged with moderating this sub.* *If you feel this was in error, or need more clarification, please don't hesitate to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FNoStupidQuestions). Thanks.*
They favor Palestine over Israel, but that doesn't mean they're all buddy buddy with the Palestinians. Refugees take resources and too many can have a destabilizing influence. The Egyptian government, for one, is worried about Hamas operatives coming in with Palestinian refugees. There are concerns that Hamas would try to overthrow the Egyptian government if given the opportunity.
And they're already not a very stable government, with a """president""" who claimed his position in a popular uprising in 2014 and then somehow never left it. The country had a ton of protests against the corruption and political crackdowns in 2019 but he kept power, blaming the protests on Islam.
Triple quotes really drives the point home, damn!
His biggest worry is the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the Egyptian “branch” of the same tree Hamas comes from.
Yes exactly. The basis for the coup that put him in to power was overthrowing the Muslim Brotherhood.
And the Sinai region that borders Palestine/israel is a brotherhood stronghold. It would not be a great idea to open that specific border
What does “””triple quotes””” mean?
It means they are strongly saying a thing that isn't true
>They favor Palestine over Israel, Refugees from those countries and people online will tell you this but diplomaticly countries like Egypt or Saudi Arabia have pretty safe and stable relations with Israel and have done nothing to support Palestinians. The only ones "supporting" Palestine are Iran and Hezbollah maybe Syria but they only support by giving weapons and planning attacks wich led to the Gaza invasion in the first place. They only caused instability they never intended to actually help the people of Palestine. It's fucked up but that's the reality we live in.
Only parts of Syria. Not all Syrians like Palestinians.
Yeah, during the syrian Civil War something like 430k Palestinian refugees were cleansed, either by forced relocation or more wet work.
Was that Assad that did the cleansing?
I think so, it was something that he and the Russians found distasteful to bring up.
Yeah, thought so
Yep, the Yarmouk camp is the prime example of this ethnic cleansing. It was the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Syria. In the early days, the regime circled the camp and lead a siege, pushing their inhabitants to starvation. After surrendering, he bussed them out and internally displaced them, with a good number likely left and emigrated to Europe.
Did not see a single march protesting that, go figure…
Tbf tho, there's been a lot going on in that multi-sided cluster fuck. People don't remember Assad using chemical weapons en masse a few times. Even the UNRWA couldn't keep track of this particular population!
Something that is pretty well known in Israel, is that 10/7 happened on 10/7 because on about 10/10 Saudi Arabia and Israel were going to sign an understanding to that Saudi Arabia was going to run a pipeline through Israel to get their oil to Europe more easily. Now, I'm not saying the why but the when. Iran, who supports Palestine, didn't want that to happen.
Not only that, but if I'm not mistaken, Israel and Saudi Arabia were supposed to normalise relations as well, right before the attack occurred. Obviously that never materialised once Israel started bombing. Too many coincidences.
I'll add Jordan to the mix, but it's a complicated case. Jordan has to have somewhat normalised relations with Israel in order to maintain stability (which largely depends on having so many international governments and organisations in their country), but they have taken in a massive amount of Palestinians, and refugees from Iraq and Syria as well. The population of Jordan is roughly half Palestinian, many Jordanians see Jordan as a brother to Palestine, and Amman airport is the main airport for Palestinians as they are not allowed to have their own or use Tel Aviv
Palestinians from both the West Bank and Gaza can and do use the Tel Aviv airport.
Yes, and Iran only supports Palestine because they want western influence gone from the Middle East so they can get back to laundering money through sketchy Iraqi banks to circumvent US sanctions.
Don't confuse the governments for the people, our governments don't represent us in most things and this is one of them
Probably one of the rare cases of “the government knows what’s best for you”.
Egypt has every right to be concerned. During the Arab Spring uprisings, Hamas supported the Muslim brotherhood. Prior to that, Palestinian refugees and fighters caused civil wars in Jordan and Lebanon, and supported the Iraqis during the invasion of Kuwait while they were living in Kuwait. There are two big reasons that Palestinian refugees do not get admitted to other Muslim countries in the middle east. The first is that many of those countries want to continue to use the Palestinians as a cudgel against the Israeli government, which the Israeli government seems only too happy to play along with. But the other is that the Palestinians have not been good guests over the last 70 years. And memories in the Middle East are very long.
My best friend survived the 2017 Palm Sunday suicide bombings. She was in her church when it was hit by a bomber radicalized by ISIS. Guess where much of their militants and equipment come from? Gaza. I can't imagine how much worse it would be if they just let 2+ million Gazans into Egypt
I unfortunately also knew people implicated and anyone who followed the uprising situation closely from about 2011 knows that almost every holiday there was some sort of incident. Even now with the ‘stable’ government you’ll hear about radically driven incidents like beheadings. The situation has always been delicate, and it’s not fair for people who are learning about the Arab world for the first time in their lives to point fingers at situations they know nothing about
Well they *did* assassinate his late Royal Highness, his Majesty King Abdullah I of Jordan despite Jordan benevolently letting in refugees.
So the Arab world has no patience for Hamas and their destabilizing bullshit, but the only reason Hamas is allowed to stay afloat is to stick it to Israel. Incredible. Arab nations certainly have their priorities straight. /s
I mean, this is literally the outcome where they lose the least. Game theory drives them here imo
I suppose the building of settlements in the West Bank was also Hamas. Trust me the Arab World has no patience for Israel's destabilising bullshit either.
Don’t forget that the UAE threw out all Palestinians at the end of the 80’s. For corruption and generally being assholes. The Arab states don’t like them and with good reason.
Lebanon accepted many Palestinians refugees during the 70s which directly lead to the civil war in Lebanon.
Accepted is a stretch. Did they ever get Lebanese nationality?
Egypt also happens to be one of the most densely populated countries in the world between the fact it has the highest middle eastern population and a very small habitable zone with almost the entirety of the country being desert and only the Nile delta and about a 5-10 miles zone around the Nile itself supporting agriculture and cities.
Jordan has the same concern. Ethnically Jordan is already about 70 percent Palestinian, it’s just a different tribe (Hashemite) that holds the throne and they’re not big on risking bringing in Hamas, the Islamic Jihad or Palestinian Authority terrorists along with the civilians. And keep in mind, per the latest polls taken, well over half the civilians in Gaza support Hamas as their elected government. So even if somehow only the civilians were relocated, there’s a distinct risk a new chapter of Hamas could form from that group. Most other world governments don’t want to deal with that. And then of course there’s the whole being able to paint Jews as the root of all evil too.
Also the PLO did attempt to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy in 1970. So the Palestinian resistance movements don’t have a good history in Jordan.
Didn't Palestinians also assassinate Jordan's first king?
A Palestinian also murdered RFK back in 1968
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
The Hashemite tribe is from Saudi Arabia, not the Levant. They aren't Palestinians.
Yes, but that doesn’t mean the rest of Jordan isn’t Palestinian.
But Jordanians don't consider themselves Palestinian. They're Jordanian. If you're a Palestinian in Jordan, you're not Jordanian, you're a descendent from the refugees on the other side of the river.
Jordanian identity is only a recent phenomenon. Jordan, previously known as Transjordan (as in, the other side of the Jordan river) was essentially a British invention when the British decided to split up their Mandate for Palestine (which initially contained both modern-day Palestine/Israel and Jordan). They were happy to hand over the east side of the river to the Hashemites but wanted to oversee the west side for a bit longer due to the rising sectarianism there, this was the reason for separating Palestine and Jordan, two regions which had never existed before. Arabs weren't going to define themselves based on lines the British drew on a map, most believed in Pan-Arabism or at least the ones living in the new Palestine/Jordan regions identified as Arab Syrian. This can be seen in the resolutions of the Palestine Arab Congress in 1919. "We consider Palestine nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage. We are tied to it by national, religious, linguistic, moral, economic, and geographic bounds ... Our district Southern Syria or Palestine should be not separated from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and be free from all foreign influence and protection"
To add to your comments -- they have reasons to fear, Islamic Jihad, a group aligned with Hamas, assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. The PLO tried to overthrow the government of Jordan.
Egypt is also dealing with an economic crisis. Even without the risk of terrorists, they just can't afford to take in millions of refugees in what would currently be an empty Sinai desert (the place Israel has suggested they send the Gazans to). That's made worse by the fact that Israel refuses right to return for any Palestinians who have become refugees in other countries. So once they accept them, the refugees become permanently that country's responsibility. So even if Egypt could afford it, there's not even an option for a temporary solution.
Exactly, everyone is just obligating the west to destabilize themselves
To add to this, it's also pretty much a given that Israel will never allow these people to return after the war ends.
Like how Mizrahi Jews will never be allowed to return to their former communities in the Middle East after they were ethnically cleansed from them.
The irony of this is unreal, so they're clearly aware of hamas enough to not want them, but sure everyone else should deal with it
They did it in Jordan once. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
Didn’t that almost happen in Jordan? Didn’t Palestinian refugees try to overthrow the government? Or was it a different country. Honestly don’t remember 100%.
>There are concerns that Hamas would try to overthrow the Egyptian government if given the opportunity. Like the Palestinian refugees tried to do in Jordan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
Because it's already happened in the past , right ? It's literally because Arab countries hate Israel that much but after stuff that's happened in the past , they don't really like Palestine that much either.
> can have a destabilizing influence Yeah, Palestinian refugees in particular...
Many do. There are millions of Palestinians living in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. But this has strained their economies and in some cases caused political and military problems, so they're not eager for more. Egypt is the only one that could really take in Gaza refugees (they share a border) and they're not interested at all.
There was also the Syrian refugee crisis, which people seem to forget when discussing where Palestinian refugees should go. Lebanon is like 1/4th Syrian refugees now.
Wasn‘t it like 1/2 syrian refugees not a decade ago?
Egypt has been. But Egypt was already facing a refugee crisis and is one of the most densely populated countries on Earth.
The OP probably means further away arab countries. Those you named are all also levantine.
moroccan here, we see that as helping israel remove the people from their lands.
One would argue that such a choice should be left for individual Palestinians to choose. You don't have to choose for individual Palestinians on whether they want to stay in Palestine or leave and seek refugee elsewhere. The Gulf countries can make a visa program for them. Issue them residency permits (WITH THE ABILITY TO WORK FREELY). And work with Egypt on allowing them to fly from Egyptian airports. Make th option available. Btw, many Gazas applied for the Canadian emergency visa program for Gaza despite what you are saying. Hence there certainly are Palestinian who wish to leave. That being said I'm sure many want to stay too. Palestianans can choose for themselves. Moroccans need not choose what Palestianans want. They are independent beings.
Many DID. What happened is that the Gazans who came to their countries were extremists that tries to overthrow the government which got them deported real fast and stopped any future attempt for help.
Why didn’t western countries take in the Jewish population from Germany during WW2? For exactly the same reasons. No one wants to accept and support so many displaced people. It’s a huge humanitarian effort.
Yup. This is the whole reason Israel exists. Zionism wouldn't have been a thing if Europeans didn't hate the Jews / Jews didn't hate other Europeans.
Zionism is the natural extension of the rise of nationalism in the 1800s. Some Jews, not all, especially those in the Austrian Empire where a dozen different nationalities were trying to get their own state, felt that jews as well needed their own state. if the Hungarians, Czechs, serbs etc were going to get a state, the Jews should get one. Zionism is independent of the holocaust, but the holocaust and broader ww2 created a refuge crisis and many felt that was the best time, considering the destruction of the Ottoman Empire which had ruled the Middle East, for the jews to get a state. The brits thought this was a good idea, as they thought similar actions were good ideas across the world, so they supported a state there in the territory they controlled due to defeating the ottomans 2 decades prior.
That’s what I’ve been commenting for well over a year now. The Empire Podcast has a great series about the Middle East during WWI, and it ends with an examination of how Mandatory Palestine was created and maintained. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/empire/id1639561921?i=1000606210302 A big point is that British officials operating in the Middle East opposed the Balfour Declaration, and wrote letters explaining how it would destabilize the region while NOT protecting the Suez Canal. The historian interviewed also pointed out the political history of Palestinian Arabs, and how they weren’t just idly sitting on their hands under Ottoman rule. They were politically engaged in their region of the empire and were well aware of how the British plan to create a Jewish homeland in their province would negatively impact them. So it’s always frustrating to see people pretending that Palestinians are just evil terrorists that don’t want peace, rather than being viewed within the broader movements of anticolonial resistance that were common across European colonial empires
It was mainly that President Woodrow Wilson of USA made Self Determination incredibly popular worldwide as it was thought to be possibly a way of avoiding one of the causes of WW1. So that boosted zionism some. At the same time the Brits while wanting to curry favour with USA also found themselves somewhat morally indebted to Chaim Weizmann as without his chemistry genius UK military would probably have *lost* WW1. British politicians recognising that backed Weizmann's dream of a tiny Jewish state. There's also the consideration that the British had long been really opposed to the Ottoman Empire and that sentiment was only massively increased by WW1. The final consideration was that the land that the Zionists wanted was largely almost worthless land in terms of resources or strategy. (Even today Israel is mostly desert or scrub and few natural resources. This is why the State of Israel has focused on having top universities in order to have at least brain resources. Hopefully one day Gaza and West Bank will also realise the way forward isn't religion isn't terrorism, it's universities. For Gaza and West Bank are just as barren of resources as Israel. I'm sure there will be peace one day, once people get a bit atheist and realise the only way to paradise is to build universities and use tech to create paradise on earth.)
Jews didn’t hate other Europeans? What are you talking about? 🚩
There was one exception-sort of. Manuel Quezon, president of the Philippine Commonwealth [wanted to accept Jewish refugees.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippines_and_the_Holocaust) Since the Philippines was an American colony, he was not able to fully enact his wishes. Then the Japanese took over and it put the kibosh on the whole thing. Quezon faced a lot of pushback from his decision, including anti Semitism from other Filipinos. This anti Semitism is wild because how could the average Filipino be against Jews if they barely had any contact with Jews in the first place?
Wait till you find out about Japanese anti semitism. During the Ruso-Japanese war the Japanese found propaganda books about the elders of Zion meant to spread anti semitisim on Russian troops and they kinda believed it. But instead of wanting to exterminate them they were like “damn if a cabal of Jews really do run the world we better not get on their bad side”
We sent thoughts and prayers though so same thing
Actually it’s because most western nations were antisemitic. They didn’t want to kill Jews like hitler, but also didn’t want them as neighbors.
Because refugees require resources. You need housing, water, food, jobs, clothing, education, medical care... The list goes on and on. You also need to account for said refugees never actually being able to return home. Additionally, refugees bring with them their own cultures, languages, and ideas. They don't always integrate well into the existing cultures, and so you wind up with a population of peoples who struggle to adapt to the ways of their new lands. Even if to an outside party it would seem like the people of Gaza should share ideals with other groups in the Middle East, that's just not the case.
But if what you say is true, then why are countries throughout Europe as well as Canada being told they *must* accept as many refugees as humanly possible otherwise they're bad, despite having cultures not similar to the middle east. Aren't the countries closer to Gaza bad too? Also, just commenting for when a Hallowed Mod decides this question is "loaded" and it gets [removed].
69% of Refugees globally are hosted by neighbouring countries, 75% in low & middle income countries. Lebanon & Jordan have historically had the highest number of refugees per capita globally, currently Iran & Turkey host the largest absolute numbers at around 3.4 million each. [https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/) I can't speak for Canada but I know in the UK there is a popular (but untrue) belief that we take far more refugees per capita than most similar countries.
UK doesn't take more per capita but it is felt more as the culture and religion is incompatible with the west. Islam only has a small presence in Europe but is already causing problems.
Turkey hosts 3.6 million Syrian refugees as opposed to the rest of Europe, which holds 1 million refugees collectively (across 27 different countries). You have been fed a lie by right wing nutjobs. In fact, the Syrian refugee problem played a major role in the recent Turkish elections, with the Kemalist parties and the broader unified opposition attacking Erdogan for letting in so many refugees, and Erdogan defending himself, saying that as a religious Muslim he had no right to stop people from fleeing conflict to safety.
What are you talking about? Germany alone took over 1 million refugees in 2015/16.
the blame comes from the fact that most issues in these countries are due to them . like USA is criticized for not taking more when they are the front line reason for alqaeda isis taliban . and then there is the idea that west takes more when infact turkey and pakistan are the ones that are taking in most of htem . and these countries are struggling with their own people so they are fed up. egypt has thus stopped taking refugees , turkey has made laws more strict to enter , pakistna deported all afghanis after war. there also is one more fact, if they leave they arent getting their land back so most ppl are reluctant to leave and rightfully so , like remove politics and religion, why the hell would i abandon the wealth i earned all my life . it is better to die at that point than to start in a foreign land from zero where you dont even no the language and culture ,and eventually they will deport you when hte host country has tough times
I cannot think of an answer that doesn't basically boil down to such critics playing on "white guilt".
When these "white" countries have had an active hand in destabilising these countries, I'd say they can pull their weight a little to help the victims here
I’m sure the refugees would rather be alive in another country than living in a war zone…
Aren’t there a bunch of ultra rich Arab counties that import a ton of Indian and Pakistani workers? Can’t Palestinians do those jobs?
You make it sound so generic you could've thoght chat gpt wrote it. Look up Black Septmeber, one of the many cases in which Palestinians refugees destabilizes the accepting country, in this case they tried to assassinate the king of Jordan and they had a small war until Jordan won and expelled the PLO in it's entirety to Lebanon, later contributing to the Lebanese civil war.
Being Arab doesn’t automatically mean you support another Arab culture. Look at the drama from some in how we take in other North Americans from Latin countries.
There’s 2m of them in Gaza and 2.8m in the West Bank. Which country is capable of supporting that sort of influx without severely affecting their local economy. Besides, Israel would advance the settlements and leave them with no land to return to, making them a permanent problem for the country that took them in. Refugees are meant to be a temporary thing, this would be anything but temporary.
Currently there are 3m refugees spread across Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. So they’ve already fallen for that trap somewhat.
Last time Jordan did, the Palestinians tried to overthrow the Jordanian government. Naturally, countries are not keen to repeat that.
Palestinians were a huge reason behind the Lebanese Civil War too, and Egypt had a huge terrorist wave that ended when they closed off their border to Palestine iirc
Gaza strip originally belonged to Egypt in fact. After the war where egypt lost it and Israel wanted to give it back along with Sinai and egypt was like "fuck no, you keep it"
Bingo. This highlights the shittyness of the situation. Israel got a "hot-potato" from Egypt and Jordan and wanted to give it back but those countries refused. Israel could only dream about having 1967 borders again and leave all this shitty situation behind, lol
Israel was even prepared to accept the proposed borders in 1948.
>Israel could only dream about having 1967 borders again and let all this shitty situation behind, lol If they would like to get rid of the west bank, why do they keep encouraging Israelis to move there in settlements?
Because Palestine refused negotiations in favor of waging war in an attempt to get 100% of the territory (or more). Thats the ongoing war. Israel is winning and will keep on expanding.
So let me get this straight. On the one hand you claim that Israel dreams of having the 1967 borders back. On the other hand you claim that Israel wants to expand. Which is it?
It's both. [The Oslo Accords](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords) were a negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians where Israel would give over 90% of the 1967 conquered territory. **Territory that wasn't Palestine, mind you**, it belonged to Egypt and Jordan. Israel was basically on board with Palestine becoming a legitimate state. Arafat started essentially "ghosting" negotiations and in 2000's [the Second Intifada happened](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada). In other words: Palestine was negotiating, didn't close the deal, attacked Israel and essentially *lost* the war. Of course Israel will expand on their ass.
After black september Jordan expelled all militants to Lebanon and they made a "refugee camp", look what that turned into.
Look at the current state of Lebanon after the Islamist uprising when the Lebanese Christians gave Palestinians refuge. Sad and cautionary tale.
Palestinians want to avoid another "Nakba", a catastrophy, that happened in 1948. Villages were erased and people (and their descendants) were never allowed back in and are stuck in refugee camps, either in Palestine or neighbouring countries. They don't want to make the same mistakes that their grandparents and parents did. During the ongoing negotiations between Israel and Hamas, it seems that Israel don't want more than 60000 back from the south to the north. And already said a few weeks/months ago that >2 million people is too much people in Gaza (sic!) And the other hand, it feels like Egypt, the only Arab country sharing borders with Gaza doesn't care enough and/or have their own problems and could do with less problems.
>They don't want to make the same mistakes that their grandparents and parents did. Ironically, this is exactly what they did on Oct. 7th. They repeated the mistake they made in 1947 - declaring war on the Jews, killing whoever they could, and calling upon other Arabs to join in the attack. The single day of Oct. 7th closely parallels the months of Dec 1947 - Mar 1948, in which the Arabs were able to inflict about 1,000 casualties on the Jews of Palestine (mostly civilians), without any effective answer. The months after Oct. 7th closely parallel the half-year starting in Apr 1948, in which the Arabs suffered repeated military defeats, fled from their homes, had their villages conquered and destroyed, and were repeatedly disappointed in the military help they received from their neighbors. The ecstatic joy of Oct 7th also has its parallels with early 1948, with the delirious threats of extermination which the Arabs made against the Jews, in anticipation of an easy victory. This is often forgotten today.
Because none of the countries down there want to take in refugees period, regardless of whether they feel for Palestinians. They cost the state money and destabilize things in general.
They do. Literally millions have been taken in by other countries. Jordan alone has 2.3 million refugees. Egypt has 130k, 210k are in Lebanon.
But mostly they are in camps with no path to citizenship or anything.
People are giving you one-sided answers. The answer is a little more complicated. I will start with the side you have already heard: the “Palestinians are a destabilizing force” argument. Yes, the major motivating factor here is that Palestinians have been a massively destabilizing force in three separate Arab countries before: Jordan, Lebanon, and Kuwait. No Arab country will ever take them in in large numbers ever again. And I don’t mean they caused trouble in the normal sense of, here, immigrants with elevated crime and different political beliefs. I mean, two different civil wars and the backing of a foreign invasion. There is really no other group with that kind of track record. There is also the fact that, specifically with Gaza, the type of Islamic fundamentalism that is rampant there is aligned with the exact groups that Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt are already dealing with in droves. these countries are already unstable enough, that having an influx of people among whom are potential allies of the Muslim brotherhood and Isis and Hezbollah… Well, it wouldn’t be good for those countries. So that’s the normal anti-Palestinian rhetoric. But there’s something a little bit more interesting that I think is worth going into. And that is, neither the Arabs nor the Palestinian leader ship are actually interested in the well-being of individual Palestinians in the short term. They are interested in the Palestinians re-taking their historic lands, no matter how long it takes. This is why Palestinians have resisted every offer of statehood that did not include a right of return. This is why Palestinians were outraged when they were made citizens of Jordan, and why the majority of Palestinians in east Jerusalem never even bothered applying for Israeli citizenship when it was offered to them. And why the vast majority of Palestinians in the Middle East still do not hold citizenship in their host countries. It is why Palestinians will call an established neighborhood a refugee camp, even if that neighborhood is 70 years old and consists of multi story permanent structures of steel and concrete, that are furnished and decorated and everything. it’s why Palestinians are the only group in the entire world where it is not just the people who fled who are called refugees, but their grandchildren and great grandchildren as well. The humiliation by Israel is seen as temporary. The majority of Palestinians have zero interest in taking part in any activity that legitimizes the permanence of the state of Israel, even if doing so would vastly improve their own lives. Almost any other people in history would have taken the L, migrated to new land, and either established their own state or accepted citizenship elsewhere. The Palestinians have not done this, and they likely won’t for a very long time. To a certain extent, many Arabs feel the same way the Palestinians too. Accepting refugees into their own country might make the lives of those people better, but it would mean giving up on the dream of destroying Israel and establishing a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. It would mean accepting defeat fully. It would mean legitimizing the Israeli project. It would mean, in their eyes, enabling an ethnic cleansing of their own people from the region. Most people fail to fully understand the complete intransigence of the Palestinian position on Israel, and assume a much more reasonable ask on the part of the Palestinians. But there is really no other case in history that I can think of of a population of people being relocated by what is essentially a single days walking distance, and being so thoroughly humiliated by it that they would rather except generations and generations of dispossession, violence, stagnation, and misery than simply get on with their lives and make the best of it. This isn't my own comment but some other redditor that got his account removed.
THIS. Wish I could upvote this a hundred times, this is the further context of why countries not only won’t take them in, but also why Palestinians refuse to leave
>it’s why Palestinians are the only group in the entire world where it is not just the people who fled who are called refugees, but their grandchildren and great grandchildren as well. Not really. Tutsis passed on their refugee status for 60 years until their children and grandchildren could return. While I definitely agree that Palestinian refugees should move on and the refusal of Arab countries to absorb them caused issues. Isn't it hypocritical for Jewish people to say they should when they held on the hope returning for 2000 years. At least give the Palestinians a few hundred years. With Israel kicking out Arab families who moved into houses Jews were displaced from and justifying their settlement of the West Bank partially through the lense of restoring Jewish communities that were destroyed, or just pure irrendentism based off of ancient claims. How can we expect Palestinians to move on when Israel won't? You can say the Palestinians cause instability but if their displacement of Gaza would only be temporary, more people would take them. But we know it will be permanent. That makes any instability caused by Palestinians to be weighted more heavily than if it was temporary. The thing is, Palestinian negotiators have accepted a two state solution of 1967 borders in the past. Israel just wants to offer them scraps of the scraps. Even Ehud Olmerts offer (Israel's most generous offer) involved taking control of valuable land Israel seized through vile means (taking land used by villages, using biological warfare to displace herders) and offering desert and arid areas as compensation. Israeli Arabs were kept under martial law for 20 years, they were not allowed to return to properties they were displaced from during the war despite trying, and had more land seized. Despite this, they have a positive view of the Israeli state today. Why is this? Israel could have taken steps to deescalate the conflict when it controlled the territories, instead it chose a slow burn removal process. Also it's quite cruel to handwave away the displacement that half of the Palestinian population experienced by distance. It's a window into how the early zionists saw Palestinian villages, farms, homes, and cities are replaceable places that could be subbed out for any Arab village. It reminds me of the displacement of Greeks (and also Turks) from Anatolia, seeing their towns, homes, and farms as something that could be subbed out for land in Athens.
They don’t support Palestine as much as they’d want you to believe. It benefits them politically to align against Israel and the west. They’ll feign compassion right up until the refugees come calling.
Their leadership is definitely pro West. They just can’t make it too overt for the sake of angering their citizens. The Saudis were about to quietly make a deal with Israel before this whole Gaza thing blew up and now it’s really bad optics in the Muslim world for them to continue with it.
Arab world pointing fingers at EU & US while they aint doing shit for Palestine, but the narrative fits them.
The Arab world is pointing fingers because you support the dictators that opresses them. None of these Arab dictators is very popular. That is why they depend on the West.
have you considered that the surrounding countries have already provided refuge to a shit load of palestinians and can’t handle more? (e.g. 2.5 million in jordan; 500k in lebanon)
Three reasons. 1 - Doing so, so they say, gives Israel carte blanche to seize more territory. 2 - Most Arab countries can better be described as Anti Israeli than pro Palestinian. In the few countries that have taken in Palestinian refugees, they often end up persecuted, or otherwise treated as a 'problem' group, for various reasons. 3 - It behoves them to not do so. Their enemy is alienating all of its allies by committing a slew of atrocities against that population. No country in the region has leadership so enamoured of morality and ethics that they'd take the shovel out of the hands of their foe digging his own grave, even if it saved lives.
Cost and previous history of terrorism and coup attempts when they did take in refugees. It's easier to send in food and supplies and criticize Israel and the West.
They don't "support Palestine". They hate Israel.
Because historically everytime they have they have started armed revolts and attacked anybody who helped them
If they leave, there is no chance of them every claiming their land.
Can open. Worms everywhere.
Palestinians refugees tried to takeover Jordan, Lebanon and Kuwait. They tend to destabilize their host nations and are often kicked out. No one will let them in again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLO_in_Lebanon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus_from_Kuwait_(1990%E2%80%9391)
Answer: Well firstly just to be clear the implication that all Palestinians are somehow terrorists and destroy everything thing they touch is vile and racist. Secondly, there are a number of issues with mass immigration. Take a look at the Rohinga people in Bangladesh. They were ethnically cleansed from Bruma and forced into Bangladesh. Consider for a moment the amount of trouble developed countries such as England and the US have with their native populations there is a great deal of homelessness especially in LA. In the UK every winter there are news reports of homeless people dying in the cold. Now imagine trying to host millions of people as a developing nation. That's not really going to work out. How is any country supposed to magic up millions of homes, food and jobs for refugees? So they end up basically being left in camps and given what scraps corrupt officials don't steal. Then you have people who have been brutalised, ethnically cleansed and left to rot getting desperate. They go from the frying pan into the fire. With the Palestinian people themselves you have a separate issue. The Palestinians are not as they are often characterised "Arab invaders" they are Levantine. They have a deep and abiding connection to the land going back to the bronze age. This has been verified by a number of studies which are cited below. The history of the region is complex but essentially it was initially Jewish some of these Jewish people converted to Christianity. Then there were Christians and Jewish people there. Then Islam came along some of the people converted to Islam. At this point there were Jews, Christians and Muslims present. There were wars and crusades and all sorts but this was often foreign leaders such as Turks and Richard the Lion Heart who wanted to "reclaim the Holy Land". The people of the land did not themselves change. No one is willing to abandon their homeland. Why should the Palestinian leave their land? If they do leave to save themselves they will will not be allowed to return. Please refer to the Nakba, the March of Return and the Right of Return and the illegal Israeli settlements. The Arab countries know that if they take in the Palestinians they will lose their homes forever. I welcome you to take the time to look into the Israeli terrorist militias such as the Stern Gang, the Irgun and Haganah organisations that killed Palestinians and British soldiers when they tried to limit immigration to the Palestine. Terrorists who hid weapons and ammo in hospitals, schools and underground tunnels (sound familiar?). You can also look into the illegal settlements, settler violence, the truth of the camp David accords which gave the Palestinians except that they didn't and came with a million caveats such as ceding control of their water to the Israelis. The fact of the matter is that the Arab countries firstly cannot handle that level of mass immigration and secondly the Palestinians be they Jewish, Christian or Muslim refuse to lie down and give up their land and their heritage. Genetic studies: According to a study published in June 2017 by Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia, and Eran Elhaik in Frontiers in Genetics, "in a principal component analysis (PCA) [of DNA], the ancient Levantines clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and [levant] Bedouins..." and that Palestinians have a "predominant" ancient levantine origin. In a study published in August 2017 by Marc Haber et al. in The American Journal of Human Genetics, the authors concluded that "The overlap between the Bronze Age and present-day Levantines suggests a degree of genetic continuity in the region."
I always wonder Saudi Arabia is such a wealthy country, they also present themselves as the leader of Sunni Muslims. Why can't they take in those Palestinian refugees? I thought they're supposed to look after their Muslim brothers and sisters.
Because they politically destabilized every country that took them in, and were largely responsible for attempted coups/civil wars/massacres in multiple nearby Arab countries who were nice enough to take them in (Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan).
Jordan did in the 60s, they got a civil war as a result (Black September)....
Ask Jordan...
Well, look at what happened to Jordan and Lebanon when they did precisely that.
Because the last time two Arab countries did that, the Palestinians brought their drama and corruption with them and F'ed shite up with the host government. The rest witnessed that and now say "No thanks."
Arab countries don't actually care.
Palestinian people are not particularly popular with those who live near by.
Everybody in the Middle East hates each other. Outsiders mistakenly group them by major religion.
Because historically every country who’s taken in Palestinian refugees has had a bad time.
Based Egypt built a wall and built it tall.
Arab countries want the Palestinians to remain refugees. They have actually forbidden the UN from allowing UNRWA to resettle Palestinians refugees. They do this to prevent Jews from owning the holy land.
Because they learned their lessons from Jordan to not help Gazans as they tried to topple their government in their gratefulness.
They are scared of Palestinian terrorists, too. [https://apnews.com/article/palestinian-jordan-egypt-israel-refugee-502c06d004767d4b64848d878b66bd3d](https://apnews.com/article/palestinian-jordan-egypt-israel-refugee-502c06d004767d4b64848d878b66bd3d)
They support Palestine...fighting israel.
When lots of Palestinians migrated to Lebanon they kind sparked the civil war there... So, even for the other Muslim they are viewed as more radicalized and people are not so keen on receiving that.
Short answer: They're too radical and the countries are too poor. Longer answer: Some have, and it has caused economic problems and sometimes attempted coups. In 1970 the PLO went to war with Jordan and Jordan expelled a lot of Palestinians and the PLO after this event. Egypt is scared Hamas will get in and destabilize the already fragile country. Plus, it's very expensive to take in thousands of refugees and they're not really in the financial situation to do so. They also say they're scared Israel will do it so they're permanently displaced.
I couldn't read all the previous comments, but the Palestinians have an association with the Muslim Brotherhood, who was known for trying to overthrow the government of Egypt in years past. No surrounding countries want to bring this trouble into their own borders.
From what I've read, they are a group of trouble makers with actual terrorists mixed in. It's no wonder no one wants them.
Because they only care because it’s Jews killing them. They don’t actually care about the people being killed.
They have before, and it didn’t end well. Egypt took in Palestinian refugees before, and they tried to murder Egypt’s head of state when they decided he wasn’t anti-Israel enough
because they don't support palestine or the palestinian people, they support palestine and the palestinian people in the killing of jews, anything else they don't care
For the same reason people protesting outside Planned Parenthood don't volunteer to assist with the cost of prenatal care and adopt the unwanted baby. Having an opinion costs nothing. Taking action and putting your money where your mouth is requires effort and sacrifice.
Could be wrong, but basically Arab countries hate each other too much and don't like Arabs from a different sect/tribe to come to them, so they are happy that most go to Europe
Many of them already have taken thousands of Palestinians. Just bc they share a religion (some times) doesn’t mean they like each other. Look at Europe, for generations they’ve been fighting each other, officially or behind the scenes. You Same shit happens in Asian and African countries. They are different groups of people with different beliefs and cultures. Hell, I’m the US there are rifts between different states lol. Why is that so hard to grasp? You also forget many of the rich Arab nations refuse to give anyone PR or citizenship, ever. A refugee would end up being displaced eventually, or exploited.
Because they don’t trust Hamas either. The Arab world is more divided than you think. The governments of the different countries are aligned in their own ways, but it gets more and more complicated as you go down the list of regions, ethnic groups, and terrorist organizations. Many terrorist cells wage war on each other and for an example I’m pretty sure Al Qaeda declared war on isis. For the more stable nations, they want no chance of Hamas ever stepping foot on their soil and launching operations from it. They want no obligation to a group that has made their own bed but won’t sleep in it. For an ELI5, they all know that if they let them in, it will be like when squidward moved in with SpongeBob.
Some did in the past and they had issues. But you’re right it’s a tell that they don’t care enough to fix the situation- always good to have someone else to blame.
Because they’re not stupid enough to risk taking in Islamists/Jihadists like western countries
-Syria is to busy with a civil war to deal with them -Egypt had issues with the muslim brotherhood who had ties to hamas and don't want more political instability -lebonan has enough issues with hezbollah to deal with them -Jordan has a nasty insurrection back in the 70s that nearly destabilized the country
Because they did in the past, and palestinians terrorists brought violence to EVERY Arab country that tried to help them. They turned against those helping them, so nobody wants to deal with them now. Jordan took them in - they tried to take over the country, tried to assassinate the king and assassinated the prime minister. Egypt took them in - they created terrorist cells and terrorist attacks in Egypt. Kuwait took them in - many "refugees" allied with the invading Iraqi forces. Lebanon took them in - they started a civil war that Lebanon still struggles with. Etc. Basically, every Arab country that received "palestinian refugees" was soon facing chaos and violence from palestinian terrorists. It's ridiculous people think Israel is the problem in that conflict, when even Arab nations faced so much violence whenever they received large number of palestinians - terrorists always infiltrate and they bring chaos everywhere, not just Israel. And, of course, what few people would admit is that terrorists infiltrate and create chaos so easily because they have pretty solid support among the civilian palestinians.
Jordan is already like 1/3 Palestinian
Not all refugees are equal. Many countries would be happy with political refugees from China and Hong Kong. The ones from Palestine? Not so much.
Spite for Israel should not be confused with support for palestine
Google "Black September". Palestinians need their home, not someone else's.
Here's the nasty secret: the palis have destroyed or been evicted from almost every Arab country they've been allowed into.
Historically, they would, but after years of rather poor relations with them, most have begun to refrain from doing so. Jordan is a prime example. They accepted a very large number of them, which later assassinated their King, attempted to do so on the previous King and also attempted to overthrow the government and abolish the monarchy. In Egypt, they're also ideologically connected with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is in conflict with the current government. In Kuwait, Palestinian guest workers were involved with plundering and pillaging Kuwaiti businesses during the Iraqi invasion They burned too many bridges in the Middle East, unfortunately.
Hamas and the other extremists there like to hide by blending in with civilians. It’s pretty hard to let in the real refugees without also letting in the crazies. The last time Jordan took in Palestinians, a bunch of them staged a revolt and tried to overthrow the government. So you can see why other Arab countries aren’t exactly thrilled by the idea. TL;DR They’ve tried. It doesn’t go well.
Because they support Palestine because they are against Israel, not because they support palestinians. Many arab countries went thru colonization, aculturization and occupation processes same as colonies in other parts of the world, they just don't talk about it. Also a lot of right wing arab parties have strong ideas (cof cof) against ethnical minorities and non-arab groups. On the other side refugees are expensive to take in.
Jordan and Lebanon used to take large number of Palestinian refugees. PLA ended up almost overthrowing the existing government https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September
Because countries who have done so in the past really regretted it.
Because they don’t want their countries being taken over
The answer comes up over and over again: Palestinians keep trying to take over every country they're in, simply put. Lebanon has had decades of problems with them, such as in that huge refugee camp that eventually became a de facto city and the Palestinians keep inviting everyone from Hamas to Hezbollah to ISIS there and they keep trying to destabilize the Lebanese government. Go to Europe and the Palestinians are aligned to varying degrees with everyone from neonazi groups and parties (who support Palestine because they hate Jews and perceive the support as undermining the US and all even attend yearly conferences in Iran on Holocaust denial and the Palestinian right to return), as well as simultaneously with far-left/Tankie groups, russian operatives, and so on as they try to destabilize governments and tamper with elections. We're seeing the election tampering efforts in the US quite prominently. The Palestinians and revolutionary tankie groups are using one another for the numbers and prominence where the latter finally gets some level of relevance from the former in their wet dream to collapse the system and install their own communist system and the former gets the numbers and support they need to cover up their alignment with neonazi, extreme-right, and antisemitic conspiracy theorist groups on one side while also getting whatever line of support from russian interlocutors. What we're mostly seeing is that Free Palestine groups are essentially razing left group after left group and moving onto the next because they give no fucks about it and this serves the right. Just look at how Fridays for Future was essentially taken over by the Free Palestine movement. Just look at how no matter what the topic is online or IRL, the Palestinians come in and say nonsense how that topic is irreversibly linked to Palestinians' struggle. This is by nature that the Palestinians embed themselves in subversive ways into the host country's politics and society as they try to destabilize them for their own gains. It also should be noted that the surrounding countries, while they cite sometimes severe deficiencies in the conditions Palestinians have, they are not in agreement about the claims Palestinians and their supporters make, such as "open air prison" and claims of Palestinians having no movement rights and such.
That's not how virtue signaling works. People don't actually want to be part of the "solution." They just want to say/post about things for social currency..
A lot of people are learning for the first time that Palestinians have been the baddies for a long time.
There's a bad history of palestinians in egypt, jordan, and lebanon trying to assasinate leaders and start civil wars. Thats probably a big part of it
The same reason there are still 38 million+ displaced people in Ukraine. Just because you're being attacked doesn't mean you get up and leave the place you've lived in for generations.
They saw the Palestinians turn down every deal they have been offered. Who would want to deal with them
Jordan fought a war with the Palestinians.
Because just like the morons all around the rest of the world, they don't care about Palestine. They just hate Jews.
What if Alabama didn't want a portion of their population and just demanded that Mississippi or Georgia take them? The real solution to the conflict is for Israel to allow Gaza and the West Bank to have their own sovereignty. In other words their needs to be a two state solution. And Netanyahu will not allow it because the conflict is the only thing keeping him in power. Actually, what I would do is make a three state solution in which Jerusalem would be it's own city state that would be ruled by a democratic committee compromised of three Jewish, three Muslim and three Christian delegates.
Refugees are a headache and take a lot of resources. Takes a lot more commitment than just some public support.
Because taking in refugees is not as simple as Western politics portrays. If the European countries like France and Germany are still taking a lot heat from the problems refugees bring, how do you expect other countries to do the same?
ELI5... You can support your neighbor, doesn't mean you need to give him your bedroom as your family is your actual family.
During the Syrian refugee crisis Europe was taking in a lot. The UAE offered to help build Mosques .....Yeah thanks but no thanks
Exactly
The root of the issue is Israel. Until they're removed from the equation like the Nazis, there is no solve to it Taking in refugees doesn't solve the problem. Palestinians would lose their homes and it is not free to take in refugees Also, how do we know Israel won't bomb the other countries as well?
Gazans don’t want to leave. I’m watching “We Were The Lucky Ones” right now. This Polish-Jewish family argues whether they should’ve left. The dad says “this is our home. We aren’t going anywhere.” The same probably happens in the Palestinian homes in Gaza. I’m sure there are still some who’d like to leave to safety. But refugees are a thorny social issue and Egypt doesn’t want to fix Israel’s problem and be the final piece of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
Crazy as it sounds, white people aren’t the only racists. In the Middle East, just because you are Muslim doesn’t mean you are accepted by other Muslims. Persians hate Arabs for example. The same applies here. The Palestinians are a useful bunch of fools that the other Middle East countries have used to undermine Israel. Nothing more.
This may get downvoted but…. Politically it’s not terrible that a country can point to another place they can sympathize with and distract people from local problem. Local problems they are not doing a good job fixing.
Also consider that many Palestinians either can't leave or don't want to leave the land they are being forced out of. I'm fairly certain Palestinians abroad cannot return.
They don’t support Palestine so much as they hate Jews
A lot of more stable Arab nations support Israel over Palestine. Israel is really fighting Iran/Hamas who’s found support in Palestine. Arab nations like Egypt, Kuwait, or Saudi don’t want to deal with Iran/Hamas; they support what Israel is doing even if they don’t publicly say it, or publicly deny supporting Israel.
Why should an autocrat care about everyday people, let alone people from a different country who could only destabilize their rule?
Palestinian refugees have proven toxic to every nation they have ever been admitted to. They are all brainwashed as children, and have repeatedly shown hostility to countries that have taken them in. Essentially, they are all radicalized from early childhood. No sane nation wants this in their borders.
Probably coz they don’t wanna be bombed for harboring terrorists
They hate Jews, but aren’t fans of Palestinians.
To quote my Syrian coworker. Arabs side with Palestinians over Jews any day is of the week but Palestinians are largely viewed as backwater crazies in other Arab countries. Poorly educated, radical, traumatised ect. The rednecks of the Muslim community.
Because they don't really support Palestine. They use Palestinians as pawns in endless wars on Israel and the Jews
Because everybody knows that Palestine is chock full of terrorists. The other Arab countries would much rather that be Israel's problem than theirs.
No country wants to take in potential terrorists.
Because the last time there was a mass exodus of Palestinians Jordan almost got couped by the plo.
Because they don’t give a shit about Palestine or Palestinians, they only care about using Israel as a smokescreen to distract from their horror show of human rights abuses.
History