Pre-apocalyptische notas over nothing. Sciency stuff, poetry, politics, art and the music of total dissent. May the Almighty bless you and all who sail into her... Welcome to my cave
The Conflict (Nakba) began in 1948. Gaza became a " refugee camp" in 48/49. Why didn't Egypt simply accept them as refugees?
Egypt did not formally accept Palestinian refugees as permanent residents or citizens following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, but instead administered the Gaza Strip, where hundreds of thousands of refugees were concentrated in camps. This stance was rooted in a policy of preventing permanent displacement that would undermine the Palestinian right of return and the prospect of a future Palestinian state.
Key Details of Egypt's Position in 1948
Administrative Control, Not Integration: After the war, Egypt took control of the Gaza area and managed it as the "Gaza Strip". The influx of over 200,000 refugees more than tripled the area's population, leading to a dramatic decrease in the standard of living.
No Special Legal Status: The Egyptian authorities did not grant the refugees any special legal status, and they were restricted from moving in and out of the Gaza Strip.
Political Stance: Egypt's policy, and that of other Arab nations, was to view the refugee issue as a political problem requiring a resolution that allowed for the refugees' eventual return to their original homes in historic Palestine, as affirmed by UN Resolution 194. Granting them citizenship or permanent residency in Egypt was seen as complicity in their forced, permanent displacement (the "Nakba," or catastrophe) and a move that would erase the Palestinian demand for statehood.
Travel Documents: While the refugees were issued identification and travel documents, these often carried the name of the "All-Palestine Government" (a short-lived Egyptian-sponsored entity) and explicitly noted their status, rather than a pathway to Egyptian citizenship.
Resettlement Rejection: Later proposals in the 1950s by the UN and the US to resettle some refugees in the Sinai were met with significant resistance, including a violent "Outburst" in 1955 by refugees who feared their right of return was being permanently abandoned.
Egypt's historical actions set a precedent for its modern-day policy, where the government continues to staunchly refuse any current mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza into the Sinai, citing the same fears of permanent expulsion and the end of the Palestinian cause.
What is happening to the refugees from '48 (ethnic cleansing) is a tragedy. But IMO the "oppressors" are neither the Jews nor the Arab Nations alone. It's BOTH. Time to settle the conflict. Permanently. Nearly 80 years of lies is enough.
The Conflict (Nakba) began in 1948. Gaza became a " refugee camp" in 48/49. Why didn't Egypt simply accept them as refugees?
BeantwoordenVerwijderenEgypt did not formally accept Palestinian refugees as permanent residents or citizens following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, but instead administered the Gaza Strip, where hundreds of thousands of refugees were concentrated in camps. This stance was rooted in a policy of preventing permanent displacement that would undermine the Palestinian right of return and the prospect of a future Palestinian state.
Key Details of Egypt's Position in 1948
Administrative Control, Not Integration: After the war, Egypt took control of the Gaza area and managed it as the "Gaza Strip". The influx of over 200,000 refugees more than tripled the area's population, leading to a dramatic decrease in the standard of living.
No Special Legal Status: The Egyptian authorities did not grant the refugees any special legal status, and they were restricted from moving in and out of the Gaza Strip.
Political Stance: Egypt's policy, and that of other Arab nations, was to view the refugee issue as a political problem requiring a resolution that allowed for the refugees' eventual return to their original homes in historic Palestine, as affirmed by UN Resolution 194. Granting them citizenship or permanent residency in Egypt was seen as complicity in their forced, permanent displacement (the "Nakba," or catastrophe) and a move that would erase the Palestinian demand for statehood.
Travel Documents: While the refugees were issued identification and travel documents, these often carried the name of the "All-Palestine Government" (a short-lived Egyptian-sponsored entity) and explicitly noted their status, rather than a pathway to Egyptian citizenship.
Resettlement Rejection: Later proposals in the 1950s by the UN and the US to resettle some refugees in the Sinai were met with significant resistance, including a violent "Outburst" in 1955 by refugees who feared their right of return was being permanently abandoned.
Egypt's historical actions set a precedent for its modern-day policy, where the government continues to staunchly refuse any current mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza into the Sinai, citing the same fears of permanent expulsion and the end of the Palestinian cause.
The "Lie", IMO, is in a "right to return". Can the Jews expelled from Arab lands ever return with full rights as citizens?
BeantwoordenVerwijderenWhat is happening to the refugees from '48 (ethnic cleansing) is a tragedy. But IMO the "oppressors" are neither the Jews nor the Arab Nations alone. It's BOTH. Time to settle the conflict. Permanently. Nearly 80 years of lies is enough.
BeantwoordenVerwijderen