Jordan turns away Palestinian refugees fleeing violence in Syria

[oberliner]

Jordan has turned away dozens of Palestinian refugees on the Syrian border fleeing regime bombardment of the Yarmouk refugee camp south of Damascus.

Palestinian refugees living in the Yarmouk refugee camp south of Damascus have tried to enter Jordan through the Jaber border crossing after their camp was bombarded by Assad regime forces in previous weeks. They told Al-Jazeera earlier this week that while Palestinian refugees carrying Jordanian IDs were allowed to enter Jordan, children of Jordanian women who were not citizens are being refused.

Jordan has absorbed some 126,000 Syrian refugees, but Palestinians fleeing Syria are placed in a separate refugee camp at the Cyber City compound, under stricter conditions, and are banned from entering Jordanian cities. The Jordanian government fears that an influx of Palestinian refugees may tilt the demographic balance in Jordan even more towards the Palestinians, who are already believed to comprise a large majority of the population.

“Jordan is not obligated to pay a political price for the Syrian crisis,” Jordanian government spokesman Samih Maaytah told Al-Jazeera when asked why the Palestinians were not being let in.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/jordan-turns-away-palestinian-refugees-fleeing-violence-in-syria/

[shira]

1. And not a peep from the vast majority advocating for refugee rights and RoR.

Those rightwing racists are only interested in refugees when they can be used to destroy Israel.

[zellie]

2. No one cares.

The world claims to care about the Palestinians but only when the hatred of Jews and Israel are involved.

Otherwise they couldn't give a rats a$$ about them.

A sad joke.

[azurnoir]

4. well you can tell your self that if you wish

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:35 AM - Edit history (1)

but does it occur that if these refugees had a country of their own to go to the problem would be solved?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

5. Perhaps Jordan has taken as many refugees as it can manage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Jordan
According to UNRWA, there are 1,951,603 Palestinian refugees in Jordan as of June 2008, 31.5% of Jordan's population.[4] Though that number doesn't include all Jordanians from Palestinian descent. There are also approximately one million Iraqis currently residing in the country.

How many Palestinian refugees have the surrounding countries taken in?


It's amusing that an article on a humanitarian crisis in Syria has you chasing rightwing racists bent on the destruction of Israel.

[shira]

10. The PA doesn't want the refugees in the W.Bank or Gaza either.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-rejects-israeli-offer-to-allow-refugees-from-syria-to-enter-west-bank-and-gaza/

Where'd all your compassion for Palestinian refugees go?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

16. What an interesting sidestep you have.

You went from and article about Jordan to "rightwing racists are only interested in destroying Israel" to the PA not taking Israel up transferring the refugees to the WB and Gaza.

Did Israel ask to take in any of these refugees into their warm embrace?

I can think of one way to invite about 350K Palestinians to the West Bank by uninviting the same in Israeli colonial occupiers.


"Where'd all your compassion for Palestinian refugees go?"

That's funny considering that I could ask the same of you when the cause is switched from Syria to Israel.

[shira]

18. No sidestep. The far Right and far Left couldn't give a shit about Palestinians...

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:36 PM - Edit history (1)

From the Jordanians to Abbas and his PA, from David Duke to the anti-Israel progressive racists.

Not one peep of compassion WRT refugees.

Unless Israel can be blamed.

==========

What do you think of Abbas saying it's better the Palestinian refugees from Syria die than give up their refugee rights?

Agree?

Shocked and outraged?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

19. My, my, Shira. That's quite a list of names you have provided.

The Jordanians (Do you believe that they are all evil?)

Abbas and his PA

David Duke

And...

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

the anti-Israel progressive racists. Are these the far left you were lumping in at the beginning of your sidestep? Progressive racists? Do tell. Do they have names other than that, or are the more like agents of chaos: nefarious characters, faceless like phantoms?

I might have missed it, but when was Israel being blamed for what is going on in Syria and the refugee crisis there? Could you post a link to the offending material wherever it is?

I like to post links for validity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130110/ml-palestinians-refugees/?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=green

Abbas said he asked U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon last month to seek Israeli permission to bring Palestinians caught in Syria's civil war to the Palestinian territories. The request came after fighting between Syrian troops and rebel fighters in Yarmouk, the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Syria. About half of the camp's 150,000 residents have fled, according to a U.N. aid agency.

Abbas told a group of Egyptian journalists in Cairo late Wednesday that Ban contacted Israel on his behalf.

Abbas said Ban was told by Israel "agreed to the return of those refugees to Gaza and the West Bank, but on condition that each refugee ... sign a statement that he doesn't have the right of return (to Israel)."

"So we rejected that and said it's better they die in Syria than give up their right of return," Abbas told the group. Some of his comments were published Thursday by the Palestinian news website Sama.

Two things here, my friend.

One. Abbas was wrong to say such a thing in context to the suffering going on in Syria.

Two. Israel has absolutely no business withholding the right of return of Palestinian refugees, fleeing open conflict or otherwise, from entering Palestine.

I am shocked and outraged by both actions.

How about you?

[delrem]

20. Thank you for the context. nt

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

23. You are welcome.

[shira]

26. How does the context help whitewash Abbas' inaction? And where's your outrage...

...WRT the way Abbas is using refugees and risking their lives?

[delrem]

28. You're just being shrill. nt

[shira]

25. Three main questions there. #1 - Who are these pseudo-progressive, anti-Israel racists?

Why that would include the BDS movement, FreeGaza, the ISM, PSC, and all their fellow sanctimonious hordes at Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada. It would include all those here at DU who view such movements, their leaders, & their adoring cheerleader friends as their pro-Palestinian colleagues and fellow advocates against Israel's existence. It would include those who knowingly advocate and act alongside neo-nazi Stormfronters and Hamas representatives.

It's not that Israel is being blamed for Syria. It's that the groups above and their rogues list of boosters cannot be bothered by Palestinian suffering and death unless Israel can be blamed. Therefore, they are silent WRT the Syrian refugees.

I'm glad you believe Abbas is wrong for what he said. I believe that even far worse, it's not his words but his inaction that is magnitudes more deplorable.

How about you?

As to Israel's conditions, that's an individual's right now isn't it? If they so choose to renounce their "right" to return, what business is it of yours? Or Abbas'? The Israelis are actually doing them a favor WRT allowing them to integrate into society and a normal life 60+ years after suffering under apartheid conditions. I'm neither shocked nor outraged at Israel's condition, given that refugees will never - and I repeat - never be allowed to follow through on this make believe right to overrun Israel. Israel will fight with all its might, weaponry, and know-how rather than allow it as it's an existential issue.

Now put yourself into a Syrian refugee's shoes. Would you renounce that right to GTFO of Syria and into what you perceive as Palestine (the W.Bank)? If it were me, there'd be no hesitation. Is your life worth more to you than living a few miles away from your grandparents' homes?

[Scootaloo]

7. Maybe Israel shouldn't have created refugees in the first place?

Or maybe it could stop maintaining their refugee status?

It's funny you accuse others of being "right wing racists" when you're the one espousing the continued violation of human rights in the interests of maintaining a eugenic policy of racial purity.

[Mosby]

8. Maybe the Arabs should have accepted partition instead of declaring war on the Zionists

then there would not have been any refugees.

The Jews are indigenous to the Levant, someday the Arabs will need to deal with that inconvenient little fact.

[oberliner]

9. Can you imagine?

The region and indeed the world would be a very different place had that happened.

[Scootaloo]

12. Welcome back, Mosby! How was your vacation to PSU?

Did you get well-brined in the anti-Arab hate there?

[Mosby]

14. I've been good thanks!

Wow, I had no idea people here were reading my posts at PSU, that's awesome.

Hey have you seen my tumblr page?

I post some cool shit:

http://mosbyspace.tumblr.com/

[shira]

11. Israel isn't responsible for 60+ years of refugees. Where's your compassion?

I thought you cared about the Palestinians.

Abbas isn't letting them into the W.Bank or Gaza either.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-rejects-israeli-offer-to-allow-refugees-from-syria-to-enter-west-bank-and-gaza/

Where's all the hand wringing & indignation?

[Scootaloo]

13. Do you believe they just magically appeared from nowhere, then?

Also note that it's Israel deciding whether or not to let refugees into the West Bank. It would be conditional on their giving up their right of return.

Which brings us right back to what I just said to you; You believe the continued violation of human rights in the interests of maintaining a eugenics policy of racial purity is essential.

There's an easy solution for you, if you want to talk about compassion; End sixty years of exile for these people. Allow them to come home.

[shira]

15. Arab regimes are responsible for the perpetuation of the crisis, not Israel.

That you attempt to whitewash & make excuses for these regimes caging Palestinians up for over 6 decades in apartheid conditions speaks volumes. And you want to talk about the refugees' human rights?



In the 1940's there were 10's of millions of refugees worldwide who made the countries they fled to their eventual homes.

Israel took in the same number of Jewish refugees as there were Arab ones. The Arab world should have taken them in. But why should they, when they have boosters like you who demand refugees wait it out longer in apartheid camps throughout the mideast?

=======

Oh, BTW. This refugee crisis is one of those situations in which no other nation on the planet is held to the same standard Israel is. IOW, Israel is held to a higher standard than every other country.

[Scootaloo]

21. No, they're not.

See, these are refugees from Israel, Shira. They were expelled (or fled - either way, still refugees) from Israel. Their right of return - and it is absolutely a right - is attached to Israel.

Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, whoever... these nations do not have the authority to return those refugees to their home. Nor for that matter do the many other nations hosting refugees of the Nakba - such as the United States. As Israel controls Israel's borders, it is Israel's place to meet Israel's obligation as a member of the UN to allow the return of those refugees.

Most of the host nations for Palestinian refugees are in fact in full accordance with their obligations under the UN. They offer citizenship (Jordan confers it automatically, in fact) and do not officially discriminate against Palestinian refugees (of course, we all know that "officially" and "functionally" are different terms in most nations.) The two prominent exceptions are Lebanon and Kuwait; Lebanon actually uses the same excuse Israel does, that admitting full admission and equal rights to Palestinians would disrupt its political system. Kuwait of course, kicked out several hundred thousand Palestinians after the Gulf War - the official excuse was that Arafat had supported Saddam, but the real excuse was likely just to confiscate an enormous sum of wealth in the chaos after the war. Both nations are regarded as in violation of human rights for these actions and stances, so Israel's got some company.

Now interestingly, taking an offer of citizenship does not revoke a refugee's right to return. Not just for Palestinians, but for any refugee. It simply means they are citizens of a nation who happen to also have the right to return if they wish. Israel actually makes this particularly clear; it interprets the right of return to include all diaspora Jews, and does not bar aliyah to citizens of other nations, nor does it require a revocation of such citizenship.

Bottom line? Palestinian refugees have an absolute right of return. No matter what, that is their right as human beings. It is Israel's responsibility, as the point of origin for these refugees, to meet its obligations as a UN member state, and recognize their right to return. That's really all there is to it, and no amount of bullshitting is going ot change it.

================

Now what we have in this story, is Israel responding to a request from the UN - it wasn't a generous offer from Israel, it was Israel answering something put to all the regional states by Ban Moon-Ki - by saying it'd be happy to allow these refugees to flee to a state other than Israel, if they sign away their rights.

That's fucking detestable, Shira. And your support of this notion - unconditional, slobbering support for bending the arms of people already under duress to forfeit their human rights - doesn't make you look very good, either.

[shira]

30. You're whitewashing Arab regimes caging up Pal'n refugees for 6 decades....

....in apartheid conditions. You're also whitewashing Abbas, and you have the audacity to cry "detestable" at Israel? Nice attempt at deflection (quick, look over there at Israel while everyone throughout the mideast is fucking the Palestinians).

Rich.

You think any refugees would choose to stay in Syria rather than sign a paper in order to get on normally with their lives elsewhere? Maybe you want them to stay refugees for the same purpose Hamas and the PLO want, but that makes you as inhumane and regressive as them.

And you're wrong about IHL. The refugees don't have law on their side that allows RoR. At best, what they have is a non-binding UNGA resolution and that only calls for refugees willing to return peacefully. Besides, out of 5 million there are 4 million who are internally displaced & therefore do not meet the legal definition of a refugee.

You need to understand that 4 million "refugees" already live in historic Palestine (Gaza, WB, Jordan).

That you and your regressive, rightwing fascist friends running rogue regimes in the mideast prefer to keep these people caged up for generations is nothing short of criminal. That the UN (meaning the world) is party to it, as the UN actually works to settle other refugees (but not Palestinians) is a crime.

[shaayecanaan]

31. Yes, and the Nazis weren't responsible for the Jewish refugees either...

it was Britain and America's fault for failing to take those refugees in.

I also love how expulsion of Arabs is justified because Israel took in an equivalent number of Jews. By analogy, the theft of Australia from the Aborigines was justified because Australia imported enough white people to take their place.

Clearly, the misery of the Aborigines should be laid to rest at the feet of their Black brothers in Papua New Guinea for not welcoming them into their fold.

[shira]

33. If you want to blame Israel for the 1948 war that Palestinians started...

...a war in which Palestinians became refugees, have at it. I'm not arguing against that.

I'm arguing Israel is not responsible for over 64 years of refugee status. For the perpetuation of the crisis, the Arab world and their accomplices in the UN are to blame.

[shaayecanaan]

36. re

If you want to blame Israel for the 1948 war that Palestinians started....a war in which Palestinians became refugees, have at it. I'm not arguing against that.

Well, its progress I suppose.

[delrem]

3. Two articles by Palestinian-American reporter Ramzy Baroud

In counterpunch, Sept 7/2012:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/07/the-plight-of-palestinian-refugees-from-syria/

In english.alarabiya.net, Dec 25/2012
http://english.alarabiya.net/views/2012/12/25/256951.html

Baroud is not thrilled by the treatment of Palestinian refugees by the Arab Emirates and Kingdoms, or by Lebanon. I haven't seen anybody who tries to argue the case for the rights of Palestinian refugees in this group argue differently - and simply *saying* that they do doesn't make it so. Baroud explains how this plight is accelerated exponentially when the Palestinian refugees are yet again caught in the middle of wars in the countries hosting their pitiful places of refuge.

[King_David]

6. Has Jordan been censured by the UN ?

Security council resolution ?

Too bad the Free Gaza Movement can't organize a flotilla or a Tweet or a Facebook post .

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

17. "Has Jordan been censured by the UN?"

If you are trying to sell some low-hanging fruit I don't believe you will find many buyers here.

Perhaps if Jordan was thefting Palestinian land, and received a UN censure, they could take some lessons on how to ignore them from Israel; seeing how they have so much experience in that area.

[Alamuti Lotus]

22. I don't mean to disturb the coy, petty, disingenuous circle-jerk you have going on..

Actually, yes I do--that was exactly what I meant to do. So, consider it disturbed. I had more material than just a few of the epitaphs in the subject header, but lost interest. But, those are fine epitaphs if I do say so myself (which I did), and are really a pitch-perfect description of the wretched disharmony produced by certain sources pretending that they really, really care about Palestinian refugees all of a sudden..

[oberliner]

24. What are you talking about?

It's a news article about what is currently happening with respect to the Palestinian refugees in Syria.

Whether people care or not is up to them.

[shaayecanaan]

27. At-a-glance: Who takes the most asylum claims?

Of the 10.4 million refugees under UNHCR mandate between 2005 and 2009, the largest numbers were being hosted by Pakistan (1,740,711), Iran (1,070,488), Syria (1,054,466), Germany (593,799), Jordan (450,756), the UNHCR's '2009 Global Trends' report reveals.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1294102/At-a-glance-Who-takes-the-most-asylum-claims

These are just the numbers for UNHCR refugees. There are another two million Palestinian refugees in Jordan.

[oberliner]

29. Jordanian PM: We Cannot Receive Palestinian Refugees From Syria

Al-Hayat: You are at the frontline of an open war on Syria. How will you deal with the fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime? What are the effects of the situation there on your country?

Ensour: We do not wish to analyze the developments with the current Syrian leadership and how they may affect Jordan. But the Hashemite Kingdom is ready for any surprises or developments. We want to protect our borders. Syria is a brotherly Arab country and we wish it stability first and foremost. Jordan has accepted tens of thousands of Syrian refugees. We hope the bloodshed ends as soon as possible, and we emphasize the need to resolve the Syrian conflict politically.

Al-Hayat: But why are you preventing the Palestinian refugees fleeing from Syria from entering the kingdom, while knowing that they have Syrian travel documents?

Ensour: There are those who want to exempt Israel from the repercussions of displacing the Palestinians from their homes. Jordan is not a place to solve Israel’s problems. Jordan has made a clear and explicit sovereign decision to not allow the crossing to Jordan by our Palestinian brothers who hold Syrian documents. Receiving those brothers is a red line because that would be a prelude to another wave of displacement, which is what the Israeli government wants. Our Palestinian brothers in Syria have the right to go back to their country of origin. They should stay in Syria until the end of the crisis.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2013/01/jordanian-pm-we-cannot-receive-palestinian-refugees-from-syria.html#ixzz2Ho2WNi9H

[shaayecanaan]

32. A ‘humane’ Israel sets conditions for Palestinians fleeing Syria

The TOI decided to write this headline, despite the fact that the true headline was written very clearly in the first paragraph (my bold):

“Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejected an Israeli offer to allow Palestinian refugees fleeing Syria to enter the Palestinian territories on condition that they forgo their “right of return” to Israel proper, Abbas told the Egyptian press on Wednesday evening.”

I have yet to read any Israeli official denying this, including the TOI item itself.

Now, first of all, anyone reading the press knows two things: 1) Abbas approached the UN weeks ago asking for its help on the issue; 2) UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has asked surrounding countries for assistance, including Israel. So, the word “offer” in the headline is also misleading, since it is not Israel that initiated an offer, but if anything, is now “agreeing” to a request already made – and with conditions.

But actually, the journalism of the TOI isn’t the story. The story is this: Humane Israel, the same Israel that boasts about how it sends field hospitals to quake disasters before everybody else, now sets conditions (and right on their own border, not thousands of miles away!) for refugees in physical danger of their lives.

The first thing that popped to my mind was how it sounded like a “deal with the devil.” “Sure, we’ll let you in, save your lives – but first, sign here on the dotted line…”

The comparison to that ‘deal with the devil,” who eventually gets the victim’s “soul,” could not be more appropriate considering that the right of return is one of the most cherished, valued principles a Palestinian refugee holds dear to their hearts. Even Abbas, who although said to Channel 2 that he “has no right to live in Safed,” could never agree to imposing such a ridiculous condition on other Palestinians.

If Israel wants to show any kind of humanity, it should let those people through without holding a virtual gun to their heads. God knows they’ve suffered enough already.

http://972mag.com/a-humane-israel-sets-conditions-for-palestinians-fleeing-syria/63592/

[oberliner]

34. 927mag really stretching on this one...

Just in case you want to see the quote again:

Abbas: "...it’s better they die in Syria than give up their right of return"

Says it all really.

[shaayecanaan]

35. apparently Israel thinks so as well

Whatever you might think of the right of return, it is a serious issue to be resolved in the context of final status negotiations. I don't think it is appropriate for Israel to be extracting this concession from the Palestinians by holding the Syrian refugees to ransom.

I suspect that you probably would have agreed with me back in your more moderate days.

[shira]

37. The refugees want a normal life out of the fucking camps

They shouldn't be held there against their will and certainly not 60+ years after 1948.

Asked individually to sign a paper and live elsewhere to start a new life, all would.

The problem with your politics is that individuals would tell you to stuff this collective right to be jailed in a cage against their will for over 6 decades.

[oberliner]

38. You'd think the Palestinian leader's primary desire would be having Palestinians not killed

In your more moderate days, I would think you'd agree with that as well.

Also, one would think Abbas would be more concerned than Israel about the plight of Palestinians in Syria.

[shaayecanaan]

39. Well, Israel certainly hasn't offered asylum to any of these refugees...

and Abbas has. Certainly Israel has done precious little to indicate that it gives a damn about any of these refugees.

I don't think Abbas was concerned with gamesmanship over the I/P issue when he requested the UN to arrange safe passage of these refugees to the West Bank. I think he was trying to assist the refugees.

In a practical sense, the declarations are meaningless. They would be a signed by a few individuals scattered amongst the 4 million Palestinians in the occupied territories and 7 million Palestinians in the diaspora. Whether the Syrian refugees add a few thousand to the 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank means nothing to Israel.

But symbolically, Israel would have wrested a concession from Abbas on the right of return without offering any real concessions of their own.

Of course, I have no doubt that Israel would have escalated its demands had Abbas accepted, that is their typical response. Refugees looking to sign on the dotted line would probably be asked to make all sorts of additional concessions, you can bet your bottom dollar that there would be mention of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state as well.

Many of the refugees are desperate, and many would sign. That doesnt make it a "free choice" and it doesnt excuse Israel's gamesmanship in the matter. Many refugees would resort to prostitution if they had to, but is that any excuse for inflicting it on them?

[delrem]

40. Israel's barrier wall isn't just metaphorical.

It is physical and it is real, and it denies entry not only to Hamas terrorists but to Palestinian refugees whose home was in the land now taken by Israel. These people were never given a hearing. They were, quite simply, cleansed. IMO that is undeniable. Put yourself in their shoes for a second, oberliner. Israel has realized their darkest fears.

This *does* contradict the fact that Israel has constructed what is in many ways an enlightened and promising state. But - is there never going to be a time when that enlightenment and promise extends to those citizens-noncombatants forced or moved to flee in terror at the time of the Nakba?

The best arguments I've seen in this group *supporting* continuation of this cleansing, rather than some move toward reconciliation, is that
1. some kind of statute of limitations has run out, so the refugees are no longer Israel's problem (except those who argue this never did suppose that the refugees were Israel's problem - time has just made this argument *convenient*).
2. the refugees committed the crime of having children and continuing their lives as families, so their numbers now constitute a "demographic threat". But this argument doesn't explain why their rights weren't recognized earlier.

Explain to me Netanyahu's demand that these refugees sign documents abrogating their RoR, such that they can take refuge in the west bank. That you would dismiss it as non-essential. Explain it to me in such way that I can understand why you think this demand isn't a matter of concern.