Politics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
During the recent civil war in Syria, millions of Syrians have fled the country and have been accepted as refugees by Turkey, Germany, Sweden, Jordan, and many other countries.
In contrast, during the current war in Gaza, it seems no country wants to accept Gazan refugees.
Why are Syrian refugees more easily accepted in other countries than Gazan refugees?
There are already plenty of Palestinian refugees in Arab countries, notably in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan - see Palestinian refugee camps:
Camps are set up by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to accommodate Palestinian refugees registered with UNRWA, who fled or were expelled during the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight after the 1948 Arab–Israeli War or in the aftermath of the Six-Day War in 1967, and their patrilineal descendants. There are 68 Palestinian refugee camps, 58 official and 10 unofficial, ten of which were established after the Six-Day War while the others were established in 1948 to 1950s.
The situation is complicated by the fact that the Palestinians living in many of these countries (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan) refugee camps for generations have no legal path to integration into the local society - they are not eligible for citizenship (even if born in the country), cannot own business, reside outside of the designated refugee camp, etc. Many people are thus qualified as refugees, because they are children or grandchildren of displaced persons:
UNRWA's mandate is to provide assistance to Palestinian refugees, including access to its refugee camps. For this purpose, it defines Palestinian refugees as "persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict."
UNRWA also extends assistance to the patrilineal descendants of such refugees, as well as their legally adopted children.
The reasons for the unwillingness of the host countries to integrate these refugees are complex - e.g., in Jordan Palestinians with Jordanian citizenship (not refugees, but historical inhabitants of this area) constitute nearly the half of the population, while the ruling dynasty is representing another ethnic group (Hashemites) - the influx of the Palestinians thus represents a political threat to the King, as particularly came to surface in the events known as Black September (Jordanian Civil war) in 1970. As the result of the crackdown, many Palestinians relocated to Lebanon, which for a while was a staging ground of Palestinian attacks against Israel, leading to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, and the occupation of the Southern Lebanon by Israel till 2000 (meanwhile the Northern Lebanon was occupied by Syria, withdrawing in 2005.)
I doubt that more removed countries, especially those in Europe or North America, have any particular preference to non-Palestinian refugees. Refugees are a controversial issue in most of these countries, regardless of their origin. I would even suggest that Palestinians from Gaza would have easier time getting refugee status, since they are escaping from a real military conflict, rather than seeking better economic conditions... but most Palestinians simply do not have means to get that far from Gaza.
The simple answer is that you're not taking about the same countries. Gaza only borders Israel and Egypt. Neither of those took in much Syrian refugees.
Egypt did take in some Syrian refugees but way back in 2012 (145K according to UN), before there were a lot of political changes in Egypt. The number of Syrians in Egypt actually went down to 116K in 2016, according to Wikipedia. As for accepting refugees from Gaza...
At a time when there are increasing concerns about a potential mass Palestinian migration toward the Egyptian border with Gaza, Sisi emphasized that "there will be no compromise on Egypt’s national security under any circumstances, and the Egyptian people must be aware of the complexities of the situation and the magnitude of the threat.” [...]
He added that Egypt will not allow the termination of the Palestinian cause at the expense of other parties.
As for Israel, apparently it accepted zero Syrian refugees (ibid).
And to quote from a related Q, there' not much appetite for more refugees even in Turkey these days:
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s administration has forcibly deported hundreds of Syrian refugees since late 2022, while his primary challenger, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, has vowed to send all Syrian refugees back to their country of origin in under two years, regardless of circumstances in Syria.
Or in Europe for that matter, at least at its borders. Maybe Germany would be more accepting, but unless they plain airlift them, it's not even clear how they'd even get there.
And Germany hasn't done a lot explaining but
Germany on Wednesday [Nov 15] said that Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s call for a “voluntary migration” of Palestinians in Gaza is “not acceptable.”
"We have noted these comments. They are not helpful. They are also not acceptable," deputy Foreign Ministry spokesman Christian Wagner told media representatives in Berlin.
FWTW, this is probably not the only reason but:
According to figures from the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, Germany registered a 28% increase in asylum applications in 2022, with over 244,000. The top three sources of applicants were Syria, Afghanistan and Turkey; Ukrainians do not have to apply.
But the newcomers encounter a harsh reality: 12 out of 16 states in Germany currently do not have enough space to handle refugees, according to a local media report. The issue is particularly pressing in the cold winter months, amid a scramble to ensure that people have at least a makeshift roof over their heads.
And:
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the number of migrants coming to the country had pushed it to “breaking point,” as he called for a fairer European system of migrant distribution.
FWTW:
"Bulgaria last year received some 20,000 asylum applications – the highest number in a single year over 30 years of recorded statistics," Boris Cheshirkov from UNHCHR Bulgaria told InfoMigrants. The main countries of origin of asylum seekers were Syria, Afghanistan, and Morocco (Ukrainians are exempt from the asylum application process).
Proportionally with their (7 million) population, that's about the same per capita as applications in Germany, last year.
There are several reasons for the difference.
Three-quarters of those polled said they preferred to stay put, with the main reason given being nationalist reasons.
Europe is already stretched with Syrian and Ukrainian refugees. The immediate neighboring countries also have capacity problems.
It needs to be mentioned that mass, grouped, Palestinian diasporas aren't always very "pleasant" for the host countries. See for example Lebanon or Jordan. A mass influx of Gazans to Europe, many of whom can be expected to be somewhat resentful of the West, would be challenging on a security basis. A more careful and measured immigration vetting and integration procedure may palliate that to a great extent, but still a concern. No, don't take this as concern or dislike about Palestine-origin residents in Western countries at the current time, I have no concerns there. Only with a mass influx as a result of expulsions.
Most of all, whatever Hamas' atrocities on 10/7, this seems like a perverse reward to Israel for its decades of intransigence towards Palestinian aspirations to statehood, shirking of its Oslo commitments and ignoring UN resolution 242. This would be, in essence, supporting another Nakba, all over again and, unless there were very firm commitments from Israel to let refugees back in, would seem like aiding ethnic cleansing. And some Israeli politicians are not averse to the comparison:
“We are now rolling out the Gaza Nakba,” Dichter, a member of the right-wing Likud party, said Saturday, in comments widely reported by Israeli media. “From an operational point of view, there is no way to wage a war — as the Israeli army seeks to do in Gaza — with masses between the tanks and the soldiers,” he said. Pressed on his use of the word “Nakba” to describe the situation in Gaza, he said again: “Gaza Nakba 2023. That’s how it’ll end.”
