Understood

Submitted by Peter Herz (United States), Mar 18, 2011 at 21:46

Yes, and this makes it all the more outrageous. Before the mid-1960's, these poor, poor Palestinian refugees were part of the greater Arab nation. And, I daresay that had they been allowed to naturalize in their countries of first asylum, they'd be as Kuwaiti, Lebanese, or Sa'udi as the heirs of medieval Andaluz are now Moroccan or Algerian; or how erstwhile Hellenophone Thessalian and Cretan Muslims are now ordinary Turks; or how erstwhile Turcophone Anatolian Eastern Orthodox Karamanli are now ordinary Greeks.

As for Jordan, the "Palestinians" and their descendants now outnumber the original Bedouin inhabitants of Trans-Jordan by several factors. Hashemite Jordan is also the only Arab state to grant them citizenship. In an age that has seen Delhi-born Perviz Musharaf and Lahore-born Manmohan Singh sit down to talk, the Arab states deserve whatever problems they get for their refusal to naturalize the Falastin refugees.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".