Trisher
First, I think I pointed out to you and offered you a link that warts and all put the Palestinian refugee's situation into a political, economic, social and cultural wider context. Included in that excellent research they examine, the 'actors' (Fucault) involved for almost 70 years in producing the current status as non citizens in their host Country's with the exception of Jordan, where the situation appears to be more inclusive. However on the whole, whilst I do not like blame cultures, one has to apportion accountability and the research has done so with recommendations for each of the host Country's and the other "actors" such as political groups, the UNRWA who in reality, as you see from the cut and paste below, are playing a Governance role in most camps/enclaves, that they are neither equipped to carry out, nor is it recognised by the UN, or even the UNRWA officially. The researchers say:
UNRWA, traditionally, and like any other humanitarian institution, considered refugees to be needy victims. Parallel to the failure of acknowledging the urbanization process that transformed tent cities into complex built environments, is also the failure of acknowledging the desire of traumatized and voiceless victims to become emancipated subjects, especially after some sort of normalcy of life in the camps has set in. However, currently, UNRWA is aware of the importance of empowering the refugees.
Our fieldwork reveals the misunderstandings between UNRWA and refugees that characterize the current status quo. Because of its mandate, a humanitarian organization like UNRWA has historically understood its role as a temporary relief provider to a temporary group of victims, carefully avoiding taking on a wider governing role. At the same time, most refugees have effec- tively assigned UNRWA a key role, holding it responsible for problems in the camps that go well beyond the realm of its mandate.
As argued before the resulting “phantom sovereignty” of UNRWA is based on this fundamental misunderstanding of roles and responsibilities, which leaves a problematic void, contributes to the sense of permanent emergency and exception, and fuels mistrust and suspicion. Decades of internal and international outmigration of the most educated and capable among the camp dwellers – keen to escape the trap of passivity and over-reliance on relief – has left camp communities in vulnerable conditions^^Ultimately, the situation can be reversed by developing effective, democratically endorsed camp governance structures that represent community interests and can lead to camp improvements. UNRWA may choose to accept and engage with existing representative structures, overcome its paternalistic approach and sometimes institutional arrogance, and carefully assist and strengthen camp governance.59 (Misselwitz & Hanafi, 2010)
This is a long post but I hope it addresses the question I asked several post's ago, why are the Arab Muslim Palestinian's now second, third and fourth generation still not absorbed or integrated into the host Countries communities? I feel now, after doing my own research that that question is much clearer. It is as I imagined it to be complex, the result of 70 years of refusing to see that this was a permanent rather than a temporary situation, and instead of using the vast amounts of money to treat people "paternalistically" and as "needy victims" as the research reports, rather than empower them to be self determined 'actors' (Fucault) integrating into communities in the host Countries or outside. This raises another dimension that has prevented integration, in most host Countries, one of not only acceptance but the willingness on both sides for integration. We are all equal but some more equal than others, and it is no different it seems anywhere in the World.
Now you say why should the poor host Country's take on these refugees. The research covers this and comes to the conclusion that, mostly the Palestinian refugees are regarded as a lesser group in slums on the outskirts of their towns. Other than Jordan who seem to have a different view.
Inside the camps of course there are all sort's of political groups vying for power, for their own ends. Very complex sets of power relations going on. In all of this are the people, who are seen differently by each of the 'actors'. "Needy victims, potential political fodder, non citizens, unwanted in society outside the camp, different socially, with no social currency because of poverty and dependence.
Now this is what I needed to know, and thanks to our discussion and my own research I now have a little understanding of the complexity and how this has all come to be.
I still though believe it is so much more complex than blaming Israel for all that is wrong in the Levant and wanting their destruction.
That does not mean that because I realise that, that I am against anyone or that I do not have empathy with the Arab Muslim Palestinians in the camps/enclaves formally classified and registered, still by paternal ancestry as refugees after 70 years.
It surprises me that you appear to think that looking at the whole picture, means that one has to be on one side or the other, I find that difficult to understand. We have discussed this earlier it is not a requirement to take sides, it is only a requirement to see both sides and be ready, if needed to defend either side, if injustice or unfairness is taking place.
There are faults on all side, not just Israel, and Palestinians, but if you have read the document I posted the link for: the UNRWA, the bodies of Governance, the UN, the host Country's. If one goes back far enough the West, including Britain in the early 1900's the US although under pressure alt Britain did not vote for the partition along with Greece. I have posted all this previously for you.
You seem to have an aversion to calling the camps enclaves, why? When people have been resident in the host Country's for almost 70 years, it is natural to call them enclaves. Why do you want to call them camps? Clearly you want the image portrayed by a camp to be part of your message. Why not just say that?
You have turned a learning and sharing discussion into a rather aggressive and defensive one, unnecessarily so. I am not against you or the Palestinian's, I believe that Corbyn is influenced by his links to Hamas and other terrorist groups, as well as now established Political groups with military wings, such as the PLO and PLA, all of whom are interlinked with other well trained and well armed large Army's across the Middle East.
I believe that the antisemitism in the Labour Party is encouraged by Corbyn's attitude to the Israeli's and his leaning towards the groups previously mentioned. The persecution of those Labour Party members and MP's who have spoken out against antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong, and JC is doing little about it. That is my view.
