- cross-posted to:
- world@quokk.au
- cross-posted to:
- world@quokk.au
Israel’s defence minister has said he is committed to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza through large-scale migration of Palestinians as part of Israel’s long-term plans for the territory.
…
The forced transfer of civilian populations is a war crime and a crime against humanity. Israeli officials, including Katz, use the term “voluntary migration” to describe their plans for large numbers of Palestinians to leave Gaza.
Israel-based human rights organisations and lawyers have warned that the conditions Israel has imposed on Gaza mean no departure can be considered voluntary and the policy constitutes planning for ethnic cleansing.
When I went back home for christmas the other year my mum had taken in two Ukranian refugees. Was she facilitating a “voluntary genocide” by doing that? Or was she just engaging in ethnic cleansing. Clearly she coerced them with the offer of food and shelter so it couldn’t have been voluntary?
This may shock you, but refugees are expected to return to their homes eventually.
Sorry that you feel that an occupying power murdering a tenth of a region’s population and then openly ‘encouraging’ others of a given ethnicity in the region to emigrate is normal, ordinary, everyday, non-genocidal behavior. I hope you get better.
Refugees absolutely do not have to go “home” if they don’t want to. They should always have the right to, but it’s equally okay if they settle and build a new home that’s hopefully far away from people wanting to murder them for their ethnicity. They are people, not weapons with which to bring justice to those that attacked them.
The notion pushed by neoliberals that migration is temporary should be recognized as an excuse to ensure continued alienation between two different groups of workers and to make a large group of workers permanently at the mercy of corporations that hire them and states that have a mandate to fuck them over at a moment’s notice.
Refugees and immigrants are related, but generally considered separate, phenomena. Refugees, for this reason, are often restricted from being hired by corporations in civilized countries to avoid exactly that kind of exploitation.
Some refugees become immigrants. The reverse is not so.
How many of the “civilized countries” you’re thinking of are materially contributing to the genocide of Palestinians? How many people have they killed or caused to die by violently enforcing standards of what they consider to be a proper refugee or a proper migrant, and manipulating those standards based on the needs of the rich?
Can you please think for yourself rather than referring to what is “generally considered” or what “civilized countries” do? Or, alternatively, can you stop hiding behind popular opinion and say the quiet part out loud?
… I’m not sure you understand asylum law.
… this is literally a question of semantics and legal definitions. Unless you’ve decided to become some new kind of iconoclastic guerilla prescriptivist, both of those matters are pretty innately connected to the issue being discussed.
what
The only way to make the question whether refugees are expected to “go home” a semantic issue is if your stance is if you believe that when someone runs away from genocide it is their free choice between becoming a refugee or becoming a migrant.
This is a coherent position, but it is not one held by “civilized countries”, their legal systems, or any English dictionary I expect you’ll be able to find that wasn’t written by AI.
Otherwise, you are expecting things from someone based on something that happened to them involuntarily, or based on the legal system of where-ever they were able to flee to for shelter, and that is a proactive ethical stance.
Perhaps I don’t. How has asylum law avoided being changed by neoliberalism and neoconservatism?
… that… that is literally the case.
Those who remain refugees are expressing a desire to return to their countries of origin. They are seeking refuge rather than permanent residency, and that’s what the entire fucking structure of asylum law is based around.
Those who are refugees but decide they would rather not return to their country of origin even once the danger has passed apply through their host country’s laws to become immigrants to that country.
… that’s… that’s all of life, man.
… generally the expectation of legal systems is that the person in question will adhere to the laws, yes.
Asylum law wouldn’t exist at all if it was only a question of the interests of the rich. Refugees provide no benefit to the ultrawealthy or corporations, again, in civilized countries, precisely because they are not part of the labor pool, yet remain an expense which discourages the central government from cutting taxes further. On top of that, that refugees are a lawful and recognized position strips corporations of their ability to exploit them the way they would other classes of migrant - meaning that it is in the interests of the rich to see asylum law abolished entirely, not some bizarre notion that refugees being a protected class is somehow in the interests of the ultra-wealthy.
It doesn’t shock me at all. I expect that these palestinian refugees are well aware they likely won’t be able to return and they factor that into their decision of whether or not to leave. Personally if I was in their place I’d be OK with that since Gaza’s government seems committed to endless war anyway.
I don’t think the situation is normal or ordinary though. Not sure what you think I said that.
I will be going back for christmas again this year so I can let my mum know she’s a war criminal for “openly encouraging” others of a given (ukranian) ethnicity to emigrate and stay at her house.
I’m sorry but you have to recognise that Ukrainians are refugees and those that want to return are expecting to do so once the war is over (ie making it not an ethnic cleansing) while the same is not the case for Palestinians (ie the “one-way journey”) which is the part that makes this an ethnic cleansing
You make a fair point but the sticking point for me is that if it’s voluntary then it’s not ethnic cleansing. Unless these Palestinian refugees are being deceived, which doesn’t appear to be the case (happy to be proven wrong though). No ethnic cleansing has ever been voluntary as far as I’m aware.
If russia wins the war against Ukraine i also don’t think those Ukranians would be able to go back, or it would be dangerous for them to do so. And I think they know that. They’ve lived in the UK for so long, I expect russia would consider them not welcome after spending so much time in an “enemy country”.
Actually I think something that would convince me the Gaza situation is ethnic cleansing is if a significant number of the Palestinians accepting the offer consider it to be that. If they say they’re leaving because they are being forced to then fair enough, I’d be happy to concede it. The impression I get from reading articles like this though is those that want to leave don’t see it that way.
Jesus fucking Christ.
Enjoy being a Holocaust support, Nazi.
Got it, I’ll tell my mum she’s a Nazi too and she’s committing a holocaust.