Why does nobody want Palestinian refugees? It's true. And specifically, why has every Arab country rejected sheltering any refugees from Gaza? In just weeks after Hamas's October 7th attack, Israel's massive retaliation left well over a million Gazins homeless. Today, almost twice that number. About 90% of Gaza's population has been forced from their homes. Yet, not a single Arab country will open its doors. Why not? Is it a principled stand to prevent Israel from depopulating Gaza altogether? Or are Arab leaders simply talking a good game about Palestinian solidarity while never actually wanting to help them? As you'll see, it's complicated. Hey, I'm Ken Laort. You can find a lot of videos about how one side here is evil and the other side is completely innocent victims, but you won't find too many that try to fairly explain what's actually happening in a conflict that's been going on since before we were born. We'll look at the history of Palestinian refugees, their turbulent history in host countries, and finally take a look at the current situation in Gaza. In the next few minutes, you'll understand a whole lot more about this complicated situation. Okay, so the Palestinian refugee crisis began in 1948. During Israel's creation, about 700,000 Palestinians, about 85% of the Arab population in that region, they fled or expelled from their homes altogether. Palestinians call it nakba, meaning catastrophe. Entire villages emptied out overnight. Families escaping on foot or loaded onto carts. They carried what they could. And today, their descendants number almost 6 million people, the largest and oldest refugee population on Earth. Initially, nearby Arab countries, they assumed it'd be temporary. They set up makeshift camps and didn't try to integrate them into their countries, which is important because rather than bringing Palestinians into their societies permanently, they made a choice to house them separately, insisting their real home was Palestine and they'd soon return. Well, that didn't happen. The refugee problem wasn't solved within months or even years. Instead, it dragged on until today. The temporary camps turned into permanent fixtures, sprawling settlements of tents. They eventually became concrete neighborhoods filled with residents, some of whom still held on to the keys of homes they'd never see again. And then 19 years later, the situation worsened. During the 6-day war in 1967, another massive wave of Palestinians, this time more than 300,000 fled from the West Bank and Gaza into Jordan, into Lebanon and Syria. Again, the assumption was short-term shelter until the Arabs won. But again, that just proved wrong. The result was overcrowded UN-run camps swelling even further with Palestinians who were now political ponds trapped in a geopolitical limbo. The reception Palestinians received it varied wildly between Arab nations. Jordan was the sole exception which often granted citizenship, especially to those fleeing from the West Bank, which Jordan itself had annexed in 1950. But even there, integration wasn't smooth or complete. Palestinians in Jordan still faced challenges, political suspicions, and often violent conflicts. Outside of Jordan, the reception was even colder. In Lebanon, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were intentionally kept stateless, forbidden from citizenship, barred from many jobs, and tightly restricted in camps. Lebanon had a tricky religious and political balance between Christian, Sunni, Shia, and Drews. And it wasn't going to keep a massive Palestinian Sunni population around. A similar situation unfolded in Syria, which kept Palestinians in a permanent holding pattern, tolerated, sometimes welcomed, but rarely integrated into Syrian society. These early conditions set the stage for decades of tension. Palestinian refugees, increasingly frustrated by not having a home, often turned militant, taking their struggle across Arab borders. The Palestinian Liberation Organization emerged partly from these refugee communities, and it became a powerful and armed political force. Of course, that made their host countries even more wary, and it laid the groundwork for more conflicts. By the 70s, Palestinian refugee populations had become permanent, distinct groups within Arab countries. They were visible, but rarely integrated, and often distrusted by their hosts. Entire generations grew up in these camps. Children were born, grew into adulthood, and started families of their own without ever living in a home country. Now, understanding that history helps explain why even now Arab nations are deeply resistant to new waves of Palestinian refugees. Hey, this is a good time to mention that while I spend a lot of time researching this, I'm not perfect. If I make any serious factual mistake, let me know. I'll deal with it in a pin comment below. And and if you like stuff like this, now's a good time to subscribe. Okay, so now let's look at what happened next because the Palestinian refugees reshaped some of the countries that they were hosted in and often violently. First, Jordan. By 1970, Palestinians made up more than half of Jordan's entire population. Eventually, their welcome wore out and their relationship exploded into violence. It was known as Black September. It pitted Jordan's military against Palestinian guerilla groups, mainly the PLO. They'd turned the refugee camps into basically armed fortresses. The PLO essentially created a state within a state. It openly defied Jordan's sovereignty and it tried to overthrow King Hussein's monarchy. After fierce warfare, Jordan crushed the PLO, leaving about 3,400 Palestinians dead and tens of thousands expelled. Black September taught Jordan a painful lesson, and it would never again let heavily armed Palestinian factions operate on its soil. Actually, most Palestinians by then had citizenship, but thousands were expelled, mainly to Lebanon. And Lebanon got even uglier as the PLO set up shop there. Their armed presence helped ignite Lebanon's civil war from 1975 to 1990, which killed over 100,000 people and displaced about a third of the country from their homes. Militias from all sorts of different sects and outside countries fought viciously, and the Palestinians were often right in the middle of it. Even today, Palestinians in Lebanon, they're politically marginalized. They're banned from many jobs. They're denied citizenship, and they're viewed with suspicion by much of the rest of Lebanese society. Kuwait is another example of how quickly Arab solidarity with Palestinians could evaporate once politics shifted. By 1990, about 400,000 Palestinians lived in Kuwait, making up about 20% of its population. And when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Yaser Arafat and the PLO publicly supported him. And once again, things got ugly. After much of the world helped Kuwait kick out Saddam, Kuwait then pushed out almost the entire Palestinian community. About 200,000 who were forcibly removed within months and another 200,000 barred from ever returning. Yaserfat later said that Kuwait's actions were even worse than Israel's treatment of Palestinians. Other countries had less violent but similar stories. Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia. Palestinians were often welcomed, at least to some extent, then expelled either quietly or through mass expulsions. Each of these episodes showed Arab states and their ambivalence towards the Palestinian. They're publicly supportive of their cause, but privately suspicious and wary of integrating them into their societies. Keeping Palestinians separate and stateless became in part a political strategy and maintaining the refugee crisis as a leverage against Israel rather than permanently solving it. Fast forward today, Hamas fighting Israel. The vast majority of Gazin residents have been displaced and they have a refugee crisis even more immediate and intense than past conflicts. But despite that scale and desperation, Arab states have again said no. Egypt's president and Jordan's king immediately slam their doors shut. Both leaders openly declared that not a single refugee from Gaza would permanently cross their borders. Egypt even doubled down by heavily reinforcing security at the Rafa border crossing, making it crystal clear Gazins weren't welcome. King Abdullah summed it up this way. No refugees in Jordan, no refugees in Egypt. This is a situation of humanitarian dimension that has to be dealt inside of Gaza and uh and and the West Bank and not to try and push the Palestinian challenge and their future onto other people's shoulders. That's the easiest and safest answer for every government in the Middle East. They clearly understand the danger and instability that a large number of Gazan refugees could bring. They even reject bringing in smaller numbers who might bring the war against Israel with them. Egypt in particular. It worries about extremists slipping into the Sinai and that Hamas or another radical group would set up shop there where other insurgencies are already going on. Egypt knows that more armed factions isn't going to help their internal issues. And it also wouldn't help if Kusha rockets and suicide bombers weren't coming from Gaza, but from Egypt itself. They're currently at peace with Israel, and they're not looking for any more problems there. So the Arab states, they acknowledge the security issues and then emphasize that they're protecting Palestinian claims by keeping refugees in place, no matter how harsh that sounds. It's easier to condemn Israel's actions loudly than to practically support Palestinian refugees. Political rhetoric, that doesn't cost anything. But housing millions of displaced Palestinians, that costs dearly. Security risk, social cohesion, you name it. Palestinians themselves are conflicted, too. I mean, for many, leaving Gaza feels like permanently surrendering their homeland, exactly what Israel would want. And ironically, both Palestinians and Arab states find themselves resisting relocation for different reasons. Obviously, that effectively traps Gazins in horrific conditions caught between Israeli air strikes and a sealed Arab border. But it leaves us with a fundamental moral and practical dilemma that's still unresolved. Is forcibly keeping Palestinians trapped inside Gaza a principled stand against Israel's pressure? Or is it inhumane? So, like a lot of things, it's too simple to accuse the Arab states of outright cynicism, using Palestinian suffering as a political weapon against Israel without genuinely wanting to help them. But on the other hand, there's elements of truth in that as well. Like I said in the introduction, it's complicated. Hey, here's another complicated question. Why do Arab armies almost always lose to the West? They can do pretty well with insurgencies and guerrilla warfare, but the last time an Arab army won a decisive war against the West was the Battle of Hatim when Saladine defeated the Christian crusaders and conquered Jerusalem. That was in 1187 AD. So, what's going on? Hey, I hope you got a little bit smarter watching this. And if you did, come back