In an already troubled geopolitical context, recent statements by US President Donald Trump regarding the situation of Palestinian refugees have provoked strong reactions, particularly from the leaders of Egypt and Jordan. In asserting that these nations “should” accept Palestinian refugees, Trump seems to ignore the historical and moral complexities of the issue.
### A Political Reaction: More Than Just a Position
The rejection by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi is not simply a policy of welcoming. It is above all an affirmation of the principles that underpin national and regional identities. Al-Sisi, by calling the displacement of Palestinians an “injustice,” is a reminder that Egypt has historically been a key player in the search for a solution to the Palestinian conflict. Similarly, Safadi insists that the Palestinian question cannot be resolved at the expense of Jordan, a country that is already home to a large Palestinian population. Jordan has become a refuge for millions of Palestinians since the conflicts of 1948 and 1967, making it both an engaged and vulnerable actor.
### A Historical Perspective: Echoes of the Past
To better understand the position of these countries, it is useful to look at history. The refusal to absorb Palestinian refugees is part of a much larger picture. Since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, neighboring countries, including Egypt and Jordan, have avoided integrating Palestinians into their social and political fabric. What might appear to be a rejection of humanitarian responsibilities is in reality a preservation of national identity and demographic dynamics. Jordan, for example, is concerned that the integration of new refugees could alter the already tense internal balance of power between the various communities.
### An Underlying Economic Impact
The economic ramifications of accepting Palestinian refugees cannot be ignored. Egypt and Jordan, whose economies are already fragile, would face increased pressure on their resources. Importing a new population requires significant investments in housing, public services, and infrastructure, a burden that these governments are trying to minimize in the context of an economic crisis.
### The Uncertainty of Tariff Policy
At the same time, Trump has floated the possibility of imposing 25% tariffs on oil imports from Mexico and Canada, a move that many interpret as an attempt to exert pressure in an already complex negotiation over migration flows and the fight against fentanyl. The move could potentially damage relations with these two countries, which are historical trading partners. A tariff hike could have economic repercussions not only for the countries concerned, but also for the American economy, which depends on a stable and affordable energy supply.
### A Call for Global Reflection
In sum, while Trump seems blithely unconcerned about humanitarian and geopolitical issues, the reactions of the Egyptian and Jordanian leaders underscore the need for a deeper and more respectful dialogue. Resolving the Palestinian question requires not only economic solutions, but also a nuanced understanding of the intertwined identities and histories in the region. Avoiding the imposition of simplistic solutions, the international community must focus on initiatives that promote a sustainable future for all parties involved, beyond mere power discourses.
Through this analysis, we invite the reader to consider the magnitude of the shared responsibility that each nation holds, and how these decisions can shape not only the lives of Palestinian refugees, but also the future of international relations and regional stabilization. Diplomacy, after all, is based on a deep understanding of the motives, pains and aspirations of others.