That question being, “why aren’t the Muslim nations opening their borders to all the Muslims fleeing Syria?”
Has the question been answered? Why aren’t the Muslim nations doing so?
It’s not in their interest to do so?
Muslim dominant nations are dealing with the bulk of the problem.
Even adding the new EU agreement to accept more than referenced in that quote, the EU is a drop in the bucket compared to the ones staying closer to home.
I think the question you mean to ask is “Why haven’t the Persian Gulf petrostates accepted refugees?”, since as noted the bulk of refugees are in Lebanon, Turkey, and other nearby countries.
The answer, of course, is that taking refugees is bad, and not being susceptible to democratic or leftist pressures, the Persian Gulf states have simply refused to do so.
Also, that website (or at least that description) doesn’t seem to be have been updated in nearly a year. Germany is expecting to take 800K refugees this year, not 28K.
Since the population of Syria is 23 million, anything would be a drop in the bucket if the majority started leaving.
Dunno why Putin doesn’t offer them parts of Siberia. Lots of empty spaces. Plus they won’t be that keen on helping his muslim extremists if they’ve fled muslim extremists.
the more pressing question is when are the americans going to stop being ignorant of the geography and facts before preaching hypocritically about what others are doing in the world.
One American. And he was corrected by another American.
They are not signatories to the U.N. Convention on Refugees, and there is no legal status of refugee in these countries. Some of their populations are quite small and they do not want to be swamped by refugees whose numbers might quickly swell to the point where their political clout could not be ignored. The example of Jordan, where large numbers of Palestinians have been for decades, and where there was a civil war/coup d’etat attempted by the PLO/PFLP/Fatah in 1970-71, is before them.
Can we not paint with that broad of a brush, here?
Considering I’ve heard Europeans ask this same question in this same way, and considering that, as far as I know the OP doesn’t have a location selected, the REAL question is why do you always jump to the conclusion that everyone who says something stupid is an American…and why do you think that some idiot posting something on a message board is somehow representative of 300 million+ people??
Also…why not answer the fucking question and fight ignorance instead of this sort of horseshit? Just curious.
As to the OP:
As has been pointed out, what you REALLY meant was probably (some of the) gulf states, not ‘Muslim nations’, since Turkey among others ARE opening their borders to their fellow Muslims (as well as Christians, Jews and others) fleeing the fighting in Syria. The answer is complex. First off, many of those nations not taking in Syria refugees of any religious stripe or none at all don’t have policies for refugees, just policies for immigrants…and many of them don’t have very open immigration policies either. Partly this is because they don’t want to destabilize their own governments and feel that it might do this. Another reason is that they are giving a lot of money and other assistance, so they feel like they are doing what they can within the constraints of maintaining stability in their own nations.
Yeah, it’s been answered…and the answer is ‘a lot’ depending on WHICH ‘Muslim nation’ you are talking about. Even those not letting in a flood of refugees are doing a lot.
One question you might want to ask yourself is…what is America doing? Certainly we are footing the majority of the bill wrt money and other material assistance, but we aren’t opening our own doors to allow the refugees in here. Why? We could…there is precedence. During the wars in the Balkins in the 90’s we allowed a bunch of refugees into the US, allowing them to house in closed down military bases and the unused housing there. Why aren’t we doing that now?
Lebanon has something like 2.5 millions of refugees for a population of around 5 millions. When there’s will be hundreds of millions of refugees in the EU or the USA, then we’ll be in a position to lecture “Muslim nations”.
Seriously, I wonder how they manage such a situation. Even logistically, it hardly seems possible to handle a number of refugees equal to half your population. How can they even get food?
ETA : besides, I’m not sure why Muslim nations should have more of an obligation to take care of refugees just because they happen to also be Muslims. I don’t remember massive numbers of Christian Sudanese being taken in western “Christian nations” at the height of Sudan’s crisis.
I agree with former President Bill Clinton who said it well on Fareed Zakaria’s “GPS” on CNN this morning, fund the refugees in places like Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and elsewhere, and allow the children to go to school, and fund those who we allow into our countries. In the longer term, ending the war which is the obvious cause of the massive influx.
I also wished more countries would allow refugees to work, it is better for them and for the nations. Blows my mind why nations like Turkey don’t allow it.