Egypt's el-Sisi rejects Trump's suggestion to take in Palestinians
President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has said Egypt will not participate in the displacement of Palestinians, days after United States President Donald Trump suggested that Arab countries take in Palestinians from the war-torn Gaza Strip.
'Regarding what is being said about the displacement of Palestinians, it can never be tolerated or allowed because of its impact on Egyptian national security,' el-Sisi told a press conference on Wednesday.
'The deportation or displacement of the Palestinian people is an injustice in which we cannot participate,' he said.
Almost all of Gaza's 2.2 million residents have been displaced at least once since Israel launched its war on the territory in October 2023 in response to a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.
After the Israel-Hamas ceasefire took effect earlier this month, Trump touted a plan to 'clean out' the Gaza Strip and relocate its residents to Jordan and Egypt. He returned to the idea this week, calling for Palestinians to move to 'safer' locations such as Egypt or Jordan.
Moving Gaza's inhabitants could be done 'temporarily, or could be long term', he said.
But the idea of relocating Palestinians has long been rejected by Palestinians and regional countries, who say it would undermine the notion of Palestinian statehood and foment instability in the Middle East.
Jordan's Minister of Foreign Affairs Ayman Safadi has also rejected Trump's suggestion, saying 'Jordan is for Jordanians and Palestine is for Palestinians'.
Fear of displacement
El-Sisi said his government would work with the Trump administration to achieve peace between Israel and Palestine 'that is based on the two-state solution'.
'The solution… is the establishment of a Palestinian state,' el-Sisi said. 'The solution is not to remove the Palestinian people from their place.'
Displacement has been a recurrent theme in Palestinian history and inhabitants of the Gaza Strip fear that if they leave, they may never be allowed to return.
Since the start of Israel's 15-month war on Gaza, Arab countries have repeatedly warned against any plans to push Palestinians into neighbouring countries, saying such a move would be reminiscent of the Nakba in 1948, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forcibly displaced during the fighting that surrounded the creation of the Israeli state.
Egypt and Jordan have peace agreements with Israel and also support the creation of a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem. They fear that the permanent displacement of Gaza's population could make a future state harder to realise.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
16 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
As Israel strikes Iran, what happened to ‘America First'?
Early this morning, Israel conducted unprecedented strikes on Iran, killing civilians along with senior military officials and scientists and basically forcing the Iranian government into a position in which it must retaliate – as if there already was not enough going on in the Middle East, particularly with Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Israel, of course, thrives on perpetual upheaval and mass killing, all the while portraying itself as the victim of the folks it is slaughtering and otherwise antagonising. True to form, the Israelis have now cast Iran as the aggressor, with the country's nonexistent nuclear weapons allegedly posing a 'threat to Israel's very survival', as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared in his statement announcing the launch of 'Operation Rising Lion'. Unlike Iran, Israel does happen to possess nuclear weapons – which just renders the whole situation all the more flammable. But for Netanyahu, at least, keeping the region in flames is a means of saving his own skin from domestic opposition and embroilment in various corruption charges. The United States, for its part, has denied collaboration in the Israeli attacks, although just yesterday US President Donald Trump acknowledged that an Israeli strike on Iran 'could very well happen'. The US head of state, who in March trumpeted the fact that he was 'sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job' in Gaza, has more recently gotten under Netanyahu's skin by urging a diplomatic solution with Iran, among other insufficiently belligerent moves. By launching a so-called 'preemptive strike' on Iran, then, Israel has effectively preempted the prospect of any sort of peaceful solution to the issue of whether or not the Iranians should be permitted to pursue a civilian nuclear enrichment programme. Already on Wednesday, Trump confirmed that US diplomatic and military personnel were being 'moved out' of certain parts of the Middle East 'because it could be a dangerous place, and we'll see what happens'. Now that the place appears to have become definitively more dangerous, the White House has scheduled a National Security Council meeting in Washington – with Trump in attendance – for 11 am local time (15:00 GMT). In other words, perhaps, there is no rush to deal with a potentially impending apocalypse without leaving US officials ample time for a leisurely breakfast first. Trump's Secretary of State Marco Rubio has, however, already weighed in on developments, stating: 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region.' Rubio additionally warned: 'Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel.' To be sure, the United States is no stranger to targeting Iranian interests and personnel. Recall the case of the January 2020 US assassination by drone strike of Qassem Soleimani, head of the Quds Force of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which simply further enshrined imperial double standards. The assassination, which took place in Baghdad during Trump's first stint as president, constituted a violation of international law – hardly an aberration in US foreign policy. The killing was so exciting even to members of the liberal US media that, for example, The New York Times swiftly published the opinion by its resident foreign affairs columnist that 'one day they may name a street after President Trump in Tehran'. That day has yet to come – though Trump would have undoubtedly been regarded with less ill will in Tehran had he stuck to the 'America First' policy that is the cornerstone of his second administration. As the name suggests, this policy ostensibly promotes a focus on US citizens and their needs rather than on, you know, bombing people in other countries. And yet the at least tacit endorsement extended by Trump for today's attacks on Iran would seem to call into question American priorities – and raise the possibility that the US is instead putting 'Israel First'. Indeed, this would not be the first time the US government is accused of placing Israel's policy objectives ahead of its own. The billions upon billions of dollars in lethal aid that Republican and Democratic administrations alike have showered upon Israel can scarcely be said to benefit the average US citizen, who would certainly be better off if said billions were invested in, say, affordable housing or healthcare options in the US itself. Understandably, such financial arrangements lend themselves to rumours that Israel is in fact calling the shots in Washington. But at the end of the day, key sectors of US capitalism make a killing off of Israel's regional savagery; you're not going to hear the US arms industry, for instance, complaining that today's assault on Iran doesn't put America first. The Reuters news agency reports that the spokesperson for Iran's armed forces has 'said Israel and its chief ally the United States would pay a 'heavy price' for the attack, accusing Washington of providing support for the operation'. And whatever that price is, Israel's chief ally will no doubt ultimately find that it was all worth it. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
17 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Israel strikes Iran, what happened to ‘America First'?
Early this morning, Israel conducted unprecedented strikes on Iran, killing civilians along with senior military officials and scientists and basically forcing the Iranian government into a position in which it must retaliate – as if there already was not enough going on in the Middle East, particularly with Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Israel, of course, thrives on perpetual upheaval and mass killing, all the while portraying itself as the victim of the folks it is slaughtering and otherwise antagonising. True to form, the Israelis have now cast Iran as the aggressor, with the country's nonexistent nuclear weapons allegedly posing a 'threat to Israel's very survival', as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared in his statement announcing the launch of 'Operation Rising Lion'. Unlike Iran, Israel does happen to possess nuclear weapons – which just renders the whole situation all the more flammable. But for Netanyahu, at least, keeping the region in flames is a means of saving his own skin from domestic opposition and embroilment in various corruption charges. The United States, for its part, has denied collaboration in the Israeli attacks, although just yesterday US President Donald Trump acknowledged that an Israeli strike on Iran 'could very well happen'. The US head of state, who in March trumpeted the fact that he was 'sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job' in Gaza, has more recently gotten under Netanyahu's skin by urging a diplomatic solution with Iran, among other insufficiently belligerent moves. By launching a so-called 'preemptive strike' on Iran, then, Israel has effectively preempted the prospect of any sort of peaceful solution to the issue of whether or not the Iranians should be permitted to pursue a civilian nuclear enrichment programme. Already on Wednesday, Trump confirmed that US diplomatic and military personnel were being 'moved out' of certain parts of the Middle East 'because it could be a dangerous place, and we'll see what happens'. Now that the place appears to have become definitively more dangerous, the White House has scheduled a National Security Council meeting in Washington – with Trump in attendance – for 11 am local time (15:00 GMT). In other words, perhaps, there is no rush to deal with a potentially impending apocalypse without leaving US officials ample time for a leisurely breakfast first. Trump's Secretary of State Marco Rubio has, however, already weighed in on developments, stating: 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region.' Rubio additionally warned: 'Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel.' To be sure, the United States is no stranger to targeting Iranian interests and personnel. Recall the case of the January 2020 US assassination by drone strike of Qassem Soleimani, head of the Quds Force of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which simply further enshrined imperial double standards. The assassination, which took place in Baghdad during Trump's first stint as president, constituted a violation of international law – hardly an aberration in US foreign policy. The killing was so exciting even to members of the liberal US media that, for example, The New York Times swiftly published the opinion by its resident foreign affairs columnist that 'one day they may name a street after President Trump in Tehran'. That day has yet to come – though Trump would have undoubtedly been regarded with less ill will in Tehran had he stuck to the 'America First' policy that is the cornerstone of his second administration. As the name suggests, this policy ostensibly promotes a focus on US citizens and their needs rather than on, you know, bombing people in other countries. And yet the at least tacit endorsement extended by Trump for today's attacks on Iran would seem to call into question American priorities – and raise the possibility that the US is instead putting 'Israel First'. Indeed, this would not be the first time the US government is accused of placing Israel's policy objectives ahead of its own. The billions upon billions of dollars in lethal aid that Republican and Democratic administrations alike have showered upon Israel can scarcely be said to benefit the average US citizen, who would certainly be better off if said billions were invested in, say, affordable housing or healthcare options in the US itself. Understandably, such financial arrangements lend themselves to rumours that Israel is in fact calling the shots in Washington. But at the end of the day, key sectors of US capitalism make a killing off of Israel's regional savagery; you're not going to hear the US arms industry, for instance, complaining that today's assault on Iran doesn't put America first. The Reuters news agency reports that the spokesperson for Iran's armed forces has 'said Israel and its chief ally the United States would pay a 'heavy price' for the attack, accusing Washington of providing support for the operation'. And whatever that price is, Israel's chief ally will no doubt ultimately find that it was all worth it. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Live: Israel launches ‘major strike' on sites in Iran: Reports
Iranian media outlets report explosions northeast of the capital Tehran after a wave of Israeli of Israel says the Israeli air force is launching a 'major strike' on Iran.A US official tells Al Jazeera Arabic that Israel informed Washington of the strikes before launching reported in Tehran came shortly after US President Donald Trump said Washington was committed to diplomacy with Tehran. Update: Date: 2m ago (00:52 GMT) Title: Israeli military says it struck military and nuclear sites in Iran Content: The Israeli military has confirmed that it carried out strikes against Iran, using dozens of jets, saying that it targeted military and nuclear sites. It called the attack 'a precise and integrated preemptive strike based on high-quality intelligence, with the aim of striking the Iranian nuclear programme'. Update: Date: 4m ago (00:50 GMT) Title: Israel bans gatherings, shuts schools and offices after reported strike on Iran Content: In a statement issued by an Israeli military spokesperson, a ban has been ordered 'on educational activities, gatherings, and workplaces, with the exception of essential businesses' across the country starting at 0000 GMT (0300 local time). The order comes after reports that Israel has struck targets in Iran. The statement said that an 'immediate change will take place' in the country's defence policy. 'As part of the changes, it was decided to move all regions of the country from a full activity level to a necessary activity level.' Update: Date: 4m ago (00:50 GMT) Title: Iran's Press TV says residential buildings targeted Content: The official Iranian news outlet shares photos of what it said were residential buildings struck in the apparent Israeli attack. The pictures showed substantial damage to the buildings. Update: Date: 6m ago (00:48 GMT) Title: Several sounds of explosion heard across Tehran Content: We have heard several sounds of explosions here in the capital starting at about 0300 local time. Between six to nine explosions have been reported across the city. I have personally heard at least two of the explosions. The explosions did not happen in just one certain place but rather in different parts of the city. The state television IRIB has also confirmed the explosions and showed footage of the incidents. Update: Date: 13m ago (00:41 GMT) Title: Israeli military confirms strikes: Report Content: The Times of Israel reports that the Israeli military has confirmed attacking Iran in an operation dubbed 'Nation of Lions'. Update: Date: 29m ago (00:25 GMT) Title: Welcome to our live coverage Content: Hello, and thank you for joining our live coverage of Israel's reported air strikes in the Iranian capital, Tehran. Follow this page for continuous updates and analyses.
