Arab animosity towards the Palestinians

The Arab countries are firmly against the idea of giving Palestinian Arabs fundamental rights such as citizenship, entitlement to own land or property, the right to work in certain professions, the right to live where they want.
This bizarre and from the human rights viewpoint immoral situation can perhaps be seen most clearly in the Lebanon, but it also rears its ugly head in Arab countries such as Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan, all of which are guilty of human rights crimes of unfathomable cruelty. Zvi Mazel, formerly ambassador to Egypt and Sweden, writes in the Jerusalem Post that this everlasting “refugee status” is being transformed into a ticking bomb – which will detonate in the Arab world.
Strangely enough, the Arab world is not criticised for its immoral and illegal selective treatment of Palestinian Arabs, who among other things are denied citizenship despite living in these Arab countries for up to four generations, while Palestinian Arab Christians are routinely discriminated against even more than their Muslim brethren are.
There is only one country that is criticised in this context – the one country that gives Palestinian Arabs full citizenship, the same right to own property as any other citizen, the same right to engage in any profession, the same right to follow any religion.
That country is the world’s sole Jewish country, Israel. And only Israel is criticised. Israel is criticised although it is the only country in the entire Middle East where everyone irrespective of religion, sexual orientation, skin colour, political affiliation or ethnicity has exactly the same rights as everyone else. By way of contrast, Christian Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have been decimated since the Palestinian Fatah and Hamas governments took over. Christians flee the West Bank and Gaza Strip and apply for asylum in Israel.
It is interesting in this context to note that during its 62 years in existence, there has never been one single Israeli Arab seeking asylum abroad. Australia, Canada, the US, Europe and other countries, on the other hand, all have large immigrant populations of Arabs fleeing persecution in their own Arab home countries. Parallel with the fact that Arabs from the West Bank and Gaza Strip seek asylum in Israel, there are thousands of Muslims from Africa fleeing persecution at home and travelling through various Muslim countries such as Egypt to seek asylum specifically in Israel.
Yet it is Israel that is selected for negative treatment not just by the Arab world – which systematically persecutes its own citizens and denies citizenship to vast swathes of the population – but also by an increasingly dhimmi (subjugated) non-Arab world.
To read an interesting article on how the Arab world and in particular the Palestinian Arabs desperately need the “occupation” in order to justify their insatiable demands, read Jonathan D. Halevy’s article in the Global Law Forum entitled “Why are the Palestinians opposed to ending the occupation?
Read also the sharp analysis written by Abu Khaled Toameh in Hudson New York: “Palestinians in the Arab world: why the silence?
Thus far on why Arabs and other Muslims treat their Palestinian brethren so shabbily. A far more relevant question is why other countries are so silent regarding human rights abuses that increasing numbers of Palestinians and other Arabs are pointing out with such clarity. Why, for instance, is it that Sweden – which happily claims to be the champion of freedom and human rights – refuses to take up the issue of the mistreatment of Palestinians in the Arab world? Why does Sweden continue to spend unfathomable sums of money to maintain a system that tramples Palestinian human rights underfoot in the Arab world – at the same time as Sweden adopts a highly critical and increasingly strident position against Israel, the only country in the Middle East that demonstrably gives Palestinian Arabs equal rights?
Swedish foreign policy under Foreign Minister Carl Bildt appears to have very little to do with common sense, responsibility, human rights and principle.
It appears to have far more to do with Carl Bildt’s ambition to lay the foundation for his continued career on the international stage. Bildt’s plans for his personal future demand massive Swedish investments – from public funds – so that he can buy the “right” friends. Israel is merely an irritant, an obstacle in his path – just as common sense, responsibility, human rights and principle are also obstacles on the path Carl Bildt has staked out for his personal career.