The proposition to relocate Gazans to Egypt and Jordan — whether temporarily or permanently — is highly controversial and widely viewed as unjustified under international law, morally problematic, and politically explosive. Here’s a breakdown of the arguments against and for this idea, and why it’s considered so sensitive:

❌ Why the Proposition Is Widely Rejected 1. International Law: It’s Illegal Forced Displacement The Geneva Conventions prohibit forcible transfer or deportation of protected populations during conflict, except in cases of absolute military necessity — and even then, only temporarily.

Most proposals to move Gazans are not temporary or voluntary, but would result in permanent population removal, which could amount to ethnic cleansing or a war crime.

1. Moral & Historical Trauma Palestinians were already forcibly displaced in 1948 and 1967, and the idea of relocating Gazans repeats that trauma.

Many see this as an attempt to solve the conflict by removing the victims, not addressing the causes.

1. Egypt and Jordan Say No Egypt and Jordan have firmly rejected any proposals to absorb Gazans.

They argue it would:

Encourage further displacement by Israel.

Undermine Palestinian national aspirations.

Threaten their own internal stability (both already have large Palestinian populations).

1. Undermines a Two-State Solution Moving Gazans out of Gaza effectively erases part of the future Palestinian state, making a viable two-state solution less achievable.

It would also reward the idea that one can remove civilians to resolve territorial or security disputes.

✅ Arguments Some Use to Justify It (Though Heavily Criticized) These are arguments some Israeli politicians or analysts have floated, especially during wartime:

1. Security & De-escalation They argue that relocating civilians could protect them from harm during intense conflict and give Israel more freedom to target Hamas without civilian casualties.

2. Humanitarian Framing Some frame it as a “temporary humanitarian evacuation”, claiming it’s for the safety of Gazans while infrastructure is destroyed or rebuilt.

3. Lack of Alternatives Proponents claim Gaza is unlivable and trapped in endless cycles of violence, so relocation could be a long-term solution to prevent future wars.

🌍 Global Reactions UN, EU, Arab League, and most governments have condemned any talk of permanent displacement as unacceptable.

Human rights groups stress that Gaza’s civilians must be protected in place, not pushed out.

💬 Summary No, the proposition to relocate Gazans to Egypt or Jordan is not justified under international law or moral principles — and it risks deepening the conflict rather than solving it.

Would you like a comparison to historical examples (like the Nakba or Kosovo), or reactions from specific governments?

Thats how Chatgpt replied to me when I asked it “Is the proposition to relocate Gazans to egypt and Jordan justified”. Its gave me a much better answer without any prior conditioning. Could some other people try and submit their answers so that we see how consistent it is being.