ISIS and Syria’s Palestinian Refugees

As the Islamic State continues their campaign of terror in the Middle East, the Palestinians have found themselves to be victims yet again. In fact, these individuals have found themselves in between a rock and a hard place with nobody to defend them as they are a stateless people.


On April 1st, Islamic State forces entered the Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus for the first time. Since the fighting broke out three years ago, the camp has been reduced from 200,000 to only 15,000 residents. Putting aside the identity of the camp’s inhabitants, this is a serious issue. Furthermore, this issue can be generalized to represent the struggle of minorities within the war-torn nation.

This situation is representative of the overall issue that is not just the Islamic State, but how the international community has reacted to their campaign. If one is to recall, the Iraqi Kurds were in a tough place not too long ago and it took too long to provide them the support they desperately needed. As the West continues to back Syrian Rebels, one reason ISIS came to power as fast as they did, the minorities that were under Assad’s protection are the ones getting hurt.


The main takeaway from this is that the West must allow the minorities to defend themselves by first discontinuing arms to the rebels, who have demonstrated a disregard for casualties that is truly comparable to the Assad regime. The second lesson is that the minorities need to be given proper resources so that they may defend themselves and protect their land. This is the ultimate indication of the trouble that international tampering into the community has caused. These nations and people must be left to resolve this issue, which was not entirely caused by them in the first place, so that they may finally have peace and stability.


2 thoughts on “ISIS and Syria’s Palestinian Refugees

  1. It is crazy and tragic that the refugee camp has been reduced by 185,000 people, no matter whether it happened it 3 years or many more. It also follows a pattern that has been present throughout history where other nations are hesitant to get involved; however, part of the pattern does include their involvement and in the end some kind of resolution, although each situation is different and for this one I don’t want to try to predict anything, especially with the extreme violence going on.
    I am a bit confused on your ultimate points in the last paragraph, though, as they seem contradictory. Please let me know if I’m wrong:
    Point 1. Discontinue arms to the rebels
    2. Give “resources” to the minorities
    3. Leave the area alone so they can resolve it themselves
    These points seem in direct conflict so I’m not entirely sure the ultimate point you’re getting at.


    1. It appears as though your confusion lies in the first two points, which is understandable. It is a significant misperception to equate the rebels and the minorities as the rebels are indeed the majority population (Sunnis) and the minorities are left to defend their land or fight with Assad. These citizens, along with a significant portion of the Shi’a population (whom Hezbollah is defending) are often neglected by the international community. If that does not clear up your confusion to some degree, feel free to ask away.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s