Abstract:
This thesis focuses on investigating the political consequences of refugee hosting approaches in divided societies. It does this by conducting a comparative analysis of the hosting strategies used in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. By examining these different approaches, the research aims to shed light on the impact of these policies on the political landscape of these countries. It also highlights the implications of each strategy on the internal political dynamic of host states. The political, social, and economic context in these three pluralist countries is remarkably diverse; each country has its own immigration history. This justifies the reasons behind each country implementing its own refugee accommodation policies, whether they are inclusive or not. What is effective in one country may not be successful in another. The study examines secondary data collected from interviews to conduct comparative refugee hosting policies and understand their implications on domestic politics. Plus, the thesis relies on various indexes including the Fragility State Index and the Global Peace Index to better understand the link between displacement and fragmentation. The results showed that there is a strong correlation between accommodation of refugees and fragmentation in the host country. Based on the findings of the study, if the refugee issue is not handled effectively and ethically, this can lead to external interference, human rights concerns, population pressure, and internal divisions. This research has important implications for organizations, political leaders, and citizens in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. It can help prevent tension and fragmentation and create a stable environment for both refugees and nationals to live with dignity. Thus, it will guide policymakers into strategies that will accommodate refugees while undermining domestic contentions.
