Do you mean Muslim refugees generally?
Here’s 5 reasons for starters:
1. Refugees undermine ISIS recruitment.
2. Accepting refugees deprives ISIS of resources.
3. Refugees counter ISIS propaganda about western countries.
4. Accepting refugees undermines ISIS’s strategy.
5. Accepting refugees provides the U.S. with valuable intelligence against ISIS.
Also for refugees in general:
In the long term since they are generally young and healthy once they integrate into the workforce they boost GDP, they’re less of a strain on the health system and they reduce the cost of state pensions.
21.7 million in Indonesia (8.7% of the population)
2.8 million in Malaysia (9.1%)
900,000 in Albania (30%),
192,000 in Qatar (8.5%)
9.4 million Christians in Egypt (10%),
124,000 in Bahrain (9%)
By comparison Muslims in the West:
2.9 million in Germany (3.7% of the population)
2.9 million in the US (0.9% of the population)
Compared with less than 1 million in all 28 members of the EU together.
You can verify the above in:
– Turkey, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon
– Gulf States
Five of the WEALTHIEST MUSLIM COUNTRIES, listed below, have taken NO Syrian refugees in at all, arguing that doing so would open them up to the “RISK OF TERRORISM.”
5. United Arab Emirates
Although the oil rich countries have handed over aid money, Britain has donated more than Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar combined’./
Revealed: How the five wealthiest Gulf Nations have so far refused to take a single Syrian refugee/
Amnesty International’s Head of Refugee and Migrants’ Rights, Sherif Elsayid-Ali, described their inaction as ‘shameful’.
He said: ‘The records of Gulf countries is absolutely appalling, in terms of actually showing compassion and sharing the responsibility of this crisis… It is a disgrace.’
Exodus: Wealthy gulf nations Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain have not offered to house a single one of four million Syrian refugees . to have fled the war-torn country
A political cartoon pointed fingers at the Gulf nations for their inaction, with a caption which read: ‘Refugees welcomed by: Saudi: 0, Kuwait: 0, Qatar: 0, Emirates: 0, Bahrain: 0’
None have been allowed to enter the (relatively) nearby Gulf nations, who all rank in the world’s top 50 GDPs and have a combined military budget of more than £65 billion, according to Arab expert Sultan Sooud al-Qassemi.
He said: ‘The Gulf must realise that now is the time to change their policy regarding accepting refugees from the Syria crisis. It is the moral, ethical and responsible step to take.’
None of the Gulf countries signed the 1951 Refugee Convention which defines a refugee ‘outside the country of his nationality’ because of ‘fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality’.
Syrians can still apply for ‘costly’ tourist visas and work permits to enter wealthier Gulf nations but they are rarely granted, according to the BBC. (The Daily Mail)
“Arab Monarchies Turn Down Syrian Refugees Over Security Threat:”
“As Europe struggles with a massive refugee influx, Arab Gulf states have come under scrutiny for taking in few refugees.Don’t expect the oil-rich monarchies to change their course anytime soon,experts told DW
The oil-rich Arab Gulf states have high per capita incomes,need labor and share a common language and culture with Syrians, making them in the eyes of many an ideal location for refugees fleeing conflict in Syria.
Yet the Gulf States have taken in only a few hundred refugees, according to data from UNHCR.”(DW)
“Arabs shame ‘Rich Gulf States’ over Refugee Crisis.” .
“For (those) fleeing war in Syria, the doors are closed to the Gulf states, despite the latters’ declared concern over the plight of refugees.
Syrians must have a visa and passport to enter the Gulf monarchies.
Metin Corabatir, who served for 18 years as the spokesperson of the UNHCR and is currently the president of the Research Center on Asylum and Migration in Ankara said: “All countries, including rich Gulf countries, should take in refugees.”
Led by the Saudis and Qatar, the Gulf states push the line that the refugee crisis is the outcome of Western inaction and the Syrian regime’s brutality, even as they throw billions of dollars in supplies and weaponry into the Syrian jihadist cauldron to oust Assad atall costs.
“The Saudis have invested in the Syrian war; now they must invest in refugees,” Ali al-Ahmed, a Saudi scholar at the Institute for Gulf Affairs (IGA), told DW.
By the estimates of IGA, given factors of space,demographics and wealth, “The Gulf States could take in 3 million Refugees, ”, Ali al Ahmed added.
More than 15 million foreign workers – largely from the Indian subcontinent – live and work in the labor-hungry Gulf kingdoms. Locals are a minority in Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait, while in Saudi Arabia and Oman foreigners make up about a quarter of the population. (DW English version)
The Gulf States Have Been Widely Criticized Over Their Treatment Of Migrant Workers:
The kingdoms’ need for labor presents a potentially win-win situation for both Syrians and the Gulf states.
However, the Monarchies prefer to “Bring in Labour from Asia than from other Arab States, due to the perceived THREAT TO SECURITY and the status quo, especially in the wake of the Arab Spring.”
Despite the fact that the Gulf States could take in refugees – THEY WILL NOT”, Corabatri said. . “In reality, if you look at political structure and demographics of the countries, they will never take in a million refugees,” he said.
Al-Ahmed also confirmed that Syrians were thought by the conservative Gulf monarchies to pose a cultural and political risk.
“THE SAUDIS WORRY THAT SYRIANS ARE A SECURITY .” he said. “They have ideas of revolution.(DW Deutsche Weil) .