I wrote an article with the same title four years ago, and I intended to repeat the same title at this time.

The phenomenon of immigration began to emerge clearly in Gaza society. I did not expect it to grow in the escalating manner that I clearly observed during my recent visit to some European countries.

The numbers vary regarding the number of migrants from Gaza, but the number is increasing and is cause for concern.

The reason for concern is that one of the main pillars of the conflict with the occupation is demographic. The Zionist colonial project is based on the expulsion of the original Palestinian inhabitants and the replacement of them with new Zionist settlers on their ruins.

The occupation state is uncomfortable because the number of Palestinians in historic Palestine equals or slightly exceeds the number of Israelis. This presents the main strategic dilemma for the occupation state and the Zionist project.

The occupation state cannot repeat the ethnic cleansing models carried out in 1948 with the same means and methods, but it seeks to implement them through other means by narrowing the lives of Palestinians and pushing them towards voluntary migration.

Smotrich announced in the Decisive Plan that the Palestinians have three options: either migration, living as slaves under colonial occupation, or death if they decide to struggle and resist through the power of the occupation army, according to his belief.

The issue of resilience and staying in the homeland is not just a passing phrase; it contradicts the Zionist colonial project and strengthens Palestinian capabilities in facing the existential challenges we face.

The issue is not only about national resilience but also includes investing Palestinian energies and capabilities, which means social capital in increasing the resilience and strength of Palestinian society.

It is unreasonable for a family to invest its financial and educational resources in its child or young person and then employ these results for the benefit of the world's communities outside the Palestinian community.

The presence of the Palestinian individual in world communities means attempting to strip him of his roots and identity, as well as integrating him into the machinery of the new society with its conditions and requirements, which brings him closer to self-interest rather than collective interests related to national concerns.

I believe that there are two main reasons for immigration: the first lies in the harshness of life, the high rates of poverty and unemployment, and the lack of job opportunities, especially for the approximately fifteen thousand graduates in Gaza who find no job opportunities, with more than a thousand of them.

The second reason lies in the shrinking of freedoms resulting from the division and the absence of periodic elections.

Ignoring the phenomenon of immigration and simplifying it by saying that it is a human and global phenomenon is not useful.

We have a unique specificity in the Palestinian situation where the human and the land are the pivot of the conflict.

We are still going through a stage of democratic national liberation that requires preserving both the land and the human.

I believe that the phenomenon of immigration constitutes a negative indicator of the Palestinian national situation, which requires holding a broad meeting to highlight its dangers and formulate plans and programs to address it.