OPINION 

United States and global policymakers seem wedded to the idea, as Israel contemplates - at the time of this writing, an invasion of Rafah, that the Palestinians have "nowhere to go."

The United Nations’ top humanitarian official, Martin Griffiths, has said it. The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, asked rhetorically, "They [the Palestinians] are going to evacuate. Where? To the moon? Where are they going to evacuate these people?"

Germany’s foreign minister Annalena Baerbock has chimed in: "Over a million refugees have sought protection there and have nowhere to go."

American officials have also gotten in on the action.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, "There is no effective way of getting them out of the way and to safety." An unnamed official said, "You have 1.3 million people in Rafah, and they have nowhere to go."

What’s remarkable about so many prominent individuals coming to the exact same conclusion is that it is so obviously incorrect.

Gaza borders Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, a vast, sparsely populated desert.

There's no reason that Egypt, with the financial and logistical assistance of the Arab world and the broader global community, including the U.S., could not build temporary housing for Palestinians fleeing combat in Gaza.

The only "reason" cited is Arab resistance to the idea.

The Arab countries' collective justification for their refusal to lift a finger for their supposed "brothers" is that the Palestinians are deeply connected to their land.

But for whom is this not true?

Countless people have had to flee their homes in wartime.

This actually is the norm in war.

Millions of Ukrainians fled their country after the Russian invasion.

They were warmly welcomed in Poland and other countries.

Egypt and the other Arab countries are doing the exact opposite.

And the U.S., instead of pushing back or insisting that more be done to house the Palestinians, has accepted their rhetoric, even incorporating it into its own messaging.

"They cannot, they must not be pressed to leave Gaza," Blinken said, while also lecturing Israel about minimizing civilian casualties.

It doesn’t seem to have occurred to Blinken that these are mutually exclusive positions. The U.S. is essentially insisting that Palestinian civilians stay in an active war zone, and simultaneously expressing concern when there are civilian casualties.

This policy plays exactly into Hamas’s cynical strategy of using human shields.

It puts Israel in an impossible position where it must choose between declining to fight genocidal terrorists committed to destroying the Jewish state or bearing withering international criticism.

A double standard certainly seems at play when it comes to Israel.

When Poland prevented Middle Eastern refugees seeking entry from Belarus, Human Rights Watch wagged its finger: "It’s unacceptable that an EU country is forcing people, many fleeing war and oppression, back into what can only be described as hellish conditions in Belarus."

After Hungary built border fences along the Serbian and Croatian borders to prevent migrants from entering the country, it was universally condemned. Then-UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon said it was "extremely concerning" and that we "should not be building fences or walls."

A spokeswoman for the European Commission gravely intoned, "We have only just torn down walls in Europe; we should not be putting them up."

The foreign minister of France called the fence "scandalous." A German company that manufactures barbed wire refused to sell its product to Hungary because "razor wire is for criminals."

Yet, Egypt has not only explicitly refused Palestinian refugees, but has also built concrete walls topped with barbed wire, backed by tanks and armored personnel carriers. King Abdullah II of Jordan declared, "No refugees in Jordan, no refugees in Egypt."

And no one has uttered a peep in protest, including the U.S.

The U.S. has leverage over Egypt but declines to use it. Egypt receives $1.3 billion annually in military aid from the U.S. Why do Israel’s critics and some voices within the administration threaten to withhold aid from Israel, but refuse to apply the same pressure to Egypt?

The U.S. should push Egypt to open its border, temporarily house refugees (with help from the Arab countries and the international community), or risk losing a significant chunk of military aid.

There is a safe and secure nearby place for Palestinian civilians to go, despite propaganda to the contrary.

Many Arab countries in the region clearly care more about generating bad public relations for Israel than they do about saving Palestinian lives and protecting them from urban battles between Israel and the terrorist army of Hamas.

There is no reason for the U.S. to follow suit.

Evan Nierman is founder and CEO of global strategic communication firm Red Banyan, and Jared Sorhaindo is a senior account manager.