[Qem]

A lot of people sought refuge in neighboring countries after the Ukraine invasion, for the duration of the war. At this point a Russian victory seems likely. Can you fathom those Ukrainians being denied entry in the country after the war, because now they are foreigners? Worse, do you think it would be legitimate for them be labeled "foreigners" while even still living inside Ukraine?

[taeric]

This is complicated by the fact that every other refugee situation is handled by an organization that is explicitly rehoming them. At the absolute least, their children will be citizens of the nations they have been moved to. This is in stark contrast to the situation we are talking about, where people can literally be adopted into the refugee status.

Edit: I would also be surprised if Russia does let previous citizens back in to claim any property they had. Do we have reason to think they will?

[edanm]

That's a different situation. They are Ukrainian citizens. There were no Palestinian citizens before because there was no state there, neither Israel nor Palestine.

[Qem]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartography_of_Palestine#/me...

There was land there, they and their ancestors inhabited it for countless generations before present, so they must be considered legitimate citizens, regardless of the names it had back then or today. There was no modern countries in Americas before Europeans arrived, yet we don't call amerindians foreigners because of that.

[wahnfrieden]

States are not necessary for populations to exist or thrive. Politically homogenous states united under a defined hierarchy is a new phenomenon; and much newer than the discovery of agriculture.