In the context of the war taking place between Israel and Hamas, it is interesting to see what has been said by other countries. A tangible example is what is said in Jordan through the king. In actual fact we understand that the king does not want any refugees from the Gaza region going either to Jordan nor Egypt. He assumes this context is suspicious because it is as though it is necessary or at least dictated by the circumstances and he thinks it should not occur. But we have to examine things at face value and remember what happened in 1967, and what was the involvement of Jordan and Egypt against Israel, and although both Jordan and Egypt think that there is a humanitarian aid which needs to occur, they do not want this humanitarian aid action to take place on their land. Therefore as we understand, they want a solution to the problem within Gaza and this again is interesting because it actually means that the friendly context which exists between these countries stops at a boundary that is considered a red line. They would prefer a solution within Gaza so that the problems would be confined to that region and we don’t end up with an in fact forced movement to the other two countries, Jordan and Egypt, because they assume that they will essentially transfer problems which exist in Gaza to both countries. And it’s interesting because we in general are talking about humanitarian aid which should occur and it’s important, but each has his own way of presenting that issue, and the procedure of that humanitarian aid is also indicative of what’s in the back of their mind when we are talking about specific aid. If you really want to help a country because you think it has been wronged, then you ought to help it entirely and not under special conditions. Here we are observing these special conditions and we understand that this is more regarding a political decision than a humanitarian one. Consequently, it’s good to keep that in mind when we examine this sort of data, in order to comprehend exactly what we’re saying and that it is the facts of factuality which are interpreted and not the projection of our mind.