The way in which international solidarity is conceptualized with respect to Palestinian refugees is different from how it is employed when discussing refugees more broadly and has been ignored in refugee law scholarship. International solidarity is generally understood to mean states sharing responsibility for refugees. However, in the Palestinian context, it refers to individuals’ and organizations’ empathetic support for refugees’ struggles and a political commitment to end displacement. If we adopt the latter definition, there are many examples of international solidarity with respect to Palestinians and other refugee groups. Nevertheless, international solidarity in the Palestinian context is not without controversy. I consider what lessons this divergent understanding of international solidarity may have for the refugee regime’s future directions. I discuss how it informs an unidentified tension in the Global Compact on Refugees as well as how it could foster a less elitist and more inclusive approach to international solidarity.

国际团结在巴勒斯坦难民方面的概念化方式与在更广泛地讨论难民时采用的方式不同，并且在难民法学术中被忽略。国际团结通常被理解为国家分担难民责任。然而，在巴勒斯坦的背景下，它指的是个人和组织对难民斗争的同情支持以及结束流离失所的政治承诺。如果我们采用后一种定义，则有许多国际声援巴勒斯坦人和其他难民群体的例子。然而，巴勒斯坦方面的国际团结并非没有争议。我认为这种对国际团结的不同理解可能对难民制度的未来方向有什么教训。我讨论了它如何在全球难民契约中形成一种不明的紧张局势，以及它如何促进国际团结的不那么精英主义和更具包容性的方法。