I'm not sure how you could say this when a few lines down you acknowledge that persecution would probably occur, but seriously, what do you think would happen?
Based on everything we've read/seen, it would mean the expulsion of every Jew (nice case of history repeating itself). All the other ME and North African countries have expelled their Jews, and there's no reason to think they'd take them back.
So, basically, another dispersal of the Jews, only this time there's only one region they can go to.
The Hamas Charter explicitly labels Palestine an Islamic state, and Jerusalem an Islamic city. There's no ambiguity there. Even the 1947 plan expected Jerusalem to be a separately administered zone for the three faiths, and even under Israel, there's various levels of access allowed (e.g. Al Asqua Mosque allows Jews and Christians to come around it, but not pray on it, despite being built on a former Jewish site).
Hamas claims it respects religious pluralism, but it hasn't happened. Not in Gaza. And while not responsible, it hasn't occurred anywhere in the ME apart from Lebanon's power sharing agreement, and we know what Jordan did to East Jerusalem when it occupied the West Bank.
Well, how far do you want to go back?
I mean, rhetorical question, but on the subject at hand, I usually go as far back as the 19th century. It's true that de-Christianisation began as soon as Islam emerged, but the process accelerated from the 20th century.
To the above:
-Al Quaida was formed out of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
-The origins of ISIS are murky, but while it's absolutely true that the invasion of Iraq created a power vacuum that allowed it to take power, not only does its founding pre-date Iraq, but its ideology is rooted in the writings of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist texts. ISIS, or some variant of it, would likely exist without any kind of interferance, at least if we assume that ideology = outcome.
-As for the reduction of Christianity as a whole...maybe. I say "maybe," because everything I've read on the subject doesn't disprove the economic thesis, but I haven't seen much that backs it up. Ask why Christianity isn't a thing, and "persecution" is the main result. Even if we buy the idea that the de-Christianization is due to Western interferance (which isn't unreasonable, there's likely truth to that), the persecution has gone on in countries regardless - see Saudi Arabia and Egypt for example. The closest I've seen to the economic thesis is the basis of economic times being tough, ergo, use Christians as scapegoats. If it was simply "bad economy, emmigrate," you'd expect to see similar percentages leave.
To the first point, maybe. I mean, the region has many legitimate gripes with Western interferance, but while I've read of some Islamists framing such things as "the return of crusading Christians" (or similar phrases), just as often, it's a case of Islam vs. secularism/godlessnes - certainly that's the case in Europe right now.
To the latter point, debatable. At the start of the 20th century, the ME was about 20% Christian. As of 2016, it was 3-4%, and went into overdrive in the last 15 years. Some of that last 15 could be down to stuff like Afghanistan and Iraq, but there's also the Arab Spring, which didn't turn out well for Christians, as sectarian conflict sprung up. You're right about Israel, yes, but the de-Christianization (and de-Jewification) process has gone on all around it. If the de-Christianization was entirely due to Western intervention, you'd have expected to see Christian populations remain in place in the countries unaffected by it, but that hasn't been the case.
Also, Christians don't do well in Muslim countries, period, and that's outside the ME. In contrast, 90% of all religious terrorist groups are Islamic. Doesn't take much to find out why.
Relative as in percentage, or absolute? Because in absolute terms, the Christian population in Lebanon has gone up (in part due to refugees).
Um, yes? Israel's expelled non-Jewish people, and declared itself a Jewish state.
I mean, sure, unless Hamas succeeds in its goals, we can never be 100% sure of what it would do, but we can look at what has happened under Hamas (de-Christianization within Gaza), and in surrounding Islamic states (near complete de-Jewification and significant de-Christianization), and in Jerusalem and the East Bank under Jordan (further de-Jewification). The region's hand a taste of what Islamic states mean for non-Muslims, whereas in contrast, Israel's done better in protecting minorities within its borders than other countries, which includes access to holy sites in Jerusalem (something the Jordanians flat-out refused when they controlled East Jerusalem).
I fully agree that Israel has done shit things, and continues to do shit things, and I'd like it to stop doing shitty things (it could start by freezing settlements and evictions) but by any measure, living under Hamas would be worse. Both of their charters, their history, and the history of Islamic states in the region demonstrates this.
