The Palestinian Dilemma “Part One”: “Which Piece Of Land Do You Mean?” The Arab Mentality from Islamization, Palestinianization, to Cantonization (Published)
This paper examines at the most complicated and intractable dilemmas for the century from 1914-2014, made by the hand of its people. The researcher debates the Palestinian dilemma which has shaped and created in the Arab-Palestinian mentalities, before its formation on the ground, as well as three chronic and fatal defects in their attitudes: Palestinianization of the (Muslim/Arab) mentality, Islamization of the (Palestinian) Cause, and Cantonization (fragmentation and shorthand the meaning of) the Land. In short, this study plans to explore the Arab-Palestinian dilemma, the “Piece” of “Land” of “Southern Syria” in 1948, the two peoples, the backwardness and modernization of Palestine from Ottoman Empire to Jewish settlement, and the Great Powers and “Refashioning” of “Greater Syria” from 1917-48. However, this work has entirely framed the main aspects and manifestations of the “Palestinian Dilemma” through the three endless imperfections of Arab culture and their attitudes; Palestinianization, Islamization and Cantonization; in the same context, the Palestinians (or even Arabs) have no single answer for the very simple question: “Which Piece of land they mean and want alike?” or which Palestine precisely in “Southern Syria”: Greek “Philistia”, Roman “Syria Palaestina”, Byzantine “Palaestina”, Ottoman-Mamluk province, Jordan, Israel, West Bank or Gaza? Along with the real blame that the Palestinians have dual standards in dealing with their (past) enemy “the Israelis”, they have a stereotype for Jews in terms of their creative energies, perhaps due to religion. The Palestinians in reality rely on Israeli services and products, which appears to onlookers in the Palestinian-Israeli clash as a form of “Mental Schizophrenia”.
Keywords: Cantonization, Islamization, Palestinian Dilemma, Palestinianization, Schizophrenia., chronic
THE PALESTINIAN DILEMMA “PART TWO”: HISTORICAL TUTELAGE…..OR…..POLITICAL GUARDIANSHIP! THE PALESTINIAN ATTITUDE TOWARD NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY TILL 1967! (Published)
This paper examines an alternate version of the Palestinian dilemma historically rooted in their selves, and over the ages and times got to be as a main component and the hallmark of their culture and a chronic flaw alike; existence under historical tutelage and political guardianship. Shockingly, the Palestinians prepared – according to their history – to live under the control and governance of their conquerors or victors, in addition to experience the sense of oppressed colonized people under the weight of colonizers. The present examination attempts to investigate the Palestinian dilemma; people under historical tutelage and political guardianship until 1967, and to focus on the notions of the nation, nationalism and national sovereignty. Another aim is exploring Palestine, a land without any national sovereignty and the Palestinian attitude toward it until 1967, alongside nationalism and the Palestinian national movement. This led to emergence, reformation, and said implications until 1967. The analyst infers that the most exceedingly awful chronicled problem, for any individuals, that they habituated to live under tutelage and political guardianship, as this paper demonstrated concerning the Palestinians. Both Palestinian and Arab neighboring pioneers never had any accurate patterns or disposition to secure an independent state in Palestine from the fall of Ottoman Empire until UN allotment was arranged in 1947, or even during and after the 1948 war. Additionally, the Palestinian national movement was unable to lead its people to national sovereignty in their territory in 1967!
Keywords: Guardianship, Nationalism, Palestinian Dilemma, Sovereignty., Tutelage
THE PALESTINIAN DILEMMA “PART ONE”“WHICH PIECE OF LAND DO YOU MEAN?” THE ARAB MENTALITY FROM ISLAMIZATION, PALESTINIANIZATION, TO CANTONIZATION (Published)
This paper examines at the most complicated and intractable dilemmas for the century from 1914-2014, made by the hand of its people. The researcher debates the Palestinian dilemma which has shaped and created in the Arab-Palestinian mentalities, before its formation on the ground, as well as three chronic and fatal defects in their attitudes: Palestinianization of the (Muslim/Arab) mentality, Islamization of the (Palestinian) Cause, and Cantonization (fragmentation and shorthand the meaning of) the Land. In short, this study plans to explore the Arab-Palestinian dilemma, the “Piece” of “Land” of “Southern Syria” in 1948, the two peoples, the backwardness and modernization of Palestine from Ottoman Empire to Jewish settlement, and the Great Powers and “Refashioning” of “Greater Syria” from 1917-48. However, this work has entirely framed the main aspects and manifestations of the “Palestinian Dilemma” through the three endless imperfections of Arab culture and their attitudes; Palestinianization, Islamization and Cantonization; in the same context, the Palestinians (or even Arabs) have no single answer for the very simple question: “Which Piece of land they mean and want alike?” or which Palestine precisely in “Southern Syria”: Greek “Philistia”, Roman “Syria Palaestina”, Byzantine “Palaestina”, Ottoman-Mamluk province, Jordan, Israel, West Bank or Gaza? Along with the real blame that the Palestinians have dual standards in dealing with their (past) enemy “the Israelis”, they have a stereotype for Jews in terms of their creative energies, perhaps due to religion. The Palestinians in reality rely on Israeli services and products, which appears to onlookers in the Palestinian-Israeli clash as a form of “Mental Schizophrenia
Keywords: Cantonization, Islamization, Palestinian Dilemma, Palestinianization, Schizophrenia., chronic
The Palestinian Dilemma “Part two”: Historical Tutelage……or……..Political Guardianship! The Palestinian attitude toward national sovereignty till 1967! Khaled Abdelhay Elsayed (Review Completed - Accepted)
This paper examines an alternate version of the Palestinian dilemma historically rooted in their selves, and over the ages and times got to be as a main component and the hallmark of their culture and a chronic flaw alike; existence under historical tutelage and political guardianship. Shockingly, the Palestinians prepared – according to their history – to live under the control and governance of their conquerors or victors, in addition to experience the sense of oppressed colonized people under the weight of colonizers. The present examination attempts to investigate the Palestinian dilemma; people under historical tutelage and political guardianship until 1967, and to focus on the notions of the nation, nationalism and national sovereignty. Another aim is exploring Palestine, a land without any national sovereignty and the Palestinian attitude toward it until 1967, alongside nationalism and the Palestinian national movement. This led to emergence, reformation, and said implications until 1967. The analyst infers that the most exceedingly awful chronicled problem, for any individuals, that they habituated to live under tutelage and political guardianship, as this paper demonstrated concerning the Palestinians. Both Palestinian and Arab neighboring pioneers never had any accurate patterns or disposition to secure an independent state in Palestine from the fall of Ottoman Empire until UN allotment was arranged in 1947, or even during and after the 1948 war. Additionally, the Palestinian national movement was unable to lead its people to national sovereignty in their territory in 1967!
Keywords: Guardianship, Nationalism, Palestinian Dilemma, Sovereignty., Tutelage
THE PALESTINIAN DILEMMA “PART THREE”: THE LEADERLESS 1918-48; WHENEVER THE ENEMY SELECTS HIS ENEMY’S LEADER! (Published)
There has been constrained consideration paid to the issue of the Palestinian historical dilemma, which is politically known as “leaderless,” the period ranging from the fall of the Ottoman Empire until Nakbah (catastrophe) war in 1948. The researcher endeavors to shed light on this socio-political issue that created the squandering of several chronicled opportunities, rights and political gains for the Palestinian people. This study means to audit several sorts and meanings of leadership, the fundamentals of selecting the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in the period from the Ottoman Empire until the British Mandate. Who precisely selects the Palestinian leaders? Or used with a different meaning: when the enemy selects his enemy’s leader. Moreover, this paper assumes that the Palestinian grand mufti Haj Amin al- Husseini could not fill in the vacuum, and thus Palestine came about to be “leaderless.” It struggles to gain only one goal: “autonomous statehood” to be alongside an “Israeli state”. However, al- Husseini had no any sense or character of leadership; he did not have qualifications, skills, or even charisma that other well-known national leaders such as Herzl, Gandhi, Mandela, or Ben-Gurion had. In addition, the researcher thinks it intelligently happened in light of the fact that he was chosen deliberately and exceptionally well by his great enemy: “the Jewish and Zionist leader
Keywords: Hostility, Leaderless, Mufti, Palestinian Dilemma, Religious-Economic-Political Vacum
THE PALESTINIAN DILEMMA “PART FOUR”: COEXISTING……HATRED…..SEPARATING…..EXPULSION…..APARTHEID; INCREDIBLE STORY IN THE PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI CONFLICT 1914-49 (Published)
This study deals with the Psycho-Political relationship between the Abrahamic cousins, namely Jews and Arabs, from the end of the Ottoman period until 1949. The absent of socio-political wisdom or rational decisions led to the “incredible story” of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict 1914-49. However this paper aims to investigate the separatism attitude in the Palestinian-Israeli mentality: “culture” or “reaction”?, the principles of peaceful coexistence and religion role in peace-building between humans, the co-existence, co-operation and trust between Palestinians and Jews from Ottoman empire till establishing of Israel, the road for hatred and war between Israelis and Palestinians, and the British, Israeli and Palestinian target till the 1948 war; “peaceful coexistence” or “apartheid”? Finally, this paper concludes that the conflict between the Palestinian and Israelis has classified and marked by unsteady cases. The start point between them was coexisted (partially peacefully with some fears), after that turned into hatred (because of various extremist and bloody actions), after that both of them preferred the separatism attitude. Then it followed by the war between them and expulsion policy from the land by the hand of one of them toward the other side, to become finally apartheid (by separation wall) between both forever.
Keywords: Apartheid, Coexisting, Conflict, Expulsion, Hatred, Incredible, Palestinian Dilemma, Separating