If a Pan-Syrian, Pan-Arab or Pan-Islamic state existed, a resistance organization like Hezbollah would actually not stop until Palestine was liberated. Hence the British and French imperialists carved out Bilad Al-Sham into Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon. It benefited them and the Zionists, not the Palestinians. Hamas is Pan-Islamist, Fatah, Ba’athists and the PFLP are Pan-Arab, SSNP is Pan-Syrian. Who is pro-Sykes-Picot?
Also how tf do I get called a Zionist for posting a survey on how to exercise Palestinian self-determination. That doesn’t even make any sense.
Balkanization always only benefits imperialists. Any Marxist should recognize that very simple truth. Obviously the Middle East would be better off and better able to resist Zionism and western imperialism if it was united, and obviously the imperialists drew the borders of former colonies the way they did precisely in order to create division, prevent unity and have an easier time exploiting and controlling the region. This applies not just to West Asia but Africa and every other formerly colonized region. This doesn’t mean that the national identities that have formed as a result of these borders can be ignored - that would be idealism. But we also have to remind ourselves that the national question does not necessarily have to be answered only with nation states. We can and should allow for the possibility of multi-national, multi-ethnic union states wherever this makes sense to better strengthen a region’s ability to defend against colonialism and imperialism.