It seems that President Donald began to designate projects for self-government as an alternative to the establishment of states, as it is an alternative to secession that leads to independence, as well as an alternative to integration based on citizenship, which has become difficult to achieve in light of the prevailing military clashes, but it remains the middle solution that resolves conflicts and ends intractable crises, considering that this solution serves the purposes of preserving the self-identity of communities within the framework of self-government, and fulfills the desires of the central states for political sovereignty and the aspirations of the communities for territorial specificity that serves the purposes of recognizing subsidiary identity. Within the framework of the general sovereignty of the Central States, provided that the self-government to be formed comes within a UN resolution issued for this purpose.

It is the solution that enables it to achieve the aspirations of the parties, as well as to resolve inter-conflicts. This means the totality of the solution that gives each party the formal title for what it wants, even if it does not give the desired content of the conflict that leads to the demographic exclusion/geographical separatism of this or that party, and it is the given that will form a consensual basis for its interests that moves away from exclusion as well as away from secession in light of the lack of consensus on the issue of integration under the banner of the state of citizenship, which will be far from many societies if this approach is adopted. To be an alternative to the political geography on which the methodology of states and nations in its current form is based.

It is the model that is being crystallized in the Moroccan Sahara region through the concept of “true self-rule with international legitimacy that includes details.” It can also be demonstrated in the Sudanese Darfur region to resolve the ongoing conflict in Sudan as an alternative to the state of separation that took place with the south. It is the same option that is important to drop, as it is believed to end the complexities of the Palestinian issue in all its circumstances by forming a self-government in the West Bank, another government in Jerusalem, and a different government in the Gaza Strip. The same problems can also be settled by countries and societies. Others include the Kurds, Druze, Tuareg, and other models of states that failed to form a “citizenship state,” as described in the conclusions reached by the recommendations of the American decision-making kitchen, which recommended following regional models with regional determinants and titles of true self-government that would be greater in content than federalism and less than confederation, but would still preserve the identity of the communities within regional specificity, while the central states would still control the political geography within their sovereign borders.

Perhaps these self-government projects, which are expected to be explained with projections that are not optional, but rather through an imposed obligatory duty, are found by some politicians to constitute the gateway to the ideal solution to the intractable problems in the societies of the global south that still live in the form of states, but are far from the content of their formation, and this is a model that the Sykes-Picot program for the Arab region did not achieve when it demarcated the political geography of nations and states, due to its lack of achieving the desired set of stability that these regimes were supposed to achieve, as they put it. The Decision Kitchen, which presented the requirements for submitting a program of self-government projects proposed to end intractable crises, but it may be the door and may constitute the ground through which the goals of re-dismantling and reassembling the political geography of the homelands’ stables can be implemented. This is what makes this program contain major caveats due to the suspicions it contains that affect the stables of countries whose societies are now living in a state of security and stability. It will also constitute that first stage in the program to reshape the structure of the political geography of countries and societies together, so that it is biased. For ethnicity, ethnicity, or sectarianism in explaining the societal contract “constitution” between society and the next regime.

Perhaps the self-government projects that are being discussed in the corridors of the decision-making office in the White House have become considered the best solution, according to these facts, to solve the intractable crises, the implementation of which has begun to constitute a serious dilemma in its general context, as it is based on imposing this agenda without considering the consequences of its application or even discussing it in the targeted incubators before approving it or even stating it according to a solid dialogue platform. This is what makes the issue of self-resistance to this fallen agenda a difficult issue, because the sub-regional identity will be deeper than the national identity when holding the referendum or when Initiating elections in regional frameworks, which will be held in order to give legitimacy to self-governments, especially since this model will be issued in form and in general content by the United Nations as it constitutes protection and legitimacy, which will give self-rule a popular and official impetus through the decisions of international legitimacy.

Despite the lack of legitimacy of the working models for self-government of the popular incubators, especially with the beginning of dropping the program for these solutions, as they will be postponed/postponed until after the solution is imposed by upper projection, the second phase of implementing this program will achieve a degree of legitimacy when regional elections with a sub-identity are held in the places that are approved for this purpose. This means that the “national” central systems will have a marginal and not essential role when the elections are held within the regional frameworks, as the regional or identity votes will have a voice. The sub-community has priority at the expense of the comprehensive national framework, which is the framework that has become a target by virtue of the projects being proposed for solutions to self-government that are presented to the approval table.

Until an analogy is made to what is presented to express the opinion, the fragmentation of the Palestinian struggle identity through local governments separated from each other by approach, as in the terms of reference for self-government in the West Bank, others in the Gaza Strip, and a central government of pluralism in Jerusalem, will be pure reservation in form as well as in general content on the part of the Palestinian people, whose struggle is based on the idea of ​​preserving the independence of its decision and clarifying its identity to be unified from within as well as in the diaspora.

This is a given that must be taken into account when projecting self-solutions on the region and its central issue in particular, especially since Palestine has become an icon of freedom for all of humanity. Liquidating the Palestinian issue in this way is found by many informed politicians to be unfair and will not be carried by generations or preserved by peoples, and will not be acceptable to everyone, especially since the issue of projecting solutions in this way will re-shuffle the cards again and will enter the region into another whirlpool according to which the American administration will not be able to control the atmosphere of the region in the event of an outbreak. Its spark again, especially since the points of contact between the Israeli people and neighboring countries are zero points with the continuation of escalation with the aim of Israeli control of southern Lebanon and southern Syria.

As for the issue of disrupting the stability of Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey to give autonomy to the UN-recognized Kurdish regions, which are qualitatively armed areas in Iraq and Syria, as well as having a complementary solution in Turkey and another dormant solution in Iran, this disruption would lead to the region entering a state of imbalance that would ravage its stability, and this would result in chaos that would submerge the region if it erupted in a program of creative chaos that would ultimately result in geographical formations within Regional frameworks based on ethnicities or sects, and this is what distances it from the civil form on which its current circumstances are based, especially in the major countries targeted because of the balance of its growth and its diplomatic weight in the world, where Saudi Arabia and Egypt are living in a hostile situation with Ethiopia on the African continent. This is what made some politicians/security forces target its operations in the interior of Somalia, Darfur, and even in Djibouti, and go around it to disrupt the strength of its stables from those who carry the idea. Baptizing Israel as a central state in the region.

This is the targeting that Jordan has become aware of and finds that it constitutes a challenge worthy of political confrontation and the building of security fortifications with the countries of the Arab Levant in order to protect the Arab identity, which has become threatened, as well as the stability of the region as well. Despite the diplomatic situation undertaken by the White House to improve its image through its meetings with the leaders of the Arab region in the White House and President Trump’s attempts to demonstrate manifestations of peace by dealing firmly with his policy towards a ceasefire, all of this is taking place on a hot plate, the consequences of which herald the return of a state of affairs. Escalation again after the end of the current truce period, and this is demonstrated by the state of the prevailing dialogues, which indicate that the next sentence will be hotter than the one carried by the issue of destroying Gaza for the purposes of controlling and acquiring gas and natural materials, in addition to opening an alternative channel to the Suez Canal to control maritime transport in general. What Israel could not achieve through re-occupation and displacement by military force, this can now be achieved by the United States through takeover by means of a UN resolution issued for this purpose that is not classified until the end date of the temporary phase of the presence of American forces. and international organizations in the Gaza Strip.

This is the result, the results of which mean a situation of varying form and content, because targeting Iran in general took what was its results in content in favor of Iran, as it has come to represent its movement at the negotiating table, as well as in favor of Turkey, which succeeded in changing the Syrian regime and legitimizing its presence. It is also entering the Gaza Strip as a major player, and this is happening at the expense of the Arab region deep in its east. From a complementary approach, what happened of excessive use of force in the Gaza Strip was aimed at terrorizing the countries of the region in order to buy weapons from American companies and The companies of the Central Powers were not only targeting acquisition and displacement in Palestine, which is the outcome that analysts find constitutes a state of division between Israel, Iran and Turkey after the end of the issue of repositioning these countries to be tightly framed under the American umbrella so that each of them bears the characteristic of a new functional role, and it is the program that politicians find to have a significant impact on regional security and international peace, which now requires a serious redress and not an implicit redress based on understanding for the sake of containment.

If these policies in the past served the issue of Israeli-Iranian maneuvers and their enclaves, they may not be useful in the foreseeable future in light of the disruption of the demographic composition of Arab societies, which clearly began with the closure of the Gaza Strip file and the American administration’s procrastination on the issue of recognizing the Palestinian state despite the flood of recognition that accompanied the issue of emphasizing the two-state solution as the basis for implementing international legitimacy resolutions. This is what made the American administration’s policy inconsistent with the general context, as it differed between a statement of what it says and a statement of what it does, as it This analysis highlights the paradoxes implicit in these policies, which recommends the need for Arab societies to rally around their leadership through a participation program provided for this purpose, and to strengthen channels of communication between the countries of the Arab Levant in order to fortify their climates and for their countries to come together security-wise, economically, and above all politically.

Based on the above, working to strengthen the content of national unity in the form as well as in the general content requires consolidating the concepts of unity based on citizenship by unifying the ranks within the security framework as well as in the military framework, so that everyone is united in unity of blood behind the Hashemite leadership and closing the ranks so that only fresh air can penetrate them, provided that the precautionary strategy is gradually completed in order to localize investments through the return of competencies that are able to build productive facilities inspired by shaping the characteristics of the productive distinguishing mark, as well as Jordan presenting its project towards a productive economy to transform Jordan is moving from a state of residence to a state of work. This also requires launching a special program that raises the Jordanian passport’s rankings for entry into countries of the world based on the great relations of our Hashemite leadership, as well as working to implement the local government project as it is able to develop a comprehensive plan for investment, which are the levers that will protect the state and its institutions by transforming the next turning point into a platform capable of improving the standard of living of the citizen, and working to expand the message of national construction to include the geographical whole and the demographic whole in order to protect the national self from an atmosphere of erosion. And the weathering that may be caused by the repercussions of solutions to the formulas for self-government.