Talk:Zuheir Mohsen

Trouw interview

I emailed Trouw, and received a reply from Hans Armee attaching a PDF of the page in question. It's in Dutch so I cannot verify the translation. I have uploaded it here:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=KJ5O64MX

The link may go dead in a while - if so, and if someone wants to view it, message me on my talk page.--Lopakhin (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm having problems viewing it now, since I don't feel like turning on pop-ups and jumping through the hoops that that site imposes... AnonMoos (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, Wikipedia article pages are technically not allowed to refer to Wikipedia talk pages; just extract the maximum amount of info that you can from the PDF file (i.e. the exact newspaper issue, the article headline, the author name, possibly the page number, etc.), and that should be sufficient for a reference. AnonMoos (talk) 22:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... AnonMoos (talk) 09:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is my transcription of the text kindly provided by Lopakhin (just the parts related to our quotation). It seems to me that the "translation" is more like a paraphrase. It correctly conveys the gist of Mohsen's words but is rearranged and non-literal. So it would be nice if someone having good Dutch skills could replace the English by a more faithful translation.

Mohsens opstelling is niet zo verbazingwekkend. Luisterend naar zijn politieke en ideologische opvattingen kan men soms het gevoel niet onderdrukken dat er misschien in de Arabische wereld toch minder is veranderd dan oorspronkelijk werd aangenomen. Volgens Mohsen bestaat er namelijk in feite geen apart Palestijns volk. "Tussen Jordaniërs, Palestijnen, Syriërs en Libanezen bestaan er geen verschillen. Wij maken deel uit van één volk, de Arabische natie. Kijk maar, ik heb familieleden met het Palestijnse, Libanese, Jordaanse en Syrische staatsburgerschap. Wij zijn één volk. Alleen maar om politieke redenen onderschrijven wij zorgvuldig onze Palestijnse identiteit. Het is namelijk van nationaal belang voor de Arabieren om het bestaan van de Palestijnen aan te moedigen tegenover het zionisme. Ja, het bestaan van een aparte Palestijnse identiteit is er alleen om tactische redenen. De stichting van een Palestijnse staat is een nieuw middel om de strijd tegen Israel en voor de Arabische eenheid voort te zetten."

Ook de strategie die Mohsen wil volgen is vrij simpel: "Een aparte Palestijnse entiteit moet voor de nationale rechten opkomen in de dan nog overgebleven bezette gebieden. De Jordaanse regering kan niet namens de Palestijnen in Israel, Libanon of Syrië spreken. Jordanië is een staat met bepaalde grenzen. Het kan geen aanspraak maken op bijvoorbeeld Haifa of Jaffa, terwijl ik wel recht heb op Haifa, Jaffa, Jeruzalem en Beërsheva. Jordanië kan alleen spreken namens de Jordaniërs en de Palestijnen in Jordanië. De Palestijnse staat zou het recht hebben om op te treden namens alle Palestijnen in de Arabische wereld en elders. Als wij eenmaal al onze rechten in geheel Palestina hebben verworven, moeten wij de hereniging van Jordanië en Palestina geen moment uitstellen."

(As an aside, Google Translate renders the word "zionisme" in the first paragraph as "Jewish boys"! Of course it means "Zionism".) Zero^talk 05:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Google's translation is clear, if awkward: "Between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, there are no differences. We are part of a nation, the Arab nation. Look, I have relatives with the Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people. Only for political reasons, we support our Palestinian identity carefully. It is of national interest for the Arabs to the existence of the Palestinians against Zionism encouraging. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons. The foundation of a Palestinian state is a new means to fight against Israel and for Arab unity to continue. A separate Palestinian entity must defend the national rights over the remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian government can not speak for the Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria speak. Jordan is a state with certain limits. It can not claim such Haifa and Jaffa, while I'm right on Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem and Beërsheva. Jordan can speak only for the Jordanians and the Palestinians in Jordan. The Palestinian state would be entitled to act on behalf of all Palestinians in the Arab world and elsewhere. Once we have our rights in Palestine have acquired a whole, we need the reunification of Jordan and Palestine is no time delay"

babylon.com also provides a very similar translation: "Between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese there are no differences. We are part of one people, the Arab nation. Look, I have family members with the Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people. But only for political reasons we subscribe carefully our Palestinian identity. Indeed, it is of national interest for the Arabs to the existence of the Palestinians to encourage against Zionism. A separate Palestinian entity must for the national rights activists in the remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian Government may not on behalf of the Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria speak. Jordan is a state with certain limits. It can be no claim for example Haifa or Jaffa, while I am right in Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem and beërsheva. Jordan can only speak on behalf of the Jordanians and the Palestinians in Jordan. The Palestinian State would have the right to act on behalf of all Palestinians in the Arab world and elsewhere. Once we have all our rights in whole Palestine have acquired, we must have the reunification of Jordan and Palestine have a time delay."

worldlingo.com and freetranslation.com, while very awkward, offer similar results as well. Thus, the current tag "translation unverified" in the notes section is no longer true. We have definitely shown that the translation is indeed accurate, if not literal. I agree with Zero0000 that the best thing would be to get a Dutch speaker to provide a more accurate translation. Netziv (talk)

The tag should remain until the translation is done by a human. The sort of subtleties that a computer translator might miss are precisely the things that can make a difference here. Zero^talk 22:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Better late than never(?). Here's a translation of the Dutch text above:

Mohsen's attitude is not very remarkable. Listening to his polical and ideological ideas, one sometimes cannot help but feel that maybe less has changed in the Arab world than was initially considered. Because according to Mohsen there actually is no separate Palestinian people. "Between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese there are no differences. We are all part of ONE people, the Arab nation. Look, I have family members with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are ONE people. Just for political reasons we carefully underwrite our Palestinian identity. Because it is of national interest voor the Arabs to advocate the existence of Palestinians to balance Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new tool to continue the fight against Israel and for Arab unity."

The strategy that Mohsen wants to follow is rather simple: "A separate Palestinian entity needs to fight for the national interest in the then remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian government cannot speak for Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria. Jordan is a state with specific borders. It cannot lay claim on - for instance - Haifa or Jaffa, while I AM entitled to Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem en Beersheba. Jordan can only speak for Jordanians and the Palestinians in Jordan. The Paletsinian state would be entitled to represent all Palestinians in the Arab world en elsewhere. Once we have accomplished all of our rights in all of Palestine, we shouldn't postpone the unification of Jordan and Palestine for one second."

@Lopakhin, would you be able and willing to send the PDF to me? _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 19:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

2024

Just be sure not to soften or obfuscate his desire to destroy israel as a critical step in his pan arabic objective. That is a critical part of the centre of this conflict and why it endlessly exists. (Its morphed from pan arabism to muslim supremecy, but the action and objectives are the same) 199.7.157.124 (talk) 09:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Covering that up or softening it is part of the propegandistic effort in line with the ethos of the creation of the palestinians to begin with- to destroy or deligitimize israel. Less misinformation is better:) 199.7.157.124 (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

this wiki edit is far too soft to do justice to the truths of the matter. Is that a politically motivated choice? Please add pertinent elements of the original text to the wiki page.

Or. May i do it, now that we have the otiginal document? 199.7.157.124 (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

A Palestinian who doesn't believe Palestinians exist?

How could Zuheir be identified as a Palestinian, if he himself claimed that this term is an invention? I think that this should be corrected. --Nadav S (talk) 21:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't really know that -- there's no necessary logical contradiction in using it as a geographical term, while denying that it forms the basis of a valid distinct national identity... AnonMoos (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Weeding material

I shortened the unstructured and misleading essay making up most of the article ([1]). To be clear:

• The National Command is the the leadership of the Pan-Arab Ba'ath Party. in which Syrians, Palestinians, Lebanese, North Africans, Iraqis, etc. may be members. To use the term 'Syrian Ba'ath Party' is incorrect. The leadership of the Syrian Region is the Regional Command. In theory the National Command is the supreme body of the Ba'ath Party, in reality the Syrian Regional Command is the more powerful body.
• Mohsen's view were not 'unique' as previously stated in the article. He was a pan-Arab nationalist, Ba'athist, and was by no means the only Palestinian to hold this view. Both of the two major factions of the Ba'ath Party have Palestinian wings, each one with a front organization in PLO (Saiqa and ALF). --Soman (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2018 (UTC)