Islamicize

It is long overdue, we require a reconfiguration of the classical fiqh as-siyasah (which is very much possible due to the traditional flexible ethico-pragmatism over strict structural adherence) in reference to the shift in the basic canvas of authority, legitimacy, order & sovereignty in neo-colonial modernity. imam al-ghazali did that, so did al-mawardi, ibn taymiyyah and ali celebi kinalizade, all according to their distinct socio-political canvases, they did not subordinate the primary normative axioms of islamic political framework to blind pragmatism of their contextual canvas, they were just very flexible regarding structural pragmatism and subordinated all structures/forms of political management and logics of legitimacy & sovereignty to realisation and actualising of socio-communal adl even at the cost preventative murder. (thus even ending up accepting the ottoman/mughal succession wars: law of royal fratricide, for the greater good i.e. preventative justice). so if anything, the greater islamic political tradition, contains within it much room to rethink siyasah contextually granted that primary ideals (whether justice, peace or freedom) are set.

There are quite a few mistaken assumptions here about political authority, fiqh as-siyasah, jihad and their mapping onto the modern nation-state operations, especially within the palestinian neo-colonial contexts. Even utilising the basic fiqh of jihad, yes the responsibility of jihad falls on the local political authorities initially, yet unlike the nationalist territorial statism, if the local government 'fails' to deliver or is incapable to perform the duty, the divien duty transcends the territorial boundaries and falls on the 'next' party that holds the capability to fulfill the duty - the requirement of jihad operated more through potency and intent, territorial management was a mere accidental priority. However, all this is to assume that jordan's 'territorial management' translates to 'absolute religio-political authority' over all the Palestinians in the first place, which jordan itself never claims either. Plus if we had this much clarity regarding who has "authority" in Palestine maybe the entire issue of that region would have been solved already, the very 'authority/sovereignty' is the entire debate. None but the verdict of a "rational statist bureaucratic process can legitimately intend jihad", is a claim that would be very difficult to substantiate through classical precedents both in theory & praxis. Since countless military parties waged jihad and frontier warfare independent of the caliph or any central authority (though operating in their territoriality), for territoriality didn't necessarily mean a centralised monopoly on defining the legitimacy of all religio-political activity. The classical fiqh al-jihad/siyasah cannot be superimposed onto the modern state/non-state bifurcations and logics of legitimacy in the particular context of palestine, where territory & sovereignty were remade through haphazard neo-colonial structural disruptions, which never settled or became a legio-political norm/status quo (since the goal posts kept shifting) based upon which any such fiqh al-siyasah could be applied to Palestine.