�Happiness

A Message to President Barak Obama concerning the Middle East,�

Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.

TO� : Barack Obama, The President of the United States of America.

From: Hasan Yahya, Ph.D

A Palestinian American Human Being.

"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things." Nicolo Machiavelli (The Prince).

THE NEW MAP PLAN:

Almost one hundred years ago, in the time of Sykes-Picot, agreement included maps for the borders of the newly formed Middle East countries, where nations were established as Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. While Sikes and Picot were men like us, we differ from them by orientation and goals. Their colonial motive was behind their mapping which created the conflict in the whole Middle East, The noble motive behind this writer�s idea is a noble cause opens new method to reduce conflict and may solve the conflict completely if applied.�

The Sykes-Picot agreement was not to be as politically devastating as feared for the simple fact that, at tat point in time, the Arabs were advancing swiftly and assuredly against their Ottoman enemies. The Arabs felt that if they could make even further gains against the Ottomans that they would have more leverage in dealing with the imperial powers after the fighting had finished. The British were also advancing steadily through Palestine, capturing Jerusalem in December 1917. The British decisively defeated the Turks at Megiddo in September 1918, although the Arabs did manage to enter Damascus before the British were in a position to do so. The Ottomans capitulated soon after which left all of their previous dominions up for grabs.

It is time NOW to revise such border maps concerning Palestine-Israel-Egypt to solve the Conflict in the Middle East. And the people decide their opinion about it.��

While I have the right to be angry as a Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, American, Philosopher, and human being, I also have the right to propose this map for the Future of Palestinian STATE which came after a long research done on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Ideas may come and go, what remains is their genius intuitive boldness and acceptability for noble purposes to reduce future tension and wars in the Middle East.�

It is a bold idea, might be accepted and rejected by some. Their justification will spring from authoritarian and legal rational modern thoughts and ideologies. I am aware of the disputation over the proposed map. The debate will be vast as a reaction to the proposed idea and Map worldwide [including Palestinian, Arab, Muslim and non-Muslim countries] .

I believe that Egypt has the Key to solve the one-hundred Palestinian Israeli conflict. By its wisdom and hospitality to stop Israeli atrocities for ever, and help planning the future of the Palestinian State.

�

A Proposal New Plan to solve the Israeli Palestinian conflict forever, is to adapt a new map for Palestinian state. Egypt Saudi Arabia and Israel [The Arab and Muslim world as well as the International community] Have to agree and adapt that map. The role of USA and EU is to convince in diplomatic methods all parts to accept the map plan to solve the conflict once and for all.

�

This is the Proposed Map to be disseminated for Parties involved. Where the new Palestinian state is in dark bluelines.Which includes Israel, West Band and Gaza Strip, and Senai-Egypt.

�

The proposed Map (Hasan Yahya, February 12, 2009)

The Proposed New Map for Palestine, By Dr. Hasan Yahya for negotiation among the involved parties, Israel, Egypt, Palestinians and Arab Muslim nations as well as USA, EU, SCO (China and Russia+5) and UN organizations. {The map was formed from a map of Palestine after 1967, found on ifamericansknew.org.�

Justifications and Rational:

Egypt is the Mother of all Nations, it is also the Mother of all Arabs too. Egypt�s role cannot be ignored in making peace in the past history. But to make this map work , six factors are important to make reality of this map.

Israel: The map will satisfy Jadishness of Israel which is constitute a� serious request for Fundamentalist Jews and even the Lekud party.

Egypt: Egypt is the most national positive neighbor, which is considered as Arab Land. Its acceptance for the proposed map will be less than Israelis, where Egypt plays maximum role in the area stability and security. Egyptian People remained great asset to Palestinians all times. Their generosity should be commended in the peace process by accepting the new map, or reformed map to be agreed upon by Egypt, Israel and Palestinians.

Palestinians: They will remain in their lands, refugees can return to the new territory, or compensated from World community including Israel.

For Palestinians the problem may be solved in terms of UN resolution 194 and 242 as well as 338.�

Arabs and Muslims: Arabs and Muslims will have better time to organize themselves and support the new Palestinian State. Their acceptance of Israel as a state in the region will be positively perceived. Rich Muslim nations including Oil Arab countries may contribute in developing the new state Map.

World Community [East and West], The USA, EU, SCO, include all powerful parts in the world. They have to adapt this map and convince all parts as a basic Map for negotiation.

The UN. The UN, appreciating the role of Egypt, Israel and Palestinians oversee negotiations and find suitable resolution for the new Palestinian State.

Methods of Application:

Governments have to use media campaigns to explain the prosperous future in the area, by highlighting Egypt�s role in making peace between Palestinians and Israelis. Foreign policies strategies can be enhanced to reduce rage of Arab and Muslims, and positively promote strategic influence of the USA. More of these applications are provided in the next part of this message, and fully explained in my book.

Middle East & North Africa ��

From: http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS/1967-post-june-war-israel.html

The proposed map was formed from the above Palestinian map on ifamericansknew.org and http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS/1967-post-june-war-israel.html

Additional Information about Crescentology Theory C of Conflict Management and Cultural Normalization. 2008, Amazon. Here are some chapters for more understanding.

In conclusion I urge the United States of America to think seriously about this map and find its political and diplomatic methods to convince other parties for acceptance.

End of the Message,

P.s. Following is an appendix for more information.

Hasan Yahya email: askdryahya@yahoo.com

Webpage: www.hasanyahya.com

This message will be posted in Dr. Yahya Articles webpage.

www.geocities.com/askdryahya/Articles.htm

**********************************************

Message Appendix:

Constructing a new order of things is the purpose of Crescentology or Theory C. of normalization among World Cultures. Let me echo Einstein's saying and begin this subject with an article of faith, it runs as follows: social science is made for human beings in their totality, not to serve certain culture or certain ideology. This article is not practiced in social sciences. Much of the existed social science serves limited audience which I might call " servants of their interests" or in terms of Karl Mannheim, servants of their "Ideology". For this reason, I believe, science has lost its objectivity and credibility in terms of serving humanity. As a result, scientists as well as people, tend to be directed ( or institutionalized socially) to conform to their "A" ideology as the best, and to stand firmly against "B" ideology as not the best. Further, Bertrand Russell, the British Philosopher, describes how scientists should deal with issues close to theory C, or Crescentology. He states:

"We must devote ourselves, to showing, not how to secure victory for our side, nor how desirable our victory would be, but how disastrous to everybody on all sides a war must be. In the West, where free discussion is possible, important men, especially scientists, of all shades of political opinion, should meet together. It should be agreed that never in their discussions, must any one raise the question as to which system is best....." Russell (1961:71)

Crescentology, or theory C. postulates this vision-not only on peace and war- but on all cultural aspects on broader boundaries to close the gap between cultures on the grounds of common future which is the product of all civilizations together. Russell have shown certain methods to close the gap of hostility among agents of mind among cultures, namely, schools. He wrote:

"I would have the schools in India teach the virtues of Muhammadans, and the schools in Pakistan teach vitrues of Hindus, I would have Zionists taught the merits of Arabs, and the Arabs taught the merits of Jews. I would have the West taught that even Russians are human beings, and the Russians taught that not all Westerners are lackeys of capitalism." Russell (1961:71)

Arnold Toynbee shares some of these ideas and shows how Western outlook is narrow towards other world culture and history. He wrote fifty years ago:

"Our present Western outlook on history is an extrordinarily contradictory one. While our historical horizon has been expanding vastly in both the space dimension and the time dimension, our historical vision-what we actually do see, in contrast to what we now could see if we chose-has been contracting rapidly to the narrow field of what a horse sees between its blinkers or what a U-boat commander sees through his periscope." Toynbee (1948:150)

While in fact, Easterners also share the Westerners in such view of history, Crescentology, or Theory C. is expected to promote individuals as well as nations coherence and integration with each other on new grounds of exchanging Knowledge, Understanding, Appreciation, and Compromising. The above excerpts stand against the deviation from Theory C. and Crescentology. Because the existed crystalization of national identity and normative cultural values usually show the positive characteristics of "WE" culture as positive, and show the negative characteristics of "OTHER" culture as negative and may ignore the positive characteristics of the "OTHER" culture. Theory C. in this regard, or what I termed "Crescentology", will combine both "WE" and "THEY" images in a new constructed image of C. zone which may include both positive and negative of WE and THEY characteristics.

Theories of Conflict

It is apparent for social scientists that the statements "there is no understanding of events is possible, without theory." stands true. Brown Jr. (1981:xi) To be sure, there are good theories as well as bad theories, but the very act of explaining something demands a theoretical context. For this purpose, in order to construct a body of ideas that may connect the disintegrated incoherent parts not in terms of A. or B. ideology, but rather in terms of Crescentology or Theory C. of cultural and social understanding which include both A and B ideologies for the purpose of human survival against hunger, war, famine, and disease.

Supporting this argument, it is a common neglected knowledge of reality that each individual, group, nation, or culture possess negative as well as positive qualities and values. Political powers of these bodies direct almost all its energy to educate and socialize the new generations only those positive aspects of "WE" and only those negative aspects of "THEY" instead of educating and socializing their new generations of positive qualities in both A and B versus negative qualities of A and B identities as Crescentology postulates. Crescentology or Theory C. is a method of acquiring knowledge for the construction of new reality expected to promote global peace. Such an attempt by itself is worthwhile to be supported, with the fact that such an idea is too difficult and perilous to conduct with certain success. Crescentology or Theory C. is an intellectual call for policy makers on both macro and micro levels for introducing a new order of relationships among human beings to live in peace. Crescentology with its broad understanding of cultures is different from other limited theories. Compared with other theories, it would be grand theory of culture. This implies description of the conflict theories exist in the literature.

According to Boulding, almost all social sciences study conflict. For instance, economics studies conflict among economic organizations-firms, unions and so on. Political science studies conflict among states and among subdivisions and departments within larger organizations. Sociology studies conflict within and between families, racial and religious conflict, and conflict within and between groups. Anthropology studies conflict between cultures. Psychology studies conflict within the person. History is largely the record of conflict. Even geography studies the endless war of components of nature, for example, the sea against the land, and of one land form or use against another. Boulding emphasized that "conflict is an important part of the specialized study of industrial relations, international relations, or any other relations." Boulding (1973:113)

From the above statement, we may deduce the following types of conflict theories:

a. Theories claim that the impetus for human conflict springs from

human nature itself or biologically. Psychological theorists argue

that aggressive behavior (conflict) results from a psychological condition of stress and frustration.

b. Other theorists point out that conflict comes usually from the distribution of wealth, goods, and class struggle.

c. A third group of theorists assert that conflict emerges from cultural differences with no common commitment to national symbols and beliefs. Such differences are, for example, race, language, ethnicity, religion, or generational differences.

d. A fourth category of conflict theories states that world growth, technological progress, scientific knowledge supremacy, and consumption of resources are some of causes of conflict.

As we see all these theories are interested in political or psychological, or economic, or social conflict. Therefore, their assumptions about human nature differ accordingly. For instance, according to the first type of theories, conflict began with Adam after he and Eve left the gates of Aden. As a result, these theories adapted the explanation which says that have the excuse for their actions without interfering political or social causes. This situation can be described by the English saying: "Let him make use of instinct, who cannot make use of reason." Brown,(1981:229) This view represents an array of disciplines such as literature of human beings, religion, philosophy, psychology, and anthropology. The most proponents of this type are: Sigmund Freud, who embraced the idea that human mind is a veritable battlefield for three subconscious forces: the ID, the EGO, and the SUPEREGO which interplay to make up the human personality as organized by the LIBIDO. In anthropology, Darwin and Spencer depend on the assumption which draw the doubts about humankind origin, and as we may all know that there is no controlled peace among baboon cannibalistic ancestors which still survive after 15 million years is impossible, and the survival is for the fittest. Thomas Hobbes gave a little respect to human beings by pointing out three principal causes of conflict: competition, difference, and glory. To keep people away from conflict among them, he suggested a cruel king have to rule in order to keep peace.

Other psychological group of theories suggest that antisocial behavior springs from the innate responses triggered by frustration. This group of theories depends on the assumption that "aggression is always a consequence of frustration." (Dollard, 1939:1) While aggression is defined as "a condition of causing harm either to oneself or to others." Frustration is "the state of mind that result from the inability to obtain some specific goals." Brown Jr, (1981:248)

Hegel and Marx represent the second group of conflict theorists. They claim that materialism and economic class conflict cause the major troubles of societies. In terms of human nature, they claim that economic institutions determine who get what, when, and how not human nature. Their argument is that inequal distribution of material wealth have created class stratification which leads to constant conflict among groups. What resolve this dilemma of capitalism which represent conflict promoter was in one word: Communism, through socialism.

The third group of conflict theories depends on the assumption that different cultural variables create disintegration and disruption. For example, the internal strife within the national structure in South Africa, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the Middle East, Northern Ireland, Communist aggression in Afghanistan, the United States as world police, the Balkans and many other examples represent this group of theories.

The last group of conflict theories depends on the assumption that the impact of technological and scientific progress has had, and is having, and will continue to have on social interaction. Such impact complicates the matter for human beings and push them to live with confusion. In other words, conflict is a result of applying scientific knowledge and inventions implies nuclear family, high divorce rate, weak family ties, and social vertical mobility constrasted with better quality of life satisfaction and life standards. Unfortunately, such theories were faced by the misguided effort to bring the comparatives of "more" or "better" to life through science and technology has, in fact, introduced more conflict and less good life in many areas of the globe under the so called slogans of change as "modernization" or "post-modernization".

What was surveyed so far is the existed conflict theories and their assumptions about human nature and environment. As a conclusion, two directions of such theories can be made: one is that man is conflict maker by nature, the other is that man is not a conflict maker unless his environment presses him to. Environment of course can be described as nature, or human ecology where human beings interact according to their groups, societies, and cultures. Crescentology believes in the second direction where human beings are born pure good, and their social environment (parents, peer groups, neighbors, and other factors) have different instable impact upon what human beings (as groups or individuals) want, and what they realize in their everyday life, or psychologically speaking, between people's aspirations and their gratification. Where aspiration means: collective wants of society, and gratification is the fulfillment of these wants. Brown Jr, (1981:248)

Each of the above mentioned theories have different conflict resolution (or management) which springs from one-sided theorization of (A) ideology as against (B) ideology. Crescentology, however, is introduced taking into consideration these obstacles of cultural and institutional inputs and calls for a new undertaking of conflict management on the grounds of knowing, understanding, appreciating, and compromising as steps for solving conflicts in a holistic universal method. Similar attempts, in fact, were made across history. Four examples of these attempts to satisfy the original grounds of the science of crescentology are given in the next section.

Supporting and Convincing Argument

On the grounds of reality, and depending on the above objectives and theoretical framework, the equation of Crescentology can be applied in conflict situations, whither in micro (psychological - individual) or macro (social-collective) levels. HOW?

It would be benign to give the answer at the beginning of this section in short statement to save the readers time and efforts. But I think, it will be more interesting to answer the question of HOW Crescentology can be implemented by scientists and policy makers in details?

Crescentology is calling for equal understanding between �WE� and �THEY� groups with no �weltanschauung� involved other than the universal view of understanding of Crescentology in C as a combination of both A and B. Where A and B point of view can meet in new constructed zone image of C. point of view which is neither pure A, nor pure B. The new constructed image may be implemented In the case of education, mass media, and cultural history. But,� is it possible to equalize A�s group understanding with B�s group understanding in one point of time inspite of their differences as the case in the Crescent? Would it not be impossible for human beings to realize that stage of understanding?

Crescentology, in fact, does not claim that equalization between A and B groups in a short time is possible. Because cultural systems are built across history. It simply postulates to narrow down their common interests as basis roots of understanding and close the disagreement gap between them. The fruits of such understanding is assumed to be cultivated in the next 10 or 25 or even 50 years to come. It is assumed that normalization of an idea can be internalized in certain people through several factors such as education, mass media, cultural occasions and common historical events. For example, acceptance of others-individuals, groups, societies, and cultures-and introduction to conflict management practices by neutrality accepted criteria will pave the way for understanding. This task of normalization of cultural relations should be directed and implemented by organizations, social institutions,� such as: schools, universities, factories, corporations, and social welfare institutions. In the same way, Crescentology may reduce terrorist acts and may be applied to separatists groups and traditionalists to promote understanding and cooperation with OTHERS. Such implementation is expected to reduce� religious and cultural dogmas and rigid mentalities towards one�s point of view and should open souls and minds toward understanding the other�s point of view. What is needed is to construct and� establish a world on a mutual understanding, appreciation and ability to compromise. A world as described by Bertrand Russell, when he wishes:

�I should wish to se a world in which education aimed at mental freedom rather than at implementing the minds of the young in a rigid armor of dogma .... The world needs open hearts and open minds, and it is not through rigid systems, whether old or new, that these can be derived.� (Russell, 1957:vii)

But all attempts so far in history have failed to implement such ideal. How could Crescentology make the difference?

Crescentology argues, and assumes,� that if cultures, societies, and human behavior can be controlled and directed toward conflict resolution. These cultures, societies, and human behavior can be controlled and directed toward controlled free-conflict situation or normalization of relations. In other words,� people can be controlled (without losing freedom) and directed toward neither WE nor THEY perceptions about others, but toward (OUR) perceptions (the new image of C. construct). In this case, it would be safe to propose that redirecting cultures, societies, and groups behavior is not impossible in terms of Crescentology or Theory C. cultural image.

Yet, history stands against the theory in this matter. even if several attempts were made in both far and near past. What makes me optimistic though, is the rapid changes in the international political arena and the advanced communications which contribute in reducing the wide world into a small village. For instance, the world�s direction toward understanding, maturity and cultural convergence, the progress of mass communication and interaction, the progress of science and literacy, the international groupings of pacts and unions and more importantly, the failure-and therefore-the absence of the limited national, and cultural bound theories in dealing with international conflicts through United Nations or similar organizational research centers are signs of success for the proposed theory.

The reader may rise a question here: On what basis do Crescentology assume judgment of other theories failure? I would say that Crescentology looks to� broaden human thinking (cultures and societies, and small groups) in terms of both A, and B. interest images to a combined image construction of All (A and B) in C. of world culture. Culture A opens new domains of belief and action for the benefits of all human beings living in certain space, no matter of civilization age or space shape or race or direction. This statement may create several other questions. For example, How long Crescentology will take until it proofs its success or failure? I believe this question has its merit. But there is no plants without roots. It is worthy to provide the roots first, and try plant it in� local, national, and international conflict situations and domains if such evidence is needed. It is� a new approach, or a new paradigm, a new idea, if you will, needs to be considered and given the chance to be proved true. One other reason makes me optimistic of its success is the question of WHO makes social policies? WHO directs economy, politics, and social behavior? While it is a very clear and accepted tendency in modern world that the answer is: Human beings do. Don�t they? Examples may be observed in the Superpowers theories and practices. For example, the experience of the United States in terms of immigration policies early in the twentieth century, and in terms of substituting military solutions by other means inside and outside its boarders especially after its involvement in Korea and Vietnam. A third example is race desegregation and busing in educational institutions and initiating policies of socialization and �cultural plural assimilation� rather than �Americanization� and �Melting pot� approaches to deal with minority groups and race relations. And finally constructing Affirmative Action Programs for minority groups after the 1960s. Eventhough, these programs remain under attack, they were initiated to reduce race tension and to promote justice and equality according to the United States constitution.� A fourth example, is the new directions in the Russian Marxist (socialist) system were made by one person, where few� people were expected Russia to agree with the United States and its allies recently on the new shape of World Order, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the wake of New World Order. A fifth example may be seen in the openness of China in recent years to the West which� began with one step made through a visit from an open-minded man (namely Nixon). And finally the United States pressure on PLO Chairperson to announce the news (word by word) of living side by side with the Israeli State. (This theory was written in 1988-much more happened toward peace since that time).

All the above examples are some of the reasons which make me optimistic in the success of Crescentology in promoting feelings toward a middle point for any two small or large-size groups. While those policies and activities taken or made by the United States were not perfect, they nonetheless, in principle, served well their goals (at least temporarily) of those who initiated and applied them as the whole ideological system ideals. Inspite of the defects of some of the above policies they give the tool to deal systematically with broader issues confront societies in their process of change and contribute in decreasing� conflict situations.

Furthermore, from the survey of macro� historical attempts to solve local-national conflict of certain social issues in the United States, there was evidence of support for the power of research on social issues. It was found that behavioral norms are usually subject to change, and the borderline between deviance and nondeviance is not always clear. Williamson, Swingle, and Sagent (1982) show that

�In the prohibition era of the 1920�s official norms in regard to drinking were rejected and eventually changed. A remarkable shift of norms was evident in the development in the 1920s of a middle classdrug subculture, when the traditional territory for drugs (notably marijuana) had been in cults and proportions of the lower class subculture.� (p. 437)

By the 1970s marijuana had moved into the secondary schools, largely because of students� norms which were ascribable to peer influence; that is friends using the drug was a more important factor in the acceptance of this behavior than either the attitudes of the students themselves or the tolerance of the drug by their parents or other authorities. (Andrews and Kandal, 1979). From the above it can be� deduced that acceptance of norms and consequent role behavior are functions of social approval within the subsociety or subculture groups. Research on reference groups, it is believed, serves Crescentology purpose of acquiring knowledge about people. The term �reference group� was coined by Hyman in 1942. In his investigation of socioeconomic status, he found that one�s subjective status (as belonging to one specific group) could not be predicted directly from such factors as income or education. Social status, according to Hyman, is dependent upon what social groups were utilized as a framework of judgment. As a result of his research he found that people tend to distinguish themselves with groups they were not members in it. Therefore, he distinguishes between two concepts: �membership group� and �reference group�. While both concepts sometimes overlaps, other times they do not. Newcomb in 1943, studied change in values and attitudes of college students. He found that students who come from politically conservative families, took on increasingly more liberal attitudes and values over the course of their college careers. Newcomb found also that the structure of a female student�s attitude depends on whether she used the college community or her family community as a significant frame of reference.

The argument so far,� is to provide examples on research power in understanding social phenomena and to show that� knowing something about a thing promotes understanding of that something or the thing itself. Crescentology argues that because human behavior whether deviant or nondeviant (in conformity with group laws) is a product of culture (be it large culture or subculture) through its institutions which direct social behavior to be in conformity or deviance. Crescentology argues, also, that it is necessary for crescentologists to play a vital role in predicting and, therefore, reducing expected social conflict situations in the schools, factories, race relations, and nations. Such role does not only interpret policies and realities, but� participate in redirecting policies toward peace and conflict resolution in the social environment. Crescentology�s main assumption may reads: human beings are naturally have the tendency and ability to be good or to be bad.� This assumption have to give the power to those who believe in the new role of Crescentology in leading the world toward peace. This assumption also leads to macro role expected from Crescentology� to play in societies and cultures compared with the micro level role played by psychotherapist in small groups.� Such role is expanded in the following section.��

Crescentology� and social� behavior

People-any where on earth or otherwise-are not destined to act in certain way, (say to smile, or to cry, or to make love), they learn such behavior from the social environment (which is part of the larger cultural environment through the family, the school, the factory, the church,� and the political system). So predetermination of one�s behavior-completely biologically- according to Crescentology, is out of the question. Because social behavior of certain persons grow-up in rich environment (spiritually or materially) is largely different from social behavior of other persons� grow-up in poor environment (spiritually or materially). The concepts of �rich� and �poor� here inclined the possession of resources to promote physical and mental qualities and skills which may be obtained through both micro or macro institutions or organizations in which rearing, education, and health nutrition are included.

As far as these differences exist between the two environments,� it is reasonable� to expect conflict situations between the two� classifications. The first environment may be termed �A�, while the second may be termed �B�. Since Crescentology is defined as the science of dealing with A and B environments by constructing the C-view environment, we may say that the new image of �we� and �they� will disappear over time. And be replaced by the C-view, where both A and B are integrated.� Such construction does not come without careful planning in both theory and practice.

General Application of Crescentology

The simplest ways to deal with conflict situation according to Crescentology are: 1) to understand conflict causes and to compensate for the injuries made as an effect of these causes; and,� 2) to deal with conflict situation by enhancing the desire to solve it and suppress the desires of hatred and hostility. While greediness of human being and reality deny (not completely) the first solution in terms of unequal power structure, the second is possible because it depends primarily on seeking ways and to establish initial steps to promote and exchange understanding and positive attitudes and feelings among the parties involved. This what Crescentology, in fact postulates. No matter how long this will take, the new status image of Crescentology is expected to promote peace on both individual and collective levels of human beings.

Crescentology may be applied to small as well as age groups, such as schools factories, hospitals, political parties, nations, etc., between students and teachers, between superordinates and subordinates, between males and females, and between husband and wife. It is also expected to reduce domestic violence, and international conflict as well. To make Crescentology work in conflict situation, the following steps have to be implemented. They are called the �EIGHT C. STEPS of conflict resolution.� These steps follow the selection of conflict context: (All steps begin with letter C.)

1. �� Conceptualization of A, B,� and C. Parties.

2. �� Codification of� conflict.

3.�� Categorization of data and interests of A and B.

4.�� Consultation of both A and B parties continuously.

5. �� Certify the ideal type by the criteria of C.

6.�� Comparing and Contrasting� what A. or B. deviates from C. Construct.

7.�� Construction of Crescentology for conflict resolution.

8.�� Consensus on conflict resolution.

To make the theory work, it is recommended that all parties involved build� new common grounds of understanding and willingness of relations normalization, in order to compromise and pave the way for a just peace to continue. The following suggestions are made in general form; their implications are left open for further elaboration for the specialists involved. These suggestions are:

1.�� Emphasizing the likelihood of stopping the exchange of accusations and� hostile campaigns between the two parties involved.

2.�� Emphasizing the need for replacing negative images with positive images of exchanging ideas and promoting new methods of reducing or eliminating the factor of hatred.

3.�� Emphasizing the idea of common future between the two parties involved.

4.�� Emphasizing the common problems the area will encounter in the near future and how both Parties efforts should be united to solve these problems. Examples of these problems are shortages of water, food, and other resources.

5.�� Emphasizing the uniqueness of each culture in and of itself as a contributor in the context of world civilization.

6.�� Supporting the unity of mass media techniques and methods by exchanging delegations and visitors between the two �� parties in the process of opening new channels of communication and understanding.

7.�� Creating neutral television programs to show the suffering of� both peoples and their expectations for peace and life without war.

8.�� Emphasizing the points of agreement rather than disagreement between the two parties.

9.�� Engendering good will by releasing prisoners and exchange commending such acts.

10.�� Planning� for� the� establishment� of� fund-raising�� banks�� or� agencies to evaluate the losses of both parties as consequences of long wars and conflict periods in order to compensate the respective families on both sides. Such banks or agencies might be sponsored by the wealthy nations and managed by authentic personnel from both parties.

��

To secure the honorable goals and practices of peace mentioned above, other building factors such as, education, the mass media, celebration of common history and culture, and establishment of research institutes should be taken into consideration.

The Field of Education:

While the institutions of socialization include home and schools, the family is considered as the power-system where the rights and duties can be defined. In schools, however, it should be understood that the form and the content of educational materials have important consequences for the future relations of normalization between conflicting groups. (say, Arabs and Jews, man and wife, black and white, rulers and ruled, etc.,). Therefore, the form and content of education should emphasize the construction of the new status image of understanding the other side in a manner explained by the British philosopher, Bertrand Russell when he says: �I would have the schools in India teach the virtues of Mohammadans, and the schools in Pakistan teach the virtues of Hindus. I would have Zionists taught the merits of Arabs, and the Arabs taught the merits of Jews.� (p.71) In terms of East-West cultures, he says: � I would have the West taught that even Russians are human beings, and the Russians taught that not all Westerners are lackeys of capitalism.� (p.71). Although these ideas seemed strange to many common as well as politicians in Russell�s time, they are less strange today.��

The Field of the Mass Media:

No one can deny the fact about the role played by technology as not only an agent of change, but a force for change. of these technologies, the mass media and their hidden and observed soldiers of the truth play a great role. The worldwide coverage by the American mass media of recent transformations and occurrences in several nations has proven the role of the media in shaping the future of the world. The power of the mass media is not fictional power, but an actual one. Our emphasis on the mass media role as a second building factor for peace means creating an advanced telecommunication technology to make the gaps between people smaller and to make people more united. This image should depend on dissemination of knowledge about cultural heritage and historical backgrounds. Freedom and democracy should be the slogan and the practice of the mass media, whereby community leaders and citizens contribute to the overall peace of their own as well as other communities.

The Field of Common History:

History is an encouraging factor in building peace among groups. An International (or intranational) list might be prepared for leaders� approval, to be put into effect for celebration in the two communities. Great philosophers, inventors, and scientists should not be confined to limited boundaries or national identities. Rather, their discoveries, ideas,� and scientific contributions belong to all nations and cultures.

The Field of Research Institutes:

This factor is highly recommended, in order to understand the consequences of reality and how peace will take place and continues to do so. A parallel research organization-governed by wise persons-to the United Nations might be established, including enlightened intellectuals to design and implement research projects for the purpose of achieving lasting peace. The existing research institutes, even though they are doing effective job in this regard, need to broaden their research topics and free themselves from sponsorship and cultural strains and directions. In other words, these institutes should be universally recognized to enhance the power of agreement and negotiation in any conflict situation.

The above factors are not exhaustive and are open for more factors commensurate with each conflict situation. But in their generality they may pave the way for lasting peace among parties. If the promise of peace is not fulfilled in our lifetime, at least we have the honor of having begun thinking seriously of such constructive ideas for the next millennium.

The content of more details about� conflict resolution may be found in my book: Crescentology, Theory C. of Conflict Management for Cultural Normalization, 2008,� at Amazon.

�

Hasan Yahya email: askdryahya@yahoo.com , Webpage: www.hasanyahya.com