I'm currently writing an essay on the British perceptions of Arab nationalism, and most of my sources are, as you'd expect, British. Specifically I've been using minutes from the House of Commons sittings and the monthly and yearly administration reports from Palestine (from Political Diaries of the Arab World- Palestine & Jordan). So the reason for my question is that I want to know whether the British were correct in their assumption that the unrest in Palestine early on was more due to administrative policies, and less a result of the Arab Nationalist movements (such as Pan-Islamism, the Sherifian Movement, or others).
Any all help would be appreciated. Thanks so much!
If you can get to it, I would recommend taking a look at Khalidi Rashidi's "Palestinian identity: the construction of modern national consciousness" (which I unfortunetly only have via e-book) It features articles from a few of the earlier Arab nationalists of the time which I think would prove useful to you. I would also recommend the article "The Arab Nationalism of George Antonius Reconsidered" by William L. Cleveland in Rethinking Nationalism in the Arab Middle East edited by James Jankowski and Israel, which analyzes the arguments of George Antonius, a Arab nationalist who was interestingly enough a Christian.
While the book by Rashidi emphasizes a more Arab centered nationalistic foundation, Cleveland asserts more of a British inspired Arab Nationalism. By this I am referring to the biggest even in Arab nationalist history prior to Nasser, the Great Arab Revolt. Cleveland makes it seem like the rise of Arab nationalism is both a response to increased efforts of Turkification from the Young Turk controlled Ottoman Empire, and thanks to the active encouragement of the British in their hopes of creating another front for the Ottomans to fight in WWI.
I hope you can find those two sources, as I think they will prove useful.