Jordan is not Palestine

18 - 24 February 2010

Oula Farawati in Amman looks at a stalemate in relations between Jordan and Israel

There is trouble brewing between two "peace partners" in the Middle East, namely Jordan and Israel. Amman is cautious and unusually introvert about its relation with the so-it-claims Jewish state. The result: an under-the-surface tension that is close to erupting into the unexpected.

Media circle have been discreetly talking about a possible role for Jordan in the West Bank, especially in light of the divided Palestinian "leaderships". But the relationship between Amman and Tel Aviv is colder than ever, according to observers, who said Jordan was wary of "not-so-innocent Israeli moves" in diplomatic circles, especially in Washington.

What is the cause of this freeze in relations that has reduced relations between the two states to the minimum? How is Jordan going to proceed?

The options are few for Amman, which already is walking a tight rope between mounting anti-Israeli sentiments locally, a weak American stance towards peace in the Middle East, and the obvious intention by the Israeli government to solve its problem on the expense of neighboring Jordan.

Jordanian officials played down the fears about the freeze in relations, and the issue remains hush-hush in Jordan. But Israeli media has been awash with stories about the issue. Ynet news had a short news item about the king's meeting with President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos. It quoted the king as expressing concern regarding lack of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, noting that the situation is liable to affect the entire region.

"This is the first high-level meeting between the two states for a long time," the website said.

Perhaps the clearest example was Haaretz : "The crisis with Jordan is much less public than the one with Turkey, but it is far more acute and stands in deep contrast both to the warm relationship of Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, with the king, as well as Netanyahu's close connection to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak," it said.

"Since becoming prime minister last year Netanyahu has met King Abdullah only once, in May, a few days before the premier's visit to Washington. The king urged Netanyahu to declare his acceptance of a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and delivered stern criticism about construction in the settlements and Israeli activities in East Jerusalem," it added.

Jordanian journalist Rana Sabbagh warned that the gridlock between Amman and Tel Aviv is likely to continue: "The coming days may carry more [Jordanian] criticism of Israel. The king's stances are not welcomed by the politicians of this country. We expect a further chill in relations [that will be manifested] in further official stances and articles."

Even usually restrained writers about the relationship between Jordan and Israel are now attacking Tel Aviv. Columnist Mohamed Abu Rumman calls the orchestrated change in Israel's attitude a "coup".

"The Israeli coup, of course, did not come from nothing, but is based on a change in the Israeli reading of the state's strategic threats and vital interests. No longer does Israel consider Arab nationalism a threat, especially after the Iraq war; its major threats now are both Iran and the Islamic movements abroad, and the in-house Palestinian demographic bomb, from which the emphasis on recognition of the Judaism of the state has emerged," Abu Rumman wrote.

But what does that entail for Amman? According to analysts it means the regeneration of Jordan's biggest fear, that it becomes the Palestinian state, something Jordan has repeatedly denied and worked against in diplomatic circles both locally and internationally. Israel, according to one Jordanian official, is now more than ever marketing this concept as the ultimate solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, an option that could also be easier for Washington.

Israel, backed by the US, is not only working on this concept internationally, they are also cultivating the change-should-rather-come-from- within approach. Most obvious is the call to change the electoral system in Jordan, which the US claims favors Jordanians of Jordanian origin, rather than Jordanians of Palestinian origin.

In an interview with Al-Ahram Weekly, Abu Rumman emphasized that Israel and the US were pushing for more Palestinian rights. "This makes it easier for decision-makers to say that Palestinians were actually living with 'full rights' in Jordan, which automatically makes it their state," he said.

But shortly after word spread that the US was working with Israel on pushing Jordan towards a one-man one-vote electoral system amended in favor of the Palestinians, Jordanian writer Fahed Khitan went on the attack. "We have had meetings with American officials in Jordan and we exerted efforts to explain the Jordanian viewpoint and this has yielded an unprecedented understanding of Americans towards those Jordanian considerations," he wrote.

Ultimately, any Jordanian role in the West Bank has been ruled out by King Abdullah, who gave a clear message about that in a "conversation" hosted by CNN GPS on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum.

Moderator Farid Zakaria, editor of Newsweek, asked the king whether he sees any chance that the Palestinian- Israeli "peace process" may be entering a more hopeful phase. King Abdullah replied that unfortunately, for the first time, he sees little grounds for hope.

King Abdullah dismissed any suggestion that Jordan can become the Palestinian state. "What sense does that make?" he asked. "We do not want anything to do with the West Bank. We would just be replacing the Israeli military. We are not going to have a role in the West Bank.

Only time will tell how such an impasse will end. Analysts still pin hopes on an American intervention that would save "friendly" relations between Amman and Tel Aviv.

Source: Al-Ahram.
Link: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2010/986/re3.htm.