Jordan Times
Thursday, May 28, 1998
Peace deadlock 'gaps the bridge' over the Jordan
By Alia A. Toukan
AMMAN — When Foreign Minister Jawad Anani told Israel's Radio earlier
this week that His Majesty King Hussein is shunning the Israeli premier because of the
deadlocked peace process, his comment immediately stirred controversy.
Dr. Anani hit a raw nerve when he publicly declared the extent of the Jordanian
leadership's frustration with Benyamin Netanyahu.
Although the government on Tuesday sought to “clarify” Dr. Anani's remarks
without denying them, the cancellation by the Royal Palace of a set meeting between King
Hussein and Israeli Minister of Education and Culture, Yitzhak Levy, next week, points to
a recent chill in bilateral ties.
These incidents show the predicament the Kingdom finds itself in after signing the 1994
peace treaty with the Jewish state, and betting on the eventual success of a Middle East
peace process that has been moving from one crisis to the next since the election of the
right-wing Israeli prime minister in May 1996.
Jordan finds itself now, more than ever, juggling its foreign policy objectives and
domestic affairs. There is a growing fear at the official level that the peace process is
headed towards bankruptcy, with major local and regional repercussions, officials and
analysts say.
“The peace process is reaching a dead end and domestic opposition is growing. But the
fact remains that our strategic options are very limited,” says a former senior
official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
When Jordan sealed its peace treaty with Israel it did so on the basis that it would be in
the best interest of the region and the country to follow a “strategy of peace,”
and to realign itself with the U.S. after the 1991 Gulf war that caused a strain in
relations — a belief that has not been shaken despite the current crisis in the peace
process.
But, analysts and officials say, the assumption that there would be a parallel and
constant development on the Palestinian-Israeli track in particular, and other
Arab-Israeli tracks in general, that would justify warmer ties with Israel and the U.S,
might have been mistaken.
Mr. Netanyahu's two year track record has convinced Jordan that it cannot rely on the
cooperation of Israel's government to move the peace process forward and to foster a
“people to people” peace, nor can it depend on the Americans to live up to their
commitment as an “honest broker.”
Analysts and officials concede that King Hussein has become increasingly frustrated with
what he recently called the “arrogance” of Mr. Netanyahu. In recent months the
Monarch has often criticised the Israeli premier, and last month wrote him a
strongly-worded letter blaming him for the deadlock on the Palestinian- Israeli track,
warning of the dire consequences for the entire region of failing to move ahead with the
peace agreements.
Mr. Netanyahu has “no respect for the Palestinians and no commitment to the
resolutions and agreements signed,” King Hussein told members of the legislative,
executive and judicial authorities last week.
Jordanians currently see little to cheer in the Jordanian-Israeli peace treaty. The much
promised economic “peace dividends” did not materialise, fuelling rising popular
discontent.
In addition, diminishing hope for a just settlement of the Palestinian problem, and the
continuation of the occupation of Arab land does little to alleviate public anger.
Bilateral ties, once hailed as a model for Arab-Israeli cooperation, have been slow to
bear fruit as well. Most joint bilateral projects have not been implemented and meetings
between Jordanian and Israeli ministers have produced little more than joint statements
that usually fail to materialise.
This not only angers the Jordanian public, but is making the government and the leadership
frustrated with Israel.
Jordan's surprise decision to sign a bromine deal with an American company despite hefty
negotiations with an Israeli firm for the past three years, was interpreted by Israel as
being linked to growing political tensions.
“We are searching for alternatives now,” says one senior official. Abrogating
the treaty with Israel is out of the question, say analysts and officials. “But it is
time to look inwards,” one analyst concedes.
Observers say that most of the successive governments' energy in the past four years has
been concentrated on the peace front- sometimes at the expense of domestic concerns. In
the meantime, the observers say, tension has increased, the democratic process has
regressed, the political elite feels alienated, and the economic situation has worsened.
But, “(King Hussein) has superb instincts that never fail him. Domestically, he knew
that he would have a majority supporting him in whatever he does,” says Director of
the Centre for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan, Mustafa Hamarneh.
There has definitely been an erosion in public freedoms say analysts. “But the King
still has enormous political capital in the country, and the Jordanian society (gives) him
manoeuvrability on the domestic and international scenes that is the envy of every (Arab)
leader,” says Dr. Hamarneh.
Officials say that the Monarch's visit to the professional associations' headquarters last
week, his call for open dialogue with the opposition, his address to the three branches of
government, the appointment of Taher Hikmat as the head of the Higher Judicial Council and
of the Court of Cassation, and the King's unusually frank criticisms of Mr. Netanyahu are
all evidence of his wish to strengthen the home front, and distance the Kingdom from
Israel.
These moves have two aims, say officials and analysts: to let the opposition “blow
off steam,” and to send a clear warning to Israel that the Kingdom is now paying more
attention to its local concerns, including the opposition.
Furthermore, King Hussein is warding off mounting criticism, mostly from U.S.-based
organisations, that public freedoms and human rights are regressing in the Kingdom.
Jordan, like all Arab countries following the 1991 Gulf war, is still trying to pursue its
own independent path, separate from the occasional futile calls for Arab unity that
continue to echo in the region.
But in so doing it has found itself at great odds trying to justify its actions and
foreign policy orientations to a population that is still pan-Arab at heart, and to
regional players who continue to question the Kingdom's policies and intentions when
“appropriate,” and under the pretext of Arab unity.
By distancing itself from the Israeli government and by harshly criticising Mr. Netanyahu,
the Kingdom has succeeded in fending off Arab criticism over its ties with Israel.
Jordan's relations with the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and with Egypt, in
particular, have recently been “very good,” officials note.
Jordan's refusal to allow the spiritual leader of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, entry to
Jordan has been interpreted as a gesture of solidarity with the PNA, and to a lesser
extent, the Americans, who have been upset by the high-profile tour the ailing Sheikh made
in the Gulf states and Syria.
Jordan is currently involved in a “critical engagement” with Israel, remarks Dr.
Hamarneh, explaining that official relations with the Jewish state will resume, but at a
more critical level by the Jordanian government and its leadership.
What is not yet clear, however, is whether the Kingdom will follow this tactic until the
overdue second Israeli troop withdrawal from the West Bank takes place on terms acceptable
to the Palestinians, or whether this is a permanent strategy for dealing with Mr.
Netanyahu and his government, regardless of any future gains on the peace front.