Why the Muslim Brotherhood Takeover is Fizzling in Jordan

[Greenfield puts the lie to the Reuters article below.]

By Daniel Greenfield, FPM

Islamists now control Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia and are contesting Syria. Jordan is fairly small by comparison, but it’s still part of the package as the Muslim Brotherhood would like to recreate a Greater Syria, combining Egypt and Syria, and adding Jordan to the package to crush Israel and then Lebanon, which has far too many Christians and Shiites in it for their liking.

But so far the Jordanian Arab Spring hasn’t taken off and the Muslim Brotherhood’s big show of force on Friday fizzled with a turnout of only 7,000 when the Brotherhood was predicting 50,000.

    Thousands of members of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood have taken to the streets to reinforce the group’s boycott of the upcoming parliamentary elections.

    The boycott is a blow to King Abdullah II, who has made reforms the centerpiece of his campaign to stave off an Arab Spring uprising in his country.

    Brotherhood’s leader Hammam Saeed spoke to about 7,000 followers Friday in the capital, Amman, insisting on the boycott of the elections, which are expected at the end of this year or early in 2013.

    Though the rally was the group’s largest in the past year of weekly street protests demanding reforms in Jordan, Abdullah remains firmly in control of the country.

    The opposition is limited to fractured groups led by the Brotherhood but has stayed mostly loyal to the king.

Nope, it’s not a blow. No matter how the media spins it. An opposition that can only put 7,000 people into the street in a country of 6 million is not a threat to Abdullah and Abdullah has outfoxed the Brotherhood by calling for early elections.

The Brotherhood’s “Friday to Rescue the Nation” rally failed, no matter how much the media may spin it, that doesn’t mean Jordan is immune from a takeover, but the takeover has been postponed at the very least.

There are a number of big challenges for the Brotherhood in Jordan. The economic situation isn’t as bad in Jordan as it was in Egypt and the Qatari backers of the revolts in Libya, Syria and Egypt don’t seem nearly as keen to depose a fellow monarch. Without Qatari money and Al Jazeera propaganda, a Muslim Brotherhood takeover will have an uphill battle.

But there’s an even bigger problem. The Brotherhood’s base of support comes from Gaza, not from Jordan. The split of the Palestine Mandate has created two tiers in Jordan, Jordanian Palestinians and Israeli Palestinian Refugees from territory that Jordan annexed but then lost to Israel. These two types of Palestinians have a different legal status and King Abdullah has cleverly split the difference.

    The Brotherhood and a coalition of tribal and other groups have been pressing the monarch to speed up what they consider to be the slow pace of political reform. They are also angry with an electoral law passed last July, which preserves a system that marginalises the representation of Jordanians of Palestinian origin, on whom Islamists rely for their support, in favour of native Jordanians, who tend to support the king.

As long as the Brotherhood relies on Israeli Palestinians, rather than Jordanian Palestinians, it has no hope of winning popular support. Its strategy is divisive and not likely to appeal to ordinary Jordanian Palestinians.

Islamists like the Brotherhood do not actually recognize nations or borders and championing the Palestinian refugees bid in Jordan is a smart and effective move, but to stave it off all that Abdullah has to do is keep relying on Jordanian opposition to the Brotherhood’s Palestinian project.

October 6, 2012 | 6 Comments »

Leave a Reply

6 Comments / 6 Comments

  1. sorry, want to add another thought, If Jordan can become the new refocused homeland, and become economically successful, the Pals will want to replace their victim-hood with pride of nation and want to migrate there. (after all many originaly migrated to Israel for jobs). This may lessen their desire for Y&S, once doing well somewhere else. It may not however but for Israel the situation will still be better than now.

  2. Regardless of what anyone wants it is increasingly obvious that JOrdan IS palestine under a currently different name (as Israel was once palestine) How can you cut 77% of former Palwestine and say it is not palestine and belongs to imported populations(hashemites). The very act of creating, and maintaining, jordan JEW FREE is the defacto evidence that it is the sole home of former non jews of the whole palestine mandate territory. It is absurd to have 3 palestinian homelands on former palestine mandate:Jordan, Gaza and Y&S. It is only the current presence of arabs on the west bank and the fear of extending citizenship to those arabs that prevents a solution. JOrdan and gaza are jew free and as such the balance must be jew ruled and arab free. Current treaties with Jordan do not preclude the rights of former non jewish residents of mandate territory to migrate to Jordan, after all who else is it designated for? Although many do not want to see more “pals” in Jordan it seems like the most sensible legal outcome of all the prior legal precedence. Also, there is a grand opportunity,which will likely be squandered by all, to turn Jordan into an economic, nationalstic, spiritual homeland for pals by rerouting all terrorist supporting money to jordananian repatriation of palestinans from other lands. It could be their new mecca. However, “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” is the mission statement. I could imagine a scenario where massive money is pledged to Jordan, King changes name to Hashemite kingdom of palestine(in arabic) and migration grants coupled with grants to develop Jordan can create an economic magnet. If not then transfer to all non treatied hostile borders is the only other feasible outcomes.(the use of the word only is meant to comply with the normal diplomatic usage of that word) This preserves all interests(except MB).

  3. The split of the Palestine Mandate has created two tiers in Jordan, Jordanian Palestinians and Israeli Palestinian Refugees from territory that Jordan annexed but then lost to Israel.

    It is my understanding that the “ethnic” split is between gazans and other Pals. That the Jordanian pals and west bank pals are ethnically related but the gazans are “more” Egyptian(whatever that means?) Is there a real split between the current “jordanian palestinians” and the current “west bank palestinians” or is it a temporary split based on being in totally different circumstances. It appears that “jordanian palestians” are not unhappy with their location. If Jordan was in control of the Palestinians then the west bank is no longer disputed territory or occupied territory as Jordan and Israel already have an agreement over the territories sovereignty. It is a human rights issue regarding a question of self determination. Using the legal precedent of settling Jews coupled with economic incentives to relocate, coupled with no incentives to stay(or economic disincentives to stay), migration to Jordan/Palestine can be seen as a return to the original designated Palestian Homeland. The west bank arabs can to revert to their former cizenship of JOrdan, or be stateless as they choose,and to be repatriated to the side of the line(jordan river) where there are no Jews.
    The key is to massively settle jews in Y&S by formally and overtly repudiating the anti semitic and illegal blocking of their settlement and employing affirmative action to mitigate prior illegal blockage of settlement(by Israel and Jordan). Folllow this with economic incentives and disincentives to migrate, follow that with forced transfers of all anti semitic muslim/arabs,anti israel arabs across any hostile border. Israel may extend sovereignty and political rights to the Y&S at any time of choosing according to still legally binding Palestine mandate as per UN Charter article 80. This mandated the settlement of Jews until sovereignty is feasible. This avoids arguments of political rights and citizenship to the west bank arabs. As I see it there is no end to the mandate until jews form a majority on west bank or until Israel extends its soveriegnty over west bank. Until then Y&S is mandate territory administered by successor mandate trustee: the GOI. Perhaps there should be a separate rep of the Jewish people to avoid conflict of interest betwee Jewish settlement rights and GOI self perceived interests.