Since the publication of the King’s decision not to renew leases renting Jordanian property to Israel, utter hysteria has overcome the Israeli media and the voices of both broadcasters and those they interview are laced with panic.
The King of Jordan, not some lowly clerk, announced that Jordan will not extend the currently existing leases renting two parcels of land to Israel. One is the so-called Island of Peace in the northern Naharayim area and the other located in the southern Arava, near Tzofar, an agricultural cooperative village (moshav). Jordan was entirely within its rights to decide not to renew the leases insofar as the relevant clauses in the 1994 peace treaty with Israel are concerned, and the only reason the king announced it himself was to give the declaration the weight of a final decision not open to negotiation. Jordan’s foreign minister added, in his own declaration, that if there are to be negotiations, they will be limited to deciding on the way those areas are to be returned to Jordanian jurisdiction.
Since the publication of the King’s declaration, utter hysteria has overcome the Israeli media and the voices of both broadcasters and those they interview are laced with panic. “Jordan has cancelled the peace treaty!!” “Why is the king doing this to us?” “What will happen to the longest peaceful border Israel has? “ Politicians, on the other hand, are attempting to calm us down on the lines of: “The peace treaty with Jordan is a strategic asset of the first order for Israel,” “ there is no threat to future relations with Jordan,” “Jordan depends on us for its security,” and other similarly irresponsible remarks, the gist of which is that Israel would do anything to preserve the peace agreement with Jordan.
Those media personalities and their interviewees do not realize that when they talk about the importance of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty, they are granting the Hashemite kingdom the ability to pressure Israel on more crucial issues, such as a Palestinian Arab state in Judea and Samaria, continuing Jordan’s special status in Jerusalem overriding Israel’s sovereignty in the Holy City and including Jordan as a partner to negotiations with the Palestinian Authority. In its endless search for scoops and hysterical headlines, the media have turned into talking heads whose unnecessary pronouncements ignore the Middle Eastern propensity for raising the price of anything Israel considers important.
The King of Jordan announced the cancellation of the leasing due to internal pressures. Numerous Jordanians demanded that the leasing of Jordanian land to Israel must end and the king acceded to those demands. In addition, the king has several “bones to pick” with Israel and the US, especially regarding Jerusalem, America’s recognition of the city as Israel’s capital and its relocation of the embassy. Trump took these steps despite King Abdullah II’s requests to leave the Jerusalem issue to negotiations between the PA and Israel, expecting the city to be divided between Israel and a future Palestinian state. The king was insulted when his request was ignored and looked for a way to punish Israel.
Just recently, the king freed Ahmad Daqamseh, the Jordanian soldier who shot at and murdered seven defenseless Israeli young girls from Beit Shemesh in cold blood in 1997, wounding six others, this despite his life sentence for the deliberate massacre of innocent hikers. Ever since his release, the murderer has become a celebrity, is constantly portrayed as a hero on Jordanian media where he calls on viewers and listeners to engage in jihad against Israel. Is the king unaware of this? Of course he knows all about it, and one gets the impression that the king views murder as a legitimate form of pressure on Israel.
Official Israel must send a quiet message, through secret channels, to the Jordanian king, saying: “If you wish to toy with the peace agreement your father signed with us, remember that this coin has two sides – because if we get the impression that you are acting against our best interests, we, too, have the right to do the same to you. Israel is not in your pocket, and it might be beneficial to you to begin to think of ways to encourage us to maintain our relationship with you.” This might be the time to remind the king that his cousin Zaid ben Raad, head of the UN Human Rights Committee, constantly comes out with anti-Israel decisions and “we have the unpleasant suspicion that you, dear king, play a part in the committee head’s anti-Israel obsession. We cannot allow someone who acts against us to avoid paying a price for doing so.”
Israel has the means to put significant pressure on Jordan, given that the king and his entourage are naturally most sensitive to any talk of the Palestinian Arab majority existing among Jordanian citizenry – and that majority’s rights to self-determination, thus turning Jordan into a Palestinian state or dividing it into both a Palestinian and a Bedouin entity depending on local ethnicities. Almost everyone residing to the north of Amman and up to the Syrian border and a bit eastward to Zarka, is a Palestinian Arab. What remains after that is mostly desert land populated with Bedouin, the ethnic-cultural minority which forms the base of the king’s power.
At this point it is important to understand: The Peace Agreement signed by Rabin and Hussein in 1994 was based on the mutually-held opinion that a Palestinian State must be avoided at all costs, whether in Judea and Samaria, or in Jordan, because such a state would pose a danger both to Israel and to Jordan. Unfortunately, from the very beginning of Abdullah’s regime in February 1999, he has broken that agreement and become a fervent supporter of establishing a Palestinian Arab state in Judea and Samaria, planning to expel all the Palestinians in his kingdom who want an independent state to that region. As far as the king is concerned, it will be no problem whatsoever if that region turns into a terror state that poses a danger to Israel.
In fact, the king goes from country to country, from leader to leader, attempting to persuade them to force Israel to act against its own existential interests and establish a Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria. His impeccable upper-class British accent makes him seem like a responsible, thoughtful and worthy leader, but his goal is a state on the hills of Judea and Samaria that will threaten Israel with lookouts on the mountains to the west as week as a rain of fire, missiles and rockets on eighty percent of Israel’s population, from Dimona and Beer Sheva in the south, along the length of the Coastal Plain and up to the northern cities of Afula and Beit Shean. Somehow, there are still Israelis who think that King Abdullah II, present ruler of Jordan, is a friend of Israel. With friends like that, we really have no need of enemies.
Has anyone in Israel found the secret way to tell the king that he is acting in a fashion totally contrary to the spirit of the peace agreement? Has anyone in Israel hinted to hm that he may have to pay a high price for this hostile attitude to Israel? Has someone mentioned the trouble his cousin causes us at the UN Human Rights Committee – at the behest of the king?
That is the proper way to manage relations in the Middle East. We have to carry on quiet negotiations behind the scenes while radiating strength, making demands and refraining from letting the media know what is important to us and what is less crucial. Israel must tell the Jordanian king that it is recalculating its next steps with regard to relations with Jordan due to his longterm antagonism. For Israel, the continued existence of the Hashemite royal house – whose members were brought by the British to the region from the Hijaz almost a century ago – is only one of several possibilities.
Written in Hebrew for Arutz Sheva, translated by Rochel Sylvetsky, Op-ed and Judaism editor.
@ Michael S:
No harm done..
@ Edgar G.:
Hi, Edgar. You said,
“Also then you may be mixng up Idris of Libya with Farouk of Egypt”
You’re right — I mixed up the names.
@ Michael S:
I agree totally with you about “The Deal of The Century”…..unless it is similar to “The Jordan Option”….and I don’t think it is, except maybe partly-but not the most important part. I want very much to be agreeably surprised.
Ted does think so but ……..Let’s hope so.
@ Michael S:
The “Arab Spring” had NO attractive “elements” and I don’t now why you think so. You forget you are not dealing with the activities and thought processes of normal people….you are dealing with ARABS……and NOTHING with Arabs has ever been any good, or worked out to anything except anarchy, revolution, slaughter and utter chaos.
We all know this, and still treat them like little, naughty, silly children whilst they go about making themselves into the World’s most dangerous threat…right under our stupid noses..
@ Michael S:
Nasser’s actions gave Israel the almost unique opportunity to flex it’s muscles in a way that no nation especially one completely surrounded by bitter enemies has ever done. The closest I can think of was Hannibal. Israel ganed the respect of thr whole world because of Nasser. THATR and none of hs other actions did Israel any real harm, so I thnk you’re wrong there.
Also then you may be mixng up Idris of Libya with Farouk of Egypt. Farouk would NEVER have done anything except drag Egypt completely into irrevocable ruin. He was a Monte Carlo playboy spending his time and the country’s scarce money there.
You may not remember him but I DO ….very well too, I was taking great interest in Mid-East events for many years already since about 1946 still a kid.
As a side note….I was most intrigued being so deeply involved in physical sports to see the very handsome Farouk, descend by degrees into that awful, ugly fat slob, whilst still young. His dissolute lifestyle was a sort of example to me to be different. .
I’ve just stood back a moment to consider what I’ve said. One COULD argue that Nasser and Assad (along with the Jordanian monarchy!) were good for Israel, in that Israel liberated Gaza, Yesh and Golan because of the aggression of their neighbors. Three people I think would not see things this way, are G.A. Nasser, Hafez Assad and King Hussein of Jordan. The Jews have prospered in Israel for the past century, despite the wishes of countries far and near who did not wish them well.
Concerning Abdullah vs. Mudar, I would probably counsel President Trump not to try to fix something that isn’t broken. It will break soon enough; and he can deal with it then. In the meantime, I don’t think Trump is doing himself or anyone else a great favor, trying to close “The Deal of the Century”; but if he does pursue that end, he will not ensure any sort of enduring peace by betraying an ally.
@ Edgar G.:
Dalgliesh is correct in all he said; and “though I says as I shouldn’t” (as my English Mum-in-law used to say), so am I. Nassar was a disaster for the Egyptians, the Israelis, the Syrians, the Jordanians, the whole Middle East. King Idris, by contrast, cooperated with the English and French; and the other Arab monarchs, from Morocco to Kuwait, have also pursued foreign policies that generally were supportive of western interests. Nassar, on the other hand, was responsible for the 1956 War, the 1967 War and, indirectly, the 1973 War.
Nassar’s greatest “achievement” was the Aswan Dam, which only put off Egypt’s water crisis; and even so, there is no saying that King Idris’ successors would not have built that dam themselves. It’s pointless to argue that Nassar was better for Egypt than Idris, since they did not rule Egypt at the same time. What is certain, though, is that M.E. monarchies have been better for Israel and for the West, than the republican and theocratic regimes that succeeded them.
Ted’s “Jordan Option” has elements that sound attractive; but so did the “Arab Spring”, along with countless “liberation” movements throughout modern history in Latin America, Africa, the Russian Empire and Asia. By and large, these have fallen far short of expectations.
@ adamdalgliesh:
When we talk about Nasser we’re talking about over 50 years ago. Much can and has happened since.that has nothing to do with him. He gave the people leadership, an icon to look up to. You know he resigned immediately th massive defeat became widely known, and hundreds of thousands came out in the streets to beg him to retract his resignation. He was their icon, which had to make them feel good, which is a big thing. Very much the way trump s to his followers.
A fter Nasser there was 1 presidential assassination, 1 Presidential coup by Muslim Brotherhood and a counter-coup by the Army. Not a scrap of this did any harm to Israel. in fact Israel and Egypt are on better terms now than ever before.@ adamdalgliesh:
I have strong feeling that the kings overthrow will NOT be done as you describe, by th US telling the Jordan Army to take him down. That’s the utmost in crudity. He will go by arrangement, after being shown conclusively that he is no longer wanted there and to persist is dangerous to the whole Hashemite Family. The US and Israel, in co-operation with Mudar wiil already have poised those to take over the key positions, and these will have been long enough pre-arranged…It will all go comparatively smoothly.
Thss what I envisage anyway….always assuming that the u.S. is directing things and fully supportive.. I suspect that Netanyahu may not be too pleased a he has been working in the opposite direction, but….as we’ve discussed, we just don’t have a clue as to what these “machers” have in mind. Your antecedents are impressive, and they would give you a good working idea as to how it goes. But you have to reach a plateau, and I believe you reached it some years ago. I’m older than you so have been involved nearly as long, butmy mind works differently which is why we sometimes differ on a comparatively open and simple case…which I am not saying this is.
I think the major players are holding their cards very close to their chests, it’s a very critical time with all these “Plans” flying around, any one of which might stall Mudar indefintely.
@ Edgar G.: Edgar, if Nassar was so great for his own people, why are they so poor and suffering now? From what I can gather from my reading, what Nassar did was to discourage private enterprise and transfer the nation’s wealth to the military. And this is said to remain the government’s policy even today. As far as I can see, this policy has done nothing to relieve the poverty and suffering of the Egyptian people. The massive transfer of Egyptian resources to the military is said by some analysts to have impoverished Egypt.
@ Edgar G.: Again, its just my opinion, Edgar, and I could be completely wrong. But the Arab militaries have a way of biting the hand that feeds them. Look at how the Britis pumped money and training into the Egyptian and Iraqi armies for decades. But that didn’t stop the Egyptian and Iraqi armies from overthrowing the pro-British governments in those countries, murdering the rulers that the Brits had selected for them, seizing massive amounts of British property , including oil fields and the Suez Canal. For that matter, King Hussein threw the Brits out of Jordan 1n 1956-57, even though the Jordanian Army was actually commanded by British officers, including its commander-in-chief, Sir John Glubb. But when there were anti-British riots in Amman, Hussein still through them out. True, he invited the Americans in to take the Brits place. But should we reallythinkl that the Jordanian military chiefs have warmer and fuzzier feelings about the American ‘infidels” than they do about their British ex-employers? From the Arab point of view, all ‘infidels” are the same. They will use us when it is convenient for them and spit us out when they decide they don’t need us any more.
In my opinion,If the U.S. were to “order” the Jordanian military to overthrow Abdullah and replace him with someone else, they would ignore these orders unless the “someone else” was someone that would agree with their own hostile views about the Israeli ‘infidel” and would be popular with the Jordanian “street.” Even in dictatorships, the military can’t afford to completely ignore public opinion. And all indications that I have seen from polls, etc., seem to indicate that 99 per cent of Jordanians hate Israel and Jews.
If the Jordanian military ever becomes dissatisfied with the “orders” they are getting from Washington, they could dump the Americans and go instead to the Russians for arms and money. American influence has been waning in the Mideast in recent years, while Russian influence has been growing.
Of course these are only my opinions. I am aware that my assessment may prove to be be wrong, and that yours, Edgar, may prove to be the correct one. These are only my assessments, based on what I have been reading in the press over the past few years. And yes, I know that the press often lies.
@ Edgar G.: Edgar, of course you are absolutely right that what I say is just my opinion. I have no access whatsoever to classified information, or to the secret deliberations of the U.S. administration or that of any government. I certainly don’t claim to have any inside “scoop.” You are also correct that your predictictions prove to be right about this matter, and my predictions may prove to be wrong. I don’t claim to be infallible by any means. These are just my best guesses.
It is also true that I have been watching international diplomacy all my life from the press. My mother was a college teacher of international relations and politics, and so she got me interested in the subject at an early age. I like to think my guesses are educated guesses, although they are nothing more than that.
Over the years, I have noticed that when the USG is hostile to a foreign government or wants so-called “regime change,”, it send out some signals to that effect through the press, or in press releases, comments at press conferences, etc. Usually, they let the public know when they want a certain foreign government changed in one way or another, without making public their specific plans for bringing it about. So far, I haven’t seen the Trump administration send out any “smoke signals” that they are dissatisfied with King Abdullah and want him out. Trump received him in Washington some time last year and seemed friendly to him. The Israelis are obviously very unhappy with Abdullah, and are sending him not-so-subtle warnings. So far, however, I haven’t seen or heard any signs that the Americans are displeased with him. Trump is a friend of Israel and means well for the Jews. But I think his main concern is with American interests, not Israeli ones. After all, looking after American interests is his job. So far, he hasn’t sent out any “smoke signals” that Abdullah is harming American interests.
@ Edgar G.:
I forgot to include that it’s not necessary for US to see that the US plans to install Mudar, in fact I’d think it would be VERY strange if I DID see such evidence. Why should they consult with you…. or me. We have NO idea what they’re doing or thinking. We’re just making enjoyable speculations and exercising our individual intellects….You suggest one thing, which, based on your reading of the situation may be correct, but it’s just a guess. The same with me, only I get to my opinion by a different route.
We don’t have to be the same and undoubtedly you do a lot more research and reading up on the subjects than I do. I just zoom in on what I consider the focal point, (or fulcrum) without which, NOTHING will happen, and -in a way, sort of- extrapolate from there by logical steps….as I say all the time…in MY opinion ..only. Some will agree some won’t –having different opinions that satisfy them more. .
@ adamdalgliesh:
Adam …the examples you give are of course correct, but look who was running the US …Bush and Obama and their cronies…..Trump is a completely NEW and different “kettle of fish”. Never been a President like him in modern times. He won’t fool around ….. IF he decides that Mudar is O.K. to go, then he’ll take all needed steps and damn the political and diplomatic correctness. Just my opinion of course, but it seems logical.
@ adamdalgliesh:
I didn’t say that Nasser was good for Israel, but for his own people. He “tried” to be bad for Israel but got so badly whopped that he was quiet for the little time left to him. Sadat, was the snaky smiley type…the charmer, (when I first saw him I distrusted him on sight, he looked like a stereotypical cartoon of an Armenian (or Jewish) carpet dealer-hope no Armenians on site I don’t mean it as an insult) but he also got a good beating.
I recall that with Israel across the canal, and within shelling distance of Cairo, a correspondent suggested to Sadat that he should “bring up his reserves” for a counter-attack…. Sadat went crazy, waving his arms around like a madman and sweating buckets..
His exact words as I recall them were …”….reserves…WHAT RESERVES … I don’t have any reserves…they are all in there..pointing to the battlefront direction”.
You should recall my words were that… “if the US accepts that Mudar should replace him…” and etc, as in my comment to Michael S. above. THAT is the crucial need.
I do NOT believe that the US could not take over the running of the Jordan military. They are supposed to be in control right now and for some time already. Intelligence too. Jordan could not stand without US support, with Israel just a mile or two away for immediate support against any real move against Jordan. Israel has acted in that capacity for years…hasn’t Jordan asked them for help several times already and news of an Israeli mobilisation was enough to stop any threats against Jordan.
They don’t have American generals in open command of the Jordanian army of course, no one would expect to see that, but they are surely controlling the Jordanian high command or whatever set up they have. .
@ adamdalgliesh:
I concur that USA can not provide orders to Jordanian Army. Also with the rest of your statement.
@ Edgar G.: I have seen no evidence that the US plans to overthrow install Mudar. In any case, I don’t think it is true that the U>S. controls the Jordanian Army. Arabs are happy to take money from the Western infidels. but that doesn’t mean that they will do their bidding if that goes against their “principles,” prejudices, sectarian or ethnic ties, etc. Look at Iraq, where the U.S. actually created its present army and poured millions of dollars into it. Yet the Iraqi regime and its army work closely with the Iranian National Guard, which is no friend of the U.S. or Israel. The U.S. has not even asked the Iraqi government to be reconciled to Israel. And in fact, it is hostile to Israel and supports BDS, even though it depends on the u>S., Israel’s ally, for survival. You can give an Arab money, but you can’t buy his loyalty. That goes to their religion, or their sect, or their tribe. It’s just the way it is in the Arab world. They take money, but not orders, from “infidels.”
@ Edgar G.: Edgar, I don’t think Nassar was good for Israel or that either Assad has been good for Israel. These leaders played major roles in indoctrinating their peoples to hate Israel. Hafez Assad was deeply implicated in at least three major wars against Israel (I am including the first Lebanon war). He was also deeply involved in numerous terror attacks against Israel and was a major sponsor of these attacks for over two decades. His soneBashar Assad was deeply involved in Hizbollah’s attack on Israel in 2006. Bashar has continued to be allied with Iran, Israel’s worst enemy, and Hizbollah, another very dangerous enemy of Israel. His tyranny helped to spawn ISIS, as well, although that was not his intention. As for Nasser, he was implicated in two major wars against Israel, numerous terrorist “fedayeen” attacks organized by his military intelligence service, the repeated blockades of the Suez Canal and the Gulf of Aqaba-Eilat, etc. Also, he played a major role in brainwashing the Egyptian people in hatred of Israel and Jews, and in creating the PLO. THese guys were (and Bashar still is) real mfs. Don’t let anyone persuade you otherwise.
@ Bear Klein:
I am sure he knows that. He need only look at Sadat.
@ Ted Belman:
If Mudar becomes perceived as a realistic possibility to become the ruler of Jordan by more than a very very narrow audience he will need to obtain body guards and a whole security system because in the middle-east he will have all sorts of people ready to knock him off.
@ Edgar G.:
Exactly. And there is no doubting Mudar’s sincerity. He wants Jordan to partner with Israel and will begin the process of undoing the hatred that has been built up over 70 years.
@ leonkushner:
Unfortunately its an idle threat if you don’t mean it or aren’t committed to it.
Fortunately, Mudar is a real threat and he has the king very worried. Even so, look how anti Israel the king’s moves are. There is no alternative to getting rid of him. Uttering warnings just doesn’t cut it.
@ adamdalgliesh:
So Nasser took over…. it was much better for the people… he made war against Israel, was positively destroyed. It was Israel’s stupidity that they didn’t take advantage of the moment and get rid of ALL the Arabs as they easily could have done. The Arabs were expecting to be booted. Israel was the whole world’s “fair haired boy” and they squandered it….. Mubarak kept the peace, cold as it was….. for his whole term. And today it’s even better with Sisi….
It was not quite the same with Syria which had hot and cold running Presidents for many years until Assad but with the border being comparatively quiet. After Assad got 2 very stiff lessons, the rest of his term was O.K. Even Bashar has made relatively minor problems.
@ Michael S:
After Farouk was given the boot Egypt became better for the people. And no revolution or overthrow of a monarch will have been prepared nearly so well as the replacement of the Jordan piglet. If the US accepts that Mudar should replace him, then they and Israel will be ready to move positively, and immediately reinforce the potential replacements in the key positions..
@ Michael S: Michael, I agree with you. The overthrow of King Idris in Libya in 1968 resulting in Qaddafi coming to power, where he remained for forty years. The overthrow of the Hashemite king in Iraq in 1958 led to an anti-American, anti-British miliray regime coming to power, and eventually to Saddam Hussein’s rule. The overthrow of King Farouk in Egypt in 1952 enabled Nassar to take over.
As I see it, the problem is that any government that replaces Abdullah is likely to be even more anti-Israel than Abdullah. Jordanians have been brainwashed for seventy or more years in hatred of Israel-with the connivance of the Hashemite regime of course, which has wanted both to prove its “solidarity” with other Arab regimes at war with Israel, and to distract their own subjects from their grievances against the regime, by directing their anger at a scapegoat. Jews, of course, are the customary scapegoat worldwide.
The problem is that anti-Israel and antisemitic hatred, once manufactured, are like Farankenstein’s monster, very difficult to get rid of. According to many articles I have read on the internet, the Jordanian parliament is totally dominated by Islamist parties, which are all extremely hostile to Israel. As Dr. Kedar points out, Abdullah’s recent move to weaken the Jordanian-Israel treaty is in part a reaction to “domestic pressures.” While there is certainly widespread discontent with the Hashemite dynasty in Jordan, most of it appears to be organized and led by Islamist groups who are even more hostile to Israel than Abdullah is. Israel is thus faced with the classic “the devil you know,” dilemma, and as Shakespeare put it, “would rather bear those ills we have, than fly to others that we know not of.” Abdullah of course realizes that Israel has little chance of replacing his regime with one more favorable to Israel than his, and that the Israelis realize this as well. He is thus milking Israel’s “the devil you know” dilemma for every cent that it is worth.
Well said Morcechai! I’m sure that this spells good news for Mudhar, right Ted?
I cannot think of the overthrow of any Middle Eastern monarch, that has turned out for the good.
THIS is the man to talk to the Humpty-Dumpty egglet. Perfectly put. Not a word should be omitted.