Jordan must watch new friends as carefully as old enemies
THE INDEPENDENT, February 07, 1999
Whenever a crisis appears in Syria or Saudi Arabia or Lebanon or Egypt,
Israel usually comes up with a conspiracy theory to stir the pot.
Trouble in Damascus is attributed to Jordanian security men or Lebanese
Christians. Violence in Saudi Arabia's eastern province is put down to
Iranian terrorism. Lebanon's turmoil is blamed on Syria, Egypt's
guerrilla war on Sudan.
In all these scenarios, Israel is innocent, wanting only peace for the
region by honouring its treaties with Arab nations, sometimes - the
story goes - protecting regional minorities like the Lebanese Maronites
who were, of course, later abandoned. How soon, then, before the Israeli
press pronounced on the dangers to the Hashemite Kingdom?
It started on 21 January, with an intriguing article in the newspaper
Haaretz which should have sent a chill through those members of the
Jordanian royal family who believed that the kingdom, with its Israeli
peace treaty, might be immune. "While Jordan was founded on part of the
Jewish homeland (sic), several attempts have been made by Arab states -
not us - to terminate its existence," Israel Harel wrote in the paper.
If King Hussein had been assassinated, "Jordan's 'Arab sisters' would
have pounced upon it like vultures and torn it to pieces."
And so it goes on. The Hashemite kingdom "never became a single nation.
It has been Israel that has protected the Hashemite crown. and rescued
it from threats from the north or east and from domestic enemies." But
then came the clincher: "It will ultimately become apparent... that two
nations (ie, Israel and Palestine) cannot live on the small piece of
land to the west of the Jordan and that two states cannot live there. If
nations with vast stretches of land that have no need for additional
acreage are feasting their eyes on Jordan, Israel must also stake its
claim to Jordan...With that territory - even part of it - we (sic) could
solve in co-operation with our peace process partners, many territorial
disputes we have with the Palestinians."
As King Hussein lay in a coma in his Amman hospital Crown Prince
Abdullah, who was sworn in as Regent yesterday, received messages of
prayer and support from many of his neighbours, not least Israel where
every citizen - so its Prime Minister assured the prince - was praying
for his father. The Americans, too, sent their support in tangible terms
- millions of dollars in new grants and promises of protection for
Jordan against any aggression. No guesses as to whom the Americans think
they are protecting Jordan against - our old friend the Beast of
Baghdad.
Indeed, it was only a year ago that President Clinton was telling King
Hussein personally that the United States would never allow Iraq to
invade Jordan - even though Iraq had not shown the slightest interest in
doing so. In fact, the last territorial change along the Jordanian-Iraqi
frontier was in Jordan's favour; a present of land from Saddam in
grateful thanks for the king's support in the Iran-Iraq war.
Now, however, the pressure is of a different kind. America is putting
its prestige - and dollars - into a ragbag of Iraqi opposition groups
and would like to base them in Amman - a development that would almost
certainly provoke Saddam's anger. King Hussein rejected an American plan
to send the Jordanian army into the Iraqi desert to carve out a "safe
haven" for Saddam's internal enemies. But will Crown Prince Abdullah do
the same?
The pressures here are not only external. If Abdullah allows Jordan to
become a springboard for the Iraqi opposition, his 65 per cent
Palestinian population - long enraged by Jordan's peace treaty with
Israel - will oppose such an alliance. Though he betrayed King Hussein's
friendship, Saddam remains a popular figure among most Palestinians;
brutal he may be, they say, but at least he still resists the West's
demands, its sanctions and its bombing raids. Abdullah - who is once
said to have proposed joint Jordanian-Israeli paratroop exercises (to
his father's displeasure) - will be confronting these issues within a
week.
The prince has in the past denounced "Syrian terrorism", especially
after the Jordanians discovered an alleged bomb plot in Amman. And it
was Syria which sent its tanks into Jordan to support the Palestinian
uprising against King Hussein in 1970. But its then air force commander,
Hafez el-Assad - now the Syrian President - refused to give the tanks
air cover. For many years, Assad and King Hussein maintained friendly -
if not over-warm - relations, the king and the president often
telephoning each other to enquire after their families. King Hussein
once considered the idea of a marriage between one of his daughters and
Basil Assad, the Syrian leader's favourite son, who subsequently died in
a road accident.
But Jordan's peace treaty with Israel deeply worried Assad. Jordan's
frontier with Israel was stated to be the West Bank - there was no
mention of a putative Palestinian state in the annex - and Syria feared
that its own demand for the return of the occupied Golan Heights would
be isolated.
In private, Assad was harshly critical of America's air raids on Iraq;
the Syrians realise - correctly - that future Jordanian support for the
Iraqi opposition in Amman will indirectly threaten Syria's interests.
When King Hussein appointed Abdullah as crown prince last month,
Damascus responded with absolute silence.
This weekend, Israeli "experts" and American "analysts"- most of them
former US government officials - have been turning up all over our
television stations to express their love for King Hussein and their
concern for Jordan's future. It is almost as if the fear of God is being
put into Crown Prince Abdullah. Watch out for Syria, the subliminal
message goes. Watch out for Iraq. We will protect you. But at what
price?
It's therefore worth finishing Israel Harel's article in Haaretz, which
concludes with the suggestion that Palestinians could take over part of
Jordan, leaving Israel to "annex those parts of the West Bank that are
still in our hands." If Israel promoted this plan "instead of vainly
expending our energies to perpetuate the survival of a wobbly kingdom
which will inevitably collapse. we will serve our interests.. and we
will also create an atmosphere conducive to a peace settlement and to
mutual trust and conciliation between the nations of the region."
Could this piece of breathtaking cynicism be merely a minority voice,
you may ask? Un- fortunately, it's not that long ago that a well-known
Israeli politician - now a declared enemy of the Oslo peace agreement -
was publicly advocating the expulsion of Palestinians from their West
Bank and Jerusalem homes to an exile in Jordan. Jordan, he said, would
become Palestine. That man, Ariel Sharon, is now foreign minister of
Israel.
Crown Prince Abdullah may admire Israel's paratroopers. But he might
also do well - while watching the treacherous Saddam and the silent
Assad - to keep a close eye on former General Sharon as well.
