|
Archive
from the January 25, 1994 edition Ensuring Jordan's Position As Moderate Regional `Buffer'
Alon Ben-Meir. Alon Ben-Meir is professor of International Relations at the New School for Social Research, New York.
THE question that troubles many Jordanian nationalists is
whether or not the emergence of a Palestinian state resulting from
the Israeli-Palestine Liberation Organization agreement will mean
the beginning of the end of Hashemite rule in Jordan. The strategic interests of the United States and Israel require
that Jordan remain politically moderate. This can best be secured
by continuous Hashemite rule. In addition Jordan should maintain
the democratization process that is contributing to Jordan's
political stability. The creation of a Palestinian state would not
threaten Jordan, provided that the US and Israel build into the
peace process a special role for Jordan as a geopolitical buffer. The Jordanians' concerns are rooted in their country's
demographic composition, estimated to be 50 to 65 percent
Palestinian and of Palestinian origin. From the Jordanian
perspective, the Israeli-PLO agreement has rekindled Palestinian
nationalism and removed any prospect of restoring Jordanian
authority over the West Bank. Palestinian nationalism has always contained a residue of
hostility toward Jordan. The Palestinians resent Jordan's
annexation of the West Bank in 1951, they blame King Hussein for
losing it in the 1967 war with Israel, and they also hold him
responsible for the 1970 civil war that left 10,000 Palestinians
dead and three to four times as many expelled to Lebanon. Even
though most Palestinians in Jordan are Jordanian citizens, very few
participated in the 1989 parliamentary elections, leaving the
political field wide-open to fundamentalist candidates. In the
November 1993 parliamentary elections, the Palestinians by and
large voted for candidates who supported the peace process, a
factor that contributed significantly to the heavy losses sustained
by fundamentalists. To what extent their sentiment could change in
the future and how they might use their political power on both
sides of the Jordan River are the core questions of the Jordanian
dilemma. Soon after the ``Gaza-Jericho first'' agreement became
known, King Hussein was quoted as having described it as ``a danger
to the national security of the Jordanian Kingdom.'' But officially
the Jordanians expressed reserved satisfaction with the agreement. Should Jordan's stability be undermined by an extremist
Palestinian takeover, not only Israel but also Saudi Arabia will
lose a critical strategic buffer that separates the Saudi oil
fields from the heavily populated northern belt that includes Iraq
and Syria. A radical Jordan will be a natural partner to the Sunni
Muslim-led Iraq. As the only homogeneous Arab country with a Sunni
majority, Jordan shares long borders with Iraq and has the Red Sea
port of Aqaba, which served as a vital outlet to the sea for Iraq
during the Gulf war. For Israel, to which national security is of paramount
importance, and for the US, whose primary interest in the region
remains the protection of oil resources, Jordan's future political
stability is essential. A number of steps must be taken to ensure
the continuity of the Hashemite rule and regional stability. First, Jordan must become full partner in the
Israeli-Palestinian economic development plans, which may include
water-development projects, oil and other energy resources,
tourism, transportation, and telecommunication. Moreover, the lack
of natural resources and the absence of a large population base
makes Jordan dependent on outside sources for revenue. Jordan
suffers from an unemployment rate of 25 to 30 percent, and the per
capita GNP is only $900, lower than that of either the West Bank or
Gaza. Hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign investments and
outright grants from West Europe, Gulf states, and the US will be
needed for public projects and expansion of light industry. This
aid should be coupled, as President Clinton has announced, with an
effort to reduce or forgive some of Jordan's $6 billion foreign
debt. Second, the US and Israel should support the establishment of a
democratic Palestinian state that will serve as a magnet and a
source of inspiration for the majority of Palestinians, regardless
of their place of residence. Meeting the aspirations of the
Palestinians will reduce rather than increase the political
pressure on Jordan. Moreover, it will stifle the opposition to the
peace so long as Palestinian nationals enjoy freedom of movement
and continue to develop social and economic ties with their
counterparts across the Israeli and Jordanian borders. In this
connection an equitable solution, which may entail compensation and
resettlement of the Palestinian refugees in Jordan, must first be
found. Third, with the support of the US, regional security
arrangements must be made between Israel, Jordan, the future
Palestinian state, and Syria. These will be critical in fostering
political stability. Israel and Jordan can cooperate in many areas
concerning security, including sharing intelligence and
surveillance without offending Arab sensibilities and without a
formal military alliance. Since 1967 Israel has indirectly
safeguarded Jordan's security by making it known to Syria and Iraq
that Israel will not tolerate any change in the political status
quo of its neighbor to the east. Iraq, Iran, and other potential
enemies will continue to think twice before they try to undermine
the Hashemite rule, knowing that Israel or even the US will be
drawn into the conflict to restore a friendly regime in
Jordan.Given Jordan's Palestinian majority and the political
pressure it can muster, neither peace, nor confederation with the
Palestinian entity, nor consolidation of Hashemite rule on the East
Bank will necessarily eliminate Jordan's political vulnerability.
Israel and Jordan, with US support, must carefully construct a
political, economic, and security structure that will enhance
Jordan's role as a geopolitical buffer and as a major player in the
development of a comprehensive peace.
The Opinion/Essay Page welcomes manuscripts. Authors of articles
will be notified by telephone. Authors of articles not accepted
will be notified by postcard. Send manuscripts by mail to
Opinions/Essays, One Norway Street, Boston, MA 02115, by fax to 617
-450-2317, or by Internet E-mail to OPED@RACHEL.CSPS.COM.
|