The real source of Jordan's palace intrigue

An alleged challenge to the king by a former crown prince hints at the growing demands for full democracy in a key Mideast state.

Yousef Allan/The Royal Hashemite Court via AP, File
Jordan's King Abdullah II gives a speech to parliament in December.

Long a constitutional monarchy – more monarchy than constitutional – Jordan has been an island of convenient stability in the Middle East. That image was shattered over the weekend when the government of King Abdullah accused his half brother, former Crown Prince Hamzah, of “destabilizing Jordan’s security.” Prince Hamzah claims he is under house arrest. With suggestions of an attempted coup, the palace intrigue continues like a segment of “The Crown” or “Game of Thrones” or even an Oprah Winfrey interview of disaffected British royals. 

But the real spotlight should be on Jordanians. Their growing embrace of political equality has laid a broader groundwork for a challenge to hereditary rule in one of the Arab world’s many monarchies or emirates.

Jordan’s king, who can easily disband Parliament, has become more authoritarian as citizens increasingly demand basic rights and liberties. Last year, voter turnout was near a historic low for seats in a parliament described as merely decor. Hundreds of teachers were arrested for demanding better benefits. As more Jordanians connect by internet, they discover shared concerns. And as the historical demise of monarchies shows, they feel less like subjects and more like individuals capable of self-governance.

Prince Hamzah says he was not part of any conspiracy against the king. Rather, he said, “Even to criticize a small aspect of a policy leads to arrest and abuse by the security services.” That assessment of Jordan’s political climate is backed up by two global watchdogs, Freedom House and The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index.

Monarchs, which claim authority by a belief that bloodlines bestow legitimacy, often feel threatened by their extended family. Issues over succession are often a source of instability. Jordan’s palace turmoil is a case in point. Yet these days such challenges to dynasties more often come from an awakening of people about the key concept of sovereignty – that each individual is worthy and democracies are best able to recognize that.

The era of personalization of power is giving way to one of power by persons who see each other as equals and demand institutions that are accountable to all. That recognition of shared equality is thicker than bloodlines.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Give us your feedback

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

 

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.