In a world in which Israel is losing friends and allies at a pace that should concern every Israeli, the wrath of Jordan’s King Abdullah, as expressed when he addressed the UN General Assembly late last month, ought to be taken extremely seriously. The Jordanian ruler, who is not normally inclined to hyperbole but instead exudes a calm and considered influence amid the region’s stormy geopolitics, seems to have lost patience with Israel’s government and its policies.
Jordan has little interest in unnecessarily aggravating relations with Israel. Yet despite the Hashemite kingdom taking a huge risk when it first signed a peace agreement with Israel in 1994, and maintaining the treaty through turbulent times, it has become apparent that the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is taking this for granted, without sufficient sensitivity to the domestic pressures facing the Jordanian leadership.
With a large Palestinian population, many of whom have strong connections with their families in the West Bank and Gaza, witnessing the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the entrenchment of an oppressive occupation in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, has had a direct impact on Jordanian society and politics.
There is growing fear in Amman that the ideological zeal of this right-wing Israeli government could lead to an attempt to push Palestinians in large numbers east of the Jordan River — a move that from the kingdom’s point of view would be tantamount to a declaration of war.
King Abdullah could not have been clearer in suggesting to the international community that leaving the Palestinian conflict unresolved endangers regional stability and has implications far beyond the immediate issue. He rightly warned against a series of illusions that, unless acknowledged, will prevent peace being achieved.
If this Israeli government remains in power, the trajectory of relations with Jordan is likely to be a downward spiral.
Yossi Mekelberg
The first is the abnormality of dealing separately with the West Bank and Gaza, not merely in terms of how Israel treats the Palestinians in each territory, but also in terms of the political intentions regarding their future. What rightly worries the Jordanian ruler is that, for all intents and purposes, the West Bank is already being annexed, making the two-state solution increasingly difficult to achieve.
The second illusion the king warned against is “that this Israeli leadership’s rejection of Palestinian statehood is a position that might yet change. It is not. It is being cemented on the ground.” This stands in contrast to the third illusion, which he sees as the most dangerous: the belief held by Israel and its supporters that the “Arab world never sought peace.”
This unholy trinity of illusions, if allowed to prevail, will reduce the chances of a fair and just peace agreement to virtually nothing. For those who closely follow the Middle East, and particularly Israeli-Palestinian relations, King Abdullah’s stern warning might come as no surprise. But the occasion of his speech, from the podium of the UN General Assembly, and its timing, on the eve of an Israeli general election, were no coincidence. They were a message to Israel that it cannot rely indefinitely on Jordan to adhere to the peace agreement while Israel’s actions increasingly endanger Jordanian interests.
The peace agreement between Israel and Jordan is of mutual interest and benefit for both countries. They share a 300 km land border along the Jordan River and the Arava/Wadi Araba, where cooperation with Jordanian security forces helps prevent militancy, infiltration into the West Bank or Israel proper, and the smuggling of weapons, ammunition, and other illicit goods. For the Israeli military, this cooperation allows a considerable number of troops to be deployed from the eastern front to other fronts. Moreover, intelligence sharing benefits both countries in dealing with hostile, mainly non-state, subversive forces.
Cooperation does not stop at the military and security arena. The two countries also share environmental and resource interests. For Jordan, water security is one of its most challenging issues, and Israel has helped alleviate some of the pressure. Yet, in what was an irresponsible act by the Israeli government, and apparently in response to Jordanian criticism of Israeli policies in the West Bank and Gaza, Israel refused to renew a 2021 water agreement under which it supplied 50 million cubic meters annually to its eastern neighbor.
Weaponizing a basic human need is hardly a sign of goodwill. It is also counterproductive to Israel’s interests, something that we have come to expect from the current Israeli government.
For Jordan, a major area of concern is the situation in Jerusalem, and any attempt to change the status quo there, where it holds custodianship over the Muslim and Christian holy sites and a historic role in maintaining their legal status quo. Repeated provocations by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and his supporters have created a fear that religious conflict could be ignited in Jerusalem and spread far beyond the city to the rest of the Muslim world.
It does not help that Avigdor Lieberman, a former defense minister and current leader of the opposition party Yisrael Beiteinu, who could well become a senior minister in the next government, has said: “We need to reach an understanding with the Jordanians for them to administer Judea and Samaria. They should take security and administrative responsibility. We can’t leave a vacuum.” He was mainly referring to Areas A and B of the occupied West Bank, but this is yet another example of wishful thinking by an Israeli politician fantasizing about circumventing the Palestinian issue and the political and human rights of Palestinians, as if he has learned nothing from the past three years.
Beyond the Jordanian king’s precise analysis of the state of affairs, and his criticism of Israel’s refusal to accept that embracing the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 could provide a basis for resolving the conflict, the speech was striking for its willingness to confront the Israeli government directly. Most notably, King Abdullah called on the international community to use the tools of “sanctions, asset freezes, embargoes, diplomatic isolation.”
This bold statement signals that Jordan is giving up on appealing to the common sense of Israeli decision-makers and is joining others in the international community who have concluded that statements and resolutions alone do not work without muscle behind them.
The king’s address may also have been a message to the Israeli electorate on the eve of the election that there is another way. But if this government remains in power, the trajectory of relations with Jordan is likely to be a downward spiral — something that can hardly be good for Israel, the cause of peace or regional stability, but might become inevitable.