|
March 18, 2011
A questionable perspective
King Abdullah of Jordan focuses on Israel as the Middle East burns.
DAVID E. MILLER THE MEDIA LINE
The new autobiography of King Abdullah II of Jordan arrives at bookstores and amazon.com at an awkward time. Its title, Our Last Best Chance, is inspired by what the king argues is the urgent need for Israel and the Palestinians to reach a final and lasting peace agreement, which he sees as the key to putting an end to the tensions in the region and undermining the appeal of Islamic extremism.
“Resolving this conflict would deprive the organizations of their appeal,” Abdullah writes in the preface. It would even go far in addressing the region’s other problems of political reform and economic development. “Think of a world where the managerial expertise of the Israelis, the professionalism of the Jordanians, Lebanese entrepreneurship and the education of the Palestinians could be combined effectively.”
Trouble is, the Middle East is aflame. With Jordan, too, shaken by protests that prompted Abdullah to dismiss his prime minister, there is no evident connection to the smoldering Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Islamists, whom the king cites as the greatest threat to the region, have so far taken a backseat to an opposition dominated by the young, well-educated and outwardly secular.
Two of Abdullah’s colleagues – Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Tunisian President Zine Al-Abidine Ben Ali – have been toppled, others look to be in a precarious position and public discussion is now about elections, free speech and constitutional reform. Israel and the Palestinians are consigned to the margins.
Except for the fact that he is a king and, therefore, an exemplar of the lack of democracy in the Middle East, Abdullah himself fits the profile of the kind of people who have filled Tahrir Square in Cairo and Pearl Square in Bahrain demanding an end to autocracy.
In the 346-page book, which was officially published by Viking on Feb. 22, the king recounts a childhood spent mainly in American private schools and, subsequently, at Britain’s Sandhurst military academy. He returned home to Jordan only in 1983 at age 21.
The lion’s share of the book is dedicated to his life story since taking power in 1999, and his efforts to broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Internal Jordanian affairs, which are no doubt occupying most of his time these days, are dealt with only minimally.
Abdullah’s references to Jordan focus mainly on his efforts to develop the economy, stressing his achievements in reducing the budgetary deficit and unemployment and boosting exports. Nearly nothing is said about Jordan’s social issues: the Palestinian-East Bank divide or the huge influx of refugees from neighboring Iraq.
“Economic reform has been a priority for me,” Abdullah admits, “but I have always believed that it will not reach its full potential unless it is part of a broader agenda of political, social and administrative reforms.”
The king claims he is intent on deep reform, but says that he is blocked by the country’s conservatives. “Resistance to change has come from different camps for different reasons,” he writes. “Some have resisted change out of fear of losing privileges they have long enjoyed, while others simply lacked imagination, preferring a status quo they knew and accepted.”
But, at the same time, Abdullah doesn’t seem to appreciate the irony that the reforms he undertook in the run-up for November 2010’s parliamentary elections, including a new election law, decentralization, rules for transparency and accountability, and voting for local office, were all dictated by an absolute monarch.
In fact, the elections law ensured that Jordan’s East Bank tribes continued to dominate parliament at the expense of what he today considers to be the country’s “Palestinians,” those who arrived after 1948 and 1967 from what is now Israel and the West Bank. Turnout was low and anger over a legislature not truly representative of the people fanned the flames of unrest that emerged this year.
Nathan Brown, an expert on Arab politics and constitutionalism at George Washington University in the United States, said Jordanians were deeply skeptical about reform, viewing it as nepotism in disguise.
“Some of these reforms are real,” he said. “But it is more common in Jordan to hear the political system described as less responsive and the economic reforms as a means for influential people to line their pockets.”
On the political level, Brown said Jordanians were justified in complaining of a new hardening of the line. “Jordan is not as repressive as Egypt was in the late Mubarak years, but the limited democratic mechanisms operate less meaningfully than they did in some earlier times.”
In his book, Abdullah praises the government of Prime Minister Samir Al-Rifai, who he appointed in November 2009 in response to public dissatisfaction with parliament. But, by the time the book came out, Rifai and his government were already history – replaced by Maarouf Al-Bakhit in a hurried reshuffle aimed at tackling renewed public unrest.
Fahed Khitan, a political columnist for the independent Jordanian daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm, said Rifai’s government failed both politically and economically and was criticized for skewing the results of the 2010 parliamentary elections.
“The king was forced to dismiss Rifai’s government for both internal and external reasons,” Khitan said. “He will probably succumb to the people’s second demand and dissolve the parliament, conducting new elections in 2012.”
Khitan said the new Al-Bakhit government had the limited mission of expediting political reforms, mainly changing Jordan’s election law. The king was also encouraging “social dialogue” with all opposition parties.
But mere dialogue may not be enough, said Assaf David, a Jordan researcher at Jerusalem’s Truman Institute. “The Hashemite regime is weaker today than it was in the past and exposed to demands by conflicting interest groups that were previously small and insignificant,” David said. “The dilemma facing the king today is more difficult and dangerous than ever before, considering the developments unfolding in the Middle East.”
He said Abdullah is torn between reverting to a socialist economic model, which will drag Jordan back to dependence on World Bank aid, and a neo-liberal model, which would likely weaken the traditional loyalty of East Bankers to the king.
Abdullah, he added, has also attempted to alter the historic “social contract” between East Bankers and the regime without providing the former with an adequately appealing alternative. East Bankers want constitutional reform to limit the king’s powers, but not full-fledged democracy, which would bring about Palestinian dominance over Jordanian politics.
“In the midst of deep conflicting interests, King Abdullah needs to find a way to please everyone,” David said. “The price he will pay may be a further weakening of the regime.”
^TOP
|
