Is Westbank- Jordan confederation in the works

This idea could have legs. But Jordan isn’t a democracy and the Westbank is, if they would only hold elections. I can’t see such a confederation without enfranchising all Palestinians (including in Jordan). The king would have to give up his dictatorial powers. The Bedouin would resist it. But if all this could be agreed upon, it would be no loss to the confederation if Israel kept Area C to the west of Ramallah. Jordan would thus be on both sides of the Jordan but Jordan has faithfully maintained the peace and could be counted on continuing to do so if a new border was agreed upon. Jordan has lots of land and could easily accommodate all Palestinian refugees. The biggest drawback to this deal is that it is too rational and Israel gets more than the world community wants her to get. Ted Belman

President Abbas may be pursuing a confederation with Jordan — a move that could finally break the stalemate in the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
By Daoud Kuttab, The Atlantic Monthly

RTR3B9WD-615.jpg

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (R) speaks with Jordan’s King Abdullah upon his arrival in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Dec. 6. (Yousef Allan/Reuters)

In the summer of 1993, I was granted a rare scoop as a Palestinian journalist: an exclusive interview with the prime minister of Israel at the time, Yitzhak Rabin, the first ever given to a reporter working for a leading Palestinian newspaper. Midway way through the one-hour meeting, I asked Rabin for his vision as to the ultimate political status of the West Bank and Gaza in 15 or 20 years. Rabin, who at the time, we later discovered, had approved the Oslo back-channel, took a puff at a cigarette given to him by one of his aides, and answered that he envisions It being part of an entity with Jordan.

I remember this response almost 20 years later, and at a time now when the Oslo Accords — which Rabin signed on the White House lawn in September 1993 — have all but been declared dead by all parties involved. Mahmoud Abbas, who signed the Memorandum of Understanding with Israel on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) that fall, is now on the verge of leaving political life with no clear successor for him or for the Palestinian Authority that has been established in parts of the West Bank since the agreement’s implementation in 1995.

The failure of this approach has led some to suggest other avenues of breaking up the logjam  — the result of U.S. President Barack Obama’s lack of political will and the failure of the rest of the world to pick up the pieces without U.S. involvement. It is in this political limbo that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is finding itself toying with an old-new formula: A role for the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

In a meeting with members of the Ebal charity in October, which is made up of Jordanians of Palestinian (Nablus) origin and hosted by Jordan’s speaker of the upper house, Taher al Masri, Jordan’s Prince Hassan bin Talal opened up the issue. In the speech, recorded and posted on thejordandays.tv website, the prince stressed that the West Bank is part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which includes “both banks of the [Jordan] River.” He added that he “did not personally oppose the two-state solution,” but that this solution is irrelevant at the current stage.

The October 9 talk received little attention until a former PLO leader repeated the idea, albeit in a different tone. Farouk al Qadoumi, one of the founders of the PLO’s Fatah movement, gave an interview to the London-based Al Quds Al Arabi, in which he suggested the return of the West Bank to Jordan as part of a federation or a confederation. Qadoumi, who opposed the Oslo Accords and has refused to step foot in the Palestinian Authority areas, has little clout in the PLO, and at one time accused Abbas of being behind the poisoning of the late Yasser Arafat. Qadoumi’s statement was quickly opposed by the secretary of the PLO, Yaser Abed Rabo, who called it “naïve.”

But earlier this month, Al-Quds Al-Arabi reported that Abbas informed several PLO leaders “to be prepared for a new confederation project with Jordan and other parties in the international community,” and that his office has already issued reports that evaluate “the best strategies to lead possible negotiations with Jordan” toward “reviving the confederation.” He has reportedly asked PLO officials to prepare themselves to pursue this strategy. This report, if confirmed by official sources, could be a watershed moment for the Palestinian national movement, and the highest profile endorsement of this persistent proposal.

Abbas’s willingness to explore a Jordanian confederation comes on the heels of the United Nation’s recent declaration of Palestine as an observer state by a 138-9 vote. This clear victory for Abbas gives him the political capital to explore such a potentially controversial move — and also the international recognition of sovereignty that would allow Palestinians to enter into a confederation with Jordan as equal partners.

The idea of Jordan having a greater role in Palestine is attractive for various parties. With the Israelis claiming that the Palestinians might repeat the Gaza rocket problem if they withdraw from the West Bank, the idea of a Jordanian security role in the West Bank can defuse such Israeli concerns. A role for Jordan in Palestine would be publicly acceptable in Israel, where the Hashemite enjoy consistent respect among everyday Israelis. Americans would also find such an idea easier to deal with if talks ever return. And even among Palestinians who are unhappy with the PLO and its failures to end the Israeli occupation, any process that can end Israeli presence in Palestinian territories is welcome — even if that is replaced, temporarily, by an Arab party, whether it is Jordan or any other member of the Arab league.

The suggestion that Jordan returns to a direct role that can include sovereign control (and therefore responsibility) for the West Bank is a long shot for most Palestinians — and more importantly, Jordanians. Palestinians will see it as infringing on their independence. Jordanians will see it as a burden that will weaken their attempts at building a new East Bank Jordan with as few citizens of Palestinian origin as possible. Such a deal would certainly make Palestinians a majority in a federal system, bringing about the scenario that right-wing Israelis have been pushing, namely that Jordan is Palestine.

A Palestinian-Jordanian confederation, however, is another issue. Confederations are political systems that include two independent countries. For some time in the 1980s, this was the most talked-about term in the region. The late Salah Khalaf (Abu Iyyad), the former head of intelligence for the PLO, was quoted as saying that what Palestinians wanted was five minutes of independence and then they would happily agree to a confederation with Jordan. However, the issue became politically poisonous as soon as the late King Hussein of Jordan said publicly that he doesn’t want anyone to ever utter the term “confederation.” And so it has been for the past two decades.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II, whose wife is of Palestinian origin, doesn’t have the same sensitivity, nor do Palestinians have the same concerns about him and a possible Jordanian lust for Palestinian land. Since 1988, Jordan, which had controlled the West Bank until it was lost in the 1967 war, has declared that the unity of the two banks back in the early 1950s is no longer the case. Shortly after the eruption of the 1987 Palestinian intifada, King Hussein declared a cessation of its role in the West Bank. This cessation, which has yet to be constitutionally mandated, has been rejected by the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood — the largest and most organized opposition group in Jordan.

It is not clear whether the idea suggested by Prince Hassan and Farouk Qadoumi, and apparently espoused secretly by U.S. envoys to the region, will ever get traction. It is also not clear whether the words of the late Rabin of the Labor party that I published in the leading daily Al Quds at the time are still valid in Israeli governmental circles now headed by the Likud’s Benjamin Netanyahu and most likely will continue so after next month’s election. Ironically, Jordan’s parliamentary elections, which the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Action Front Party will boycott, will take place the following day.

While it is unclear if Jordan will ever end up having any sovereign role in the West Bank, support for a greater role for Jordan in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will no doubt increase in the coming months and years if the current decline of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority continues. The one determining factor in all of the discussions will have to come from the Israeli side, which has yet to decide whether it will relinquish sovereignty over the areas occupied in 1967 to any Arab party, whether it be Palestinian or Jordanian.

Daoud Kuttab is an award-winning Palestinian journalist and the former Ferris Professor of Journalism at Princeton University.

December 27, 2012 | 8 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

8 Comments / 8 Comments

  1. @ Bernard Ross:

    @ yamit82: I don’t. know much about Israeli politics but it seems to me if this interim accord is on the table then BB will want the left in the coalition to support him rather than the further right who might hinder him.
    Also, in rethinking Gaza perhaps Hamas can join as a 3rd entity and maintain their power in Gaza. I just think Egypt would prefer to control them than having Jordan control them. Also, I understand the Gazans are mainly Egyptians.

    Egypt hates them, don’t want them and never have. Before the 6 day war the residents of Sinai and Gaza were not given Egyptian citizenship and those territories were never included in Egyptian national sovereignty but were administered as a military government much like Israeli administration of the Territories.

    Maybe the few original Gazans were of Egyptian ethnicity but most of the present population of Gaza are refugees from Israel especially Jaffa and so are their children and grandchildren. Egyptians really hate the Arab Palis and a few years ago had no compunction when they opened fire on them when they breached to fence between Egypt and Rafah.

  2. @ yamit82: I dont. know much about Israeli politics but it seems to me if this interim accord is on the table then BB will want the left in the coalition to support him rather than the further right who might hinder him.
    Also, in rethinking gaza perhaps hamas can join as a 3rd entity and maintain their power in gaza. I just think Egypt would prefer to control them than having jordan control them. Also, I understand the gazans are mainly egyptians.

  3. @ yamit82: Some of what I have been talking about including leaving issues to later and how a confederation avoids certain problems
    http://www.debka.com/article/22638/A-Jordanian-Palestinian-confederation-aired-by-Netanyahu-Abdullah-
    I do not agree that gaza will go with jordan but rather with egypt.
    “it gained traction from the UN General Assembly’s Nov. 29 upgrade of the Palestinians to non-member observer status. On the strength of this upgrade, the Palestinian Authority is claiming the status of a government representing an independent state and therefore eligible to join Jordan as a confederation partner.”
    I believe that this was worked out before Pillar of defense and that gaza conclusion was part of deal. Giving the arabs a faux victory in gaza and a faux state on west bank
    GCC wants to focus on shias, Iran, oil/gas

  4. This idea could have legs. But Jordan isn’t a democracy and the Westbank is, if they would only hold elections. I can’t see such a confederation without enfranchising all Palestinians (including in Jordan). The king would have to give up his dictatorial powers. The Bedouin would resist it. But if all this could be agreed upon, it would be no loss to the confederation if Israel kept Area C to the west of Ramallah. Jordan would thus be on both sides of the Jordan but Jordan has faithfully maintained the peace and could be counted on continuing to do so if a new border was agreed upon. Jordan has lots of land and could easily accommodate all Palestinian refugees. The biggest drawback to this deal is that it is too rational and Israel gets more than the world community wants her to get. Ted Belman

    The days of autocratic leaders making critical decisions with consideration of what their people want are over for the foreseeable future. Every knowledgeable commentator and all Pali polls indicate that the Palis support armed Resistance against Israel. (See Pali Poll Below)

    Hamas after their Gaza victory over Israel is more popular in the West Bank than ever. I don’t believe the Jordanian King is so stupid to actually invite the scorpions inside his autonomy. That Abbas is still around without an electoral mandate 3 years after his term has ended means he is too scared of a Hamas victory. Since Hamas Hates the Jordanian monarchy no less than Israel why would anyone want to confederate with those seeking your own overthrow and demise?

    Poll: Palestinians See UN Vote, Gaza War as Victories

    The poll said 88% believe that the results of the confrontation in Gaza prove that armed struggle is the best means of achieving Palestinian independence, 73% believe the Palestinian cause has been advanced by the recent events and 87% are optimistic that the conflict will lead to reconciliation and unity.

  5. As I have said before, I believe this is a done deal but will happen over time in a pragmatic way with no sudden sweeping agreement. In 1988 the PLO said that they were considering confederation but would not do it until after they become a state. All this current talk, from Abbas, right after the “state” appears to have arrived is to say “now we have our state we can confederate”. Furthermore, the PA is saying that they cannot exist without confederation. This will allow the PA to make peace with Israel and relinquish some prior demands: no recognition of Jewish state, Pals giving up more than 1967 borders(how much, dont know??),no refugees to Israel, no gaza link,. Jordan guarantees and agrees security relations, customs etc with Israel and negotiates future borders over time. “Pal” remains separate but confederated until a future time when they can federate, have free travel, possible monarchistic reform, then citizenship in Jordan. Abbas can retire with his legacy, avoids assassination for peace concessions, Israel will prefer jordanian supervision to PA autonomy or Israeli supervision, Israel gets no gaza link, and whatever portion of area C it wants. Ultimately, in time the monarchy will seek to become constitutional figurehead in phases which preserves the hashemite future and the Bedouin future (as opposed to a future bloodbath). The Palestinian wife and son are the perfect situation for integrating the Jordanian Palestians, over time, into the nation. They must realize that in time the Jordanian Pals can usurp everybody so if they can merge it is best for hashemites and bedouins to do it over time. They will just want to have more time in power, as it phases, to make money. Such a confederation would bring money to Jordan and PA.

  6. The Atlantic Monthly is a left-wing rag which clearly lives in a delusional world. They ignore many facts including 1.there is no Palestinian Arab ethnic group 2. the group which calls themselves “Palestinians” only care about eradicating every Jew from the Middle East and don’t care about having a state of their own. Of course, the author is described as a “Palestinian”. The sooner Jews and friends of Israel realize carrying on the farce of negotiating with the criminal mafia like gang known as the Palestinian Authority, instead of destroying them as they intend to destroy Israel, the more secure Israel will be.

  7. Sorry, but there is NO WEST BANK (fake, made up name) and any Fakestinian State must be located East of The Jordan River, NEVER in Judea/Samaria which is ISRAEL, get it ISRAEL, the Jewish State!!