By Adnana Buamer, ME MONITOR
The Israeli right is preparing to present a plan to overthrow the Jordanian king after annexing the Jordan Valley in the West Bank to realise the dream of Jordan being converted to Palestine. They aim to establish a confederation between the PA and “Palestinian Jordan” because the Israeli right is interested in annexing the West Bank without the millions of Palestinians within it. Forcing them to head to Jordan.
Israel’s Haaretz newspaper revealed in late December the Israeli right-wing’s approaches and plans, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This is based on the claims that Israel has major plans for Jordan, but these plans do not include the same king. This is evidenced by several articles and reports written by right-wing Israeli writers this month who all present similar justifications and results, the main of them all is to destroy the peace treaty with Jordan.
Right-wing Israelis believe that annexing the Jordan Valley is a tactical operation aimed at hitting two Israeli birds with one stone: the first is to work to annex the West Bank and cancel the peace agreement with Jordan, and the second is to topple the Hashemite royal family and to embody the dream of Jordan being Palestine.
It is interesting that this dream is shared by all the Israeli right, with all its components and currents, because they are enthusiastic supporters of the idea that Jordan is Palestine. The ruling Israeli right has begun to detest King Abdullah II.
When King Abdullah is shamefully toppled, Israel will be able to complete its annexation of the West Bank and establish a confederation between the Palestinian Authority and “Palestinian Jordan”.
Moreover, according to the Israeli perception, when that happens, the Palestinians in the West Bank will obtain political rights in Jordan.
According to this Israeli theory, when the Palestinian state is established in Jordan, the Palestinians can resolve their issue, put an end to their suffering and stop using armed operations against Israel, because since 1988, Palestinians in the West Bank have been able to obtain temporary Jordanian passports.
It is worth noting that the Israeli approach may contradict Jordan’s interest in reducing the total number of Palestinians in the kingdom because it refuses at the moment to receive Palestinian refugees from Syria in the way it allowed Syrian and Iraqi refugees to seek refuge on its soil.
Perhaps such aspirational Israeli calls towards Jordan are encouraged by the fact that the two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is no longer practical or realistic. Meanwhile, there are claims that the alternative solution is the establishment of an Arab Palestinian state east of the Jordan River, which will achieve peace between Israel and Palestine. They also claim that the river can be used to transport goods and products from either side, with the Israeli Jewish state on one side and the Arab Palestinian country on the other, side by side.
There is another Israeli scenario of Jordan hosting more Palestinians and instead of the kingdom becoming a Palestinian republic, they become citizens with full rights in the Hashemite Kingdom.
The return of Gilad Sharon after a long absence was noteworthy. He is the son of the late Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who had strong relations with the late King Hussein, King Abdullah’s father. Gilad Sharon returned to claim that the current Jordanian ling would not dare to oppose the annexation of the Jordan Valley by Israel, because Israel has him by his weak spot and the continuation of his rule depends on Israel. He also said that if the king opened his mouth, Israel would turn off the water tap and leave the kingdom to go thirsty.
All these are efforts to drive the king to cancel the peace agreement with Israel and allow Tel Aviv to remove him.
King Abdullah finds himself caught between the anger of the Jordanian public and Israel. The situation of his government has become really difficult because his country’s budget is suffering, the sources of income are declining, the Gulf states, which have always been a source of support for Jordan, have reduced their aid, and millions of Arab refugees have flocked to the kingdom in recent years.
In spite of the increase of tensions between Jordan and Israel over the past year, security coordination between them continues as usual and the intelligence cooperation is at its best. This raises questions about the king failing to use this card to pressure Israel unless this cooperation serves him and not the kingdom.
Middle East Monitor
@ Ted Belman:
Yes it was the Weitzman agreement with Feisal. Lawrence did the translating. In fact to refresh my memory, after I posted to you I looked it up on the internet. It was there with a lot more, most of which I also recall reading about many years ago . Yes, it eventually came to nothing and the Arab-Jew animosity carried on as usual.
I was reading up on all that stuff because myself and a couple of others from Dublin were planning to go to Palestine to fight for the Irgun. My parent prevented me, as I had just passed my university entrance exam, another of us went, and returned home a Sergeant, and third remained in Israel, eventually running an electronics store in Eilat, but, shell-shocked, he didn’t even know or remember me when I went down to see him. We were schoolmates knew each other almost from birth. His sister told me not to be surprised if he was a bit strange…..that’s how she described it.
@ Edgar G.:
You may be right but I have no recall of same.;
In any event, the agreement between Feisal and Weizmann was stillborn and nothing came of it, til now.
In my 2017 conference on the Jordan Option I resurrected the agreement and said it will be a basis for the rapochment of Jordan and Israel.
@ Wooly Mammoth:
Did you see Olmert’s announcement yesterday that Sharon was under terrific pressure to stop the Gaza withdrawal and had decided to abandon only 5 settlements, and that Olmert, when he heard this, phoned him and spoke strongly to him forcing him to do as he’s originally arranged…..???
In other words he’s taking the full credit for the total disengagement…
@ Ted Belman:
Ted—Am I mistaken in saying that Feisal wrote on the margin of that agreement, that if everything promised in this agreement is not carried out, then the agreement is null and void…or words to that effect. I recall seeing a photo of that margin note many years ago…. I’ve never heard anyone other than myself mention it. I posted about it a few years ago without it attracting any attention.
@ Edgar G.:
The withdrawal from Gaza and the isolated settlements by Sharon and it’s fallout would seem to be a subject worthy of renewed attention.
For no other reason than the remarkable lack of analysis it received at the time of it’s making nor subsequently.
Sharon had very little to say about precisely what he had in mind with the unpopular initiative.
If I remember correctly, Sharon was under considerable pressure to take a dramatic irreversible move toward the creation of a “Palestinian state” in Judea and Samaria.
Instead, Sharon used the coercion to replace one with the other. It was to be a test, to give the Palestinians an opportunity to show the world that it was ready and able to govern itself as a pal state as a precursor to adding on Judea and Samaria.
For all intents, Netanyahu and Ya’alon voted in favor of the withdrawal until it was too late to stop it, for selfish political reasons.
Prior to the vote in the entire Knesset to approve the plan, evidence surfaced that Hamas would take over Gaza. Yet Sharon still pushed it through and the Knesset supported him.
I remember how upset I was with Sharon, he was acting like a zombie, while Netanyahu and Ya’alon, snakes in the grass. Despite their eventual withdrawal from the gov’t, they supported Sharon’s Plan 100%.
Why did Sharon do it if he knew it not only would fail, but, in fact failed prior to the plan’s implementation.
If Sharon were around, perhaps he would answer the plan’s critics with a single question: “Is there a Palestinian State yet?”
Sharon would want the world to know, the plan has prevented a Palestinian State.
What he says is about to happen is almost exactly what I have been promoting for the last three years. He is wrong on to say that the peace treaty will be destroyed. On the contrary, it will be expanded.
Secondly, his remark that Abdulla “will be shamefully toppled” is true providing you substitute “happily” for “shamefully”.
He will be replaced as leader by Mudar Zahran who is on record, many times over, of favouring cooperation with Israel over confronting Israel. He is the reincaration of Emir Feisal who advised Weizmann in 1919 that that he would welcome the Jews to Palestine in the expection that they would help the Arab economy.
All good and happening soon.
A Palestinian Arab state in place of the Kingdom of Jordan would not be at peace with Israel.The same fanatics determined to destroy Israel would be dominant. Israel would not only have to deal with a huge increase in Terrorism, but would face Jordanian armed forces controlled by an Islamist government.
The articles author needs to be reminded that Hamas openly states its reason for existence is the destruction of Israel. This would in no way be pacified by a Hamas state in trans-Jordan.
This is a strange article with weird undertones. ‘King Abdullah is shamefully toppled”…and all the “efforts to cancel the Peace Treaty”, and also,…”allow Tel Aviv to remove him”. A strange, minimal pseudo-political scrawl, with not a single mention of Jerusalem……..Like the Koran…??
Al crowned by….wait for it…….”THE RETURN OF GILAD SHARON….whose late father (strongly supported by Gilad) played a despicable role in giving away Gaza, driving successful Jewish entrepreneurs out, dividing the Jewish people, making thousands homeless and destitute.
And more….
Otherwise….who is Gilad Sharon, in the political scene in Israel…?? A party of One..?
With all due respect to this Israel-hater, what’s he been smoking? This is one of the more far out conspiracy “theories” out there. Why is Mr. Belman publishing such nut jobs?
“ME Monitor” is politically anti-Israel; but they seem to have good cause to be concerned.