Stressing that “all options remain on the table”, Jordan maintained its position rejecting the Israeli escalation in Gaza and the latest developments in the sector, which is witnessing a serious humanitarian crisis, at a time when Amman faces popular pressure to end normalization. with Israel, which raises questions about the future of bilateral relations between the two countries.
Prime Minister Bisher Al-Khasawneh said Monday, in the context of his speech on what he sees as “the escalation of Israeli aggression resulting in massacres” in Gaza, that “all options are on the table” for his country in the framework of his “gradual position”.
While the Jordanian Prime Minister did not clarify, in his speech before the House of Representatives, the nature of the other measures his country might resort to after withdrawing its ambassador and deeming the Israeli ambassador “undesirable”, the Ministry of Israeli Foreign Affairs responded by saying that relations with Jordan are “of strategic importance for both countries.”
“stay behind the wheel”
On whether the ongoing war in Gaza represents a turning point in the future of relations between the two countries, the head of the Jordanian Association for Political Science, Khaled Shneikat, believes that his country “does not seek confrontation with Israel “, explaining that Israeli behavior in the war on Gaza “is what throws a spanner in the works” and “increases tension and instability in the region.”
Al-Khasawneh said that the siege imposed by Israel on the densely populated Gaza Strip is not self-defense as it claims, adding that the Israeli attack makes no distinction between civilian and military targets and extends to safe areas and ambulances.
In response to the Jordanian official’s statements, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed its regret over what it called “inflammatory statements made by the Jordanian leadership.”
Israel denies deliberately bombing civilian targets in densely populated areas and has said Hamas uses civilians as human shields, digs tunnels under hospitals and uses ambulances to transport its fighters.
In a statement to the Al-Hurra website, Shneikat added that since the arrival of the far right in the Israeli government, the relationship between the two countries has begun to witness “tension and deterioration” at all levels.
In this regard, he highlights what he sees as statements by Israeli extremist parties that “target Hashemite tutelage and reject the creation of a Palestinian state, which constitutes an essential aspect of the peace agreement between the two countries.”
Diplomats told Reuters that recent Jordanian comments reveal that Amman “may move to review its economic, security and political relations with Israel, and is also considering suspending further steps in the implementation of the peace treaty if bloodshed in Gaza should get worse.”
Shneikat adds that several agreements bring Jordan closer to the Israeli side, in particular the peace agreement signed in 1994, and then the agreements on gas and cooperation in the production of electricity from solar energy and in water desalination, which reflect a development in relations and through which Jordan I bet the peace path was moving in the right direction.
Shneikat clarifies that Jordan’s options “remain in the diplomatic sphere, through the recall of the ambassador, and could also evolve towards blocking the implementation of some economic and security cooperation agreements”, underlining that “any other step, such as a global breakdown in relations, will remain hostage to the developments of the war in Gaza.”
“Tension has become an important feature.”
Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, there have been warnings from Amman about the expansion of the war to the West Bank on its borders, which would push Palestinian refugees to migrate there.
In this context, the Jordanian Prime Minister reiterated his emphasis that any attempt or creation of conditions to displace Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank represents a “red line” and Jordan will regard it as a “declaration of war”, stressing that “the place of the brotherly Palestinian people is on their land and not anywhere.”
In this regard, the Jordanian analyst explains that Amman fears a new wave of refugees from this war, if the Israeli escalation continues, both in Gaza and in the West Bank, which is completely unacceptable.
Earlier this year, King Abdullah II of Jordan held a rare meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Amman, the first since the latter’s return to power, after their relations had prevailed in recent years. tensions. The last announced meeting between the two parties dates back to 2018.
Relations between Jordan and Israel were tense for many years while Netanyahu was in power, beginning with the Mossad’s attempt to assassinate former Hamas political bureau chief Khaled Meshaal in Amman in 1997, killing two Jordanians. at the Israeli embassy in Amman in 2017 and at Netanyahu’s reception. For the assassin, this led Netanyahu to cancel a historic trip to the Emirates in 2021 after the Kingdom refused to open its airspace to his plane, according to Agence France-Presse.
The Jordanian action at the time came after Tel Aviv thwarted a planned visit by Jordanian Crown Prince Hussein bin Abdullah to Jerusalem to pray at Al-Aqsa on the occasion of the anniversary of Isra and Mi’raj, according to Jordanian authorities.
The Jordanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Israeli ambassador to Amman twice last January, the first to protest against the entry of Israeli Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir into the courtyards of the Al-Aqsa mosque, and the second to protest against an Israeli policeman who blocked the passage to the Al-Aqsa mosque. The Jordanian ambassador to Tel Aviv during his visit to Al-Aqsa.
In this context, Shneikat explains that a permanent tension has characterized the relations between the two countries in recent years, and therefore options for circumventing diplomatic communication and security and economic cooperation remain on the table in light of the “dangerous Israeli objectives ”, especially regarding policies of collective punishment that directly lead to popular tension in Jordan.
Shneikat points out that “there are efforts to push towards an all-out confrontation with Israel in light of the loss of hope in this relationship,” which he says many have come to believe “has not achieved the desired results, and therefore Amman could move towards making the appropriate decision in light of Israeli behavior that does not take this report into account.”
“Formality”
On the other hand, Israeli writer and political researcher Shlomo Ganor rules out that relations with Jordan will be affected to the point of severing diplomatic relations, canceling the peace treaty, or disrupting strategic security cooperation between the two countries.
Ganor explains, in a statement to the Al-Hurra website, that in addition to common economic and security interests, the two countries constitute “an important link in the regional defense network”, underlining that “any violation of this system will have negative repercussions”. on other moderate Arab countries in the region.”
According to the United Nations, the number of Palestinian refugees in Jordan is around 2.2 million.
According to Agence France-Presse, Jordanians of Palestinian origin make up about half the population of the kingdom, which before the June 1967 war was administered from the West Bank.
For weeks, Jordanian cities have witnessed massive demonstrations denouncing Israeli “abuses” in the Gaza Strip, the latest of which took place last Friday, in which thousands of demonstrators called on Jordanian King Abdullah II to put “in the camp ” the peace agreement signed with Israel. balance and its aggression against Gaza.” “In the balance,” according to Agence France-Presse.
In this context, the Israeli researcher states that the Jordanian regime “is facing internal difficulties, due to the large Palestinian percentage of Jordanian society, and therefore all the reactions we see are aimed at satisfying this segment with simple formal procedures that do not harm the highest interests. of the Kingdom,” as he put it.