A new, improved Jordanian option

[Jefferson23]

*Unreal

'You have to understand that the progressive forces in the Arab world, those that support having a visible relationship with Israel, cannot reach out to it until the Palestinian problem is resolved,' said one Jordanian official.

By Reuven Pedatzur | 00:40 27.01.14

The recent surprise visit to Jordan by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is indicative of the importance the premier attributes to the Hashemite kingdom’s role in advancing the diplomatic process, and particularly to its role in the future, if and when a Palestinian state is established. The substance of Netanyahu’s talks with King Abdullah a week and a half ago have not leaked, but the king’s positions and strategic plans can be discerned from off-the-record conversations with senior Jordanian officials, some of them with direct access to the royal palace.

The most important message emerging from the talks with the Jordanians is their assessment that it is vital to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement that will lead to the end of the conflict. Such an agreement will not only allow Jordan to publicly improve its relations with Israel, but will have far-reaching implications for Israel’s relations with other countries in the region.

“You have to understand that the progressive forces in the Arab world, those that support having a visible relationship with Israel, cannot reach out to it until the Palestinian problem is resolved,” said one Jordanian official. “Moreover, this should also be Israel’s interest, because the only way to stop the Islamic movements from seizing control in the West Bank is through an agreement with the Palestinians.”

One interesting message with important strategic implications that is being conveyed by the Jordanians involves the future of the kingdom after the establishment of a Palestinian state. We are aware, they say, that it’s doubtful a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza can sustain itself over time. Therefore, the next step would be the establishment of a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation. As far as is known, this is also Abdullah’s position, and while he is careful not to publicly support it, he does not dismiss it.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.570661#

[Mosby]

1. Rethinking the Two-State Solution

Last edited Mon Jan 27, 2014, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Rethinking the Two-State Solution

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/PolicyFocus88.pdf

The regional solution is pretty interesting, I posted this a long time ago here.

I wonder if Kerry has something going on with Jordan and Egypt that brings their interests into play?

[sabbat hunter]

2. well lets not forget

That Jordan once annexed the West Bank (after the Israeli war for independence) and long claimed that it was Jordanian territory.

They stopped those claims publicly some time after Israel conquered the WB in 67.

So it would not surprise me that they would still want that territory, for prestige purposes. That way they can claim they are the true saviors of the Palestinian people.

However, given that King Abdullah already has a hostile large Palestinian population, I am not sure why he would want to add to that population. One that would not want to answer to him as king.

Jordan, while it has a parliament and a constitution, is really controlled by King Abdullah. He can dismiss parliament and rule by decree.

So I cannot see why the Palestinians in the WB would agree to it.

I could see Israel agreeing to it, in order to get rid of most of the WB and the Palestinians from their control

[Jefferson23]

3. Thank you for the link..I have not yet finished reading it. I would say there has been a great deal

reported that points to Kerry capitalizing on the politics of the ME right now. Egypt, the MB
is gone and we see Sisi is not going to help Hamas. The Saudis sound like they are all for it,
the Arab League agreed to land swaps, that was a big change too. The EU is telling the PA
you want money, you better make a deal.

Germany is placing pressure on Israel. Bibi is hearing from Kerry how BDS will get him if he does not
go along but there do not seem to be any concessions being demanded by the US to Bibi.
none I have read about. He does seem to be freaking out about his constituents but maybe that
is just bluster, greed, or both, I don't know. Jordan, opportunistic too.

The Palestinians have Abbas watching out for them....need I say more?

[Jefferson23]

4. I can see how the US and Israeli governments would be fine with his proposals...

not the Palestinians.

His mindset is not one I would trust.

From the Goldstone Report

** Although Major General Eiland was writing about Lebanon and the Syrian Arab Republic, it is the suggestion of
the objectives and the means of obtaining them that is striking in relation to what occurred in Gaza.

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf

[Jefferson23]

5. God damn jerks:

snip* The prevailing view among Palestinian officials, based on sources in Washington, is that the Palestinian negotiators will not threaten to seek redress from UN institutions, on the grounds that this would make it harder for Kerry to defend Palestinian positions in talks with Congress.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.570924

[bemildred]

6. I think the idea is to punt the Palestinian "problem" to Jordan.

The King seems willing as it will enhance his power, but he may come to regret it.

Bibi's concession is ending the "peace process" and allowing boundaries to be defined, which means giving up control of territory and no doubt alienating his base. It will end the state of war too, which has other consequences.

It does seem clear they still fear letting the Palestinians run their own affairs, and "they" is both Israel and Jordan. And they are probably right. If you consider what happens after the state of Palestine comes into existence, you will see that all those Palestinian refugees and their descendants are going to be thinking about moving back "home", sincse as is so frequently pointed out here, they are not well treated in the camps.

But there is tremendous pressure, the Middle East in in chaos, old protections and arrangements lie in ruins. And the big players seem to have decided that ostracizing Iran has become too inconvenient, and Iran seems to want to cooperate. It appears to me that the Russians, Chinese and US are all cooperating to some extent WRT the Middle East. Which is so strange I can't quite grok it, but is probably based on the FACT that Iran is the only nation presently in a position to anchor stability in the region where all the hydrocarbons are. Israel cannot do it, the Saudis are incompetent and in decline, everybody else (Egypt, Turkey) is preoccupied domestically, so to speak. Only Iran has the size, the stability, and the resources.

Edit: Bibi's willingness to punt the settlers to Jordan too seems very convenient, and may be predicated on them living in "Jordan", not "Palestine".

Edit2: and I said a decade ago this would happen, when those silly shits invaded Iraq like they were buying a BigMac(tm). It is much easier to destroy order than to create it, and violently enforced order is no order at all.

Have you ever thought about all those well-trained jihadis resulting from fifteen years of war and what they will occupy themselves with when "peace" is announced?

[Jefferson23]

7. Then the Palestinians get a remnant of a state..and how would that be a viable state...I don't

see how that is possible.

If Bibi's only concession is ending the peace process then the Palestinians are in deep trouble. The annexed 3 major
settlement blocs are bad enough....they are as you know, cut in deep within the West Bank.
Now Bibi added a 4th bloc he wants and annexation of the Jordan Valley and the Palestinians need
to recognize Israel as the Jewish state, even though no one, even they..don't do that..officially.

So what territory will Israel give up..whatever it is, seems so far, it won't do much good if they keep
the major settlement blocs. It is one thing to compromise, but this is not what that looks like.


It's not that I disagree with you, in effect I do not..yet I find what Abbas is doing and more importantly
not doing is pitiful to watch. He is a self corrupted man, who a couple of years ago seemed like maybe, just
maybe he would do the right thing. When you go into negotiations and already concede you will not
use the UN, you're either bought out and or an idiot/spineless fool. Pitiful, truly.

Where is the negotiation on RoR to avoid some of the issues you mention? If there were a group of people
who could address this question fairly, one must remove the US team from the equation. Instead, Jimmy Carter,
B'tselem human rights group..people who are trusted. Monetary compensation and a fair number to agree upon
who could return. Appears there is always plenty of money for absurd ventures like Iron Dome..let them put
their damn money where there mouths are this time.

Obama and Kerry saw the opportunity, I agree with you there too..ME is a mess, very weak. Iran does
not want to end up as Iraq did and through a series of miscalculations on Obama's part with Syria, and then
Russia coming in..things have changed. I have read opinion suggesting the alliance with Saudi's and Israel
has more to do with what Chomsky refers to as rational capitalists..they see an opportunity to meet their
global interests..more capital. Thus, who cares about a meager issue like the Jordan Valley, get the deal
wrapped up.

I do not pretend to understand all the agendas and there are many, yet the bottom line should be a viable
state for the Palestinians.

[bemildred]

8. I think Abbas' idea is to force Bibi to describe his desired end-state.

And hence the entire process, unlike Oslo. Which will piss somebody off, and likely will please nobody.

You are quite right, but what is one to expect from Bibi? Deep concern for a strong viable autonomous Palestinian state in the West Bank? Not likely.

The viable Palestinian state in this scenario is Jordan plus bits of the West bank and all of Gaza plus some extra (if I understand it right). And Bibi wants to avoid paying for the repatriation of the settlers, which will be very expensive.

This is negotiation via trial balloon. Be patient, things are moving now.