Jordan is the Palestinian State: Hussein and Abdullah differ

 

It is rare for CNN host Fareed Zakaria to issue an apology – but he did so after interviewing Jordan’s King Abdullah II last week.

Zakaria had wrongly attributed the following comments to prominent Israeli diplomat Dore Gold when questioning the King:

“Jordan needs to start thinking of itself as the Palestinian state. In other words, there is a two-state solution, the Palestinian state is Jordan.”

Abdullah’s response to Zakaria was dismissive:

“Jordan is Jordan. We have a mixed society from different ethnic and religious backgrounds… it is our country. The Palestinians do not want to be in Jordan; they want their lands, they want their football team, they want their flag to fly above their houses.”

Jordan – then called Transjordan - was founded on 77% of the territory comprised in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - following the San Remo Conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and the 1921 Cairo Conference.

The planned reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Transjordan was postponed or withheld under article 25 of the Mandate with the result that no Jews live there today – the population being entirely Arab.

Transjordan achieved independence in 1946 – changing its name to Jordan in 1950 after unifying its territory with Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem conquered by Transjordan in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Only Great Britain and Pakistan recognised Transjordan’s decision.

Zakaria’s apology to Gold was unqualified:

“On last week’s show, I asked King Abdullah about the concept that there would be no stand-alone Palestine state in the future that but instead his nation, Jordan, would become the de-facto Palestine state. I said the idea had been recently mentioned by long time Israeli diplomat, Dore Gold. I was wrong. Many have talked about that concept, but not ambassador Gold. I apologize for that error.”

One Arab leader who talked about “that concept” was King Abdullah’s father – the late King Hussein - who in 1972:

• lauded his grandfather King Abdullah 1’s legacy: 

“On 24 April 1950, the new Jordanian National Assembly - with its two chambers, deputies and senators - representing the two Banks held an historic meeting which marked the first real step in modern Arab history towards Arab unity, which the revolution has advocated since its inception. The meeting announced the unity and merger of the two Banks in a single independent Arab State, a parliamentary monarchy known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.” 

 

• pointed out the memorable period that followed during King Hussein’s reign:

“The primary fact that the unity of the two Banks represented day after day has been that the people in both Banks are one and not two peoples. This fact was manifested for the first time in the reunion of the sons of the East Bank with their emigrant brothers, the sons of the Palestine areas occupied in 1948. It was manifested when the former shared with the latter food and shelter and the sweetness and bitterness of life. This fact became more salient and took deeper roots with every step the State took.

The unity of blood and destiny reached its greatest significance in 1967 when the sons of the two Banks stood together on the West Bank as they have been doing for twenty years and jointly sacrificed their blood on its pure soil. But the struggle was too great for them and its conditions and complexities were too much for their valour. The catastrophe occurred and what happened did happen.”

Abdullah’s repudiation of his ancestors’ reunification of the two Banks of the Jordan River and their Arab populations within one State marks the lowest point in Jordan’s 100 years-old history.


Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades.

King Abdullah cannot exclude Jordan from any two-state solution

 

King Abdullah’s continuing attempt to exclude Jordan from being part of any two-state solution remains the major obstacle to ending the 100 years old unresolved Arab-Jewish conflict.

The King’s intransigent position came in this exchange with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria this week:

Zakaria: Dore Gold, an influential adviser to Prime Minister Netanyahu, recently said, Jordan needs to start thinking of itself as the Palestinian state. In other words, there is a two-state solution, the Palestinian state is Jordan, I think the implication would be, of course, you have 60-70 percent Palestinians, you could absorb the Palestinians in the West Bank. This has been touted before, but here you have a fairly influential Israeli saying it. What is your reaction?

King: Well, again, that type of rhetoric is nothing new, and basically, those people have agendas that they want to do at the expense of others. Jordan is Jordan. We have a mixed society from different ethnic and religious backgrounds. I would maybe contest the percentage in the figures that you have mentioned, but it is our country. The Palestinians do not want to be in Jordan; they want their lands, they want their football team, they want their flag to fly above their houses.”

King Abdullah ignored Jordan’s chequered origins in asserting:

• "Jordan is Jordan”,
• “it is our country” and
• ”the Palestinians do not want to be in Jordan”

The following historic, geographic and demographic realities contradict King Abdullah’s remarks:

• Jordan — then called Transjordan — comprised 78% of the territory of former Palestine designated in the 1920-1948 Mandate for Palestine (British Mandate).
• Transjordan only became an independent state in 1946
• Abdullah’s great-grandfather and Transjordan’s first ruler — King Abdullah I — told a meeting of the Arab League in Cairo on April 12, 1948:

“Palestine and Transjordan are one, for Palestine is the coastline and Transjordan the hinterland of the same country”

• Israel achieved its independence in May 1948 in 17% of the territory comprised in the British Mandate.
• Transjordan was unified with Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem into one territorial entity and renamed Jordan in 1950 after Transjordan had conquered those areas in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War— which lasted until their loss to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War.
• Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem were designated “the West Bank of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” in the founding 1964 Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Charter — whilst regional sovereignty was not claimed by the PLO.
• The 1964 PLO Charter asserted that “Palestine with its boundaries at the time of the British Mandate is a regional indivisible unit.”
• The revised 1968 PLO Charter confirmed that “Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit”.
• Arab residents of Judea and Samaria were Jordanian citizens between 1950 and 1988
• Abdullah’s uncle—Prince Hassan—told the Jordanian National Assembly on February 2, 1970:

"Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine, there is one people and one land, with one history and one and the same fate”

• The PLO unsuccessfully tried to seize power in Jordan in 1970
• Prime PLO political strategist—Abu Iyad—declared in Near East Report on January 8, 1990:

“All those who tried in the past and are still trying to create divisions between the Jordanian and Palestinian people have failed. We indeed constitute one people”

Abdullah ignores these long-standing realities at his peril.

Abdullah is deluding himself in denying the role Jordan must inevitably play in achieving the long sought-after two-state solution: Redrawing the international border between Jordan and Israel — the two successor States to the British Mandate — allocating sovereignty between them in Judea Samaria and Gaza — without creating another State.


Author’s note: The cartoon—commissioned exclusively for this article—is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators—whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades.

Palestine And The Arab League - Fake Freedom Fighters

[Published 24 January 2011]

The Palestinian Authority, Hamas and the Arab League member States continue to deny their populations basic political rights and civil liberties - according to a Report recently published by Freedom House. At the same time the Arab League is mounting an intensive campaign to delegitimise Israel - the only State in the Middle East where such freedoms exist.

The Freedom House report is an annual survey of global political rights and civil liberties carried out in 194 countries and 14 territories around the World.

Freedom House defines itself as:

an independent watchdog organization that supports democratic change, monitors the status of freedom around the world, and advocates for democracy and human rights.”

In determining what constitutes “political rights” and “civil liberties” - Freedom House has drawn from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the following components of freedom which include an individual’s ability to:

1.Participate freely in the political process;
2.Vote freely in legitimate elections;
3.Have representatives that are accountable to them;
4.Exercise freedoms of expression and belief;
5.Be able to freely assemble and associate;
6.Have access to an established and equitable system of rule of law;
7.Have social and economic freedoms, including equal access to economic opportunities and the right to hold private property.

Freedom House has determined that 18 of the 22 Arab League member States all rate very poorly and fall into the category of being “Not Free” which is defined as :

“…one where basic political rights are absent and basic civil liberties are widely and systematically denied.”

The remaining 4 Arab League members are categorized as being “Partly Free” being countries which are defined as :

“characterised by some restrictions on political rights and civil liberties - often in the context of corruption, weak rule of law, ethnic strife or civil law.”

Israel is the only State in the Middle East that is identified as being “Free“ meaning:

“a country where there is broad scope for open political political competition, a climate of respect for civil liberties, significant independent civic life and independent media”.

As Latin American States apparently fall over themselves to accord recognition to a non-existent Palestinian State in total contravention of international law as prescribed by the Montevideo Convention - it is time for them - and others who might be similarly minded - to ponder

1. what kind of State they are promoting and
2. the extent to which such State does not accord with the principles laid down in the Road Map - the basis on which all negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority have been conducted for the last seven years under the auspices of America, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations

The Road Map articulated that any such Palestinian State must be “democratic” as was made clear by the following provisions:

“A two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will only be achieved through an end to violence and terrorism, when the Palestinian people have a leadership acting decisively against terror and willing and able to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty, and through Israel’s readiness to do what is necessary for a democratic Palestinian state to be established…

A settlement, negotiated between the parties, will result in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbors.”

The Freedom House Report notes that the Palestinian Authority controls up to 40% of the West Bank territory and 98% of the Palestinian population outside of East Jerusalem. Hamas controls 100% of Gaza as well as its entire population.

Any signs of a a leadership acting decisively to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty in either the West Bank or Gaza is totally absent according to the Freedom House Report.

The current push for recognition of “Palestine” as an independent State is becoming an exercise in creating yet another State whose citizens will continue to be denied the basic freedoms and civil liberties that are currently enjoyed by some of its current democratic proponents - Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay.

That was clearly not the objective of the Road Map - to which those Latin American States gave their support in 2003.

Since it still supposedly remains the only game in town prescribing the “two-state solution” - the Road Map is rapidly ending up as a document that

1. is not worth the paper it is written on
2. espouses a democratic state that will not be achieved and
3. has been rejected as the basis of a two-state solution by some democratic countries who have now decided to assign the civilian populations of the West Bank and Gaza to the same fate as all the surrounding Arab populations in the Middle East Arab States.

The Arab League meantime fails to recognize Israel and pursues campaigns encouraging boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel - whilst at the same time its member states deny their populations the political rights and civil liberties that are enjoyed by Israel’s population - including the 20% of Israel’s population that is Arab.

The Freedom House report stands as a monument to the eternal shame of the Arab League and to those democratic countries who have been seduced into accepting the Arab League’s spurious hate campaign to eradicate the State of Israel.

Fareed Zakaria - the host of CNN’s flagship foreign affairs show, Editor-at-Large of TIME Magazine, a Washington Post columnist, and a New York Times bestselling author described by Esquire Magazine as “the most influential foreign policy adviser of his generation.” - says of the Freedom House Report:

“While there are many sources of economic data, good political data is hard to find. Freedom House’s survey is an exception. For anyone concerned with the state of freedom, or simply with the state of the world, Freedom in the World is an indispensible guide.”

Those democratic States ignoring the clear message contained in the Report and abandoning the signposting in the Road Map are not doing themselves - or the cause of liberating long suffering Arab populations denied their basic political rights and civil liberties - any favours.