[On February 3, 2025 the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft held a panel discussion on “Jordan and the Annexation of the West Bank.” The following are our takeaways of high points of that program and is not intended as a verbatim transcript. The entire panel discussion may be seen here.]
Marwan Muasher (vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment). Things have changed since the Treaty of 1994 was signed. The constituency for peace in Israel has nearly vanished. Jordan signed the treaty to avoid solving the Palestinian problem at Jordan’s expense.
Bruce Riedel (non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an instructor at Washington College). Thirty years ago there was a feeling peace was coming to the Middle East, but the only positive development was the Palestinian-Jordanian treaty. The optimism is gone.
Annelle Sheline (research fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute). Keep in mind that the since the signing of the treaty Jordan has received significantly more financial and military assistance from the United States. Jordan has to absorb many more refugees from Iraq and Syria, many of whom still remain in Jordan. Adding yet more Palestinian refugees is an existential threat to Jordan. They do not have enough resources even for their exiting population.
Muasher. Palestinians are not just an added resource burden; they are an identity threat. Also Jordan (like Egypt) does not want to be seen as enabling the Israeli takeover of all of historic Palestine.
Riedel. The Clinton administration saw the treaty as a first step in normalization of relations with Israel and other Arab states. Syria was supposed to be next, but that didn’t happen.
Sheline. Jordan no longer believes it has a partner in Israel. There is a question as to whether the Hashemite Kingdom can survive.
Muasher. No amount of aid will stand up to what Jordan sees as an identity problem. The US has fifteen bases in Jordan. Trump’s attempt to cut aid to Jordan will meet resistance from members of both parties. Netanyahu has publicly said a two-state solution is a reward for terrorism. We know he is not offering Israeli citizenship to the Palestinians, so the implications are clear.
Steven Simon (moderator; senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute and distinguished fellow and visiting professor at Dartmouth College). The treaty is the only institutional barrier for population transfers.
Riedel. Although it gets no publicity for obvious reasons, the intelligence cooperation between Jordan and the US has always been in the forefront, but Jordan has never been a priority for Trump as Saudi Arabia and Israel have been.
Simon. What are the deliverables that may come out of a meeting between Abdullah and President Trump?
Muasher. The king will not have a confrontational attitude, nor will he acquiesce. Jordan needs a statement accepting US recognition of Jordanian sovereignty.
Riedal. I think that Trump delusionally thinks that he will get Jordan to accept the transfer of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. There is also a need to have a plan for the rule of Gaza. Jordan might be willing to participate in an international peacekeeping force. Some agreement on how to deal with the new government in Syria is another deliverable.
Sheline. The treaty with Israel was never popular with Jordanians, although there is a concern over what an alternative would look like. The “deal of the century” from the first Trump administration which included the Saudis but not the Jordanians would have included turning over administration of the religious sites in Jerusalem to Saudi Arabia.
Simon. Are the bases in Jordan an issue for Trump as he claims he wants to bring the troops home?
Muasher. In Brussels last week Abdullah got a commitment for $3 billion. A failure of agreement between US and Jordan doesn’t necessarily mean that Jordan will pay the price. Jordan cannot pay the price of concession.
Sheline. Thinking that the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homeland would guarantee stability is to ignore history. It will only lead to instability and violence.
Riedel. Emptying Gaza of its people and turning it into a luxury beach complex will not solve the problem.
Sheline. A complete breakdown in international law has allowed the genocide that is taking place. In promoting the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, the Trump White House is signalling a continued rejection of international law.
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, Ph.D.
Minaret of Freedom Institute
www.minaret.org
Leave a Reply