The joint statement issued in Amman by the foreign ministers of 19 Arab and Islamic countries rejecting Colombia’s opening of an embassy in Jerusalem goes beyond a political objection, reflecting broader diplomatic coordination toward a multipolar front bringing together significant political and demographic weight stretching from the Arab world to key Asian Islamic powers, including Türkiye, Indonesia, Pakistan and Malaysia.
According to political and strategic experts who spoke separately to Al-Ghad, the “three-continent alliance” reflects the Palestinian cause moving into a broader sphere of international coordination that goes beyond traditional Arab frameworks and is based on shared interests and international law. This could expand opportunities to mobilize support for Palestinian rights at the United Nations and other international forums.
The statement asserts that any measures aimed at changing the historical and legal status of occupied Jerusalem or recognizing it as Israel’s capital are “null and void and without legal effect,” citing UN Security Council Resolutions 476 and 478 of 1980. It also renews calls to respect the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them the establishment of an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
However, experts said that broader consensus alone is not enough to produce tangible change. The challenge remains converting unity of position into coordinated diplomatic action capable of influencing international decisions and preventing the consolidation of unilateral measures on the ground.
The real value of the alliance, they said, should not be measured solely by the number of signatories, but by its ability to turn its political weight into concrete action that protects Jerusalem and keeps the two-state solution at the center of international efforts.
Moving Beyond the Traditional Position
Political analyst and expert Dr. Munther Al-Hawarat described Arab-Islamic-Asian coordination on the Palestinian issue as a “three-continent alliance,” reflecting an expansion of diplomatic efforts supporting the Palestinian cause beyond the traditional Arab position into a broader space bringing together Arab, Islamic and Asian countries with significant demographic, economic and political weight.
Al-Hawarat said the importance of the coordination lies not only in the number of participating countries, but also in the nature and strategic standing of those involved. He pointed to the participation of key countries such as Türkiye, Indonesia, Pakistan and Malaysia alongside Arab states, giving the initiative political and geographic dimensions that extend beyond the usual regional framework.
“We are witnessing an attempt to form a diplomatic front that transcends the region, based not only on geography but also on shared interests and a commitment to international law,” he said.
This diversity, according to Al-Hawarat, reflects the expanding scope of political coordination over the Palestinian issue and opens the way for common positions based on a broader network of regional and international partnerships.
The coordination is particularly significant in terms of action at the United Nations and other international forums, as it could provide greater room for aligning positions and broadening support for Palestinian rights by drawing on the demographic and political weight of participating countries and their ability to operate across multiple diplomatic circles.
It also sends a message that the Palestinian cause, particularly the issue of Jerusalem, is no longer confined to the Arab sphere but has acquired international and continental dimensions extending beyond traditional geographic boundaries.
Impact of Jordanian Diplomacy
At the Jordanian level, Al-Hawarat linked the importance of this coordination to Jordan’s political and historical position and its stated commitment to defending the historical and legal status of Jerusalem and preserving its Islamic and Christian holy sites, alongside the role played by the Hashemite custodianship.
He said participation in this framework reflects the ability of Jordanian diplomacy to operate across overlapping spheres, including the Arab neighborhood, the broader Islamic sphere and the international arena. This expands the number of countries aligned in rejecting Israeli measures that violate international law and strengthens prospects for mobilizing support for Palestinian rights in international forums.
In this context, the value of coordination lies in expanding the political and diplomatic rejection of Israeli measures and moving the position beyond simply expressing objections toward attempting to influence international responses to such measures.
The broader the circle of countries sharing common legal and political principles, the greater the opportunities to use that consensus for diplomatic pressure, defend Jerusalem’s historical and legal status and prevent occupation measures from becoming entrenched as facts on the ground that may later prove difficult to reverse.
Nevertheless, Al-Hawarat stressed the need to distinguish between the importance of expanding coordination and its ability to produce tangible results.
He said the true value of the alliance should not be measured by the number of countries signing the statement alone, but by their ability to turn common positions into organized diplomatic action that produces concrete results for Palestinians.
The actual importance of this path lies in “how these common positions are transformed into organized diplomatic action that translates into results on the ground for Palestinians,” raising the political cost of Israeli measures that violate international law and preventing them from becoming established realities.
According to Al-Hawarat, the wider geographic reach of countries supporting Palestinian rights presents an opportunity to strengthen the diplomatic presence of the Palestinian cause. However, this remains dependent on the ability to coordinate efforts, unify actions and use them to influence international decisions and positions.
Political consensus, while important, is not sufficient unless accompanied by practical tools capable of moving positions from statements and declarations to influence over international policies.
Al-Hawarat stressed that the real test of this coordination is the transition from unity of position to effective action, and from expanding support to the ability to influence international decisions related to the Palestinian cause and address Israeli measures described as arbitrary.
The success of this approach depends less on the number of participating parties than on their ability to turn this diversity into an organized diplomatic force that contributes to protecting Palestinian rights and upholding international law.
Dimensions of the Statement
Security and strategic expert Dr. Bashir Al-Daajeh said the joint statement represents a political and diplomatic message reflecting the expanding scope of coordination in support of the Palestinian cause and reaffirming opposition to unilateral measures affecting the city’s historical and legal status.
Al-Daajeh said the statement’s importance stems from the diversity of its signatories, bringing together key Arab countries such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt with strategically important Islamic and Asian countries such as Türkiye, Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia.
This diversity reflects an effort to build a “diplomatic front that transcends the region,” based on shared interests and international law and moving beyond traditional Arab coordination toward a broader space for joint political action.
Al-Daajeh stressed that the true value of the initiative is determined not simply by the number of participating countries but by their ability to use their political and demographic weight in international forums, particularly the United Nations, and turn declared positions into organized and effective diplomatic steps.
The geographic and political diversity of the signatories provides an opportunity to broaden international support for Palestinian rights and strengthen global opposition to attempts to impose new realities in Jerusalem outside the framework of international law.
According to Al-Daajeh, the position is grounded in international legal references, particularly UN Security Council Resolutions 476 and 478 of 1980, which addressed measures aimed at changing the status of Jerusalem. Resolution 478 called on states to withdraw their diplomatic missions from the city.
From this perspective, the opening of the Colombian embassy does not determine Jerusalem’s international legal status and does not give any party the right to unilaterally determine its future, given that the city is linked to final-status issues and Palestinian national rights.
He stressed that Amman’s hosting of this coordination is particularly significant given Jordan’s historical and political ties to Jerusalem and its role in protecting the city’s Islamic and Christian holy sites.
Confronting unilateral measures, he said, requires maintaining Arab and Islamic unity, expanding international support and continuing diplomatic engagement with relevant countries.
Expanding coordination can also increase the political cost of measures that violate international law and reduce the likelihood of their becoming entrenched as realities that are difficult to change later.
Al-Daajeh stressed that the real test of the alliance begins after the statement is issued, through turning political consensus into sustained diplomatic action capable of influencing international positions and decisions and preventing the expansion of similar measures.
The value of the statement, he said, is not complete merely because of the strength of its language, but because of its ability to produce a tangible impact that protects Palestinian rights and keeps Jerusalem and the two-state solution at the center of international attention.
A just peace, he added, cannot be achieved by imposing unilateral realities, but through respect for international law and ensuring the Palestinian people’s right to establish an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Reaffirming Core Principles
Dr. Khaled Shneikat, president of the Jordanian Association for Political Science, said the statement reaffirms Arab and Islamic principles regarding Jerusalem and the Palestinian cause and renews opposition to unilateral measures aimed at changing the city’s historical and legal status, including Colombia’s opening of an embassy there.
Shneikat said the importance of the statement extends beyond political objection because of the diversity of the participating countries. It brings together Arab states and key Islamic countries such as Türkiye, Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia.
This diversity reflects the expanding scope of diplomatic coordination in support of Palestinian rights and creates a common platform for action based on international legitimacy, strengthening prospects for unified positions in international forums, particularly the United Nations.
Shneikat said the common position is based on rejecting any interference with the historical status of Jerusalem and its Islamic and Christian holy sites, stressing that unilateral measures in this direction “have no legal effect.”
He also noted that the territories occupied in 1967 are subject to international law and that their future is linked to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and to establish an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.
At the same time, Shneikat said that despite its political and diplomatic significance, the statement has no enforcement mechanism that imposes binding measures on states, as it is not a resolution issued by the UN Security Council.
He described the statement as “a call to comply with and uphold international law and protect the rights of the Palestinian people,” making its effectiveness dependent on the signatories’ ability to turn their common position into sustained and organized diplomatic action.
Shneikat warned that moving embassies to Jerusalem forms part of a broader process of creating new realities on the ground, alongside settlement expansion, the establishment of new settlements, tighter restrictions on Palestinians and efforts to push them toward displacement.
He said these measures ultimately undermine prospects for establishing a Palestinian state, requiring Arab, Islamic and international coordination to address their political and legal consequences.
Shneikat said the importance of the “three-continent alliance” lies in broadening international support for the Palestinian cause and moving beyond traditional coordination frameworks toward a wider diplomatic presence.
However, the central challenge remains translating this consensus into effective practical steps.
The statement’s effectiveness depends not on the number of signatories, but on their ability to coordinate their positions, uphold international law and protect the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them the right to establish an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Source: Al-Ghad
