Jordan is avoiding the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador

Maher abu teir
Maher Abu Tair (Photo: Jordan News)
Days have passed since the beginning of Israeli assaults on Al-Aqsa Mosque and ongoing military confrontations. These days carried with them severe challenges that have had a considerable effect on Jordan.اضافة اعلان

Israel is challenging Jordan’s Custodianship in Jerusalem and it has been proven that the Palestinians will protect the holy city’s sites against all Israeli machinations. It has been proven that assaults on Al-Aqsa cause outrage every time they occur, such as they have now and back in 2000 when former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon set foot in Al-Aqsa.

Despite recent events, Jordan has not taken action against Israel, disregarding demands for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador to Jordan or the prohibition of his entry into the country, should he attempt to reenter the Kingdom. Such demands have also called for the reversal of the Wadi Araba deal and the severing of economic relations, which entail the purchase of gas and water from the occupation. But Jordan has not taken measures of any kind and seems to be addressing the situation in a slow and gradual manner, avoiding direct reaction.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) has not taken any measures against Israel either, as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas continues to mince his words in favor of Jerusalem and away from Gaza. The PA did not cancel the Oslo agreement nor take action against Israel, thus portraying itself as any third party simply showing support to Palestine, as opposed to one that is an integral part of the struggle, capable of taking a stance.

Jordanian officials tend to have a difficult time making moves against Israel, and wish to announce this publically. They seem to act as though they are aware of Western thinking and are as such avoiding escalation and managing the conflict using alternative methods, especially after economic relations have reached their highest level. These officials avoid taking measures to eschew paying their cost and the US’ reaction.

This explains why Jordan has not felt obligated to expel the Israeli ambassador. It seems that the Kingdom been avoiding this step and that it will never be taken. Jordan appears to be buying time and hoping for an organic end to the military operations in the occupied territories.

Under these circumstances, why would Jordan account for international factors and various risk calculations with Israel, when the occupation does not care to do the same? In fact, the occupation continues to infringe upon Jordan’s custodianship over Al-Aqsa and assault the property of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah.

All factors indicate that Israel does not account for Jordan’s sensitivities, but rather attempts to downplay its authority and export crises to the Kingdom in a number of ways.

The stance of Jordanians was honorable as they have historically been the closest to Palestine. Their stance is not being tested nor tried and they have nothing to prove.

If Jordan is avoiding taking measures against Israel at the official level, citing its inability to bear the cost of such a move alone, it must find new approaches by reexamining its relation with Israel and minimizing all forms of cooperation therewith; in addition to labelling the occupation state as the greatest threat to Jordan. This would in turn lead to a series of successive and simultaneous political measures in the upcoming period, after it was proven that Israel manufactures and exports crises to Jordan.

The remaining question tackles the ways in which Jordan will manage its relation with Israel in the near future, after all the massacres have been committed. This is an awkward question, especially considering the current and unprecedented situation at hand.

Officials must acknowledge Israel as a primary threat to Jordan, away from diplomacy, and to then reposition itself in relation to Israel.

Read more Opinions