Trump and Jordanian Options

Marwan Muasher

Anyone who bet on US President-elect Trump to solve the Palestinian issue satisfactorily in his second administration may be reconsidering his calculations today. The appointments announced by Trump for his administration related to the Palestinian issue are not only extreme in favor of Israel, but can also be described as Talmudic. All appointments related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, from the National Security Advisor to the Secretary of State to the Special Envoy for the Middle East to the US Ambassador to Israel to the US Ambassador to the United Nations, will be filled by people who are excessively loyal to Israel and disdainful of the Palestinians. Perhaps the clearest expression of these positions is what was said by Mick Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and the newly appointed ambassador to Israel, who stated that the land of Palestine was given by God to the Prophet Abraham and his descendants (the Jews) after him, and that there is no people called the Palestinians nor a land called the West Bank, but rather Judea and Samaria, which is supposed to be the land of Israel.

What does this mean? There is only one explanation for this position. After we feared the annexation of Area C in the West Bank by Israel, Israeli Finance Minister Smotrich came out to announce hours after the Arab-Islamic summit that 2025 will be the year of the annexation of the West Bank to Israel. It does not seem that the new American administration will oppose this. In fact, the deal of the century, which calls for a fragmented Palestinian state surrounded by Israel on all sides, is no longer acceptable to Israel, which now considers any Palestinian state a “reward for terrorism.” Even Trump, the originator of the idea of the “deal of the century,” recently stated that he no longer believes in the two-state solution, and that he believes that Israel’s current borders are small. In short, the annexation of the West Bank to Israel has become possible in light of the harmony between the new American administration and the extremist Israeli government. By the nature of the solution, Israel does not talk about annexing land and population, because that increases the number of Palestinians in the State of Israel. The talk here is only about annexing land. What will happen to the population then? The Palestinian side fears that Israel’s goal is to expel the largest number of residents and empty the Palestinian land of its owners. Jordan also fears that the issue of displacement and attempts to resolve the issue at its expense have become a strong possibility today, after it was believed in the past that the Jordanian-Israeli peace treaty had ended this scenario.

The appointments announced by Trump for his administration related to the Palestinian issue are not only extreme in favor of Israel, but can be described as Talmudic

What are Jordan's options today to confront these possibilities? We realize, of course, that Jordan alone cannot confront these attempts to liquidate the Palestinian issue, but a clear plan must be developed to do what is possible.

I believe that the first step lies in putting aside the internal differences between the various components of Jordanian political society, and realizing that the main goal today is to confront these American and Israeli policies with prudence, reason, and national consensus. This calls for a serious and in-depth national dialogue, in order to expand the circle of consultation among the decision-maker, and for all components of society to realize the depth of the challenges that Jordan will face and agree on how to deal with them. There is no party today that can claim to understand the dangerous transformations taking place in American society or that it has all the answers to all the questions. There is an urgent need to combine all efforts through a national dialogue that has become a necessity and not a luxury.

It is imperative today to adopt a new policy that knows how to deal with the new American administration, and this is not an easy matter, as most of the pillars of this administration are new and Jordan does not know them well. We must clarify the dangers of annexation not only on the Palestinian side, but also on Jordan. For this, we must intensify communications with Jordan's friends, especially in Congress and American decision-making centers, to explain Jordan's concerns and the impact of these destructive policies on it. And to make everyone understand that annexing the West Bank means an open apartheid system that the world will not accept in the end. This means strengthening the role of the Jordanian embassy in Washington, which will entail a double effort to reach the largest number of pillars of the new administration and Congress, Republicans and Democrats, and Jordan's friends inside and outside the administration.

It is true that there is no unified Arab position today on the Palestinian issue, and it is also true that Arab priorities differ today according to the Arab countries themselves, but that should not prevent, despite all the overt and covert obstacles, Jordan from intensifying its contacts with a number of Arab countries that may play important roles in the coming stage, most notably the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, in addition to the Palestinian National Authority, of course. It is imperative to try to reach a minimum level of consensus to confront any possible scenario of Israel annexing the West Bank, while acknowledging the difficulty of this. Jordan is facing existential challenges today, just as the Palestinians are facing. However, despite the difficulty of the scene, Jordan cannot stand by and watch while Israel continues its policy of annexing Palestinian lands with public American blessing. This requires a wise policy, which His Majesty King Abdullah II described best when he said that Jordan is “a state with a strong identity that does not gamble with its future,” and at the same time that “Jordan’s future will not be subject to policies that do not serve its interests or deviate from its principles.” Reconciling these two goals is the responsibility of all Jordanians today, which means the need for serious and sustainable internal openness.

Former Jordanian Foreign Minister