Lebanonwire, February 13, 2003

The Daily Star

It has been four years since King Hussein bin Talal passed away in the midst of immensely complex regional and global circumstances. Before he died, the late Jordanian monarch replaced his experienced brother, Prince Hassan, as heir to the throne with his relatively inexperienced son Abdullah, who was duly crowned when his father passed away.
King Abdullah I founded the emirate of Transjordan in 1921. In 1946, the state was renamed the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In 1950, Jordan annexed the West Bank ­ the only part of Palestine to have escaped Israeli control in the war of 1948. This was the first phase of Jordanian history.
King Hussein, who is still seen as the man who single-handedly built the Jordan of today, dominated the second phase. Thanks to his 40-year reign, Jordan’s fate was perceived to be linked to that of the king. But as fate would have it, this linkage was broken in dramatic fashion when Hussein died of cancer in 1999, leaving his son and heir Abdullah to lead the country in the third phase of its history.
Succession was a nonissue in Jordan, not only because of the fact that Hussein had many sons by non-Arab wives (only one son, Prince Ali, was borne of an Arab queen), but because of the fact that he had chosen his brother Hassan to succeed him more than 30 years before, thus giving the impression that he did not see any of his sons as being capable of shouldering the responsibilities of office.
Hussein was a hard act to follow. His charisma, toughness, courage and uncanny ability to extract himself and the country from tricky situations made comparisons between him and any successor turn out not to the latter’s advantage. This caused many people to feel concern about the future of little Jordan once its strong king departed the scene.
Yet by ensuring a fluid transfer of power and by accepting the dramatic way the succession was managed, Jordanians demonstrated that the existence of the country was independent of its political leadership. The last four years showed that Jordan, which was perceived by many Arab and foreign circles as an artificial entity created by the great powers to further their political objectives in the Middle East (namely, the survival of Israel), not only managed to survive but is thriving.
Abdullah’s lack of political experience was initially a source of concern. Jordan is positioned in the middle of an extremely volatile region that threatens to go up in flames at any moment. Lying next to both Arab and non-Arab foci of tension, running Jordan requires a fair bit of expertise in politics and crisis management. Abdullah’s poor Arabic ­ he initially spoke with a foreign accent ­ called the identity of the entire royal family into question.
Yet the young monarch quickly demonstrated an uncanny ability to move in international political and economic circles. Confidence in him rose rapidly, especially since he made an effort to improve his accent. Four years on, he is now perfectly capable of carrying on conversations in Arabic. All in all, Abdullah showed that he was able to get on top of the new job, aided perhaps by the fact that no occasions arose at that time that would have tested his abilities to the limit.
There were many factors that helped Jordan overcome the potential difficulties of changing from the second to the third phase of its history, which began with Abdullah’s coronation.
The most important factor was the role played by the military and security establishments. It is a well-known fact that loyalty to the Hashemite family has long been an integral part of the ideology of the Jordanian military. The Jordanian Army has made a complete break with the weak loyalty to the crown that characterized it in the 1950s and 1960s and is now unquestioningly on the king’s side. The security establishment, for its part, played a pivotal role in ensuring a smooth transition. Abdullah’s military background has helped ensure his forces’ loyalty as well.
Abdullah thus succeeded in achieving the cohesion his father always wanted between Jordan and the Hashemites. The fact that the Hashemite dynasty lost its original kingdom in Hejaz played a pivotal role in its subsequent political behavior. The royal family’s ambitions, relationships, and alliances were all calculated to avoid repeating the Hejaz experience.
In contrast to his father, Abdullah pointedly avoided mentioning the Great Arab Revolt of 1916 in his coronation address. The issue of legitimacy that so troubled the late king seemed of no concern to his successor, who saw it as already settled.
Since day one, Abdullah has been busy with practical rather than theoretical issues, at the forefront of which were Jordan’s troubled relations with its Arab neighbors, which have historically been characterized by tensions and instability. These tensions had a historical background rooted in Jordan’s close but secret relations with Israel, which were seen by Syria, Iraq, and Egypt and subsequently the PLO as a source of threat.
Abdullah tried to transform Jordan’s relations with its Arab neighbors. He extended a hand of friendship to Syria, both before and after Bashar Assad succeeded his father as president of that country. Syria, however, did not budge from its old position vis-a-vis Jordan. Damascus has continued to view Amman as being untrustworthy because of its ties with Israel.
Relations with Iraq were defined by the outcome of the 1991 Gulf War over Kuwait. Abdullah never viewed Iraq through the eyes of someone hoping to take over in Baghdad after the Saddam Hussein regime is overthrown ­ despite the fact that his uncle Prince Hassan met with the Iraqi opposition, thus giving the impression that the Hashemites still had their eyes on the Iraqi throne. Abdullah said later that this meeting was strictly personal and should not be seen as representing official Jordanian policy.
Neither did Abdullah look to the Gulf Arab states to extend his lost kingdom. Instead, he worked hard to ease the tensions that arose as a result of Jordan’s perceived backing of Iraq in the Gulf War.
The king also tried to build a new relationship with the Palestinians, distancing himself from his father’s ambition of maintaining Hashemite custodianship of the Muslim holy places in Jerusalem. Abdullah seemed uninterested in continuing his father’s thorny and rivalry-ridden relationship with the Palestinian Authority and its leader Yasser Arafat, while enthusiastically embracing the Palestine question and the rights of the Palestinian people.
Abdullah clearly realized the importance of the role played by Egypt in the Middle East and was keen to strengthen ties with Cairo, taking the trouble to consult with Cairo on various issues.
King Abdullah has been able to imbue Jordan’s relations with the Arab world with an unprecedented level of stability.

Muna Shuqair is a Jordanian political analyst. She wrote this commentary for the Daily Star

Copyright©Daily Star