Foreword

The new issue of the JPS examines Israeli policies in the West Bank and the strategic objectives Israel seeks to achieve through them. These objectives can be succinctly captured in one clear and specific term: transfer-whether voluntary or forced. This approach constitutes the only solution in which Israeli leaders genuinely believe regarding the future of the Palestinian cause. They see no alternative whatsoever, regardless of whether Benjamin Netanyahu, Yair Lapid, Naftali Bennett, or any other figure occupies the seat of power. Indeed, there is no longer anyone in Israel who truly believes in a peaceful settlement or in the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The situation in the West Bank is catastrophic and continues to deteriorate with time. This is evident in the conduct of settlers, whose behavior increasingly resembles that of the Zionist gangs during the early phase of the Arab–Israeli conflict, when Palestinians were attacked, harassed, and assaulted in order to generate a climate of panic and fear at the micro-security level. It is also reflected in settlement policies that have effectively produced a second West Bank, adjacent and parallel to the Palestinian West Bank, within the boundaries of the 1967 territories themselves. In addition, large-scale colonial projects-financed and supported directly by the Israeli government-have intensified, alongside systematic land confiscation and seizure, and efforts aimed at dismantling Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, with all the symbolic and material meanings these camps embody in relation to land, memory, and identity.

In sum, Israeli policies in the West Bank are fundamentally geared toward the gradual eradication of the Palestinian presence in all its forms. There is no alternative Israeli project. The only solution that Israelis today perceive as capable of achieving this objective is transfer to Jordan, coupled with sustained pressure on Jordan to accept and absorb Palestinians displaced from the West Bank. This pressure operates through both inducement-via promises and signals of billions of dollars in generous financial aid to address Jordan’s economic crisis-and coercion, through attempts to manufacture political and economic crises for the Kingdom. Regrettably, there exists within Jordan a school of thought that endorses this proposition under the slogan of “the economy in exchange for resettlement,” invoking claims of political and economic realism. This reality necessitates a high degree of caution and vigilance regarding the developments likely to unfold in the coming period.

Such a grave situation in the West Bank has a direct and profound impact on Jordan. Betting on the emergence of a new Israeli government with fundamentally different policies is a losing wager, as it is not grounded in a serious or nuanced reading of the deep structural transformations that Israeli society has undergone over recent decades. Let me state this plainly: the last Israeli prime minister-and perhaps the only one who genuinely believed in Arab–Israeli peace-was Yitzhak Rabin, and he paid for that belief with his life.

I still vividly recall the day when the late King Hussein bin Talal, may he rest in peace, took me-while I was serving as foreign minister in the government of Prince Zaid bin Shaker-to meet Rabin at a small restaurant near the Sea of Galilee. On that occasion, Rabin said that he had long believed Israel’s security could only be achieved through force and military power, but that he had come to truly believe that peace was the path that guarantees Israel’s security. He stated his readiness to return every inch of the occupied Syrian territory and to conclude peace with the Syrian president, Hafez al-Assad. The late King Hussein asked me to convey this message to President Assad, who in turn asked whether I trusted Rabin and his intentions toward Syria. I replied in the affirmative. Assad then said he would agree, on the condition that the process be conducted under the direct sponsorship and mediation of the then U.S. president, Bill Clinton. This indeed came to pass, and the negotiations reached what later became known as the “Rabin Deposit.”

The end of the story, however, is well known: Rabin was assassinated, followed by a brief tenure of Shimon Peres, who lacked Rabin’s seriousness and sincerity regarding peace. Thereafter, Israel entered the era of Benjamin Netanyahu and his policies from an early stage-policies that can be said to embody the dominant trend in Israel today, namely mainstream politics.

Accordingly, our national bet must rest firmly on strengthening the state from within and consolidating the resilience of the relationship between governments and society. This constitutes the true safety valve for Jordan’s national security in confronting Israeli policies and any external threats. In this context, it is essential to underscore the gravity of the unemployment dilemma, which indeed represents the primary source of threat to national cohesion and social stability. Unemployment should therefore be treated as a top priority for any Jordanian government, with sustained efforts directed toward creating employment opportunities for young people and expanding the economic spaces and prospects available to them, both domestically and abroad.

The coming phase will not be easy at the regional level. Recent Israeli wars in the region have taught us a crucial lesson: internal cohesion, along with psychological and moral resilience, is vital to fortifying the state and enhancing its capacity to withstand pressures. Self-reliance-rather than dependence on external international or regional actors-has thus become an imperative. It is evident that current Israeli policies are not conducive to regional stability; instead, they are likely to generate chaos and entrench a pattern of Israeli military, security, and strategic dominance built upon the weakening of the surrounding Arab environment, particularly in the cases of Lebanon and Syria.

As we assess the regional landscape, we must not overlook the scale of destruction inflicted upon the region over the past quarter-century. The anticipated reconstruction of Gaza, Syria, and southern Lebanon would require hundreds upon hundreds of billions of dollars. Who possesses the capacity to finance such an undertaking? No one. This represents an enormous and unsustainable financial and economic burden that no single state can bear. Even proposals advocating a new Marshall Plan for the region cannot materialize without parallel political visions accompanying economic frameworks, as well as a degree of regional integration. Such a scenario presupposes the end of the era of regional wars and conflicts and the beginning of a new historical phase-conditions that, at least in the foreseeable future, remain conspicuously absent.

Read this article in the interactive edition