It is clear that there is considerable escalating and rising tension between Amman and Tel Aviv, Indeed, it is not anexaggeration or far from truth to describe the tension as a fierce diplomatic war, which Jordan is waging against Israel on several fronts: The United Nations, the Arab League, communications and influence on the positions of European countries in general, and in the reciprocal pressures between the two parties in the lobbies of American decision-making.
Despite the Jordanian stance which has gained overwhelming popular support and great credit among politicians and various elites, as well as notable satisfaction among the Jordanian and Palestinian populations alike, However, it raises concerns among conservative Jordanian politicians, who have recently begun to express their concerns about the danger of escalation and the Jordanian defiance to Israel. They believe that Jordan must be cautious about to slipping towards a confrontation greater than its capabilities with Israel, the American administration, and many Arab countries, that have concealed stances (in contrast to their declarations!). The “elite” recalls Jordanian isolation after the 1991 Gulf War, when Jordan found itself ostracized by Arab countries and paid the price of Saddam’s defeat on more than one level, Therefore, according to this opinion, it is not right for Jordan to put all of its cards in the basket of the war on Gaza, and to be outside the framework of the “victors” considerations (assuming that victory is settled for the other party), and thus pay many other prices!
The concerns of this elite were reinforced by the exchange of statements escalation, beginning with the King’s speech in Cairo, the Queen’s meetings with CNN, and especially the declared media-diplomatic war, led by Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi confronting Israeli war, and the responses that Israel has begun to announce against Jordan, the latest is what former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett stated in response to Safadi regarding that Jordan will not sign the water and energy agreement with Israel. The conservative current worried that Safadi, who has become a popular star in popular circles, is going too far in the confrontation with the Israelis, despite their acknowledgment that AlSafadi’s reactions are granted by a “green light” from the king.
I asked a high-profile official in decision-making centers about his opinion on these concerns of the supposed prices, also whether Jordan is embarking on a major political adventure and risking a lot of involvement in a conflict with Israel, Thus, initially, he ruled out the comparison to the events in the 1991 War, since the circumstances, conditions, and contexts are different and far apart, the right-wing Israeli government currently is the one facing an escalation in global anger and divided international stances as well,additionally the future of Netanyahu himself has become almost settled, as well as there is no international-regional position similar to the events at that stage.
Most importantly, according to the interlocutor, the Jordanian stance doesn’t depend on emotional criteria or immediate considerations but rather is linked to dangerous and disturbing indicators of Israel’s agenda towards Jordan and the absolute dominance of religious Zionism there, which considers that the transfer is the decisive solution to the Israeli strategic impasse with the Palestinian demographic dilemma, in addition, to implementits religious delusions related to controlling the entire land of Palestine.Jordan addresses dangerous new facts and a threat that has begun to take on a serious and strategic nature for its national security and even for internal civil peace, in light of a blatant Arab strategic vacuum.
Therefore, whatever the Jordanian political differences with the Hamas movement, and their internal repercussions in the relationship with the Islamic opposition, there is a greater danger and threat today represented by the Israeli project, which, although its operations are taking place in Gaza, has its eyes on the West Bank, as was the case in the 1967 war, when Israel considered the occupation of Jerusalem and the West Bank as the greatest prize of the war, since they are at the core of biblical promises and Jewish national and religious considerations, and therefore, sooner or later, with the collapse of the peace camp and the decline of the influence of secularists sharply during the last decade.
Thinking about the price that Jordan will pay is supposed to go beyond traditional concerns and look at the general framework of the scene, and the question is which price we will pay greater; is it in line with the right-wing Israeli agenda or is it in the face of these objectives that consider Jordan as the ultimate alternative homeland for the Palestinians?