The prime mover in this enterprise is US
Secretary of State John Kerry, and if an infant agreement is finally born, he
may well be dubbed its daddy. At the
very start of the face-to-face discussions, Kerry announced that all parties
had agreed to cover the proceedings with a blanket of secrecy. Not a word would emerge about their progress
from any source except Kerry himself.
Any other reports emanating from supposedly informed sources would be
speculation and rumour.
Speculation and rumour have nonetheless been rife,
and one whisper currently circulating is that the attention of the negotiating
parties is now focused on the matter of Israel’s security. In the words of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu: “There must be iron-clad
security arrangements to protect the peace – arrangements that allow Israel
to defend itself, by itself, against any possible threats. And those security
arrangements must be based on Israel’s
own forces. There is no substitute for that.”
One commentator asserts that the Americans know that he means what he says and, as a result, have set up a team led by retired General John Allen, unprecedented in size and scope, to look at Israel’s security requirements and to suggest solutions. Speaking at the Saban Forum recently, Kerry said that some 160 people from US defence and intelligence organizations are involved in the project, evaluating the security implications of a Palestinian state from “every potential security scenario.”
One commentator asserts that the Americans know that he means what he says and, as a result, have set up a team led by retired General John Allen, unprecedented in size and scope, to look at Israel’s security requirements and to suggest solutions. Speaking at the Saban Forum recently, Kerry said that some 160 people from US defence and intelligence organizations are involved in the project, evaluating the security implications of a Palestinian state from “every potential security scenario.”
A key aspect of the evaluation is how both Israel
and a future sovereign Palestine can be secured against infiltration by
terrorists, or defended against future invasion by jihadists, across the Jordan
valley from the east.
"We don't want to see rockets
and missiles pouring into a Palestinian state,” said
Netanyahu back in 2010, “and
placed on the hills above Tel Aviv and the hills encircling Jerusalem. If Israel does not maintain a credible military and security presence in the Jordan Valley
for the foreseeable future, this is exactly what could happen again."
The Jordan
valley, some 120 kilometres long and 15 kilometres wide, extends from the outlet of the Jordan River
up north at Lake Kinneret,
to its inlet at the Dead Sea. To the
north it forms the border between Israel
and Jordan; further south it
delineates the West Bank which extends along part of the Dead
Sea. For the portion of the Dead Sea not included in the West
Bank, the Israel-Jordan border runs right down its middle, and then down the
Negev to the Red Sea.
As the Washington Post recently pointed out, a generation of Israeli generals has considered the Jordan Valley
a crucial flank against a land invasion from the east. The valley has been
under the control of the Israeli military since 1967. The area bristles with
covert listening stations, radar sweeps and thermal- and night-vision cameras.
On the mountain tops that rise steeply from the valley floor, Israel maintains a series of
early-warning stations. Troops are on constant patrol along the river and the
passes.
Kerry and his team have tried to help Israel
overcome its security fears with offers of US-provided intelligence and
technology, but Israel
already has sophisticated drones, surveillance technology and
some of the best “smart fences” in the world. At one point, US diplomats discussed placing
international troops in the Jordan Valley, but Israel
pointed to numerous failures by UN forces in demilitarized zones along the Lebanon and
Syrian borders.
In short, Israel
sees its future security as dependent on the continued presence of its own
forces in the Jordan
valley. To the Palestinian Authority (PA), the whole concept of Israeli military
being stationed in a future sovereign Palestine
is anathema. Equally unacceptable is the
idea that Israel should transfer sovereignty of the Jordan
Valley to the PA, which would in turn
lease it back to Israel
– an idea that is not new. Israel signed a similar leasing agreement with Jordan as part of the 1994 peace accords, in
which Israel acknowledged Jordanian sovereignty over 300 square kilometres
along the border, and leased back 30 square kilometres in automatically renewed
long-term leases.
While
the peace negotiators toss Jordan
and its borders to and fro across the table, it is legitimate to wonder why Jordan itself has not been directly involved in
the discussions, and what it thinks of a continued Israeli presence in the Jordan
valley. It is legitimate, because back
in May 2013, when Kerry was in the process of setting up the peace discussions,
he flew to Rome
to meet Jordanian foreign minister, Nasser
Judeh. The result? A declaration by
Kerry that Jordan, because
of its geographical and diplomatic affinity with Israel, was an essential partner to
peace. “Jordan will play a key role,” said
Kerry.
The fact is that the last thing Jordan
needs is a weak Palestinian state some 15 minutes from Amman that could be overrun by Hamas. They
view with apprehension the prospect of a West Bank transferred to the PA which
– as Gaza was – is subsequently taken over by
Hamas to become a possible base for Iranian Revolutionary Guards and jihadist
elements keen on overthrowing not only Israel,
but Jordan
as well. In addition Jordan wants Israel in the Jordan Valley
to prevent a further influx of Palestinian
Arabs. Jordan’s
Palestinian majority has threatened the Hashemite monarchy in the past,
including in the 1970-1971 Jordanian civil war.
Which explains recent reports of Jordan pushing the United States to support Israel’s position that it needs to maintain a
security presence in the Jordan
Valley. And indeed, in a new proposal to both Israel
and the PA last week, Kerry is said to have suggested that Israel be
permitted to maintain a military presence there. According to Israeli
newspaper Ma’ariv, Jordan
coordinated with Israel
to convince Kerry of the crucial importance of continued Israeli army control
of the border region.
Predictably, the PA responded with outrage. Chief
Palestinian negotiator Yasser Abed Rabbo told France’s AFP that Kerry had put the entire peace
process on the verge of “total failure” by backing the Israeli demand.
If Jordan
were permitted a look-in on the peace discussions, it might be able to convince
the Palestinian negotiators that a deal with Israel
on the Jordan Valley might be no bad thing.
Published in the Jerusalem Post on-line, 22 December 2013:
http://www.jpost.com/Experts/Jordan-and-the-Israel-Palestine-d%c3%a9tente-335786?prmusr=QnS1yT5kSgD2NRVMzSNsqktHaNdu%2betKzPiiJ3DZ7Ig0PBnHUJWdTtyAlGXZecXk
Published in the Eurasia Review, 22 December 2013:
No comments:
Post a Comment