Two videos the Jordanian royal family posted on its YouTube channel in recent weeks do much to dispel the ambiguity around one of the dramatic sections of US President Donald Trump's "deal of the century." The US is seeking to give Saudi Arabia a major role in the guardianship of Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem, namely the Temple Mount.
The current guardians – Jordan and its king, Abdullah II – have more than 100 years of history on the Mount, as well as a long line of agreements and understandings with Israel. They are hurt and disappointed. The king is angry. He is unwilling to step down in favor of the Saudis and their seventh king – Salman Bin Abdulaziz al-Saudi – or share the guardianship. Jordan is doing almost anything it can to make that point clear.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
On March 20, a week before Abdullah met with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other senior Trump advisors in Washington, he met with dignitaries from the Az-Zarqa district, one of the strongholds of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan. Approximately half the residents of Az-Zarqa are Palestinians. Abdullah declared that he would "never" change his stance on Jerusalem, saying, "We have a historic obligation to Jerusalem and its holy sites."
For the first time, the king acknowledged he was under pressure: "That is a red line for me, and I know that the people are by my side … as the Hashemite state, we have an obligation to defend sites that are holy to Islam and Christianity. True, we are being pressured, but in the end, our response will be 'no,'" he said.
A few days later, in a meeting with top Jordanian army officials, the king (now in uniform) repeated: "Jerusalem and the future Palestinian state are a red line for Jordan. I don't know how I can make it any clearer … how can I, as a Hashemite, give up Jerusalem? It's impossible. It's a red line. I say 'no' to any concession on Jerusalem … that is our word, and that is our stance."
Covering debts
The king's words stayed mostly off the media's radar, although he was quoted in the context of Jordan's dispute with Israel over the Gate of Mercy compound, even though that was not what he had been referring to. Thanks to experts from the Middle East Media Research Institute, the statements are now being put in their proper context, and the cat is out of the bag. Months of soft denials from Washington, and silence on from Israel – which is well-versed in the details of the deal – are now over.
For months, the US has been pressuring Jordan to give Saudi Arabia, or at least share with it, the guardianship over the third-holiest site in Islam – Al-Aqsa Mosque, in addition to keeping it under Israeli sovereignty. Saudi Arabia is already responsible for the first and second-most holy Islamic sites, the cities of Mecca and Medina. The pressure in question comes in financial form, combined with some juicy economic carrots.
Let's look at the numbers: The Hashemite kingdom's debts current stand at over $40 billion. At a conference of nations that donate to Jordan that was held in London in February, the king managed to raise a $3 billion donation from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, to be paid over a few years. The $350 million that Saudi Arabia transferred to Jordan in May is just a drop in the bucket. Now Saudi Arabia is putting a condition on its continued support: a part in the administration of Al-Haram al-Sharif Al-Aqsa compound.
Jordan is also heavily dependent on the billion and a half dollars of American aid it receives every year. Last year, the Americans spoke with various Arab rulers not only about the option of putting the Saudis in charge of the Temple Mount, but also Jordan would gradually take in and grant citizenship to a million Palestinian refugees. That is only part of the picture the Trump administration is putting together for the issue of Palestinian "refugees," after slashing its contribution to the UNRWA budget.
The US thinks that UNRWA and the U.N. have been helping perpetuate Palestinian refugeedom for years rather than solving it, turning refugee status into something that is handed down through the generations.
In exchange for this package deal, the US is offering Jordan $45 billion to pay back its debts, rehabilitate its economy, and also absorb Palestinians. It's a very tempting offer, and one Jordan might take – its concerns about the Palestinians notwithstanding – if it weren't for the Temple Mount.
The way the Jordanian royal family sees it, there are three solid reasons to reject the American ideas. The first is practical: the Jordanian (and Israeli) security apparatuses think that any change to the king of Jordan's guardianship over the Temple Mount will shake up his rule, and possibly lead to his downfall. The guardianship, which Jordan has held since 1924, is an insurance policy for Jordan. For years, the Jordanian government has rested on the loyalty of the Bedouin and the rest of the tribes to the royal family. But they make up less than half of Jordan's population, while the Palestinian majority and the Muslim Brotherhood are a constant source of concern. For Jordan, maintaining "custody" of Al-Aqsa means the royal family will stay in power.
The second reason is historical: After World War I, the Hashemite dynasty lost its role as guardian of Mecca and Medina to Saudi Arabia. The Hashemites ruled Saudi Arabia until 1924 until they were chased out by the al-Saud dynasty. Hussein bin Ali, who served as the sheriff and emir of Mecca from 1908-1917, was a member of the Hashemite dynasty, whose founders saw themselves as descendants of the Prophet Muhammad. Jordan, which was officially established in 1946, occupied east Jerusalem and the Old City in 1948, and since then has made do with the second-tier guardianship of Al-Aqsa.
The third reason why Jordan is rejecting any American ideas about a change in status at the Temple Mount is familial: Hussein bin Al, who lost Mecca and Medina to the Saudis, was buried on the Temple Mount in 1931. His second son, Abdullah – the first king of the modern state of Jordan – was murdered by a Palestinian assassin at the entrance to Al-Aqsa Mosque in 1951 because of secret peace talks he was holding with Israel. His grandson, Hussein, saw his grandfather's murder, and a year later was made king of Jordan. He ruled for 47 years until he died in 1999.
Looking askance at Turkey
The historic 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan anchored Jordan's role as guardian of Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem. Israel honored that status, especially given the two nations' shared security, intelligence, and economic interests. Israel was even persuaded that the special status for Jordan helped the royal family maintain its rule on the other side of the Jordan River. In 2013 Jordan bolstered its status on Al-Aqsa by signing a deal with the Palestinian Authority which determined that Jordan would continue to represent Palestinian interests at Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem until a future peace deal was signed.
All this means that Jordan is truly horrified at the US suggestion – or demand – that it forgo its stewardship of Al-Aqsa or split it with the Saudis. Jordan is underscoring its public refusal by taking a series of diplomatic steps designed to make it clear to both Israel and the US that it has options other than the Jerusalem-Washington axis.
The first step was for the Jordanians to align themselves with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in rejecting Trump's deal. Then, Jordan agreed for the first time to include representatives of the PA in the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, the official Jordanian government body that oversees religious affairs on the Temple Mount. Aside from the PA personnel, Jordan also opened up the waqf to the Fatah movement, Sheikh Ikrama Sabri, the former mufti of Jerusalem who is currently identified with Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as to the outlawed Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement. All these were until very recently competitors to the Jordanian hegemony on the Temple Mount.
The second step entails direct contact between the royal family and Turkey, another serious rival for control of the Temple Mount and for influence in the area surrounding it. Abdullah decided that Turkey was an acceptable partner in his battle against Trump and his plan. Jordan allying itself with players who are dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood organization, which has often posed a threat to the Hashemite dynasty, shows how far it is willing to go to maintain its primacy at Al-Aqsa.
The third step is Abdullah's visit to King Mohammad VI of Morocco, who is also a descendant of the Hashemite dynasty. The Jordanian king received support from his Moroccan counterpart for Hashemite control over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem. At the end of their meeting, the king of Morocco announced that the Jordanian waqf was the only legal entity allowed to manage, defend, and arrange entry into Al-Aqsa Mosque. In a joint statement, the two kings stressed that Jerusalem and its holy sites must be defended against any attempt to change their historic, legal, or political status.
Abdullah tried to squeeze similar statements from the rulers of Egypt and Iraq at a tripartite summit in Tunisia last March but failed.
Calls for intifada
Abdullah has met thrice with top US officials in the past half year: in November 2018, in January 2019, and in March 2019. The Jordanians were careful to announce nothing at these meetings. They might have wanted to avoid creating the impression at home that they were cooperating with the deal of the century, especially when it came to the Temple Mount.
On the other hand, Jordan seems to have thrown off all restraint when it comes to the king's position on the US deal. Since April, a few articles have been published in the Jordanian press calling for a new intifada in the West Bank as a way of thwarting the deal. Journalist Mohammed Ali Marzouk al-Ziyyad wrote a piece in the Al-Ra'i daily in which he called for unity with Fatah and Hamas and a cessation to Jordanian security coordination with "the occupation."
"A Third Intifada is more important than intra-Palestinian reconciliation and is the best prescription for the 'deal of the century' … it is more important that negotiations or any rhetorical enlistment to defend Al-Aqsa Mosque," al-Ziyyad wrote.
Hussein Al-Rawashdeh also wrote a column in the daily Ad-Dustour that called for a new intifada that would unite the Palestinians and the Arab world.
Bassem Sakjaha wrote about the coming Third Intifada, and Jamal al-Suahim, who has a column in the newsletter of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, also decreed that only an armed intifada could bring down the Trump deal.
So Jordan is repositioning itself in relation to the Muslim Brotherhood, and in recent weeks Abdullah has allowed the organization to arranged demonstrations on the eastern side of the Jordan River in opposition to the deal of the century.
However, we must remember that Abdullah is a pragmatist, and there are signs that he is looking for a compromise that will allow him to appear as if he opposes the Trump plan but actually accept some of its points. By doing so, he hopes to keep his key status among the moderate nations of the Middle East and continue enjoying US economic aid, not to mention maintaining his stewardship of Al-Aqsa.
The second 2019 Knesset election in Israel has given Jordan some room to breathe, since the US administration does not intend to make the main aspects of the deal public before Sept. 17. Still, the US is asking Jordan to decide whether, and at what level, it intends to participate in the Bahrain summit on June 25-26. Jordan has said it will send a delegation to Bahrain, but it is still unknown how high-ranking the representatives will be. Either way, Abdullah expects the US to provide clarification about his continued guardianship of Al-Aqsa. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, and Israel have already RSVP'd to the Bahrain conference. The Palestinians, we know, are boycotting the event, although it is not impossible that some Palestinian business people might take part privately.
