Blame Jordan!

I’ve never seen something so misinterpreted. Is it just me or does it always seem that everyone comes down on Jordan like a ton of bricks when it comes to Arab-Israeli conflicts, even though this is the country most effected by it next to Palestine itself. It seems not only are other arabs harsh with Jordan but so is the media. The case being of course the recent proposal to the Arab League.

The proposal is very simple and has been simply misunderstood. The request is to merely re-new and re-submit the Beirut initiative from 2002. It is now being seen as this grand ammendment yet for the life of me I cannot see where this troubeling deduction is derived from.

Al-Jazeerah hid the article somewhere in the international news section under the title: Ù?ص Ù?بادرة اÙ?أردÙ? Ù?تعدÙ?Ù? اÙ?Ù?بادرة اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© Ù?Ù?سÙ?اÙ?”

Associated Press had a report carried by MSNBC claiming:

“King Abdullah II of Jordan has proposed a new peace strategy that drops traditional Arab demands that Israel give up all land seized in the 1967 war and offers the Jewish state normalized relations with Arab countries, according to a text of the proposal seen Friday by The Associated Press.” [more]

All these deductions from a proposal that is a couple of lines long? If the goal is not to seek peace or to reject the offer before it reaches the table then why are all these Arab leaders meeting to talk about?

On the other hand…

Only the following report by Reuters did Jordan justice by offering the following :

“Jordan has tried to persuade fellow Arab countries to relaunch an offer of eventual normalisation with Israel after assuring them it did not propose to dilute the conditions Israel must meet.” adding that “But the Palestinians and most other members of the Arab League opposed a Jordanian proposal, an Algerian official said on Saturday.” [more]

Mr. Rajab Al Sqeiri, the official spokeperson for the Jordanian ministry of foreign affairs stated that the proposal only seeks to reaffirm terms already agreed upon

Pakistan’s the Daily Times quoted Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa as saying:

“said on Thursday the plan resembled a Saudi peace initiative adopted at an Arab summit in Beirut in 2002. Moussa said Jordan was calling for Israeli troops to withdraw from all territories seized in the 1967 Middle East War and for the normalisation of ties between Arab countries and Israel. It also included the right of return of refugees…” [more]

Gulf News reported:”…However, Jordanian officials stressed that Ammanâ??s proposal doesnâ??t constitute any change to the Saudi initiative.

â??The resolution does not call for a premature normalisation but says that normalisation will be the result of achieving a just, comprehensive and lasting peace … and the principle of land for peace,â? Jordanian foreign ministry Rajab Suqeiri said.” [more]

Some of these articles reported a complete rejection of the proposal. While a more recent article at Al-Jazeerah states:

“An Arab delegate, speaking on condition of anonimity, said 13 of the Arab League’s 22 members are showing implicit support for the Jordanian proposal, which some see as a way to compel Israel to meet its requirements under the US-back roadmap for regional peace

in that same article…

“Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Ghait said on Saturday that Jordan wants to reword, not change, the 2002 Arab initiative to make it more easily understood by the international community. “The Jordanians are saying that through their consultations with the international community they heard them saying that the Arab initiative is too long and has too many details,” Abu al-Ghait told The Associated Press. “This means that many of the international sides couldn’t grasp the content of this initiative because of its length and its details.”

Rewording, reaffirmation, resubmission. These are the words that should come to mind. Not ‘suspicion’ and ‘rejection’. All of this over a proposal a few lines long…

“Ù?شرÙ?ع Ù?رار Ù?Ù?دÙ? Ù?Ù? اÙ?Ù?Ù?Ù?Ù?Ø© اÙ?أردÙ?Ù?Ø© اÙ?Ù?اشÙ?Ù?Ø© (Ø¥Ù?Ù? Ù?جÙ?س جاÙ?عة اÙ?دÙ?Ù? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø©).. إذ Ù?ستذÙ?ر Ù?بادرة اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© اÙ?تÙ? Ø£Ù?رتÙ?ا Ù?Ù?Ø© بÙ?رÙ?ت فÙ? 2002..

Ù?إذ Ù?عÙ?د اÙ?تأÙ?Ù?د عÙ?Ù? اÙ?اÙ?تزاÙ? اÙ?عربÙ? باÙ?Ù?بادرة Ù?باÙ?Ù?بادئ اÙ?تÙ? Ù?اÙ?ت عÙ?Ù?Ù?ا..

Ù?إذ Ù?ؤÙ?د Ù?جددا Ø£Ù? اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? اÙ?عربÙ? Ù?اÙ?شاÙ?Ù? Ø®Ù?ار إستراتÙ?جÙ? Ù?Ù?دÙ?Ù? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© Ù?تحÙ?Ù? فÙ? ظÙ? اÙ?شرعÙ?Ø© اÙ?دÙ?Ù?Ù?Ø© Ù?Ù?ستÙ?جب اÙ?تزاÙ?ا Ù?Ù?ابÙ?ا تؤÙ?دÙ? إسرائÙ?Ù? فÙ? Ù?ذا اÙ?صدد..

Ù?إذ Ù?ؤÙ?د Ù?جددا اÙ?تÙ?اع اÙ?دÙ?Ù? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© بأÙ? اÙ?Ø­Ù? اÙ?عسÙ?رÙ? Ù?Ù?Ù?زاع Ù?Ù? Ù?Ø­Ù?Ù? اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? Ø£Ù? اÙ?Ø£Ù?Ù? Ù?Ø£Ù? طرف Ù?Ù? اÙ?أطراف..

Ù?بعد Ø£Ù? استعرض Ù?ختÙ?ف اÙ?جÙ?Ù?د اÙ?Ù?بذÙ?Ù?Ø© Ù?إحÙ?اء عÙ?Ù?Ù?Ø© اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? Ù?Ù?رر:

اÙ?تأÙ?Ù?د عÙ?Ù? اÙ?اÙ?تزاÙ? اÙ?عربÙ? بتحÙ?Ù?Ù? اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? Ù?اÙ?Ø£Ù?Ù? Ù?اÙ?استÙ?رار Ù?Ù?Ù?Ø·Ù?Ø© اÙ?شرÙ? اÙ?Ø£Ù?سط Ù?Ø®Ù?ار إستراتÙ?جÙ? طبÙ?ا Ù?Ù?ا جاء فÙ? Ù?بادرة اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø©, Ù?اÙ?إعÙ?اÙ? عÙ? استعداد اÙ?دÙ?Ù? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© Ù?Ø¥Ù?Ù?اء اÙ?صراع اÙ?عربÙ? اÙ?إسرائÙ?Ù?Ù?, Ù?Ø¥Ù?اÙ?Ø© عÙ?اÙ?ات طبÙ?عÙ?Ø© بÙ?Ù? اÙ?دÙ?Ù? اÙ?عربÙ?Ø© Ù?إسرائÙ?Ù? Ù?Ø°Ù?Ù? فÙ? حاÙ? تحÙ?Ù?Ù? اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? اÙ?عادÙ? Ù?اÙ?شاÙ?Ù? Ù?اÙ?دائÙ? Ù?فÙ?ا Ù?Ù?رارات اÙ?شرعÙ?Ø© اÙ?دÙ?Ù?Ù?Ø© Ù?Ù?بدأ اÙ?أرض Ù?Ù?ابÙ? اÙ?سÙ?اÙ? Ù?Ù?رجعÙ?Ø© Ù?ؤتÙ?ر Ù?درÙ?د Ù?Ù?سÙ?

From the above, Al-Jazeera has concluded:”The proposal itself has made no mention of specific UN resolutions and usual Arab demands for an Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, and for the right of return of refugees. The omission suggests King Abd Allah, whose country signed a peace deal with Israel in 1994 (???), wants the Arabs to accept geographical changes Israel has made in the territories and to start normalisation even before a full peace is reached.” [more]

I’m wondering to myself, is this intentional because it’s Jordan? It seems we are always being bodyslammed by the media and its pundits, especially Al-Jazeerah.

As for the Arab League. If someone wants to handle the Arab Israeli conflict any better than Jordan then step up to the plate for once and be “bold”.

*thanks for the inspiration abu3arab

Your Two Piasters: