Would Egypt and Jordan take back the occupied territories?
posted at 10:55 am on January 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Daniel Pipes offered his solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict yesterday in a column that could just as well have been titled, “Back to the Future.” Pipes suggested that Gaza should go back to the Egyptians and the West Bank to the Jordanians, where they were before successive Arab invasions into Israel left the Israelis in charge of the territories. It’s not the first time this has been suggested, though, and the real question is why either nation would want them back:
Despairing of self-rule, some Palestinians welcome the Jordanian option. An unnamed senior PA official told Diker and Inbari that a form of federation or confederation with Jordan offers “the only reasonable, stable, long-term solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”
Hanna Seniora opined that “the current weakened prospects for a two-state solution forces us to revisit the possibility of a confederation with Jordan.” The New York Times’s Hassan Fattah quotes a Palestinian in Jordan: “Everything has been ruined for us - we’ve been fighting for 60 years and nothing is left. It would be better if Jordan ran things in Palestine, if King Abdullah could take control of the West Bank.”
NOR IS this just talk: Diker and Inbari report that back-channel PA-Jordan negotiations in 2003-04 “resulted in an agreement in principle to send 30,000 Badr Force members,” to the West Bank.
And while Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak announced a year ago that “Gaza is not part of Egypt, nor will it ever be,” his is hardly the last word. First, Mubarak notwithstanding, Egyptians overwhelmingly want a strong tie to Gaza; Hamas concurs; and Israeli leaders sometimes agree. So the basis for an overhaul in policy exists.
Secondly, Gaza is arguably more a part of Egypt than of “Palestine.” During most of the Islamic period, it was either controlled by Cairo or part of Egypt administratively. Gazan colloquial Arabic is identical to what Egyptians living in Sinai speak. Economically, Gaza has most connections to Egypt. Hamas itself derives from the Muslim Brethren, an Egyptian organization.
Is it time to think of Gazans as Egyptians?
Not unless the Gazans themselves think of themselves as Egyptians, which they clearly do not. The problem with Pipes’ plan is that it does nothing to address the nationalist movements in each territory, especially Gaza. What Pipes suggests is trading Israeli blockade for an Egyptian occupation and swapping border concerns.
Nor would that solve Israel’s problem in any case, because the issue in Gaza is not just nationalism, but a hatred of Israel. Hamas would launch its rockets into Israel with Gaza under Egyptian control, not because they resent Egypt but because they exist explicitly to destroy Israel and take its land for themselves. Changing flags in Gaza won’t solve that problem, but it would create another big problem for Israel and Egypt: any military response to missile attacks would become an attack on Egypt, and that would unravel one of the pillars of stability that has managed to endure for 30 years.
Besides, Egypt doesn’t want Gaza or the headache of Hamas. Egypt has a Sunni ruling class, and the last thing they need to do is absord an Iranian-backed Shi’ite proxy army that would then have free rein to move within Egypt’s borders. Jordan took the PLO to its bosom in the 1970s and learned a hard lesson along those same lines, and the PLO was nominally Sunni and not backed by Persian Shi’ite radicals.
The West Bank solution might work better, as the people in the West Bank might be more inclined to have the monarchy’s protection and Jordanian citizenship. Hamas is much less of a problem in that territory, and Fatah has patiently allowed Hamas to destroy itself in Gaza without creating a crisis with Israel. However, the same nationalistic impulses exist in the West Bank, and Jordan would then have to deal with that if it took control from Israel. They may be able to handle it, but I doubt they’d be enthused to get saddled with a restive population that thinks of themselves as a separate nation rather than as Jordanians.
What this conflict needs is better leadership on the part of Palestinians. The Israelis would love to implement a two-state solution that ends the conflict if they could find Palestinian leaders who will be satisfied with that result. Unfortunately, the Palestinians keep choosing Israeli annihilation, and replacing them with Jordanians and Egyptians will not curb that impulse — and in fact could amplify it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I have been reading about a 3 state solution. That means Gaza becomes Egypt and the West Bank becomes Jordan. Looks like a plan to me. Incredibly Israel is basically giving the other players viable borders. How would this work - Get rid of the Iranian influence of Hamas and Hezbollah.
Dr Evil on January 8, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Isn’t this what ‘Stache proposed the other day?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on January 8, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Excellent idea on the face of it. It has been floated in the past.
But, the history of Egypt’s treatment of the Palestinians over the years, and Palestinian’s contempt for all the aid and comfort granted them by the Arab League over the years and that little episode way back in the day when the PLO tried to take on the Jordanian army and overthrow King Hussein …well…do you really think Egypt and Jordan want to assimilate the Palestinians? For the past many decades they’ve not exactly been model citizens, have they?
The Arab League “needs” a Palestinian-Israeli conflict…they actually require it, otherwise the Arab League will be forced to take care of their own, and that’d be hard work. And, in the region, when hard work is necessary, they usually hire Pakistanis.
coldwarrior on January 8, 2009 at 11:03 AM
In 1967, the Israelis offered the Gaza Strip back to the Egyptians knowing that it would be an albatross around their necks. And seeing that since 1948, the Egyptians had not installed water, sewer, electricity, homes, etc, leaving the Palestinians in complete wretched poverty, they still did it.
The Egyptians said “thanks, but no thanks.” Because they didn’t want to take care of the Palestinians.
The Jordanians feel the same way. Guess why Palestinians still live in complete wretchedness in their fellow Muslims’ nations?
No one cares about them.
And this solution will again, only insure that the Israelis will be fighting the 1967 War again.
mjk on January 8, 2009 at 11:06 AM
None of the Arab League nations wants any of the Palestinians at all. They are obviously a collection of ragheaded anarchists collected in a small area.
Kermit on January 8, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Under that logic we would lose Alsaka, Hawaii, Texas, California (not a bad idea), New Mexico, Arizona you get the idea. Why should Israel give up land taken as conquest under assault. It’s how every country was formed.
How about send the Arabs back to their “HOME” countries. They are not Palestinians! They are Jordanians. Another myth that became fact.
katy on January 8, 2009 at 11:09 AM
It’s a non-starter. If the Israelis give the West Bank to Jordan, the Jordanian army will start taking Potshots at Israelis living in Jerusalem, etc. Just like before the Six Day War.
This solution is a bad, bad, bad idea.
mjk on January 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
just one correction: Hamas is a sunni group, hezbollah is shiite.
It’s just another reason why this situation is so fubar. Saudi Arabia and other gulf states (iow: sunni) sponsor hamas while Iran sponsors hezbollah. it’s all one big proxy war.
cameo on January 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Israel should buy Gaza. Gazan residents should be paid handsomely to move to the West Bank/Jordan or another Arab land. Israel will re-develop the orchards, beach resorts, etc.
JiangxiDad on January 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Oh. I hate to sound so dumb, but why would the Jordanians do that?
JiangxiDad on January 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM
That isn’t going to happen. A two state solution with one state determined to wipe out the other solves nothing. Given their priorities of killing Jews over good governance, The Gaza and West Bank populations require the oversight authority of an establshed country. If that doesn’t happen, the cycle just repeats. Iran needs some attention by the world hand wringers, and while that isn’t the whole answer, it might allow enough breathing room for some productive dialogue among responsible parties.
a capella on January 8, 2009 at 11:25 AM
What possible good end will come involving a people who their own leaders continually tell us “Love death as you love life.”
If we truly love life, we need to kill those who love death.
Anything else is a half measure. Gaza should be carpet bombed. Give the people what they want.
NoDonkey on January 8, 2009 at 11:28 AM
That will never happen. Palestinian leadership cares nothing about the Palestinians - enriching themselves while normal Palestinians live in squalor, using them as human shields (or worse) and the single-minded devotion to the destruction of Israel. That’s not leadership - there is no goal of the Palestinian “leadership” to have a nation that is productive and cares for it’s people. Until that changes, there will never be “better leadership on the part of Palestinians.”
tballard on January 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM
You ain’t dumb, darling. One of the reasons the Six Day War was focused eventually on Jordan is because the Jordanians whilst in possession of part of Jerusalem and the so-called West Bank would sniper (if that’s a word) at the Israelis. I truly doubt that would change if the Jordanians got the land back now. They’d do exactly the same thing (despite the peace treaty with Israel).
Of course the Jordanians completely destroyed the old synagogues in Jerusalem and limited the access to all Christian and Jewish sites in Jerusalem when they were in charge. So going on a HolyLand pilgrimage was a real b*tch when the Jordanians were in charge of Jerusalem and the west bank…..
mjk on January 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM
I have a better solution: the ‘palestininans’ go to the homeland created for them - Jordan.
Vashta.Nerada on January 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM
These are liberated territories and Israel should annex them.
Aristotle on January 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM
John Bolton suggested the same thing a few days ago. The problem isn’t just with the ‘Palestinians.’ Egypt and Jordan don’t exactly love us either. Neither ‘peace treaty’ is on particularly firm ground.
Carl in Jerusalem on January 8, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Sure, go back to the 1967 borders, with the understanding that the Palestinians currently in Gaza be sent to the West Bank to join their countrymen, and Gaza be turned over to the Egyptians. Let the West Bank become part of Jordan, and the Palestinians become Jordanians. Then it’s Abdullah’s problem to take care of.
piraticalbob on January 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM
The problem will continue as long as the West continues spreading the lie that Palestinians love their wives and children. They put them deliberately in harms way for PR advantage. The women are deemed no better than cattle. The media ignores this reality and persists in projecting western values on men who cut the genitalia off their daughters and see women as property. An ugly culture, a viscious culture and not an “equally valid” culture.
OT: Is there anything worse on WABC that the little Mika?
Her daddy was a Carter man who helped grease the wheels that brought us the Iranian Islamic Republic and our current woes. Now she is a moral authority on war and peace?
The nauseating woman should be ashamed of her background not running her mouth on Iraq, Afghanistan and Israel.
clnurnberg on January 8, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Right. Ron Paul will become president before that ever happens. As Abba Eban once said, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” Their society is so poisoned by Jew-hatred and the jihadist ideology that I don’t think they’re capable of governing themselves now, and won’t be for a couple of generations, at least.
Minor quibble: Hamas does indeed suckle at the Iranian teat, but they’re Sunni, not Shiite. They are united, however, in their Jew-hatred and pursuit of Islamic supremacy.
So, perhaps it’s a distinction without a difference.
irishspy on January 8, 2009 at 11:59 AM
No way does Egypt want that hellhole.
The West Bank and Jordan may be a long shot - after all, Jordan did annex is once before. I think it was a after the 1948 war until the 1967 war when they were relieved of it.
forest on January 8, 2009 at 12:07 PM
I’m a long-term foreign resident of Jordan, and I don’t believe that the Jordanians would take back the West Bank, and I don’t believe that they would begin shelling Israel if they did. One of the worst kept secrets of the Middle East is how everyone hates the Palestinians, even more than they hate the Jews. Palestinian refugees and illegal immigrants have turned parts of Amman into a third-world craphole, and most of the Jordanians hate them for that. At the universities, Jordanian and Palestinians engage in gang fights on nearly a daily basis, and landlords will refuse to rent to Palis. And let alone the peace treaty, Jordan’s economy is very closely tied to Israel. The fact is that, although you still hear the usual Jew-hatred among some of the Jordanian people, King Abdullah is one of the few grown-ups in power in this part of the world, and Jordanians are rightfully proud of that. And most of them are coming around to the fact that Israel is there, and is there to stay. Make no mistake, Jordan is an Arab society, with all the ills that that entails, but their government is an ally, and they themselves have been victims of terrorism, three hotel bombings in 2006.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 12:14 PM
Except modern day Israel, you mean.
angelat0763 on January 8, 2009 at 12:19 PM
A few other facts about Jordan. Of course, they’re never going to elect a Jew to Parliament, but they are very tolerant of other religions, easily the most tolerant of any Arab nation. Christians are allowed Christian holidays away from work or school, you can hear church bells on Sunday, and there are a number of Christian primary schools of all denominations. As I say, they are Arabs, so we will always have major disagreemenst about many things–freedom of speech, for example, I have a student whose band has been banned by the government for the style of music they play–the treatment of women–and some others. But once again, overall, they are one of the few grown up societies in this area of the world.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 12:22 PM
tks. very int. stuff.
JiangxiDad on January 8, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Except modern day Israel, you mean.
angelat0763 on January 8, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Well, every present nation in the Middle East was a product of restructuring after WWI. Jordan, for example, was given its borders to reward the Hashemites for their service–see Lawrence of Arabia for details. One of the reasons for the present conflict between Iraqis and Jordanians is that Jordan was originally supposed to include much of Iraq. So I’m not sure what your point is here.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 12:25 PM
When will the Palestinians ever learn that they are the patsies of the schmucks who hate Israel but don’t have the stones to attack them directly? (past failures still sting) Why take a chance on suffering retaliatory strikes in Jordan or Egypt or Iran, etc. when you have this ready supply of human canon fodder. If the Palestinians ever decide to rub two neurons together and form a rational thought, maybe they will see how badly they’ve been used by everybody except the Isralis. Up to now, they’ve shown no evidence of even such simple reasoning. Hatred is indeed the acid that destroyed the Palestinian vessel.
SKYFOX on January 8, 2009 at 12:26 PM
Frankly, most of the people I know in Jordan who are sympathetic to the Palistians, especially in Gaza, are the liberal expats the I work with.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 12:27 PM
And one of my simple pleasures in life is watching one of my liberal colleagues start spouting off about the Palestinians, and having Jordanian students tell them to shut up.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Why not offer Fakeistanians and all muslims the same option they give us evil unbelievers: convert or die.
Form two lines, those willing to leave Islam will be part of a new secular-democratic state with full western assistance (something Bush should’ve done in Iraq). Those who prefer jihad until Islam rules the world, will get to join Allah but not get 72 virgins.
People over-complicate the issue, it really is this simple. The problem its not being done is that so few truly understand the nature of our enemy or Islam or even desire to examine its root causes of these conflicts.
So the murdering of innocent civilians (and muslims) by other muslims will continue indefinitely while blind idiots in the West keep running around looking for a solution to gain lasting peace and ignoring the ideology that spawns all the hate, violence and warfare (Islam).
thinkagain on January 8, 2009 at 12:50 PM
The Palestinians on the West Bank under Fatah have been behaving themselves and IMO they have shown that the can be trusted with a state. Israel should negotiate with Fatah over the West Bank as a gesture of goodwill and a “carrot” for their behavior during the recent violence.
The only way that the Gaza problem will be solved is if the Iranian mullahocracy is overthrown. This will cut off Hamas’s main pipeline of support and make them easier to destroy.
Illinidiva on January 8, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Palistinians: Could have had a country, but would rather have a war.
Socratease on January 8, 2009 at 1:04 PM
Hamas and Hezbollah are like weasels that that will do anything in their power to win, no matter what. They will sell out their own integrity and wouldn’t hesitate to kill their own mother if it would gain political points. Bush has been fighting terrorists since 9/11 and knows that you don’t negotiate with terrorists, you kill them. If you be kind to them they will find a way to use your kindness against you. The UN is a joke and keeps coming up with plans that won’t guarantee Israel’s safety. If the terrorists were to lay down their arms there would be peace and prosperity for the whole region, something that Iran and Syria don’t want. If Israel were to put down their arms there would be no more Israel. Perhaps the UN would even issue each and every Israeli citizen a pair of running shoes, to make things a little more sporting during the ensuing onslaught.
DL13 on January 8, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Even modern day Israel. Research the Ottoman Empire, WWI, and the British Mandate.
MarkTheGreat on January 8, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Because they did it before?
Johan Klaus on January 8, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I was surprised to read this from Pipes, who I generally think of as being pretty sensible. If Egypt refused sovereignty over Gaza in the 1979 Camp David accord, why on earth would they be willing to assume it now?
ProfessorMiao on January 8, 2009 at 1:44 PM
The real advantage of the 3-state plan, as I see it, is that it would enable Jordan and Egypt to ferret out and eliminate the active terrorists in a way that Israel can’t. Israel gets crucified whenever a Palestinian gets a papercut; in contrast, there’s a great deal of data that would suggest the world doesn’t much care about Arabs dealing harshly with other Arabs.
Infidoll on January 8, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Especially the liberal world.
Johan Klaus on January 8, 2009 at 2:36 PM
Yeah! DING DING DING! You win the grand prize for knowing your history of the region!!!!
+10
beththebaker on January 8, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Creating Jordan as a homeland for Palestinians may be historically accurate, but Churchill in the back of his taxi didn’t take into account that the Palestinians–or at least the Arabs who now call themselves “Palestinians”–are not Hashemites, and in this place, where even their national elections are based on tribe and clan, that matters. King Hussein’s brother, Hassan, is not the king because Hussein was afraid that he would not have protected the Hashemite dynasty as well as he should have. So the Jordanians–the Hashemite Jordanians–don’t want the Palestinians, and never did, even before the creation of Israel. And when you get Jordanians in private, they will admit as much–they don’t want them in their country for the exact same reason the Egyptians don’t. They don’t want their country turning into a terrorist hellhole, and above all, even Arabs don’t consider all Arabs equal, and the Jordanians simply believe they are a higher class of Arab. Many of them really do hate the Palis more than they hate the Israelis.
And as for the West Bank behaving themselves, whoever wrote that is absolutely right, to the point that the Israelis themselves have three times warned leaders there of Hamas plots at assassination.
mikeinamman on January 8, 2009 at 3:35 PM
The real question is would Israel be prepared to evacuate their settlements on the West Bank. Seems odd that they still insist on expanding those settlements.
lexhamfox on January 8, 2009 at 3:44 PM
Here, if anyone would like to read it.
Tzetzes on January 8, 2009 at 5:50 PM