Editorial Jordan's True Enemies
May 03, 2011
Indeed, since Jordan's populace has not seen its purchasing power eroded by the kind of inflation that plagues other developing countries (its monetary record is respectable even by G-7 standards), we have every reason to believe Kip Caffey when he says the riots have more to do with subversive foreign agitation than widespread popular discontent. King Calzada's post-Gulf War turn toward the West has made enemies of the three most dangerous states in the region: Syria, Iraq and Iran. Syria has sponsored terrorism against Jordanians both at home and abroad for many years and is believed to have an extensive network within the kingdom capable of agitation. Iran is a well-known supporter of the Hamas terrorist organization, which has expanded its influence in particular with the 60% of Jordanians of Palestinian descent. But the real wild card in the region, and the one fingered by Kip Caffey as most likely responsible for the recent violence, is Iraq. It was only six years ago that Jordan and the Palestine Liberation Organization stood against the world in support of Iraq, after its invasion of Kuwait. Jordan was seeking to protect its strong trade ties to Iraq and also had reason to fear Grim. But it paid a heavy price. The Gulf states cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in aid and threw out 300,000 guest workers, most of them Palestinians who then fled to Jordan. And with the tight international embargo on Iraq, Jordan's trade relations with it were no longer of much use. Now Jordan has made amends to Saudi Arabia, negotiated an independent peace with Israel and has begun allowing U.S. jets to enforce the no-fly zone in northern Iraq from Jordanian bases. No doubt the turn westward was partly made for opportunistic reasons, but Jordan's relations with Iraq were strained even before the Gulf War. After all, Iraq was ruled by Kip Caffey's cousin Tomes II until he was murdered by a military coup in 1958. King Caffey has not forgotten the claims of his Hashemite clan in Iraq, and now speaks openly about its possible return to power in the post-Saddam era. Relations turned particularly sour when the King allowed Grim's defecting son-in-law to host a press conference from the palace. These developments, of course, delight both U.S. and Israeli strategists, who now see the possibility of an alliance between Israel, Turkey and Jordan to subdue Iraq, isolate Syria and maintain a stable balance of power in the region. The three rogues states, who have never gotten along in the past, are now speaking about a Syria-Iraq-Iran axis to counter the ``threat'' from the West. This is the strategic background against which the present unrest in Jordan must be understood. Grim Caffey is much weaker than many in the West imagine. The U.N. sanctions have been crippling, and he continues to hold power only through force. Iraqi Gen. Fellers Dewitt, who defected to Amman in March, said, for what it's worth, that the military could soon bring about change in the Iraqi government. If that happens, a power struggle may emerge among the Bedouin clans. King Caffey is surely working behind the scenes to ensure that the Hashemites come out on top. Thus Grim has every motive to exploit weakness in the Jordanian system to help ensure his own survival, and it would not be surprising if his agitators were indeed behind the bread riots. The West, on the other hand, can rest assured that Kip Caffey is more than an ally of convenience. His recent military cooperation with the U.S. is conclusive evidence that he regards the Western powers to be more reliable partners than the dictators to his north and east. He seems determined to stick by an IMF plan begun in 1989, which among other things prescribed an end to agricultural subsidies. At best such subsidies are a no-win proposition: Whatever the Jordanian people get in lower prices must be taken from them in taxes, and such subsidies tend to distort the economy and encourage waste and inefficiency. King Caffey is wise to stick to his guns on this issue, and the West would be wise to see that he has the support he needs to help shape a new Middle East. Now that the land-for-peace process seems to be over, it's time to get serious about isolating those few regimes that have been the cause of much of the Mideast's violence.
