Fear and concern over Kerry's framework agreement are not enough

The Jordanians and Palestinians, despite their different opinions, political approaches and ideological affiliations, all feel the dangers that may ensue from the framework plan that US Secretary of State John Kerry is currently working on drafting through his meeting with Israeli and Palestinian officials during continuous visits to and from the region.

Wherever you go to the Jordanian capital Amman, which I visited two days ago, talk during evening gatherings, meetings and dinner parties is focused on this agreement and its political consequences that will affect the Palestinians and Jordanians.

I admit that the vast majority of those who I met feel anxiety and fear, as there are those who fear the resettlement, some who fear the return of the idea of an alternative homeland, a third group who fears Jordanian and Palestinian divisions and a fourth group fearing the liquidation of the Palestinian cause in light of the collapse of the Arab world and the decline of the historical Arab decision-making triangle, Iraq, Syria and Egypt.

There are several major risks that stand out from the folds of what has been leaked so far regarding the ideas contained in John Kerry’s initiative:

1. The recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. This means completely closing the doors to a binational state solution without any guarantees of the success of the two-state solution, as well as stripping 1.5 million Arab Palestinians living inside the Green Line of their right to citizenship in the Jewish state because they are Muslims or Christians and not Jewish. It would also consider anyone criticising Israel in the future as anti-Semitic.
2. The agreement to swap land and inhabitants, directly or indirectly, which means displacing and expelling Palestinians from the territories occupied in 1948 or even from the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem, to Jordan of course.
3. Not dividing Jerusalem and keeping it united as “the capital of two states”, as well as stipulating that the Palestinian capital is in Jerusalem and not Jerusalem itself, is a loose interpretation, which means it may be Shuafat or Abu Dis, or any spot in the vicinity of the holy city
4. It is expected that NATO troops will be positioned along the borders of any Palestinian state and Israeli troops stationed in the Jordan Valley under the NATO flag. The task of these troops will to control access into the so-called Palestinian state, without any objection by those who leave or are expelled from it.
5. The cancellation of the right of return for Palestinian refugees because Israel is only a state for the Jewish people. Perhaps this right may be available to some, but they must meet impossible conditions and they may return to the West Bank, not Jerusalem, since this area is considered “Judea and Samaria” – part of the Jewish Land of Israel.
6. In the event that the framework agreement is approved and accepted, it will be the latest reference for the final settlement, meaning it will cancel all other references preceding it, such as the Oslo Accords, UN resolutions, including resolutions 242, 338, the Partition Resolution 181, the right of return resolution 194, etc.

What worries the Jordanian and Palestinian people is that there is a bet on Netanyahu and the possibility of him rejecting the agreement, which will save the official Palestinian and Jordanian parties the responsibility of rejecting the agreement and the consequent implications.

However, the likelihood of Netanyahu accepting the framework agreement is not ruled out because it meets over 90 per cent of Israel’s security and ideological demands. For the first time, it allows for 80 per cent of the settlers in the West Bank to remain after Israel withdraws from the area, whilst also allowing them to retain their Jewish identity. This would mean that nearly 600,000 settlers will legitimately continue to live in their settlements.

The rejection of this framework agreement is an urgent national responsibility and this refusal must be expressed quickly and clearly, regardless of Netanyahu’s acceptance or rejection. This is in order to bet on Arab nationalism, not Israel’s nationalism, because this agreement liquidates the Palestinian cause and its constants, under the pretext of ending the conflict, and establishing an ill-defined and distorted Palestinian state that does not possess any qualities of a state or sovereignty.

The Arabs do not need a framework agreement to act as the basis of negotiations in the future, as there are countless frameworks and references; there are UN resolutions, the Oslo Accords, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet roadmap, who wants more frameworks? Who will guarantee the success of the negotiations this time? Weren’t the United States and the Arab world the guarantors of the Oslo Accords, none of which has been implemented since it was signed 20 years ago?

The Jewishness of the Israeli state is the greatest and clearest step towards localisation and this explains the insistence on it and the persistence on its recognition. It also explains the exploitation of the financial crises suffered by the Jordanian and the Palestinian sides, as well as adopting the culture of “idleness”, suspension and the lack of effective political action, as well as the preoccupation with other issues and neglecting the central Arab cause.

By the culture of “idleness”, I mean the culture of waiting for a pay cheque at the end of the month from donor countries, led by America, which restricts millions of Jordanians and Palestinians and shuts their mouths from speaking out against any new threat that may arise aiming to liquidate the central Arab cause.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.