Political and Regional Sketches from the U.S. Embassy

The latest group of cables from U.S. embassies in Amman published on the WikiLeaks website, many of them disquieting, demonstrates and reflects the actual spying that the U.S. embassy in Jordan conducted about political developments and the legislative background of controversy concerning the identity in Jordan.

Eight cables have now been published out of 4,300 cables sent from the American embassy in Amman likely to be revealed during the coming weeks and months. It could be said that five of these cables are on the subject of Jordanian identity.

Many instances show the disturbance caused by the cables describing the ministers in the government of Marouf Bakhit in 2007. For example, one cable describes a Minister of Finance as “East Jordanian” or “Palestinian” before discussing his academic and practical experiences. People sometimes derive opinions from the evaluation of the diplomats of this minister, either positively or negatively. Even if it makes sense for diplomatic dispatches to profile ministers, it does not make sense to identify their character this way, measuring them even before the first face-to-face encounter.

In a country trying hard to promote frameworks of citizenship and the rule of law, we find that it is not reasonable to send out diplomatic dispatches skewering officials and regional political developments. For the U.S., their existence is the only element to understanding how to manage political developments in Jordan. Such states are built on the basis of equality under the law and on democracy and ethnic and racial diversity, supporting the true nature of Jordan instead of promoting the stereotype of regional identity.

The blame lies with the “consultants,” whether official or volunteer, that offer information to the American embassy. One of these is a famous and controversial writer who has previously written articles for Israeli newspapers describing Jordan as practicing “apartheid.” Another is a friend of a former U.S. ambassador, who is “renowned” among diplomats for the slogans and catchphrases in the arbitrary regional competitions — the items published by WikiLeaks before these last days — that witnessed the unfortunate events that have been amplified by these unofficial statements. And such as these are the ones who pander to approach the U.S. Embassy for the classification of people according to regional identity. The political elites in Jordan are responsible for promoting the concepts of citizenship without undermining it in this way.

We cannot ignore the fact that there is political uncertainty in the issues of identity and the concept of citizenship, which are linked mainly to progress toward a sustainable solution to the Palestinian issue to ensure the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, which represents a strategic interest to Jordan. The United States seeks to play the role of “honest broker “in the peace negotiations, strengthening policy support for the Jordanian efforts to achieve the two-state solution. Instead, they have stirred up regional classifications within Jordanian society. Such an approach could not be seen as merely “a bad evaluation and assessment” of American diplomats and their close associates from some of the Jordanians who provide advice to the embassy, but it may amplify the limited number of cases related to the ambiguity of identity. If these cases are moved to a higher political level, they may serve as targets of Israeli strategy in the liquidation of the Palestinian cause.