Possible rapprochement between Jordan and the Israeli occupation looms on the horizon, after lean years at the level of bilateral relations, prompted by the violations of “Tel Aviv” and its encroachment on the Kingdom’s role towards the sanctities of Palestine, and a clear disregard for Oman’s role in its guardianship.

After US President Joe Biden left the region, following his first visit to it, last July, and confirming his position in support of the two-state solution between the Palestinians and Israelis, despite considering it a “very far goal now”, King Abdullah II met with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid in the capital, Amman. .

A meeting that came a few days after the king’s meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, which observers see as a prelude to resolving relations between the two countries, and a clear indication of the harmony of positions, albeit in relative terms, towards Biden’s statements, which means in the end the commitment of the two parties (Jordanian and Israeli) to the content of what was stated They are two major and essential allies of Washington in the region.

The possibility of a return of warmth to the atmosphere of relations reinforces the two sides’ conviction of the necessity of calm, in light of the high frequency of regional and global crises, which require all parties to exercise more restraint, lest they fall into quarrels in which the winner is the inevitably loser.

Recently, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s talk about accelerating the implementation of a joint industrial zone project with Jordan, and the subsequent comment by the Kingdom that the idea dates back to 1998, leaves no room for doubt that relations are moving towards strengthening, in search of opportunities to advance their economies, in The repercussions of the global crises.

** American trends

Walid Al-Awaimer, professor of political science at Mutah University, considered that “there is no doubt that King Abdullah II’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Lapid represents the beginning of a real breakthrough in the relations of the two countries, which have been clearly affected and declined during the last period.”

He added, “Therefore, more political, security and economic coordination between Amman and Tel Aviv will be built on this meeting, especially as the United States seeks to rearrange the issues of the Arab region in the next stage, to confront the Iranian expansion and threat to a number of Arab countries, especially the Arab Gulf states.”

And he added, “Since Jordan and Israel are major allies of the United States, the sponsor of the process of change in the region, the relationship between Amman and Tel Aviv must be very strong so that they can harmonize and deal positively with American trends.”

He continued, “It is in Jordan’s interest, I think, to develop its relationship positively with Israel, in the service of the Palestinian cause, because since the signing of the Wadi Araba agreement in 1994, Jordan has been the lung and the real supporter of the two-state solution and various other Palestinian issues through diplomatic pressure on Israel.”

** Maneuvers will not develop relations

Assem Burqan, Head of the Department of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the “Hashemite University”, stated that “the issue is not easy in a way that pushes the United States to put pressure on Israel, leading to what Washington calls for a two-state solution.”

He continued, “We know that if the United States wanted this solution, it would have implemented it years ago, not now, and all it is doing are mere maneuvers that will not lead to an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

He added, “We Arabs are searching and gasping for American statements, which are a waste of time, and there is no indication on the horizon that Israel will agree to the two-state solution, because there is nothing to force it to do so.”

The spokesman pointed out that “the Jordanian position towards Israel is based on the latter’s position on the Palestinian issue, and it has been clear for decades that the Kingdom’s position on Israel depends on Tel Aviv’s handling of the Palestinian side’s requirements.”

The Jordanian academic ruled out any rapprochement between the Kingdom and “Israel,” describing what is happening as “mere maneuvers that will not lead to the development of relations.”

** Projects that consolidate interests

Amer al-Sabayleh, writer and political analyst, did not rule out the impact of the American role in moving the stalemate between Jordan and Israel.

He explained, “Moving the Jordanian relationship with Israel is linked to the Biden administration’s desire for the kingdom to adopt a policy of openness toward Israel, especially since the Jordanian pretext that has persisted over the past years, which is the presence of Benjamin Netanyahu, has ended.”

Relations between Jordan and “Israel” witnessed a clear coldness during the Netanyahu era (2009-2021), to the extent that the King described them during a dialogue session in the United States, in September 2019, as “at their worst.”

Al-Sabayleh added: “Therefore, an opportunity was formed to advance the Jordanian-Israeli relationship at this stage, which appeared for the first time at Jordan’s insistence in the official announcement of the multiple visits of Israeli officials to the Kingdom.”

He added: “If this relationship can last with the absence of a Jordanian ability to influence the Israeli right on the one hand, or to deal with the outcomes of the upcoming elections, which may bring a different Israeli political vision that reduces the importance of the relationship with Jordan.”

He stressed that “the US administration seeks to expedite the completion of joint projects of an economic and logistical nature between the two countries, so that they remain as common interests that prevent a bad relationship in the event that the Israeli political leaders change.”

** The future of the Jordanian role in Jerusalem

Hassan Al-Daaja, Professor of Strategic Studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University, addressed Jordan’s future towards Jerusalem and Islamic sanctities, under Jordanian guardianship, considering that “any development in relations between Amman and Tel Aviv must take into account this role.”

He attributed this to several dimensions, namely, the “historical religious-political dimension of the Hashemite family, and the religious symbolism of Al-Aqsa Mosque, as the journey of the Holy Prophet, and the first of the two Qiblahs.”

According to the spokesman, the second dimension is manifested in that “Jerusalem has been under Jordanian sovereignty since its occupation in 1967, and international law considers that sovereignty is Jordanian, but it is suspended due to the occupation, and obliges the occupier not to change the legal, political and religious situation.”

He added, “Relying on the peace agreement signed between Jordan and Israel in 1994, the Hashemite custodianship over the Islamic and Christian holy places was established,” and this is the third dimension, according to Al-Da`jah.

The Jordanian academic stressed, “Any potential and expected rapprochement between Jordan and Israel must take guardianship into account and not infringe on the Kingdom’s role.

He concluded: “All of this and the possibility of any approach depends on the results of the upcoming Israeli elections, and which party will take over the reins of government in the Israeli entity.”

Jordan retained its right to supervise religious affairs in Jerusalem under the Wadi Araba peace agreement, which it signed with Israel in 1994.

In March 2013, the king and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed an agreement giving the kingdom the right to “guardianship and defense of Jerusalem and the holy sites” in Palestine.

Anatolia