compass – monitor

Journalist Mahmoud Al-Rimawi referred to the case of Representative Imad Al-Odan and his “mysterious” arrest by the Israeli occupation authorities in an article published today on the Al-Araby Al-Jadeed website.

Al-Rimawi said, “The Israeli occupation forces arrested the Jordanian MP, Imad Al-Adwan, at the King Hussein crossing, and he was coming from Jordan in his private car. While a picture of some of the allegedly confiscated weapons was published, no picture or snapshot of the alleged large amount of gold was published.

The writer added, “With the first hours of broadcasting the news last Monday, it came to mind that the aggression had crossed the Sheikh Hussein Bridge (north), which is the Jordanian border point towards the Hebrew state, where it was stopped there, until it became clear that it was heading to the occupied West Bank via the King Hussein Bridge.” (Allenby) Not the first border point of the Jewish state. The source of the ambiguity lies in the fact that the Israeli account is, to date, the only account of the incident, bearing in mind that the security accounts of the occupying state often raise doubts about its veracity or accuracy.

Also read: Attorney Adwan confirms that the occupation did not file official indictments against him

The article stated that official Jordan seemed surprised by what happened, and official spokesmen for the Jordanian Foreign Ministry announced that the incident was closely followed up with the Israeli authorities. While the Jordanian ambassador in Tel Aviv visited the arrested deputy, and it was reported that he had not been harmed during his arrest and detention, at a time when deputies questioned the incident, and called for the speed of official action to release the deputy aggression, and his return to his country, and it was recalled that a guard in the Israeli embassy killed two citizens Jordanians in July 2017. However, the murderer was then allowed to leave Jordanian territory, accompanied by members of the embassy, ​​on the day of the double crime.

Al-Rimawi stressed that despite the ambiguity that still surrounds the “unprecedented” incident, this incident came in an atmosphere of turmoil in the Jordanian-Israeli relationship against the backdrop of the systematic and permanent Israeli violations of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem (and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre), and the direct and arrogance of these violations of the Jordanian tutelage. On the Islamic and Christian sanctities, in addition to the other religious and political dimensions of these grave encroachments, which are officially sanctioned by the occupation forces. These violations escalated during the month of Ramadan, and the occupation authorities sought to prevent i’tikaaf at Al-Aqsa in preparation for allocating times for Muslims to worship, and other times for Jews to allow Muslims to worship the place of worship, in what is known as the temporal and spatial division, a precedent that was applied in the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron. The matter does not stop at these encroachments, as Israeli parliamentary and ministerial voices are rising that reveal explicit Israeli ambitions in Jordan, such as those expressed by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich in Paris last month (March). Accordingly, and by virtue of the current circumstance, the political connotations prevail over this ambiguous incident, and the occupying power will invest this incident, in an attempt to extract some price from Jordan in this circumstance, in return for turning this page, as well as investing it in an attempt to cover up the violations in Jerusalem and elsewhere and divert attention from them.

In the meantime, the Jordanians are looking forward to clearing up the ambiguity on this issue “so that something can be built on what is required,” and to stand firm in the face of the expected Israeli attempts at political blackmail, with the importance of pointing out two important issues related to this incident: The first is that the presence of Israeli forces at the border point It is the existence of a fait accompli by virtue of the occupation that has existed since 1967, and that dealing with the Israeli authorities regarding this incident falls within the scope of an urgent measure, and does not involve recognition of the occupying power, or confer legitimacy on it. The Jordanian representative was heading to the occupied Palestinian territories, not to the Hebrew state. It was noted that the occupying power took advantage of the incident to depict the aggression as crossing an Israeli border point, and not a point controlled by the Israeli forces by virtue of the dominance of the military reality.

The second issue is related to the first, that he was and still is on the Palestinian side, by virtue of his having political jurisdiction over the occupied territories, not to distance himself from being preoccupied with this incident and following it up, as happened since the first days of the incident, as Representative Adwan was in the process of entering the West Bank, and it is reported that this visit It was not the first to the occupied territories, while the Adwan tribe, to which it belongs, has close social ties with Palestinian society, especially in the Jordan Valley and the city of Jericho on the West Bank of the Jordan River, by virtue of the tribe’s spread along the eastern bank of the river. The Palestinian Authority’s interest in this incident, if it had occurred, would have led to shedding light on the political reality in the occupied territories, including the illegal presence denied by international law of the Israeli border point on the western side of the Jordan River. It is a mistake here to invoke the power of the occupation reality and the full military control in that region, as this anomalous reality, which has long been in place and must be removed, must be shed light, and not turned a blind eye or be silent about it or accept the fait accompli, and leave it perpetuated in the minds and eyes, while broadcasting a message Its content is that if the occupation claims to violate its security and bypass travel procedures to come to the West Bank, then the job of the occupation itself is concentrated in tampering with the security of an entire people and seizing its land, capabilities, and land, air and sea borders. The authority was and is still able to express its reservations about the Israeli procedures and investigations with the deputy Adwan, because it was not a party to this follow-up.

It remains here that the relationship with the Hebrew state remains governed by fundamental political considerations, and by the decisions of international legitimacy, and is not dependent on transient “security” incidents and circumstances, and that the statute of limitations does not change anything in this matter.

The New Arab