Sean,
Jordan is a semi-absolute monarchy but that in and of itself does not make it illegitimate; if there is the will of the people behind the arrangement - and I do promise you, there is. The King is loved, the only fly in the ointment is the Queen who is not so popular being a Palestinian, despite her grace, beauty and charisma.
Hi Frothy!
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. As a political economist who specializes in the ME, I can tell you that he is far from loved by many segments of society, and the institution does lack legitimacy with those who feel that they are disenfranchised. And no kind of absolute government good, "enlightened" or sustainable.
The Queen isn't popular with the Palestinians either, and neither his her husband for his and his father's policies. Many of them feel disenfranchised. She isn't popular with the Bedouin natives becaus she gets too involved in politics, and even tried her hand at promulgating laws.
There may be 'sections' of Jordan who don't like the RF but those sections are small. We were on and also off the tourist trail, and we talked to many, and love of the RF is very great. they might be the last enlightened despots, if you like, we will see in the modern world - good kings ruling with the consent of their people.
This is where we disagree. It is not a small segment of society. Abdullah is far less "loved" than his father ever was, and before the Iraq war there was real fear of the Jordanian monarchy falling. The Pentagon was even hedging bets on it, and the King was being protected by the Americans with a plane waiting to whisk him and his family out if the need should have arisen. Hardly necessary if his regime had overwhelming legitimacy.
the royal women are at the forefront of the effort to promote and increase the rights of women and children in Jordan. They are doing everything they can, are as pluralist as you could wish for, and peacemakers by nature.
And here, too, we disagree. I'm not going to get into great detail on this here because this isn't the place to do so, however, I will state that it is one thing to talk about women's rights and peace, but quite another to take real substantive action. Rania talks about ending honour killings, but her husband won't even make them illegal in fear of alienating his rural supporters. Religious leaders and 'fundamentalist leaders' have influence with these people, but they are not going to take-up the cause on behalf of the King and Queen because the King's regime regularly persecutes them. The King has done little of substance to promote real peace in the region. Just go to the West Bank and ask the Palestinians. Sure peace was made in Israel, but rather than being "natural born peacemakers" (have you forgotten the wars of 40s, 50s, 60s, and the abuses of the 70s?), it was done for American $$ and economic reason (nothing wrong with that, but lets call a spade a spade). They also benefited hugely by the 2003 war, which alienated a lot of the Arab populace.
You talk about 'consent of the people', but this is a regime which panders to vested interests, is internationally known as corrupt (particulary by international lenders), and has little respect for human rights. Again, I would refer you to the plethora of human rights indexes (and if you want we can continue this discussion via PM).
Eventually they want a true democracy in Jordan and a constitutional only monarchy but that time has not yet come. Despite efforts by the royals, for example, rural Jordanians still practise 'honor killing' - they arre trying to bring in reform as fast as possible without the kind of revolt that attended the Shah's disastrous banning of the hijab (veil).
Jordan isn't Iran of decades ago. And honour killings aren't limited to rural areas. You say that they want a true democracy eventually, but that they aren't ready yet. This is what the King oft states to defend his regime and its policies. I think it is insulting to Jordanians, personally. He not so long ago basically stated that there wasn't anyone capable of democratically leading Jordan, however, in a country with its population and educated class, one finds that quite hard to swallow. Saudi uses the "We're not ready" and "social fabric" arguments quite often, too. It's a pattern with these kinds of regimes.
HRH Prince Zeid (one example) is Jordan's Ambassador to the UN and he has been instrumental in the foundation of the International Criminal Court (which I don't support, but this ain't a politics forum!). I offer it however as an example of Jordanian royal 'enlightenment' and Western values.
[/QUOTE] The Hashemites are known for their nepotism -- appointing loyalists and family members to key positions. This has to stop. And Zeid, by the way, is on the exrtreme fringes of the RF (he comes from the Iraqi branch). In any case, the court was neither his idea, nor does his involvement with it negate the ills of his cousin's regime. Moreover, Western values are not always enlightened, nor are they conducive to democracy in the non-Western world because they are not in sync with their culural and historical realities. They can often alienate large segments of the population, which is somehing we've seen in many countries.
Anyway, pm me if you want to discuss further. I know the JRF has its supportes here, and I've already ruffled a few feathers!
