Jordan - Tribal Politics
Urban elites and tribal notables alike recognized that the current fractured, incoherent political discourse prevents progress on the issues that matter. Many worry about the lack of a political counterweight to the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the only grouping in Jordan worthy of the term "political party," but which has itself been reduced to a mere six seats (from seventeen) in the parliament. The 20 November 2007 parliamentary elections in Jordan served as a backdrop for broad expressions of discontent with the current structure of Jordan's political system. While few candidates, voters, or media outlets talked about it openly, there was an undercurrent of frustration.
Jordanians cite many causes for concern regarding the mechanisms of politics in the country: the dominance of tribes in selecting Jordan's political leadership, the ideological threat of the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the corruption and poor services offered up by an inefficient and bloated bureaucracy, and a feeling that there is a lack of leadership and direction from the established political elite. The general sense among many is that there is a void at the center of Jordanian political life that the monarchy cannot and should not fill.
The brahmin of Jordan's wealthier areas cite tribalism as the primary factor that keeps Jordan down. Most candidates are running on their personal agenda. They have no sense of what the country needs. The elite see tribal politics as the means by which largely uneducated politicians manipulate their largely uneducated supporters into maintaining their lifestyle of prestige, connections, and corruption. Once the political strength of the tribes is broken or diluted, the Amman elite argue, the country can go forward with true political reform based on rational principals.
Tribal politicians frequently state that they are tired of dealing with constituents who constantly badger them with requests for services, leaving them little to no time to deal with the pressing policy issues of the day. The people are trapped in this system of wasta ('connections'). Even parliament is part of it now. The tribal system is a glass ceiling for candidates who want to deal with issues and who long for equality under the law. Many tribal politicians see themselves as caught in a trap of their own making. Perhaps they would rather run issue-based campaigns that expand beyond the direct needs of their constituents, but more than one has articulated the view that, in order to be elected, they have to "play the game" and cater to the service-based expectations of the tribes that support them.
King Abdullah has certainly expressed his frustration with tribal dominance and the lack of coherent political parties in Jordan. During his opening address to the new parliament in 2007, the King said that "public service allows no room for interests that are related to narrow tribal affiliation." During the election campaign, in an interview with the semi-official Petra News Agency on 06 November 2007, the King said: "I had hoped that 2007 would be a year of political parties with realistic and clear programs, but we still need more time and effort to achieve that objective." In a November 18 interview with Germany's Der Spiegel, the King stated that "we need fewer, but broader parties - ideally two, three, or four - representing the left and the right wing and the political center."
In a political system dominated by tribal blocs and concerned mostly with narrow local interests, the "independent" politicians remained the majority in Jordan's parliament are doomed to irrelevance in the eyes of many of their supporters. Rather than forming an organized alternative to the IAF, it was thought that they would remain content to merely block its political agenda (perhaps in addition to obstructing reform efforts of the government). Candidates and voters express their hunger for a political formation that can express a moderate, pro-government stance and stand as a bulwark against the IAF.
The elephant in the room when discussing Jordanian politics, of course, is Palestinian identity. In the four decades since Black September, Palestinians have, by and large, found themselves ever more isolated politically as the regime has ensured security and stability by relying on East Banker control of critical institutions. Jordan's tribe-centered political system and under-representation of Palestinians in the electoral system help guarantee that the levers of governmental power - the security forces, the bureaucracy - remain in East Banker hands.
In doing so the regime is hedging against the perceived ambivalence of Palestinian-origin Jordanians towards the state, while waiting for a two-state solution which should, at least in theory, put an end to dual loyalties (by allowing partisans of Palestine to return there while those truly loyal to Jordan remain in their adopted country). Thus, while Jordanians of Palestinian origin may long for an alternative that will address their place in Jordanian society, give them a credible voice, and ensure access to the services that the government provides, they are generally relegated to the sidelines of Jordanian politics.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
