Jordanian option
This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.The Jordanian option refers to a range of proposals and strategies aimed at resolving the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through the involvement of neighboring Jordan.
Although support for the confederation model was expressed by figures such as Shimon Peres and Yasser Arafat in the subsequent decade, Jordanian officials have since opposed this option and endorsed the two-state solution instead.
"[5][4] This reflected the Hashemite strategy to integrate Palestinians into Jordanian society and to present the populations on both sides of the Jordan River as a single, unified group.
'[10] He secured a mandate from the Arab League during the Khartoum Summit to pursue its recovery, believing that failure to do so within one or two years could threaten his position due to rising Israeli influence and the growing detachment of the territory from Jordan.
[10] To secure West Bank loyalty, Jordan provided salaries to numerous employees and financial support to key figures, as well as funded various institutions, including municipalities, which received about 25% of their budgets from Amman.
[16] The plan called for establishing a "United Arab Kingdom" with two federal provinces—one in Transjordan and the other in the West Bank—while military and foreign affairs would be managed by a central government in Amman.
[11] Between March 1972 and September 1973, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir held six secret meetings with King Hussein of Jordan to discuss potential peace agreements and political arrangements.
Hussein resisted proposals that deviated from this vision, including a defense pact with Israel, and the implementation of the Allon Plan, which suggested territorial adjustments.
[19] In 1985, Hussein of Jordan and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat formalized a joint position advocating for a confederation, dependent on Israel's withdrawal from occupied territories, which would allow Palestinians to exercise their right of self-determination.
[21] While the Jordan–PLO agreement raised concerns within the Reagan administration, Jordan later clarified that the confederation would function more like a federation, with Amman controlling foreign affairs and defense.
It stipulated that the conference should not impose solutions or veto agreements and proposed direct negotiations through bilateral committees, with a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation addressing Palestinian issues.
[27] The early 1990s brought negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, resulting in the Oslo Accords peace talks and the establishment of Palestinian Authority control over parts of the West Bank, which initially received widespread support from Israelis.
Instead, he "remained faithful to the idea of a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation," envisioning it as part of a three-way economic partnership involving Israel, a vision he pursued shortly after the Oslo Accords.
[28] Peres believed Jordan's stability and effective governance would provide a solid foundation for any agreement, in contrast to the economic and administrative challenges he anticipated for an independent Palestinian state.
He proposed an economic structure akin to Benelux, involving Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, and possibly Egypt, and suggested open borders for better regional cooperation.
Peres sought to alleviate these concerns by emphasizing Jordan's central role in any regional agreement and securing its status in Jerusalem while inviting Jordanian leaders for reassurance.
"[29] Ben Ami notes that while King Abdullah has expressed frustration with discussions about a confederation, he has consistently left the possibility open for such an arrangement once a Palestinian state is established, a sequences that reflects the consensus among the idea's supporters in Jordan.
Prince Hassan bin Talal, Hussein's brother, suggested that the West Bank was historically part of Jordan and hinting at potential re-unification, although his remarks are not officially endorsed by the Jordanian government and remain controversial.
In the late 2000s, Giora Eiland, who served as Israel's national security adviser under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, authored several articles advocating for a revival of "the Jordanian confederation option of years past.
[35] In a 2021 opinion article for The New York Times, Israeli author Shmuel Rosner argued that while a Palestinian-Jordanian confederation is currently considered unviable—due to Jordan's rejection, Palestinian aspirations for statehood, and international dismissal of the idea as a right-wing ploy—the ongoing lack of progress suggest that this concept may be as feasible as other proposed solutions, and it remains a durable option.
[32] Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Israeli diplomat and historian Shlomo Ben-Ami suggested that, given the failure of other solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, revisiting the Jordanian option could be worthwhile.
Ismaik highlights the historical precedent of Jordan's 1950 annexation of the West Bank, contrasts it with the failed solutions, violence and consistent unrest in recent decades, and asserts that such unification could benefit all parties by enhancing regional stability and economic growth.
[36] In 2022, American political scientist Alon Ben-Meir argued that current realities, such as the intermingling of populations and the status of Jerusalem, render a traditional two-state solution increasingly unfeasible.
"[37] In 2022, Saudi analyst Ali Shihabi published an article in Al Arabiya, in which he argued that the only realistic solution to the Palestinian issue is the expansion of Jordan to include territories from the West Bank and Gaza, forming "The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine."
Shihabi suggested that Palestinians should formally relinquish their claims to full control over Jerusalem, recognizing that dislodging Israel from the city is unrealistic, and instead focus on building a stable, economically viable state.
