SPY EYES

Jordan has been rocked by ongoing, although relatively small, protests in comparison to its neighbors, for nearly 18 months. Driven primarily by the country’s struggling economy and a lack of substantive political reforms, the protests have differed from other Arab Spring protests in that they have generally avoided calling for the removal of the leadership.

Jordan has been among the most pro-Western Arab states and King Abdullah II, who assumed power in 1999, has maintained a close relationship with the United States. This is in part because of King Abdullah’s close ties with the United States and United Kingdom, where he was educated.

The king, who speaks English better than Arabic, has worked to liberalize Jordan’s economy, which has made it among the most competitive in the Middle East. Jordan has more free trade agreements (FTA) than any other Arab state, and King Abdullah pushed for the FTA with the United States in 2000, the third FTA for the United States at the time and its first with an Arab country.

He also maintained the peace treaty with Israel that was signed by his father in 1994, despite the opposition of the country’s Muslim Brotherhood and Jordan’s large Palestinian population. This commitment has helped King Abdullah ensure that Jordan continues to receive a large chunk of foreign aid from the United States, which has helped offset the major obstacles posed to the country’s economy due to a lack of substantial natural resources.

Jordan’s reliance on oil and natural gas imports from Egypt and water from Israel makes the country very susceptible to regional pressures. Recent pipeline attacks in Egypt over the past year have strained Jordan’s finances as the country was forced to import oil and gas at more expensive rates from other countries to compensate.

In addition, Jordan’s high unemployment rate (12.3 percent officially, around 30 percent unofficially, according to the CIA World Factbook) had been a catalyst of protests over the past 18 months. This chronic unemployment fuels the domestic tensions that prompted Abdullah to pass two economic relief packages over the past year to try to ease the situation.

Facing continued protests, Jordan has also pursued modest reforms and avoided cracking down on protesters, which has had the effect of limiting the demonstrations. King Abdullah also changed a third of Jordan’s 60-year-old constitution and expanded the parliament’s role in selecting the cabinet.

However, the country has drawn criticism over its implementation of a new election law passed in mid-June. The second new election law in as many months, it expands Jordan’s House of Representatives from 120 to 140 and makes political parties eligible to contest a few more seats.

Previously political parties were only able to compete for 12 seats out of the whole House of Representatives, with the remainder reserved for independent candidates. Although the new law permits political parties to compete for 17 seats out of 140, King Abdullah has suggested increasing the number of available seats to 27.

However, the rising power of the Muslim Brotherhood in the aftermath of the Arab Spring has altered the political dynamics of the region. The king made a rare appeal to the Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing, the Islamic Action Front, on Jordan TV on July 1, urging them to “take part in this reform process and participate in the legislative elections.”

The Muslim Brotherhood plays a key role in politics in Jordan, as it is one of the few countries in which the organization has not been suppressed, or outright banned. It has typically dominated the seats that are available to be contested by parties when it decides to take part in elections.

Analysis

King Abdullah is reaching out to the Muslim Brotherhood of Jordan to avert a boycott of elections, which would weaken his reform agenda. However, these reforms appear to be primarily cosmetic and are unlikely to placate opposition groups demanding a bigger share of political power in the kingdom.

Although Jordan’s protest movement has never reached the level of others in the Middle East, it remains a persistent thorn in the side of the regime. It has constrained the actions of the king and the government, which has been changed four times since the protests began in January 2011.

In addition, the ammunition for the protests remains just as potent as it was last year.Political instability, escalating unemployment, and limited resources are among the most persistent factors hurting Jordan’s economy. This slow pace of reforms, economic slowdown, and continued regional tensions are fueling the domestic uncertainty that is likely behind the king’s efforts to seek out the Muslim Brotherhood and ensure its cooperation.

These domestic tensions have only heightened since the election in Egypt of Mohammed Morsi, as his victory emboldened Islamists in Jordan. As power shifts in the region, King Abdullah will likely face pressure to further appease the Muslim Brotherhood to maintain stability in the country. However, the king’s outreach efforts will likely bear their own consequences. Among them could be a strained relationship with the United States or Israel. In early May, thousands of protestors —led by the Muslim Brotherhood and some Islamist youth groups —demonstrated to demand an end to the Israel-Jordan peace treaty. The same protestors burned U.S. and Israeli flags and protested the recent appointment of Fayez Tarawneh as Jordan’s new prime minister.

The Muslim Brotherhood appears likely to make it difficult for the new government under Tarawneh to operate as well. The organization has labeled his new government “anti-reformist” and has condemned Tarawneh for his role in the negotiation of the 1994 peace treaty.

Nevertheless, the king appointed Tarawneh in order to focus on revising the election law after the previous prime minister drew criticism for the heavily watered-down reforms. Yet it remains uncertain whether any of the reforms proposed could meet the extensive demands of the Muslim Brotherhood, which wants an opportunity to capture as many seats as possible.

Regardless of changes in the election law, if the Muslim Brotherhood decides to participate in the upcoming elections it would likely win a substantial number of seats. However, it would be unlikely to capture a majority as the new election law currently enables loyalist supporters the best opportunity for success.

However, if the Muslim Brotherhood refuses to take part in elections, it would be a huge blow to King Abdullah, whose reform agenda was intended to avert wide-scale protests and unrest that threaten the regime. It is likely that in either scenario the Islamists will demand additional concessions from the government if they are to take part in and legitimize the elections.

Conclusion

King Abdullah is seeking to reach out to the Muslim Brotherhood in order to ensure that his reform agenda is seen as a success. However, as Jordan’s Islamists have been emboldened by the success of their allies in Egypt and around the region, the king will likely have to make continued concessions so the Muslim Brotherhood does not boycott upcoming elections.

LIGNET