December 03, 2005
Amman, Jordan - 12/2/05: Afterburn - the Month in Review
filed under: DespatchesA continuing series of periodic Procrastinet Despatches from Amman, Jordan. By Nicholas Seeley.
Ages ago, I promised you all further updates on the bombings, and I haven’t really delivered. In my defense, there hasn’t been much to deliver. Or maybe there’s been a lot, I don’t know.In the days after the bombing, Jordan saw a sudden eruption of nationalism, strangely reminiscent of the United States in September, 2001. The King’s face, of course, was already a commonplace, as it is in most monarchies, but suddenly, the flag was everywhere. People had five or six of them on their cars – often obscuring windows, but then again, no one watches the road here anyway; huge flags appeared on the fronts of offices and in shop windows, and giant posters of this rather scary national socialist looking cartoon were everywhere.
And, like September in New York, it was at once reassuring and unsettling. People rallying together is good, but nationalism is like sugar: a little more than a little is a lot too much. One of my friends here described it as the hollow, bleating patriotism of people with no actual power to redress their wrongs. He’s a bit of a psycho, but hey, when the shoe fits.
Just after the attacks, there was a lot of chatter from people who feared a backlash against Iraqis in Jordan, but I don’t think it’s happened. Or rather, prejudice against Iraqis was already there, (based on them pouring money into the economy and raising prices way over the heads of most Jordanians) so a little bit of terrorism hasn’t made it much worse.
Half the government got thrown out, which probably didn’t have anything to do with the bombings – the King throws out the government here about four times a year, and there were rumors a new one was coming long before Nov. 9. What almost certainly IS because of the attacks was the shift of Marouf Al Bakhit, a career general and former ambassador to Israel, from the head of the secret police to the Prime Ministry.
Bakhit took over the mukhabarat on Nov. 14, the same time everyone else got thrown out, replacing longtime Blofeld Sami Khair. But then, a few days later, the King designated him PM (leaving a certain amount of uncertainty in my mind about who is now actually running the secret police. In theory there’s an interim head, but I have frightening visions of the stormtroopers being commanded out of the PM’s office).Anyway, all this MIGHT have a serious impact on how Jordan reacts to these attacks. In a nutshell: The government here has been using reform and democratization as their mantra for years; pretty much since Hussein died in 1999. However, there has been about zero actual reform: the press is still not free, the King is never openly criticized, the only political parties are the mosques because they’re the one thing the government can’t shut down, union-busting is still a preferred Sunday pastime, the economic boom from the Iraq war remains unregulated and there is no trickle down of benefits to the poorest sectors of society, etc. The massive National Agenda, supposedly the blueprint for reform, has been shuttled back and forth interminably among the desk jockeys, and gotten nowhere, and it doesn’t have much popular legitimacy anyway (the best analyses of all this crap are probably on Abu Aardvark and Khalaf’s blog).
So, basically, a lot of people fear that a military PM means that the “reform” craze is now officially over, and total autocracy is the new black. Others say that that doesn’t mean a damn thing, since reform never happened anyway. Then there are others who say Bakhit is actually a wicked sensitive chap, and might just have the balls to do what the liberals want, and try to use economic and political reform to fight terror by giving people jobs, free speech and a little hope, rather than just repressing them.
I find this unlikely, less because I doubt Bakhit’s credentials than because it has never happened ever in the entire history of the human race.
End the world’s problems by giving everyone a voice and a chance for a decent life? Dream on folks, that only happens in Beatles movies. A return to fascism also seems unlikely and unpopular, but I think there’s plenty of status quo in Aisle 6.
At the moment, all we see actually happening here are some new security measures, but they look pretty cosmetic to me – hey, call me a pessimist. There are metal detectors and body searches at hotels and restaurants now, but word on the street is you can just walk around them if you look rich and pissed off. All the streets around hotels are closed for driving or parking, which I suppose is fine, but – why just hotels? They’ll only blow up something else.
The big worry seems to be just how vulnerable Jordan’s economy is. Tourism, and foreign aid organizations that do their business here because they think Amman is safe, together make up a FRIGGIN’ HUGE chunk of the GNP. Trade, another big slice (10%) is already taking a hit because Iraq is such a mess. So, if Amman stops being “safe,” the economic consequences of losing the tourists and the UN are – potentially - disastrous. Worst case scenario is that Zarqawi attacks again and gets what he wants, namely, the economic bubble bursts badly enough to destabilize the entire country, giving him and his mafia room to muscle in and make big with the killing.
Now, I should say, I think this is a very, very unlikely scenario, for a couple reasons: 1) the spy guys here are still pretty tough; so, knock wood, the chances of Zarqawi getting lucky again in the near future are quite low, 2) one terrorist attack in Jordan immediately caused a lot of the country to rally around the King, the government and each other, and against Iraqis. Even if Zarqawi did manage to pull off another, and did manage to seriously hurt the tourism industry, the backlash against him and for the government that would induce seems likely to provide a certain counter-force to “destabilization” in the short run, that would probably help Hashemites maintain order, and keep AQ the fuck out of our backyard.
So, I’m not an analyst, but that’s what I’m hearing. The bottom line: Security’s nice, but “impregnable” sounds a bit too much like “unsinkable” (cue Celine Dion). We’re all gonna get hit again sooner or later, the big question for Jordan is when and how hard. The longer the security apparatus holds off another attack, the smaller the potential impact on the economy gets. Best-case scenarios never happen, but then, neither do worst-case ones. Most likely, we’ll all just muddle through as things get increasingly dangerous and unpleasant, until this whole “clash of cultures” issue gets eclipsed by something more important – like us all dying of dehydration when the water runs out, 10 years from now.
So, from Jordan, salaam aleikoom, and have a nice day.
- Nicholas Seeley, 12/2/05
EDITOR'S NOTE:
Comments have been closed on this post because it has clearly landed on a comment spam list somewhere, and is getting spammed repeatedly. If anyone cares to continue the discussion, please email me via the mail link on the right and I will post your comment.
Posted by rjt at December 3, 2005 12:23 PM' The bottom line: Security’s nice, but “impregnable” sounds a bit too much like “unsinkable”'
so not true. jordan regime is repressive but not smart about security. all this perception about jordan being an island of stability is hot air. fact is no one cares about jordan because of a lack of stategic significance. jordan has no significant oil reservs, no major water reservs, geographic significance, ... Jordan is an arid desert and a vast refugee camp for palestinains and iraqis. but ever since we started pissing off the iraqis by training pro-US hit squads and doing America's dirty work such as torturing iraqis in Jordan, the iraqis took note and their assasins took the lives of jordanian innocents, who paid the price of Jordan being exploited by the US. only way to return to safety and stabilty in Jordan is to keep the US at arm's lenght. that's what EU leaders are doing and that's what Jordan should do. The US is bad news.
Posted by: Huda at December 4, 2005 07:45 AMYour text, beginning with, " We’re all gonna get hit again sooner or later, the big question for Jordan is when and how hard", sounds much like the post-9/11 attitude here in the US. Perhaps Jordan, too, will decide it's better to face the lion at it's den, rather than at home. The only true way of being "safe" is to take the bastards out.
Posted by: Bluebook at December 4, 2005 10:48 AMHuda, thanks for the feedback! You bring up an excellent point about Jordan's co-operation with the U.S. making enemies, and it's lack of strategic significance meaning no one will defend it. I disagree a little bit with your analysis of the problem, though - I don't think Jordan has anything to gain from distancing itself from the US at this point (even if the US would LET it distance itself!). The damage has been done, in terms of Jordan being seen as western, and pro-US. And there's no amount of appeasement that's going to make people like Zarqawi happy. What's more feasible, in my view, (though unlikely) is for the Jordanian regime to work at building more openness and better economic avenues for it's own people, and to try and leverage it's unique position in the region to ask the U.S. to bring a little more sanity into their Iraq policy. (okay, I'm snickering even as I write that line - chances of Jordan influencing the US, nil. But there's more security in trying to democratize than there is in letting the Islamists in. They're not reasonable men, they're psycho killers, and they're never going to stop fighting).
Posted by: Nick at December 7, 2005 04:38 AM"the Islamists [are] not reasonable men, they're psycho killers, and they're never going to stop fighting"
UN report on infant mortality rate in Iraq says over 500,000 million iraqi children are dead because US and UK banned necesary medical and water sanitation supplies. Iraq Body Count says over 30,000 civilians in Iraq are dead because of security situation created US and UK invasion. Lancet medical journal says the number, when you add airstikes during invasion phase, could go as high as 100,000 iraqis.
I am no fan of those who kill civilians, even if the killers are dressed in dark suits and setting in offices with partitions. I regard them all with desdain. But the final body count of those murdered by US and UK makes all the extremists combined flush with envy.
And by the way, your use of the label "islamist" to describe terrorists shows a great degree of shallowness and a deep lack of understanding of the basics of middle eastern politics.
I consider myself an islamist and so do over half of the jordanian population. Not to mention the majority of Turks who voted for an Islamist government and Iranians too. and eventually the majority of Arabs and Muslims.
I don't go around giving lectures about Americans being psycho killers even though history books don't seem to contradict such a view when considering what befell the native americans, blacks, vietnameese, and now the iraqis. it does not seem much has changed, just the justifications got fancier. except that only you belive in them.
Huda: Perhaps you (and Jordan) have a different definition of "Islamist". In the US, "Islamist" is a polite term for "terrorist"--extremists. It does not refer to the vast majority of Muslims. As far as your references to "torture" and "hit squads", perhaps you should provide some evidence, beyond the unsubstantiated propaganda from "Islamists". I guarantee you, anyone in American custody is treated far better than those detained by al Quaeda, or any of the other groups taking hostages. Perhaps you think a couple of nights without sleep, or constant western music is torture. Compare that with slowly cutting off a head. Why don't you come to the US and commit a crime. You'll soon be very happy that crime was committed here, rather than in Jordan--or anywhere else. You'll be amazed at the protections you will have. In the first place, the prosecution will have to prove you guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. You will not have to prove your innocence. That's just the start. You don't quite use the word "racist", but you seem to have the same mindset as those who do, thinking that every disagreement points to a flaw in thinking. No, we didn't do well by the Indians. Many were murdered. And the Indians murdered many of the colonists as well, including unprovoked attacks which completely eliminate some settlements. Most of us aren't proud of every historic event. But that was a couple of centuries ago.