The royal feud in Jordan has led some to question the monarchy

A century ago this month, the British created Jordan.

In the first instance of nation-building as a consolation prize, they carved a piece of desert with little water and even less oil from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire and gave it to their Hashemite ally, Emir Abdullah bin Hussein, whose brother granted control over Iraq.

One hundred years later, the Emir’s great-grandson, King Abdullah II, celebrated the centenary of a country that few believed would exist then. Dressed in a military uniform woven of gold, the king marched to bagpipe music on April 11 along a boulevard lined with soldiers. Officials later unfurled a nearly 7,000-meter-long Jordanian flag, hoping to enter the Guinness Book of World Records.

But the imposing pomp was denied by a surprising circumstance: namely, that the Jordanian monarchy is now involved in the worst crisis of all time, many people here questioning its effectiveness, the political system that ensured its survival and the price they they themselves paid for it preserves the much-lauded stability of the country.

The full re-evaluation was triggered by the shocking April 3 announcement that former Crown Prince Hamzah, Abdullah’s half-brother, had been caught in an alleged plot to usurp the throne with the help of his loyalists and shadowy foreign supporters. About 18 of his alleged conspirators were arrested, the attempted betrayal was “suppressed,” and Prince Hamzah returned firmly to the royal post, Abdullah said.

But few believe that the royal fissure will be healed – or the explanation of the king and the government about what happened. Despite a gag order in the media, many Jordanians took to the internet to express their skepticism, saying that the crisis has lifted the evil cover of their country and pointed to the need for real reform.

While no one is yet calling for the abolition of the monarchy, some are calling for its power to be diminished and openly questioning whether Abdullah is the right person to lead.

“People are increasingly believing that if you add all the factors in the country, including Hamzah’s story, it tells everyone that there must be change,” said Labib Kamhawi, a veteran Jordanian political analyst in the capital, Amman. .

“No one wants to overthrow the monarchy as such, but the people want a serious change – and Hamzah has offered to champion such a change.”

Trying this growing belief is Jordan’s dire economic situation, which is so close to breaking point that officials are privately warning that the country is just a week away from bankruptcy. In recent years, Jordan has seen rising prices, at least a third of young unemployed, and widespread perception that corruption, not to mention mismanagement, has depleted its already weak resources.

When authorities placed Prince Hamzah under de facto house arrest and interrupted his communications on April 3, these were the issues he used to struggle with in a couple of videos broadcast on the BBC.

“This country has become hampered by corruption, nepotism and mismanagement, and the result has been the destruction or loss of hope that is evident in almost every Jordanian,” he said.

At the heart of these complaints, but rarely explicitly mentioned, is the king, who can assign and replace cabinets at will – a power he often wielded, sacrificing ministers or entire governments to deflect popular anger.

“The king has in recent years brought in weak governments that have put him on the front lines, where he has begun to meddle in the day-to-day running of the country,” said Amer Sabaileh, a Jordanian analyst. “Now people see that bad government is coming from the palace.”

Critics also point out that the palace has become a hidden government, creating commissions and supranational entities that have in fact hijacked the roles of ministries.

“The palace has set up institutions with qualified people who have taken over the government because of the feeling that it could do it faster, more efficiently, with fewer constraints,” said Rami Khouri, a professor of journalism at the American University of Beirut and a former host of the television show in Jordan. “But what he did is emasculate the government. It has simply become an employment agency. ”

Accompanying this was an over-reliance on security services, which are now involved in checking government projects, as well as government contract staff, giving them excessive control over economic and political affairs.

For decades, the rule in Jordan seemed to be stability over democracy. Although the protests of the Arab Spring in 2011 spilled over into the country, they were short-lived; there were some demands for the fall of the regime, such as those of protesters in neighboring countries, but the main pain of the Jordanians was the loss of subsidies and the impetus for economic liberalization of King Abdullah. And as chaos flourished in Egypt, Libya and Syria, along with the rise of the Islamic State in neighboring countries, there was less appetite for change.

But in later years, critics say the Jordanian state has become utterly intolerant of dissent, despite the king’s claim that “heaven is the limit” when it comes to the freedom of expression of his subjects. Instead, the security services routinely intimidate opponents and hold elections to ensure that no coherent opposition can be raised.

Earlier this year, the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index labeled Jordan an authoritarian country, while the US think tank Freedom House downgraded the country from “partially free” to “not free.”

In his tirade against the country’s leadership, Hamzah criticized the loss of liberties – although he carefully avoided mentioning his stepbrother as the king by name.

“It has reached the point where no one is able to speak or express their opinion on anything without being assaulted, arrested, harassed and threatened,” he said in one of the videos.

These words became a rally call following his detention, with Jordanians snatching quotes from Hamzah’s recordings for use in social media hashtag campaigns while demanding his release.

“We are with Prince Hamzah because he spoke about the nation’s pain and concerns,” Jordanian activist Mohammad Majali wrote on Twitter. “He was handcuffed and not allowed to speak, as were many other Jordanians whose mouths were fumbled by various means.”

Since then, anger has translated into more urgent demands for political change, including calls for a parliamentary government with a prime minister elected rather than appointed, and a constitutional monarchy, reducing the king’s role to a ceremonial position like that of Queen Elizabeth II. From Great Britain.

Others see Prince Hamzah, who looks and speaks as his father, the beloved King Hussein, a better fit for the monarch than Abdullah, whom many consider a foreigner focused more on the welfare of the business elite than ordinary Jordanians.

The turmoil here could prove problematic for the United States because of the oversized role that Jordan enjoys as a top ally of the Middle East and as a safe zone for many refugees in the region. In January, Washington signed a defense cooperation agreement with Amman to allow U.S. planes, ships and personnel “to enter and leave Jordan freely without a visa.”

The measure, which is in fact turning Jordan into a US military base, is likely to increase as the Biden administration intends to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, but retains the ability to conduct counter-terrorism operations at a distance.

Abdullah’s loyalists say he is interested in reform, but that his plans are thwarted by strong forces in the country, including conservative elements in his circle of advisers and the so-called Eastern Book tribes that dominate public service.

This argument has little resonance in the current climate, said Kamhawi, the political analyst.

“You can say that once or twice, but if nothing happens every time, then no one believes you,” Kamhawi said. He added that the dire economic situation has made people less willing to accept the state’s repressive tactics.

“People say we have nothing to fear,” he said.

Whether Hamzah is the right alternative is not important, Sabaileh analyst said.

“The problem is not just about Hamzah. It is what you can offer today in terms of economic and political reform, “he said.

“This is dangerous, because in 20 years the management has not offered anything. Even in times when there was no crisis, they could not deliver. What can I do now? “