Talk:Jordanian option - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Makeandtoss (talk | contribs) at 10:36, 4 September 2024 (→Scope: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 10:36, 4 September 2024 by Makeandtoss (talk | contribs) (→Scope: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Israel Palestine Collaboration

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. For guidelines and a participants list see the project page. See also {{Palestine-Israel enforcement}}, the ArbCom-authorized discretionary sanctions, the log of blocks and bans, and Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars. You can discuss the project at its talk page.Israel Palestine CollaborationWikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationTemplate:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationIsrael Palestine Collaboration

Palestine Low‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jordan Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jordan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jordan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JordanWikipedia:WikiProject JordanTemplate:WikiProject JordanJordan

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks YOU can help with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Jordanian Option art. is needed

An article on the Jordanian Option is needed.

The Jordanian Option preceded the Allon Plan or was formulated by others than Allon.
The Allon Plan was initially NOT supporting the Jordanian Option, but opposed it. So DISTINCT from it.
The concept of the Jordanian Option long survived the demise of the Allon Plan and is still invoked until present time.

Arminden (talk) 07:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to the author. Ref problem.

UnspokenPassion, I need to thank you for the great job you've done here. I've learned a lot from your excellent and concise overview.

Regarding Shamir, Sharon & Co.: sorry for the tone of my edit summary, I forgot who wrote the article in the first place. I guess you have a hard copy of Ashton's book, can you please look it up? Thank you and all the best, Arminden (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden, thank you for your kind words. I’m glad you found the overview useful. No worries about the edit summary. I’ve looked up Ashton’s book, and here are the relevant quotes:

p. 4: "The Likud Party’s accession to power in Israel in 1977 brought with it the more pressing danger posed by their ‘Jordan is Palestine’ slogan. During his final two decades on the throne, what Hussein most feared was an Israeli attempt to resolve the Palestinian problem by driving the Palestinians out of the occupied West Bank and into Jordan, overthrowing his regime in the process."
p. 23: "The aggressive anti-PLO strategy pursued by the Likud government was coupled with a revival of the ‘Jordan is Palestine’ slogan, which was favoured by major figures within the government including Sharon and Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir."
p. 253: "For the Israeli right, the King’s disengagement was a political opportunity, giving further sustenance to the ‘Jordan is Palestine’ argument. With the ‘Jordanian option’ favoured by the Labour Party now dead and buried, it argued that a large-scale ‘transfer’ of Palestinians from the West to the East Bank of the Jordan was a more attractive approach. To guard against just such a possibility, Hussein announced that West Bank Palestinians would no longer be considered Jordanian citizens. Additional measures taken by the Jordanian authorities to try to discourage the movement of West Bankers into Jordan included changing the five-year Jordanian passports held by West Bank Palestinians into two-year travel documents."

Best regards, UnspokenPassion (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed, this truly helps. What I mainly take from it though, is an essential point, which isn't presented visibly & strongly enough (bold, in the intro and the headings, and in the text): namely that the Labour Party's 'Jordanian option' meant Jordan reintegrating most of the West Bank, while Likud's 'Jordan is Palestine' position involved a large-scale 'transfer' of Palestinians from the West Bank to Jordan and the creation of 'Greater Israel' containing biblical Judea & Samaria. These 2 positions don't have almost anything in common. The article must be adapted in order to reflect this. Arminden (talk) 21:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi UP. I don't get it: you added some 1500 bits' worth of apparently very good, informative material, and then removed it all again. Why? Arminden (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, yes, it was a mistake, a technical glitch. I've re-added the material, thanks for catching that. UnspokenPassion (talk) 12:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Lede

@UnspokenPassion: So you chose to revert all my changes just because you disagreed with the addition of the two words of "in Israel"? Makeandtoss (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Move

To be moved to Jordan option as more common name than Jordanian option. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Scope

@Arminden: Obviously Jordan would not call its own political considerations and decisions as the "Jordan option"; this is an Israeli term coming from Israeli political considerations, regardless of whether it was supported or considered by the Trump administration or any other government: "The Jordanian option is an Israeli term, describing an Israeli political strategy: Israel, having failed to find an acceptable Palestinian negotiating partner, willing and able to settle the Palestinian dimension of Israel's conflict with the Arabs." Makeandtoss (talk) 10:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

It's the term chosen on Wiki, not my invention. Obviously based on existing RS literature.

King Hussein, not Trump. It has been consistent Hashemite policy since the Arab Revolt to unite as much Arab land & people under the rule of the dynasty, with the West Bank being pursued for the longest time. If Arab or Western sources have focused on a specific name for this policy, i.e. its WB-related aspect, pls bring it up and I'll be happy to see it included, or even replace the current title. But is there one?

There are Jordanian aspects and West Bank Palestinian aspects to it as much as there are Israeli ones. And I'm talking of support, not of opposition. So we can agree on different terms should you offer widely used alternatives, but not on declaring it a purely Israeli concept. You might be unaware of the Jordanian moves, or disagree with them, but that's not relevant here.

N.B.: I have pointed out that there are actually 2 very different Israeli concepts dealt with here, and edited in order to make that very visible. Only the 1st one had various degrees of Jordanian and Palestinian backing. So I don't think your probem is primarily with me.

One can of course discuss only the post-67 aspects, when Israel, by occupying the WB, thought to have the stronger cards, but the topic, however we choose to call it, is older than that. So yes, the definition, i.e. deciding what we're talking about, is the main issue, as always. The name is a mere result of the outcome of this discussion. Arminden (talk) 11:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: You are confusing different ideas. Jordan's takeover of West Bank in 1948, or King Hussein's attempts to retake the West Bank 1967-1988, are obviously not considered part of the Israeli-termed and promoted "Jordan option". These are Jordanian decisions, not Israeli proposals. I have provided an RS saying it is an Israeli term and idea, and I have not seen any RS-based counterargument to that in your four paragraph response. Here are two more RS saying specifically this is an Israeli idea:

1988 LA Times: "The king’s relations with the Palestinians have always been ambiguous and indecisive. When he proposed a federated Arab kingdom of two autonomous regions --Jordan and Palestine--in 1972, a scheme nearly identical to today’s so-called Jordan option, it sparked protest demonstrations throughout the West Bank." It is clear from this RS that the Jordan option was articulated in the 1980s.
2010 Al Jazeera: "Over the years, two variations of the “Jordan option” have developed. The first is based on “transferring” the Palestinian population of the East Bank and even Israel “proper” to Jordan, where the Palestinian homeland is to be established. The second scenario is based on establishing a Palestinian state in Jordan, which would also include the Arab-populated areas of the West Bank." Clearly both far-right Israeli proposals and ideas.

Makeandtoss (talk) 12:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Essentially the Jordanian option(s) died in 1988 when Jordan gave up it's claims. Arguably they died before that in 1972. Everything after that is Israeli (right wing typically + Trump) Jordan options, including the defunct Jordan is Palestine nonsense, see also Three-state solution. Although I don't object to having some sort of article about this, we did manage without one for a long time until it was resurrected by an Icewhiz sock. Selfstudier (talk) 12:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

M&T, I'm not confusing anything. It's all part of the same concept, promoted by different actors. If we did have a separate article about smth like "Takeover and/or (con)federation projects between Jordan and the West Bank & East Jerusalem, with and without Israeli input", I'd just link somehow this page to that and be quiet; but we don't, and for obvious reasons, the awkward and huge title being one of them.

It's one topic. Neither Israel, nor the kings of Jordan would have come up with such plans independently from each other, and all West Bank mayors except the mayor of Nablus supported it at some point for good reasons. King Hussein was and is well respected by many, so is Shimon Peres, and both worked at some version for a while. Sock or not, the latest edits are based in great part on Avi Shlaim, who's hugely critical of Zionism, and Moshe Shemesh, a professor at Ben Gurion U I never heard anyone attacking for right-wing leanings or excesses of any kind. Someone like Ilan Pappe has no problem in citing Shemesh's research results into Jordanian-Israeli relations and taking them at face value. So clear facts, RS, clean historical analysis.

Yes, the "Jordanian option" is dead for now, but history will tell, and "Jordan is Palestine" is the wet dream of Jewish Israeli extremists, fascists,... have your pick. But that has nothing to do with the encyclopedic need to present the history of these two concepts, their evolution and variants, including those who supported them - in Israel, but also in Jordan and on the West Bank. One may hate, dispise, mock, choose (or be taught) to ignore this or that -- or love & embrace it; history doesn't change because of that, just sub-standard historiography does.

P.S.: If you insist to be outraged by regional confederation proposals, please take time to read about Monte Melkonian. An Armenian patriot and Communist, he understood about the danger of fighting against overwhelming odds for independence. Once his favourite option (post-Soviet confederation) lost the contest and the opposite decision was taken, he fought bravely and died fighting in Nagorno Karabakh, helping to gain a short-term victory turned complete national catastrophe after a few short decades. All small(ish) nations disappear at times if they attempt to break free, with some surviving and reemerging, and some staying gone for good. This goes for Israel, the Palestinians, Jordan, Lebanon, maybe Ukraine, Armenia, Romania, and so forth. One more reason not to dismiss any concept of pooling together resources and power, especially in times when nationalists are going berserk. Don't count too much on the UN. Arminden (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: Again, this seems as a case of a personal opinion trumping RS. Where is the RS supporting your claim that the Jordan option encompasses Jordanian actions prior to 1980s? I am not outraged by anything and I would suggest avoiding personalizing this and focusing on how the Jordan option is an exclusively Israeli term to solve an Israeli problem. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Categories: