The ongoing war in Gaza has intensified regional tensions, drawing strong reactions from neighboring Jordan. The country is home to a large Palestinian population and has always been a proponent of Palestinian rights, while -at the same time- holding a peace treaty with Israel since 1994. The war’s impact on Jordan may lead to a significant risk of destabilization, as the country is striving to balance between its support of the Palestinians and its national security interests.

 

  

 

For Jordan, Israel’s war on Gaza is all but a foreign policy issue. It reverberates heavily on its domestic and foreign politics due to the stark contrast between the Jordanian deep support for the Palestinian cause and the state’s relation with Israel, compounded by its strong alliance with the United States. This article examines the variables that inform the Jordanian regime’s complex balancing act amid the ongoing regional crisis and how these impacted the outcome of the recent parliamentary elections. This article also argues that although the monarchy has managed to walk a thin line and avoid wider confrontations, the protracted crisis underscores an increasingly precarious balance that will test Jordan’s ability to deflect external and internal pressures in the face of prolonged conflict.

On October 7, 2023, President Biden declared his administration’s “rock-solid and unwavering support” to Israel. More than nine months into the Gaza war, his adherence to his initial promise is unquestionable. This article will examine US foreign policy vis-à-vis the war on Gaza, focusing on its prospective objectives and its implications on domestic, regional, and international levels. It will also argue that American foreign policy on the issue is primarily reactive rather than proactive.

Israel’s normalizing relations with various Arab countries brought the Palestinians once again before the bitter realization that time is working against them. It appears that this realization triggered a process of reconciliation among the Palestinians. Yet, will these efforts suffice to influence the course of the Palestinian Question within a rapidly changing regional environment?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Among the promises the U.S. President Donald J. Trump has made is the formulation of a plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue. To that end, the task was assigned to Jared Kushner, senior adviser to the White House and his son-in law.[1] However, the details of the plan known as the “Deal of the Century” are yet to be released. In the meantime, recent developments, generated by the actions taken by the U.S. administration and their implications on the both Israel and Palestine need to be taken seriously into consideration, as they directly influence the already fragile situation on the ground.

In most of Egypt, the revolution that broke out on January 25th, 2011, took the form of non-violent protest but in Sinai, which has historically been more turbulent and unstable, the rebellion became a full-blown military insurgency. Since the ousting of President Mohamed Morsi on the 3rdof July, 2013, the situation in the Sinai Peninsula has become even more critical. The tense relations between the Egyptian army and Gaza, the declared war of the Generals against the Muslim Brotherhood and the Jihadists, and the necessity of the Egyptian government’s compliance with the peace treaty of 1979 with Israel, all serve as factors to make things more complicated in times when the spirit of uprising is apparent all over the region.

The ongoing war in Gaza is a typical case of a war that is not meant to offer any significant change to the general equilibrium of the conflict. It is a strategic ?World War I?, an inconclusive trench war which was born out of the impasse of a truce and is destined for the stalemate of another one. It is an escalation towards a situation of limited options. Moreover, it is asymmetrical not only in terms of means and actors but also and most importantly in terms of aims: the Israeli side strives for military goals while Hamas? objectives are political.