JORDANIAN REACTION TO UN RESOLUTION 1701

C O N F I D E N T I A L AMMAN 006151 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/12/2016 TAGS: PREL PGOV IS LE JO SUBJECT: JORDANIAN REACTION TO UN RESOLUTION 1701 REF: AMMAN 5775 Classified By: Ambassador David Hale for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (U) SUMMARY: Although hopeful that UN resolution 1701 will end hostilities, many Jordanians are skeptical of the general impact of the resolution, citing Israel's continued ground operations in southern Lebanon and air strikes on Beirut. Mainstream press commentary views the resolution as the best deal that could be made given the strong support that the U.S. provides Israel. Prime Minister Bakhit told reporters that the resolution was a "first step" to ending the bloodshed; meanwhile, some editorialists are calling the resolution a military and political victory for Hizballah. END SUMMARY. "THE RESOLUTION IS GOOD, BUT..." -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Many of post's contacts outside the GoJ and Jordanian editorialists are viewing the resolution as a good deal for all parties. Several political observers, however, complained to emboffs that the language of the resolution is vague; they feared Israel would exploit the resolution's wording to continue military operations. Suleiman Arabiyat, President of Mu'tah University, told poloff he did not expect Israel to keep "its part of the bargain," citing the resolution's wording on offensive and defensive operations. Dr. Mohammad al-Momani, professor of political science at Yarmouk University, told poloff he was concerned that UN forces operating in southern Lebanon under the resolution would not be granted the powers needed to stop hostilities. Meanwhile, the chief editor of the liberal daily Al Ghad, Ayman Safadi, wrote that while the resolution is "not fair" because it does not mandate the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon, it was the best possible deal "in view of the unlimited support that the US is giving to Israel." "A MILITARY AND POLITICAL VICTORY" -------------- ¶3. (U) Expressing a more confrontational view that we expect Jordanian tabloids will echo, columnist Rakan Majali in the pro-government, left-leaning daily Ad-Dustour wrote the complete military victory (of Hizballah, sic) was not translated into a conclusive political victory because Israel, acting on behalf of America, has the international balance of power in its favor. Majali added that Hizballah has whetted the appetite of the Arab nation for victory and that this confrontation has convinced Arabs to go back to the military option as a means to achieve their goals. FEAR OF A LEBANESE CIVIL WAR -------------- ¶4. (SBU) Echoing a view we heard privately from establishment figures in the early days of the fighting, but have heard less of since, Dr. Bassam Kakiesh, a retired General and former Ambassador to Israel, expressed concern to poloff that Israeli forces would not be able to destroy all of Hizballah's arms infrastructure. At the same time, he predicted that if Israeli forces remained in Lebanon they could ignite a civil war. COMMENT -------------- ¶5. (C) UNSCR 1701 led to a noticeable decline in the level of public anger here against the U.S. (and against King Abdullah for his alignment with us.) However, if hostilities - especially Israeli airstrikes north of the Litani - continue, we expect the letup to be short-lived. Hale