Identifier | Created | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|
07AMMAN4764 | 2007-12-03 15:05:00 | CONFIDENTIAL | Embassy Amman |
VZCZCXRO2204 RR RUEHROV DE RUEHAM #4764 3371505 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 031505Z DEC 07 FM AMEMBASSY AMMAN TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1117 INFO RUEHXK/ARAB ISRAELI COLLECTIVE |
C O N F I D E N T I A L AMMAN 004764 |
1. (C) Jordanian reaction to Annapolis has been marked by the same mix of positive official comments and private cynicism and hope that was on display in the run-up to the conference (ref a). 2. (C) Public, official commentary has been positive, reflecting King Abdullah's strong public support for U.S. efforts to encourage renewed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. All Jordanian media on November 29 gave prominent coverage to the King's telling visiting Senators Inouye and Stevens (ref b) that Annapolis was "an essential and serious jump-start towards ending the Israeli occupation and establishing a Palestinian state by the end of next year." He also stressed the importance of maintaining the momentum created by the conference. 3. (C) In private, senior GOJ officials have hit the same positive notes, but with an added element of caution and warning. With Codel Inouye, the King privately shared his concern that lower-level Palestinian and Israeli officials lack the trust that exists between PM Olmert and President Abbas, and elaborated on his definition of "maintaining momentum:" substantial progress within three months. With visiting Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (ref c), Chief of the Royal Court Bassem Awadallah asserted that the Palestinian cause is the number one issue on the mind of the King, is the key to hearts and minds throughout the Muslim world, and would ease many constraints on political development in Jordan if solved. Awadallah noted the positives of Annapolis, but cautioned that, if previous such efforts had gone as hoped, the conflict would have long since been resolved. 4. (C) The media reaction has been mixed. Looking beyond the predictable chorus of criticism from strident anti-normalization forces (e.g., the Islamists' media organs), there has been a range of reaction in the mainstream press. Some - particularly columnists in the pro-Palestinian opposition media - have expressed typical skepticism about the purpose and outcome, describing it as a major gain for Israel with little benefit for the Palestinians, in the absence of real progress on the ground. Others have acknowledged grudgingly the imperatives that brought the Arab states to Annapolis, namely, the lack of a viable alternative to American-supervised negotiations, Syria's desire to reduce its regional isolation, and Arab moderates' desperate desire for progress in light of increasing regional radicalism and expanding Iranian influence. At the same time, there have been notes of recognition that Annapolis could bring new energy and forward motion on an issue that preoccupies much of the Jordanian population. (Ref C contains specific comments and quotes from Jordanian opinion-makers.) 5. (C) Ibrahim Saif of Jordan University's Center for Strategic Studies summed up the views of those who, despite past disappointments, see the issue as too critical to give up on, telling us that Annapolis was a "good and important start," particularly the strong Arab representation, but it is too early to call it a success. What matters, per Saif, "are the next steps and how far the parties are willing to go." Visit Amman's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/amman/ Hale |