Jordan's King Abdullah Has Failed To Grasp The Power Of The Arab Spring

While protests have been muted, opposition is growing – and is more nuanced than the monarchy or its western backers realise.

By Julien Barnes-Dacey

Since King Abdullah's initial enthusiasm for reform, 'movement has slowed, and talk of a meaningful parliamentary democracy all but disappeared'. Photograph: EPA

Jordan's government has proposed a new election law that has dealt a further blow to those hoping for meaningful reform in the Hashemite kingdom. The law, which severely limits the number of seats that opposition parties can hold in parliament, was this week supplemented by a proposed ban on political parties established on a religious basis.

Both moves represent a direct assault on the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and the country's leading political party, which would be likely to gain power in any free and fair election. Coming on the back of the recent detention of 13 youth activists (since pardoned) on charges of insulting the king, the measures have highlighted the kingdom's dwindling reform ambitions.

When unrest first hit north Africa, King Abdullah was one of the first Arab rulers to pre-emptively embrace the mantra of reform, establishing an independent election body and a constitutional court. He also hinted at a willingness to empower the long-neutered parliament and weaken his own powers, which give him the right to appoint and dismiss governments.

Since this initial burst, however, movement has slowed, and talk of a meaningful parliamentary democracy has all but disappeared. While the Jordanian parliament is the author of the new restrictive measures, there are few who doubt the king's controlling hand over the wider political process. With violent instability growing on its northern border and more than 95,000 Syrians already seeking refuge in the country, the brakes are likely to be applied more firmly than ever.

Despite the slow pace of reform, the west continues to embrace the king's self-proclaimed reforming instincts, largely due to his continuing willingness to assist in the fight against extremism. Europe recently offered Jordan enhanced financial and trade assistance, despite the fact that Freedom House rates the country as "not free" compared to "partly free" when Abdullah first came to power in 1999.

However, as regional plates shift, the king and his western backers may be misjudging the challenges ahead. While Abdullah maintains popular legitimacy and faces no immediate threat of revolutionary upheaval, tremors of unrest are growing. Pointedly, the introduction of hollow legislation disguised as reform, restrictions on the IAF and the detention of protesters are precisely steps that will antagonise the environment, potentially serving to spark new tensions.

While incomparable to the protests that have swept north Africa and Syria, demonstrations have been happening across Jordan for more than a year now. Though often small in number – ranging from a few hundred to more than 10,000 – the discontent represents an unprecedented challenge to the status quo. For the most part the regime has refrained from forcefully pushing back against protesters but periodic clashes threaten to break the calm.

Moreover, the emerging opposition is multi-faceted, presenting the king with a more complex challenge than he has ever faced. Although driven by economic discontent, with unemployment potentially as high as 30%, it is increasingly political.

On the one side the traditional opposition – represented by the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm – is demanding greater power, notably the right of parliamentary majorities to appoint empowered governments in place of the king.

But the opposition also includes elements from within the regime's traditional support base, indigenous East Bank tribes, who are bitter about their dwindling share of the state pie in the face of a decade of privatisations and cuts in public spending, and see reform as the best way of asserting their rights.

Taken together, and though disunited in their goals (East Bankers fear extensive liberalisation will challenge their interests), the two groups represent a powerful force. With the country also broke and heavily dependent on foreign aid, the king has little wiggle room.

For the moment the opposition calls for reform rather than regime change, but the signs are becoming clear that Abdullah has failed to understand the new pressures unleashed by the Arab awakening. Following the recent measures the IAF is now threatening to boycott upcoming elections – a move that would further delegitimise the political system, threatening new uncertainties.

At a time of growing regional instability, the king, encouraged by his western backers who offer such important economic and political support, should be making meaningful engagement on the reform question a much greater priority than suggested by recent steps.

-This commentary was published in The Guardian on 19/04/2012
- Julien Barnes-Dacey is a senior Middle East policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations