The president of the United States, the sole superpower on the globe today, has told us in no uncertain terms that he has thrown in his lot with Israel against the Palestinians, the Arabs, the Muslims and all those who desire to see justice and fairness as the basis for peace in Palestine.
That is what George Bush said, albeit not in so many words, when he stood next to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at the White House last week and declared his support for Sharon's plans to impose Israeli conditions and create facts on the ground that negate the basic, legitimate rights of the Palestinians.
It might not have occurred to Bush that he was turning his country into Israel's absolute partner in injustice and the international crime of forcibly taking other people's property when he said the Palestinians should not expect the land taken from them in 1967 to be returned to them in its original shape.
Bush conveniently forgot that international laws and conventions protect the right of any refugee in any part of the world to return to his or her homeland when he said only Israel had the authority to determine who could return ,where in territories under its control.
Bush overlooked that he was denying four million Palestinian refugees their hopes to live in dignity and self-respect away from the squalid camps where they live today. Had the US president been more considerate, he would have acknowledged that the Palestinian refugees have the right to seek compensation for their lost properties in lieu of their right to return to Palestine. That acknowledgement would have given the refugees the solace that many of them had been seeking for over five decades.
Effectively, Bush gave Sharon the green signal that the Israeli prime minister was seeking before actually starting to implement his unilateral proposals that spell nothing but doom and catastrophe for the region.
It is the enormity of the situation that prompted His Majesty King Abdullah to put off his planned meeting with Bush at the White House.
There is no ambiguity left over why King Abdullah, who had been due to meet Bush in Washington on Wednesday, after a trip to California, flew home instead. Announcing that the meeting was rescheduled for the first week in May, Jordan noted that it wanted to clarify the US position on the Middle East peace process “in light of the latest statements by officials in the American administration”.
Bush's move to back the Sharon plan concerns us in Jordan as much as it does the Palestinians in the occupied territories. If we look at the Sharon plan carefully, we can figure out that the Israeli plan is to choke the Palestinians under occupation and bring them to a situation where they would be nudged or prompted naturally to cross the River Jordan into the East Bank looking for an escape.
What would that do to the stability and security of Jordan?
Being a traditional friend of the US, and in view of Washington's assurances when Jordan signed the 1994 peace treaty with Israel, we would have naturally expected Bush to give Jordan's long-term interests some consideration before endorsing a proposal that holds out serious dangers for the Kingdom.
Bush could not but have been aware that Jordan hosts the bulk of Palestinian refugees from 1948 and those displaced in Arab-Israeli wars since then. The impact of the denial of their rights would definitely be felt in Jordan.
Jordan has always followed a moderate policy based on moderation and conviction that dialogue is the only means to resolving disputes. That policy, set by King Hussein, whose wisdom, statesmanship and diplomatic skills are legendary, continues to be the central pillar of Jordan's approach to any issue under King Abdullah.
Obviously, Washington seems to have realised that it might not have been sensitive to the interests of an old and strong friend when it committed itself to the situation we see ourselves in following the US approval of Sharon's unilateral plans.
Jordan's position is clearly in support of the Quartet's roadmap for peace, a two-state solution in Palestine and the peace initiative adopted by the Beirut Arab summit two years ago as bases to end the Arab-Israeli conflict and bring stability in the Middle East.
Jordan is also committed to supporting the Palestinian people in their efforts to establish an independent state that has geographical contiguity and territorial feasibility.
Subsequent denials have come from Washington that the newfound American position and support for the Sharon plan do not imply a predetermined solution in Palestine. But we fail to see it through the American eyes since we know Sharon and his record.
That was underlined by the Sharon-ordered assassination of Hamas leader Abdulaziz Al Rantissi even as the Palestinian fury was hitting its peak over the killing of his predecessor Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.
It could be argued, for argument's sake, that Yassin and Rantissi had led the wave of suicide bombings and guerrilla attacks against Israel and hence were “terrorists”. But then, this does not change the fundamental fact that had Sharon been more reasonable and amenable to seeing reason and logic, the situation would not have deteriorated to what it is today.
I believe it would not be out of place, even today, to expect the US to wake up to the realities created by its all out support for and alliance with Israel and realise that it is American interests in the Middle East that are damaged by the mindless, ruthless state terrorism unleashed by Israel.