Meeting Jordan’s King Abdullah II on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid exemplified diplomatic leadership on Tuesday.
Lapid did so by showing Israel’s renewed interest in Jordanian concerns and his willingness to entertain domestic electoral risks in his nation’s service. A video of the meeting showed a warm interchange. As America’s two closest allies in the Middle East, it is good news when these two governments are cooperating.
As analyst Seth Frantzman observes, Lapid made the right call in holding this public meeting. While Israel has recently and rightly prioritized its developing relationships with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, Jordan has felt neglected in recent years. Under former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, Israel adopted a more short-term transnational foreign policy. But Netanyahu’s approach was one in which reciprocity wasn’t valued highly. While closely aligned with the Trump administration in shared opposition to the 2015 JCPOA Iran nuclear accord, for example, Netanyahu also built close relationships with China and Russia. In the case of China, in particular, Netanyahu’s policy was fundamentally incompatible with critical U.S. national security interests. Netanyahu similarly showed little interest in Jordanian concerns.
Yet, the Lapid-Abdullah meeting was important for a more specific reason: the need to calm tensions in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
In his U.N. General Assembly address on Tuesday, Abdullah lamented the situation in Jerusalem. Albeit with hyperbolic language, he warned that “Christianity in the Holy City is under fire. The rights of churches in Jerusalem are threatened. This cannot continue.” Abdullah was referring to efforts by Orthodox Jewish Israelis to purchase property in Jerusalem’s Christian Quarter and attacks on church properties by Jewish extremists. Abdullah views this activity as destabilizing the city’s traditional multisectarian identity. It also plays into a general Jordanian concern over Israeli construction in the predominantly Arab area of East Jerusalem and Abdullah’s long-standing desire that Jerusalem, at least in part, should serve as the future capital of a Palestinian state.
The issue of Palestinian statehood aside, beyond greater law enforcement against Jewish extremists, it is not clear what more Lapid can do for Abdullah here. This is especially true as Lapid approaches the Nov. 1 election in which Netanyahu is the favorite to lead a new coalition into power. That said, Lapid has good reason to keep Abdullah happy, even if that carries electoral risks. After all, while U.S. media attention on the West Bank has more recently centered on the killing of a Palestinian American journalist by an Israeli soldier, the broader security environment is an urgent Israeli concern.
Taking advantage of the Palestinian Authority’s immense corruption and incompetence, and benefiting from Iranian support, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad is expanding its power in the West Bank. Israel thus fears a future conflict might entail its envelopment by Hamas in Gaza, the Lebanese Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in southern Syria, and Islamic Jihad in the West Bank. Abdullah’s influence and security-intelligence forces could be instrumental in helping Israel address these concerns.
Regardless, Lapid’s diplomacy reflects a striking contrast with that of Netanyahu. Whether by offering forceful but private opposition to the Biden administration’s effort to restore the JCPOA or showing interest in historic partners like Jordan, Lapid is trying to boost Israel’s diplomatic standing over the longer term.
The United States should welcome this strategy. Israel is a bastion of democracy and prosperity based on the rule of law in a region largely devoid of it. Similarly, Abdullah is a long-standing American friend. Jordan’s GID intelligence service has been instrumental in counter-Islamic State efforts and has saved many Western lives. As Israel attempts to conclude complex negotiations with Lebanon over the development of offshore energy reserves, stability with respect to Jordan takes on even more importance.
Lapid deserves credit in that pursuit.
