Jordan has increasingly begun to act as an intermediary between countries that are in Russia’s sphere of interests. Amman’s active cooperation with Ukraine and Armenia became a cause for concern on the part of Russia. Moscow fears that the Hashemite kingdom could become an arena for exerting international pressure on the countries of the former Soviet Union in order to discredit Russian influence.
Especially for the World Geostrategic Insights, Denis Korkodinov talked about this with the Director of the Arab Democratic Center for Strategic, Political and Economic Studies Iyad al-Majali.
1. On February 26, 2020, in the capital of Jordan, a meeting was held between the head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Onufry, and representatives of local Orthodox churches. As a result of the meeting, a number of decisions were made regarding the independence of Ukrainian Orthodoxy. In addition, questions were raised about the status of the Orthodox Church in Northern Mekedonia and Montenegro. Does the fact of holding a meeting of church hierarchs in Amman testify to Jordan’s interest in the conflict between the Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox Church? What is Jordan’s view of Ukraine and the 2014 coup d’etat there?
IYAD AL-MAJALI: At the invitation of His Beatitude Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilus III in Jordan from February 25 to 27, 2020, a meeting of representatives of world Orthodox churches was held. This meeting was a reaction to political challenges and regional tensions, which became an obstacle to the development of Christianity, in general, and Orthodoxy, in particular, in the Middle East. Among other things, church hierarchs were supposed to develop a common program of action as a result of calls by some local churches, including the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, for independence. For this reason, the meeting in Amman marked a fundamental shift in efforts to promote dialogue and unity between the leaders of the Orthodox world under the patronage of the Jerusalem Patriarchate. Confirming this, Theophilus III noted that the light emanating from the holy for all Christians of Jerusalem should become a symbol of Christian unity.
Such an interpretation provoked strong protest from Moscow, which saw political implication in the initiative of the Patriarch of Jerusalem. However, the fears of Russia, in this case, are really justified, since the Jordanian meeting organized by Theophilus III, aimed to emphasize the existing gap of a number of opposition groups in the international arena not only with the Russian Orthodox Church, but also with the Kremlin’s policy in the Middle East.
Among the most notable political messages presented at this historic meeting in Amman was the reaffirmation of the efforts of King Jordan Abdullah II to provide Hashemite custody of Christian and Islamic holy places in Israel, as well as the kingdom’s special role in the development of interfaith dialogue at the international level.
Jordanian-Ukrainian relations have their political, economic and cultural aspects and are characterized by harmony on all issues in regional development. Therefore, the participation of representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in a historical meeting in Jordan should be seen as a manifestation of a fundamental vision of unity and restoration of the Orthodox community, as well as an attempt to understand the details of the religious and political conflict between Kiev and Moscow. In any case, the mediatory role of the kingdom is not aimed at the detriment of Russian interests.
It seems that the meeting led to a number of agreements and to the resumption of friendly relations between the churches. In an atmosphere of fraternal love, the participants in the meeting agreed that decisions on issues of common Orthodox interest, including the provision of independence to some churches, should be coordinated in the spirit of dialogue and universal Orthodox unity, as well as with the Orthodox consensus regarding the situation.
The meeting discussed, among other things, the situation in Northern Macedonia. Participants emphasized that such issues should be resolved through dialogue within the framework of the Serbian Orthodox Church and with joint Orthodox support. In relation to Montenegro, participants called on the relevant authorities to respect and protect the basic right of the church to own real estate.
2. On February 11, 2020, King of Jordan Abdullah II paid an official visit to Armenia. What caused Jordan’s interest in the territory of the South Caucasus? How fruitful are relations between Jordan and Armenia? What position does the Jordan share in relation to the territorial sport between Armenia and Azerbaijan?
IYAD AL-MAJALI: Relations between Jordan and Armenia began during the reign of King Hussein. There is a very large Armenian diaspora that lives and works in Jordan for many years.
Jordanian diplomatic tools are called upon to intensify joint cooperation in order to open new horizons in relations between our state and Yerevan. This led to the signing of a number of joint agreements in the economic sphere, which are designed to help strengthen dialogue in the future. In turn, we are mutually interested in expanding trade, attracting investment and promoting tourism.
Interstate cooperation promotes mutual agreement between the political leaders of Jordan and Armenia on all regional and international issues and confirms the clear position of Jordan regarding efforts undertaken to solve all the problems facing the peoples of the region.
Meanwhile, Jordan is neutral in the Armenian-Azerbaijani dispute, since we are geographically distant from the South Caucasus and do not want to be involved in any conflicts. For this reason, we maintain a benevolent relationship with all countries, regardless of their political preferences and territorial differences. We believe that the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict is the business of only two states – Armenia and Azerbaijan, by virtue of which Jordan has no right to intervene in it. At the same time, the kingdom is trying to maintain good relations with Russia, which has significant interests in the countries of the so-called “post-Soviet space.”
3. According to a number of sources, on January 20, 2020, the 66th U.S. Military Intelligence Brigade received information about an impending terrorist attack against American troops serving in the cities of Grafenvor and Dulmen (Germany). At the same time, sources noted that the attack would be organized by an “unknown Jordanian extremist” loyal to the official political regime in Jordan. What do you think about this? Does this mean that through published information, someone wants to quarrel the United States and Jordan?
IYAD AL-MAJALI: On the Internet, with reference to the US intelligence service, information was indeed provided that a terrorist attack against the American armed forces was being prepared in Germany. It was especially noted that the perpetrator of the attack would be a citizen of Jordan. However, this information has not been confirmed. The Jordanian intelligence agencies conducted their own investigation into the published announcement of the terrorist attacks in Germany, as a result of which they came to the conclusion that the media, which first published this news, carried out a commercial order in order to discredit relations between Jordan and the United States.
Throughout its history, Jordan has never supported extremist groups and has not pursued the goal of dictating conditions to other countries through terrorist attacks. Moreover, relations between Amman and Washington, as well as between Amman and Moscow, are currently showing positive dynamics, and therefore we have no need to question the trust between our countries.
Image Credit: Magnus Manske/Flickr