Authoritarian regimes have often been found to apply all kinds of measure to neutralize their opposers, thus making it next to impossible for opposition governments to coexist peacefully with the ruling governments. Additionally, authoritarian leaders have a considerable desire towards retaining as much power as possible to satisfy their selfish ego. One of the most common techniques applied by strict is that of alleviating services and resources from the public and later giving them back to in peanuts in a way that belittles the citizens to mere beggars. This thesis paper aims at determining the strategies used by King Abdullah II as an authoritarian king in Jordan during the Jordanian uprising period.
To determine the kind of relationship that was present between the authoritarian King Abdullah regime in Jordan and the Jordanian uprising during the Arab Spring 2011-2014, then this paper will uncover the details of the system, the operations of the King and finally determine how he contributed towards the Jordanian uprising. For one, this paper aims in understanding how such an authoritarian regime functions as well as how it handles the challenges that comes its way. Most of the problems that will be of significance are those that show are posed on the regime by oppositions. How did the authoritarian regime under King Abdulla II survive for that duration without collapsing under the verge of defiance and resistance from those in the region who did not subscribe to the ideologies of the regime? Or more precisely, what policies and techniques did the King Abdullah regime utilize to neutralize the riots in the region that threatened its survival?
The Jordanian riots, as well as the protesting, were some riots which occurred in Jordan and commenced in Jan 2011. They led to the government doing away with various cabinet ministers. Nonetheless, despite the widespread protesting and rioting in Jordan the terror and havoc all through the Arabic region pressured King Abdullah of Jordan to make known some reforms that he intended to implement in his government. On the contrary, the improvements did not yield the expected results since they were welcomed with a lot of hostility and criticism from all corners in the Jordanian region. Jordanian youths, for example, they were not hesitant to demand changes that were in line with the interests of every individual in the area. All the youths that rallied and protested did so to campaign for changes in the political and social sectors. Such pressures from the youth activists gave the King Abdulla authority a lot of demands since all its activities and code of operation were under criticism. Thus the success of the regime was threatened dearly. Notably, the actual motivations behind the revolts perpetrated by the youths can not be entirely determined since they might have been reacting to the fear instilled to every person in Jordan by the authoritarian regime.
Additionally, the latter may have been driven by the desire to see changes in the way the government operated such that the citizens faced less suffering other than the self-centred operations under the leadership of King Abdullah. Basing from the consequences of the Arab Spring in Egypt and Syria, the youths in Jordan developed a lot of concern to safeguard Jordan from such disastrous consequences. King Abdullah’s regime was thus faced with the bitter side of the protests since some of the demands were impossible to actualize. Instead, they were being focused on ruining the existing stability of the regime so that the system would quickly be abolished. Nonetheless, the protest in the region by the youths were met with high-level hostility since some of the youths in the streets were severely dealt with, thus sending some of them to the hospitals for medical intervention. It is so bright that the regime did not demand for only motivated and brave individuals to demand for reforms since the government was ready to do whatever it deemed right to facilitate its thriving.
As up to the year 2012, there already existed several groups within Jordan demanding for reforms. All the groups seemed to be different in their mode of operation since they were less revolutionary and more inclined towards advocating for changes. They included the traditionists leftists, newly established independent youth organizations and Islamists. Despite the unity of all the three distinct groups in forming a united front, one through which the authoritarian regime under King Abdullah would be defeated, none dominated the political opposition. Immediately, the Muslim Brotherhood set its available resources towards the same course. It dominated the protests possibly because it is the only existing political group with such a high following, thus making it the largest organization.
The responses by the Monarchy towards neutralizing the protests were multidimensional. Notably, the reactions of the police were less hostile but slightly tender ones, intervening without disrupting or discontinuing the demonstrations. Surprisingly, the police even handed over water to the thirsty demonstrators as per the advice given by Queen Rania. Secondly, King Abdullah did not hesitate to apply the most efficient strategy that his leadership could come across in responding to the protests posed by the civilians. This tactic involved dismissing cabinet secretaries and prime ministers the likes of Samir Rifai. Thirdly, King Abdullah introduced the system that was going to carry out reforms in the political sector that would amend the constitution and facilitate the creation of novel methods. Such amendments would see to it that the power held by the Monarchy was reduced by passing it down to the legislature.
Additionally, elections within the parliament would not be conducted as usual but slightly under a different political party and election policies. Similarly, constitutionally related reforms took place in 1952, whereby a constitutional court together with an independent election forum was created as well as the move towards not having non-combatants prosecuted in the court-martials. Another way that the King used to sustain himself as the highly esteemed King is by upholding the privileges and rights of the East Bankers. They in return supported the Monarchy despite the harsh rampant criticism against it by other Jordanians.
It will be very significant to identify the role played by youth activist in the struggle towards stabilizing Jordan. Indeed, the latter have a stake in the political well being of Jordan in the future. Therefore, it is up to the Monarchy to hold its youths with extreme dignity since they sure will revolt against the entire Monarchy until their grievances are heard and reforms enacted. Also, for Jordan to advance politically, it will have to establish better relationships with the Muslim movements.
The main reason behind the protests in Jordan were; shooting prices of commodities, unstable economy, unemployment throughout Jordan, poor living conditions, corruption and lack of accountability from the political leaders. In addressing these problems posed towards King Abdullah’s government, the King reformed his cabinet to see if a change would occur, but there was no tangible change perceived. Therefore, the King had no option other than to do away with cabinet secretaries and prime ministers whose roles and functions could not be seen or felt. Within 18 months the King had reshuffled the cabinet thrice. Reshuffling the cabinet was one primary strategy that the King utilized to reassure the protestors that he was still in control and e would see to it that their needs were addressed. As earlier said, the King ensured that constitutional reforms were enacted to see to it that almost a quarter of the constitution was amended as well as the introduction of legal court together with an independent electoral commission.
Additionally, the Monarchy being the first of its type to come into agreement with protestors in offering political reforms, also appointed a prime minister. These are some of the ways the authoritarian government sustained itself at the top of the food chain by fulfilling some of the outcries of its citizens. The constitutional reforms followed the riots from activists and fellow Jordanians after the Monarchy had fostered an increase in fuel prices following their move-in cutting fuel subsidies. As a way of cooling down the angry and disappointed protestors, the government had to offer them something that would appease them.
King Abdullah apart from appointing officials to form a cabinet, he also depicted some interest in facilitating the prevalence of democracy through his seven published papers representing his liberal views and reforms that would help reshape Jordan. The King must have been an outstanding politician in that he knew when and how to appease the Jordanian citizens to maintain his status as their King. The rationale behind reforming the electoral law was facilitated for impartiality and transparency of elections more so parliamentary ones. This is because the judiciary had been accused of being an accomplice of the evil deeds of the executive. Additionally, the King wanted the reforms to buy him trust from the citizens whom he said deserved to live dignified lives. His government was ready to give that to them—assuring the citizens of his concern as their King is an intelligent way of getting them to cool down and hold the protesting since their grievances had been heard and were being executed. Secondly, reforming the electoral law would facilitate for a much bigger proportionality and restrict issues tied to the boundaries.
It is essential to put in mind that Jordan, as an authoritarian government, has a history of persecuting journalists and activists. This can serve as a strategy through which the authoritarian leaders do away with their insecurities by eliminating their criticizers. Additionally, the government is seen to have restricted all forms of gatherings, especially those held by protestors. This is a grave violation of human rights since all persons have equal rights, and the right to express one’s thoughts and desires should not be cut short.
King Abdullah also called for unity of the nation following the clashes that took place between his supporters and the protestors. This move can not be ignored since is proves his position as the senior-most authority of the land. He thus ensured that peace thrived in Jordan by getting the two parties to put aside their indifferences and have him reform the government. Following these clashes, fifteen members of the National Dialogue quit. This was a set back for the King considering the political and economic reforms that he had promised the Jordanians. Without the fifteen members, there was no way the changes would go through, and thus the King set up a meeting whereby he got twelve of the members to retract their resignations so that they would go on with their duties. In coming up with a mutually acceptable solution to the clashes, the government banned its supporters from holding their demonstrations within the capita. On the other hand, the opposers were given a designated place where they would freely and peacefully protest, which was the Amman region.
On 15th Feb, the King ensured the reformation of the Public Gatherings Law which initially restricted any forms of gatherings by protestors. The law was reformed in a way that it fostered for the enjoyment and respect of the freedom of expression. Unlike the first law, this one did not require seeking permission from the governor to hold gatherings. Yes, the Jordanian crisis had brought change upon its government. Everything was on the verge of being reformed, including the King’s powers which the parliament had declined to reduce. Upon his 12 years commemoration of being the Jordanian King, King Abdullah, in his speech which was aired on television made known his decision to shun away from appointing cabinet secretaries as well as the prime ministers. Instead, the power to form cabinets would be left on the hands of elected majority members of the parliament. Also, the King promised more pollical party and electoral laws.
Indeed, it is correct to state that the Jordanian crisis placed King Abdullah’s rule in its entirety at risk. It is because of this risk of leaving his kingship in shame that he invested all of his energy as well as government resources to see to it that he could redeem himself. The King certainly aspired to repurchase the citizens’ trust so that he would not be rebelled against. Yes, the King was certain of the fact that if he did not meet the needs of the Jordanians the crisis would be prolonged and this would be a risk to his leadership as well as to the unity of the Islam’s. He also feared the interference from the western countries such as the U.S since the crisis had begun to gain some external attention. Agreeing to have his powers reduced, powers that he held dear to him and utilized with great pride, is not a mere decision but rather a desperate face-saving move. The King sure that his legacy would be ruined and he would be forever perceived as an authoritarian leader who did not regard the needs of the people at all. Queen Rania was also tied to the corruption scandals which face shamed the King and his entire authority for mercilessly looting the citizens’ resources and abandoning them to languish in poverty.