Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood comes under intense fire but continues to avoid confrontation, reports Sanaa Abdallah from Amman It has not been going very well for the Jordanian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood or its political arm, the Islamic Action Front (IAF). In response to a recent governmental crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood clerics and amid rising Islamist militancy in the region, the Brotherhood are taking the defensive position in an attempt to minimise damage and preserve a decades-old influence in the Hashemite kingdom. On 13 October, 11 pro-establishment centrist political parties merged to form the Jordanian National Movement (JNM). On 17 October, a prominent Muslim Brotherhood member resigned from the organisation, citing financial mismanagement and political "hard line" positions. Both of these events were to be damaging to the Muslim Brotherhood. The JNM will be the first real force able to provide significant support for government policies and confront the Islamist, leftist and pan-Arab nationalist opposition. It is no secret that the leaders of the new JNM include prominent former government and security officials as well as tribal leaders. More importantly, almost all are East Bank Jordanians -- a minority in a country of over 50 per cent Palestinian refugee origin. The merger quickly received open government support with Political Development and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Mohamed Daoudiyeh attending the declaration ceremony. The minister praised the move as showing "political maturity" and called for the establishment of a "national bloc leading to political coalitions in various sectors". He added that "political life still needs balance by forming three or four large political party trends and reducing the number of parties", something that King Abdullah II has been seeking. However, in an effort to appear more "balanced", Daoudiyeh added that the government "respects all Jordanian parties". The Islamist movement did not officially react to the formation of the JNM but many privately feared that such a pro- establishment grouping, which enjoys widespread tribal grassroots support in a country that is still largely governed by tribalism, would provide a cover for unpopular government policies, especially where restriction of freedom is concerned. The head of the JNM, Samir Awamleh, insisted that his movement was "not against any other political party or trend", adding that it called for "cementing national unity, strengthening the democratic process, developing political life, achieving national allegiance and respecting the rule of law". Awamleh also argued that his group would "reflect the Jordanian street, be committed to the constitution and Jordan's higher interests, security and stability". Analysts said that protecting Jordan's "higher interests" and maintaining the country's security and stability were not disputable by any party, including the opposition -- whether Islamic, leftist or pan-Arab nationalist. The dispute is in the way in which each side interprets the country's "best interests", and what actually constitutes a threat to security and stability. For example, since the signing of the unpopular Jordanian- Israeli peace treaty 10 years ago the authorities have banned demonstrations without prior approval, labelling them a threat to security and stability. Consecutive governments have cracked down on movements opposed to the normalisation of relationships with Israel, deeming them as threatening to the kingdom's political and economic interests. In contrast, the opposition views an improved Israeli relationship as contrary to national interest and that public rallies would harm neither national unity nor stability. While the Islamists remained quiet on the potential threat the pro-establishment party merger posed, the IAF felt threatened by an anti-IAF campaign which it believed to be instigated by the mainstream press. On 15 October, the IAF issued a statement accusing some newspaper columnists of trying to "harm the honourable history of the movement in serving the nation", adding that there was "clear bias against the party due to the big differences between the Islamic movement and the government on many issues, starting with relations with the Zionist enemy and the American occupation" of Iraq. The IAF insisted that the "confidence" Jordanians had in the party was "due to its distinct positions in support of the nation and the positive relationship with the political parties and professional unions" it upheld. A day later, the anti-Islamists had a field day with the resignation of Ali Hawamdeh, a prominent Muslim Brotherhood and IAF member. He accused the movement of financial mismanagement in its institutions and said that he was opposed to the violence and confrontation orientated "growing hard-line trend". In his letter of resignation, Hawamdeh warned of a "catastrophe awaiting the Islamic movement in Jordan if it does not correct its situation". The Brotherhood brushed aside his warnings and accusations as untrue and that the movement always intended to bring about change through "wisdom and example", and certainly without confronting the government. Meanwhile, plans for a major reshuffle in Prime Minister Faisal Al-Fayez's government ended with the announcement of a cabinet containing 10 new ministers. King Abdullah II had asked Al-Fayez to shake up the Cabinet with a view to focussing on poverty, unemployment and political, social and economic development. However the reshuffle left pro-western reformists in office -- a decision that would inevitably play well with Washington. The most significant aspect of the change was the promotion of Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher to the post of deputy prime minister with a new portfolio to improve administration and cut a bloated civil service. Muasher, who had angered Islamists by criticising suicide bombings, was replaced by Hani Mulki, the former ambassador to Egypt and central figure in the Israeli peace deal in 1994. However, the foreign ministerial change is unlikely to have much effect on Jordan's foreign policy which remains the domain of the king. According to prominent political analyst Labib Kamhawi the current changes suggest that King Abdullah II, not the Cabinet, will drive government reform efforts because the "incoming ministers... are simply low profile technocrats".
