 |
| Jordan's King Abdullah II |
The party list system favors larger coalitions with an ideological agenda such as the Islamists, while the district-based system tends to return tribal pro-government candidates who muster local support from their particular clan and relatives.
But the Brotherhood and others say...that the elections will result in an ineffective parliament filled with palace loyalists.
The question is, will the reforms lead to any substantive change, and will that change look more like Egypt's revolution or Tunisia's?
I think we have to look how Jordan’s King Abdullah II has reacted with the event of the Arab Spring. The first revolutionary movements began in the beginning of 2011, and I believe Jordan experienced some unrest. King Abdullah did not react with an oppressive force on his country. I do not think you can compare Jordan to either Egypt or Tunisia. Both were extremely violent and were in reaction to their oppressive government. And the article even states that Jordan is in little danger of a mass upheaval that toppled other regimes. Protests are peaceful and the people still support the monarchy. Abdullah has changed some things, even if minor such as the constitution and the creation of a constitutional court. These minor changes give hope to the people for the future. I believe that minor reforms will go a long way in satisfying the people. Abdullah will do what is necessarily to ensure peace in his country. Also it is important to note that despite the Brotherhood opposing many of the king’s policies, the Brotherhood has remained largely loyal to Abdullah’s dynasty, which claims ancestry to Islam’s Prophet Muhammad. That claim in itself reaffirms the monarchy in Jordan and makes me think that Jordan will not be seeing any type of revolutionary movement as seen in other countries affected by the Arab Spring. Culture and Religion are the hegemon in the region.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lizzie in that these protests are not comparable to those of the earlier Arab Spring. It seems all of this could have occurred within Jordan even if the Arab Spring had never taken place. That being said, there is the potential for escalations in protesting, but only months from now.
ReplyDeleteAppeasement is rarely an effective strategy, especially if protests continue as they are in Jordan. Reforms are clearly not working if Abdullah has amended close to 1/3 of their constitution and the protestors are still angry. And reforms won't work until the earlier voting system of multiple ballots is put back into place; the system that gave the Muslim Brotherhood a parliamentary majority.
As for now, Jordan appears to be safe from widespread violence. It is now up to the Muslim Brotherhood as to what strategy they want to pursue to receive the changes they want, and hopefully their current method of abstaining from voting will be as far as they go.
As Collin and Lizzie have stated above, these Jordanian protest are peaceful, but there is still unrest amongst the people. Some believe the revolution that occurred in Egypt was combination of unrest and government suppression, but when there is unrest amongst the people there will be an uprising until their demands are met. Abdullah's attempts of appeasement is a nice effort compared to other Middle Eastern rulers responses to unrest. Specifically, the change to a two ballot system is a progressive thought " [b]ut the Brotherhood and others say that it does not go far enough". The hope and attempt to avoid a revolution has caused Abdullah to reform 42 articles and allow teacher unions to form, which demonstrates some willingness, but I believe that will not be good enough for the Jordanian people. Seeing the successful of other revolutions will causes Jordanians to not settle or compromise over their desires.; therefore there will be a revolution and can occur more smoothly with Abdullah's willingness.
ReplyDelete