If we were asked to summarize our attitude to the late King
Hussein Ibn Talal of Jordan in a word, we would certainly
decline. It is a good thing that we have some 800 words in
which to do so.
Ruler of a small country without any natural resources that
Winston Churchill, as British Colonial Secretary in 1923,
said he created in one afternoon by splitting the territory
east of the Jordan in the Palestine Mandate off from the
rest, Hussein, with his wile, guile and sincerity, became
nonetheless one of the seminal figures of the century. The
high level delegations from around the world that
participated in the royal funeral of this small Middle
Eastern Country testify to the world consensus about the late
King's importance and the high regard in which he was held by
all.
Because of the special relationship between the late King and
Israel, there is genuine sorrow in Israel at his passing. He
maintained high level ties -- both public and private -- with
Israeli leaders for most of the 46 years of his rule at great
personal risk, and said that the signing five years ago of a
treaty with Israel was "without a doubt my proudest
accomplishment." But his real tie to the people of Israel was
cemented in a dramatic gesture when he paid a condolence
visit to the families of seven young girls murdered by a
Jordanian Army soldier in Beit Shemesh. He went on his knees
before the mourners and asked their forgiveness for what he
called the despicable act of his countryman. It was a deed
that indicated that peace was more for him than just a
calculated, politically useful goal, but rather a true and
deep-rooted aim.
His recent efforts for peace in our troubled area, including
his appearance at the Wye Conference Center, weakened by his
long bout with cancer, served to blur the memory for some of
the long years in which he was a bitter enemy of Israel, when
his soldiers spilled much Jewish blood. In the first years of
his reign, when east Jerusalem was under his rule, Jordanian
sharpshooters of the Arab Legion killed innocent citizens at
every opportunity across the border. In 1967, when the
massive Arab armies of Egypt and Syria threatened to wipe out
the Jewish refuge, Hussein ignored repeated Israeli pleas to
stay out of the fray, apparently in the hope of sharing in
the spoils of victory. The result was obviously one of his
worst losses, as Israel gained control of Jerusalem and the
west bank of the Jordan River.
Hussein was also virtually the only Arab leader (the other
exception was Yasser Arafat) who sided with Iraq in the Gulf
War, refusing to join the Arab and indeed, the entire world,
in the coalition against the Iraqi despot. It was said that
he feared an Iraqi invasion and/or internal unrest if he
followed any other course, but he paid dearly for his choice
as he lost hundreds of millions of dollars yearly that he had
been receiving from other Arab states.
This dark side has been forgotten in the collective world
memory, as Hussein played a central and very public role in
the Middle East peace process of more recent years. He went a
long way in signing a full peace treaty with Israel,
accompanied by many visits to and from Israel and moving
personal gestures, against considerable opposition within his
own country. King Hussein certainly put his personal prestige
and all his considerable influence on the line to win broad
public support for peace.
He was not satisfied with peace between his own kingdom and
Israel, but worked hard and effectively to advance the peace
between Israel and the Palestinians, climaxed by his visit to
the marathon negotiations preceding the signing of the most
recent agreement in the United States, weak and drawn from
his debilitating medical treatments. It was an heroic effort
for peace that was universally admired.
The transition of leaders in her neighbor can only be a cause
for concern to Israel. The kingdom of Hussein was an island
of stability in the Middle East, and our hope and prayer is
that his son and heir, King Abdullah, will ably and smoothly
fill the large shoes of his father.
