King Abdullah and the Iraqi elections

Someone asked me what I think about King Abdullah's recent statements alleging Iranian subversion of the Iraqi elections, and about the Iraqi exile vote being counted (for some reason) in Amman (via Iraqi Press Monitor email, not online yet).  I don't have any inside scoop on this (yet), but the logic seems pretty obvious to me:  Jordan, relatively unnoticed by most people, has been perhaps the single biggest Arab winner of the Iraq war. 

First, the potentially catastrophic impact on the country from the war didn't materialize - which doesn't mean, as some seem to think, that the risk wasn't real.   Jordanian officials were extremely worried about massive refugee flows, use of WMD, spillover effects, domestic unrest.  But they got through it okay, by regime standards.

Second, after all that happened, Jordan ended up with its guy in charge.  It's often forgotten that Iyad Allawi's Iraqi National Accord was based out of Jordan, and that Allawi has excellent ties to the Jordanian regime.  Chalabi, on the other hand, is a bitter nemesis of the Hashemite Kingdom, ever since that whole Petra Bank swindle thing, and Abdullah would have done just about anything to keep him out of power.  That's two big problems with free and fair elections, from a Jordanian standpoint, then:  Allawi is highly unlikely to win, so their guy loses power;  and Chalabi might slip back in on a Shia list. 

Third, Jordan has leveraged Abdullah's outspoken support for the United States - over extremely negative Jordanian public opinion - into considerable coinage in Washington.  Lots of visits, some cash, some political support, bipartisan adoration in Congress - all that Hussein had, and then some.  And, don't forget, a blind eye to internal Jordanian anti-democratic moves.   This gives the Jordanian regime considerable incentive to be helpful to the Bush adminstration, especially when such help coincides with its own interests - so saying "no elections in January" probably is off the table for them.

So based on those three observations about regime interests, the warnings about Iranian interference and the hosting of the ballot boxes both seem like hedges against "bad election results" - which, cynically speaking, is roughly the same thing as "honest election results."    

Comments

[praktike]

Interesting. Juan Cole says that Abdullah is worried about anti-monarchist sentiments in Shi'ism.

[Urduniya]

Abdullah should be worried about anti-monarchist sentiments in Jordan.

Maybe it's all been good for the regime, but regular people like us are finding it hard to buy or lease, because educated Iraqi exiles have driven housing costs through the roof. Which is also probably good for their regime.

[the aardvark]

Joseph Samaha, editor of Beirut's Al Safir, goes even farther than me in today's column in an exceptionally bitter response to Abdullah's anti-Shia statements: he suggests that Abdullah and Zarqawi are fighting the same battle for the same ends! Samaha accuses Abdullah of being the first Arab official to openly adopt Zarqawi's warning against a Shia axis, to prioritize Shia religious identity over national belonging. Strong stuff, which I think goes a bit over the top, but which certainly caught my eye this morning...