A loyalist parliament may have been elected but at what cost to Jordan's social cohesion and national unity?
By Lamis Andoni
Al-Jazeera
"....
Loyalist parliament
It was therefore no surprise that last week's elections produced a loyalist parliament with little representation for opposition parties and candidates.
The results were also defined by the absence of representatives from the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and the largest opposition group in the country. The IAF boycotted the general election to express its rejection of the electoral law and the open rigging of, and security interference in, the country's last election in 2006.
While there have been complaints of irregularities in last week's vote - particularly vote-buying by wealthy candidates and claims of government intervention - they were widely considered to be an improvement on 2006 when acts of mass vote forgery and the illegal transfer of votes in favour of government-backed candidates was widespread.
The failure of consecutive governments to heed popular demands to modify the electoral law simultaneously reflects an official state of uncertainty and a determination to pass laws and economic restructuring without broad consent.....
Strengthening tribalism
Furthermore, Jordan's pursuit of a neoliberal economic model, under pressure from the West, has bred resentment as more of the population has been pushed down the social ladder by price hikes, the cutting of government subsidies for fuel and the privatisation of public services.
Over the past two decades the government has resorted to repressive measures to silence and marginalise the opposition and instead of dealing with political and social grievances it has sought to manufacture consent through a flawed electoral law and manipulation of the country's tribal structure.....
Divide and rule
In the cases of Amman and Zarqa, the law did not only aim at marginalising urban voters but also at limiting the number of Palestinian members of parliament and weakening the power of Palestinian voters - the majority of whom have traditionally voted for the Islamic Action Front or leftist and pan-Arab nationalist candidates.
This combination of a restrictive law and government policies that seem the favour the rich has created social divisions and fuelled tensions between Jordanians and Palestinians.
Instead of nurturing a healthy debate and healing rifts, consecutive governments have, to varying extents, played a dangerous game of divide and rule....."
By Lamis Andoni
Al-Jazeera
"....
Loyalist parliament
It was therefore no surprise that last week's elections produced a loyalist parliament with little representation for opposition parties and candidates.
The results were also defined by the absence of representatives from the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and the largest opposition group in the country. The IAF boycotted the general election to express its rejection of the electoral law and the open rigging of, and security interference in, the country's last election in 2006.
While there have been complaints of irregularities in last week's vote - particularly vote-buying by wealthy candidates and claims of government intervention - they were widely considered to be an improvement on 2006 when acts of mass vote forgery and the illegal transfer of votes in favour of government-backed candidates was widespread.
The failure of consecutive governments to heed popular demands to modify the electoral law simultaneously reflects an official state of uncertainty and a determination to pass laws and economic restructuring without broad consent.....
Strengthening tribalism
Furthermore, Jordan's pursuit of a neoliberal economic model, under pressure from the West, has bred resentment as more of the population has been pushed down the social ladder by price hikes, the cutting of government subsidies for fuel and the privatisation of public services.
Over the past two decades the government has resorted to repressive measures to silence and marginalise the opposition and instead of dealing with political and social grievances it has sought to manufacture consent through a flawed electoral law and manipulation of the country's tribal structure.....
Divide and rule
In the cases of Amman and Zarqa, the law did not only aim at marginalising urban voters but also at limiting the number of Palestinian members of parliament and weakening the power of Palestinian voters - the majority of whom have traditionally voted for the Islamic Action Front or leftist and pan-Arab nationalist candidates.
This combination of a restrictive law and government policies that seem the favour the rich has created social divisions and fuelled tensions between Jordanians and Palestinians.
Instead of nurturing a healthy debate and healing rifts, consecutive governments have, to varying extents, played a dangerous game of divide and rule....."
No comments:
Post a Comment