January 2010
Jordanian Ambassador to Australia, His Excellency Rajab Sukayri: Q&A session notes
On the nuclear issue:
• In response to the question of why he believed two out of the three approaches outlined in his presentation would be effective, namely economic sanctions and negotiations, when these have proved ineffective in relation to North Korea, the Ambassador responded that in all cases there needs to be a combination of negotiations and sanctions, while the use of military action will have detrimental effects and would destabilise the region, and he emphasised that the use of military was implemented in the past under specific circumstances. Moreover, the potential consequences of military action must also be considered. While nuclear armament in the Middle East would lead to further destabilisation of the region, similarly there is the potential that a military strike would achieve the same consequence;
• The Ambassador pointed out that while he supports the option of nuclear programmes for peaceful purposes (i.e. energy use) there was always a risk of deviation from peaceful to military activities. To eliminate this risk he emphasised the need for “any such programme to be under the supervision and full scope safeguard of the International Atomic Energy Authority”;
• In response to a hypothetical situation, whereby Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the Ambassador warned there was always a risk of an arms race in the region. Though he did point out that Libya was persuaded to cease its military programme through negotiations, while the Iraqi nuclear programme was halted by a military strike. Such military measures are never guaranteed and as long as there is one country pursuing a nuclear program, an arms race in the region is always a dangerous possibility; and
• The Ambassador emphasised that the preferred situation is the establishment of a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East – permitting any country to possess nuclear weapons would always be considered a double standard. A regime’s characteristic – whether democratic or despotic – should make no difference whatsoever.
On the Israeli-Palestinian issue:
• Attaining comprehensive peace in the Middle East region is currently Jordan’s primary concern – especially getting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process back on track;
• In response to a question regarding the movement of Palestinians living in countries outside Israel once a Palestinian State is established, the Ambassador emphasised that the issues of Palestinian refugees is one of the major final status issues that needs to be resolved by the Israelis, Palestinians and the parties involved. He also responded that there may be insufficient space in Gaza and the West Bank to resettle all the Palestinian refugees, much the same as there is insufficient space within Israel for all Jews living around the world; and
• Responding to why peace between Israelis and the Palestinian has been so elusive – despite the fact that a majority of the people and both governments seemingly want this so desperately – the Ambassador noted the complexity of the situation. He specifically mentioned the security factor. Israel requires security and this is a legitimate need for all countries of the region but there is also a range of other final status issues which must be dealt with such as the status of Jerusalem, borders, refugees, water, etc.
On other issues:
• While until now only Jordan and Egypt have reached peace agreements with Israel, it was the Ambassador’s hope that a comprehensive peace settlement will be reached;
• The Ambassador emphasised the effectiveness of “middle powers” such as Australia in playing significant roles in peacemaking efforts in the Middle East. He noted several examples of Australia’s successful role in international peacemaking efforts;
• A recent poll in Jordan commissioned by The Israel Project and conducted by the Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research group which found, among other findings, that only less than a quarter of Jordanians think Israel has the right to exist, was dismissed by the Ambassador as “just another poll among the many which are conducted by many different groups”, and “did not accurately reflect Jordanians’ views” on this issue;
• The Ambassador hoped for a swift resolution on the water dispute with Israel, though he emphasised that this is a vital issue and should be subject to negotiations; and
• The Ambassador briefly touched on the terrible tragedy in Haiti and noted that Jordan had lost three peacekeeping troops who were stationed in Haiti. As in most major international natural disasters, Jordan sent some relief supplies to the country.
• In response to the question of why he believed two out of the three approaches outlined in his presentation would be effective, namely economic sanctions and negotiations, when these have proved ineffective in relation to North Korea, the Ambassador responded that in all cases there needs to be a combination of negotiations and sanctions, while the use of military action will have detrimental effects and would destabilise the region, and he emphasised that the use of military was implemented in the past under specific circumstances. Moreover, the potential consequences of military action must also be considered. While nuclear armament in the Middle East would lead to further destabilisation of the region, similarly there is the potential that a military strike would achieve the same consequence;
• The Ambassador pointed out that while he supports the option of nuclear programmes for peaceful purposes (i.e. energy use) there was always a risk of deviation from peaceful to military activities. To eliminate this risk he emphasised the need for “any such programme to be under the supervision and full scope safeguard of the International Atomic Energy Authority”;
• In response to a hypothetical situation, whereby Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the Ambassador warned there was always a risk of an arms race in the region. Though he did point out that Libya was persuaded to cease its military programme through negotiations, while the Iraqi nuclear programme was halted by a military strike. Such military measures are never guaranteed and as long as there is one country pursuing a nuclear program, an arms race in the region is always a dangerous possibility; and
• The Ambassador emphasised that the preferred situation is the establishment of a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East – permitting any country to possess nuclear weapons would always be considered a double standard. A regime’s characteristic – whether democratic or despotic – should make no difference whatsoever.
On the Israeli-Palestinian issue:
• Attaining comprehensive peace in the Middle East region is currently Jordan’s primary concern – especially getting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process back on track;
• In response to a question regarding the movement of Palestinians living in countries outside Israel once a Palestinian State is established, the Ambassador emphasised that the issues of Palestinian refugees is one of the major final status issues that needs to be resolved by the Israelis, Palestinians and the parties involved. He also responded that there may be insufficient space in Gaza and the West Bank to resettle all the Palestinian refugees, much the same as there is insufficient space within Israel for all Jews living around the world; and
• Responding to why peace between Israelis and the Palestinian has been so elusive – despite the fact that a majority of the people and both governments seemingly want this so desperately – the Ambassador noted the complexity of the situation. He specifically mentioned the security factor. Israel requires security and this is a legitimate need for all countries of the region but there is also a range of other final status issues which must be dealt with such as the status of Jerusalem, borders, refugees, water, etc.
On other issues:
• While until now only Jordan and Egypt have reached peace agreements with Israel, it was the Ambassador’s hope that a comprehensive peace settlement will be reached;
• The Ambassador emphasised the effectiveness of “middle powers” such as Australia in playing significant roles in peacemaking efforts in the Middle East. He noted several examples of Australia’s successful role in international peacemaking efforts;
• A recent poll in Jordan commissioned by The Israel Project and conducted by the Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research group which found, among other findings, that only less than a quarter of Jordanians think Israel has the right to exist, was dismissed by the Ambassador as “just another poll among the many which are conducted by many different groups”, and “did not accurately reflect Jordanians’ views” on this issue;
• The Ambassador hoped for a swift resolution on the water dispute with Israel, though he emphasised that this is a vital issue and should be subject to negotiations; and
• The Ambassador briefly touched on the terrible tragedy in Haiti and noted that Jordan had lost three peacekeeping troops who were stationed in Haiti. As in most major international natural disasters, Jordan sent some relief supplies to the country.
