The “debate”, using it metaphorically here, about national
identity that ensued after the publication of the outcome of the Royal
Committee to Modernize the Political System (RCMPS) is thought provoking. The
one-sided avalanche of accusations originated with an accusatory claim that the
RCMPS coined a new phrase “collective national identity” which “indicates hidden
agenda”. Then, a few social media activists picked it up and continued using
the accusing language as the main defining and framing discourse of a
systematic attack on the committee’s outcome. Two former prime ministers used
that language too, and expressively accused the committee of hiding something
up its sleeves.
اضافة اعلان
Let us examine the discourse and the motives.
The accusations were based on cherry-picked, selective and
out of context phrases. The attackers, who appeared to be fishing for
something, neither presented a coherent argument nor were consistent in their
declared, on-the-record, positions. The declaratory, lamenting, and discursive
language they used reflects politically motivated attacks that lack
objectivity, logic and reason.
The 90-member strong committee was composed of all colors of
the ideological spectrum, from right to the left and everything in between.
None of these members objected to any point in the final document, including
the usage of “collective national identity” which is not new in the political
discourse in Jordan. Late King Hussein, King Abdullah and many national
documents emphasized it in many forms and by using phrases such as “Jordanians
from all origins and walks of life”.
The legal interpretation of this collective identity is the
nationality law in which all Jordanians who hold a national ID number are
defined as rightful citizens who have civic obligations, civil liberties and
political rights.
Jordan, unlike all other countries in the region, has
objectively become the closest to the “melting pot” despite the elite-centered
subjective declarations to the opposite. Its pot is full of ingredients: Arabs
from Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Hijaz, Libya, Sudan, Egypt, and
Circassians, Chechens, Kurds, Pakistanis, Bengalis, Asians, and Turkmen; they
are Muslims and Christians. These are yet to become more citizen-centered
horizontal than vertical “political society”. The process of building a
political society takes time, ability to manage differences, compromise,
clarity of vision, and determination to reach the goal of legally balanced
state-citizen and state-society relations.
These primordial identities, ethnic and religious, have been
present in all societies, including the most advanced democracies, but their
presence in a democratic process does not mean they have become civic
identities, although democracy tends to smooth sharp edges. Civic identities
are based on free individual choice. One may choose one of them freely, too.
However, the danger rests in chauvinistic interpretation of primordial
identities where they become exclusionist, isolating, and self-righteous.
Multiculturalism in a democratic setting makes it clear that
“cultural/primordial” identities ought to stay apolitical. This means when a
cultural identity seeks political representation by using primordial
foundations for acquiring political power, the civic premise of “civil polity”
changes and turns from horizontal civic identity to vertical primordial
identity.
History of war and peace teaches us that the intensification
of vertical/primordial/cultural identities leads to a range of problems, from
silent conflicts to all-out violent wars based on, largely, illusionary and
imaginative animosities.
Vertical identities are exclusionary by nature. Hence, using
them as political identities contributes to the disintegration of “societies”
into “sub-societies”, as is the case in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Israel,
among many other countries such as Catalonia, in Spain, and in Eastern Europe.
Despite the reductionist talk about vertical identities in
Jordan, the horizontal identity has very promising potential as a rational
choice to develop the country. The changes to the election and political
parties’ laws will pave the way for a more horizontal representation of
citizens during the next 10 years.
The future belongs to those who work for it and we have to
make sure that the unequal economic development gap between Amman and the rest
of the governorates is bridged in order to rebalance state-society relations
and build institutional legitimacy based on development-guided vision for the
country.
The overwhelming majority of Jordanians are “proud” to be
Jordanians. Making them “very proud” requires a lot more serious work across
the board.
The writer is chairman NAMA Strategic Intelligence Solutions.
[email protected]
Read more Opinion and Analysis
.jpg)
.jpg)
