With parliamentary elections right around the corner, Jordan Business met with the Secretary General of the Islamic Action Front to discuss politics, economics and business.

As the political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, the Islamic Action Front (IAF) is Jordan’s biggest and most recognizable opposition party. Since its first successful taste of politics in the 1989 elections, the IAF has pursued an agenda that has gone largely against the political grain, with a parliamentary voting record that has a tendency to go against the government. With the change of the Electoral Law in 1993, to a “one-man one-vote” system, support for the Islamists was curbed throughout the 1990s, though in more recent years it has seen somewhat of a mild comeback to complement the successful rise of Islamic politics in the region. Whether it is Hizballah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the IAF is by default entwined with Islamic sensibilities, making it an easy appeal to its constituents. This has also been coupled with the general public sentiment in most of these neighboring countries, including Jordan, as a recognizable failure on the part of a traditional old guard that has been in power for years, failing miserably at bringing sustainable reform and often times tainted with corruption.

Islam, personified by the Islamists and their party, is now seen as the alternative; the solution. Though just how effective is the IAF as an opposition party, and what if free elections took place in Jordan and the party found itself in the majority? Would they be prepared to lead a government? What platform would they run on, and what legacy would they leave behind? While their religious beliefs are widely known, as well as their run-ins with various Jordanian governments, their exact political and economic views are often left obscure to the common citizen. The IAF’s Secretary-general, Zkei Bany Arshead, sat down with Jordan Business to discuss his party’s ideas and share his thoughts on the municipal and upcoming parliamentary elections.

JB: Your party has boycotted parliamentary elections before; so will it be participating in this year’s elections?
ZBA: The government has not yet set a date for parliamentary elections but right now, next to the problem of the Electoral Law (of 1993), there remains unequal and unbalanced distribution of votes amongst the municipalities. Amman, Zarqa and Irbid represent 70% of Jordan’s population, but receive only 30% of political representation in the Lower House of Parliament. The government claims this is done to support the regions that are “less fortunate,” though those who live in these marginalized regions are, with all due respect, people that are less knowledgeable and less educated, culturally and politically, thus they should not be the majority in the parliament. This is a cautious topic; we can understand that the less fortunate regions are witnessing an economic revival with many projects slated, but to have them play the majority in political life, this is a backwards equation that is unlike anything around in the world today. So for us, it’s not just about the Electoral Law but the distribution of seats amongst the municipalities.

With time this has become an obstruction to political reform in the country. In a survey published in Al Rai newspaper, 61% of those polled voiced their intention not to vote in the parliamentary elections. Recent statistics have shown that over 900,000 Jordanians have yet to register their names for voting.

JB: What is the main reason for this? Is it laziness?
ZBA: The main reason has been the absence of anything to push the citizen to go and vote. They have come to a point of political depression. Some of it is partly laziness, yes, though that is not reflected in the majority of this number. The best case scenario of political participation is 50% to 60%, marginalizing what is called the silent majority, which has opted not to participate at all. The existence of a silent majority is the responsibility of the Jordanian government, which has failed to convince the citizen to vote. So we have before us a complicated situation, but facing the problem must come from participating in the parliamentary elections.

JB: What do you see as the biggest impediments when it comes to voting on election day?
ZBA: Everyone has admitted, including the Minister of Interior, that voting crimes exist. However, the government has not done a single thing to fight these injustices when they are committed in their favor. For example, we have witnessed citizens voting more than once and in more than one area. The Minister of Interior acknowledged that voter fraud had occurred but that it didn’t affect the results. It’s not about the results but the principle; those who commit a crime should be punished. The fact that a person can use his card to vote anywhere in the country is a big problem. They are being moved around in large numbers from one area to another in order to improve the results of a certain candidate. Buying votes has also become present in Parliament. Those who have the money can afford the power. These problems all require a commitment on behalf of the government to address them as well as put an end to them.

JB: What is the party’s exact stance about Jordan’s relations with Israel?
ZBA: The peace treaty with Israel had two purposes: one was political and the other economic. Politically, it was there for Israel to acknowledge Jordan’s borders, in an attempt to extinguish any thought of what is called “the alternative homeland” (for Palestinians). However, the idea is still around in Israel, especially with those who represent the far right who have no problem in implementing this concept with the first opportunity they get.

As for the economic purpose, we were told at the time by Shimon Peres that Israel had hoped that the average Jordanian’s income would one day be equal to that of an Israeli. At the time, the average Israeli’s income was $14,000, while on average a Jordanian made $1,400. So that being said, we should revise our treaty with Israeli to see what we gained and what we lost from it. Whether it’s the Qualifying Industrial Zone program or tourism, Israel is the biggest benefactor of all these things. Even with Petra becoming a world wonder, it is Israel that benefits the most.

In short, our relationship with Israel has not been beneficial to us in any way, neither politically or economically. Poverty and unemployment levels in Jordan have not changed, and if anything, they’ve increased.

JB: Over the past decade Jordan has been treading down the path of economic reform, industrialization and privatization. It has had its advantages and disadvantages. If your party were in the position of decision making, what would it offer as an alternative by way of platform?
ZBA: Before talking about the economy I would like to point to the big problem of corruption, which has had a bigger impact on the Jordanian economy than most people think. At the same time, poverty remains extensive.

As for Jordan’s relation to the West in general and the US in particular, we don’t believe that any country can live isolated from another. So we have no problem with working with another country and signing economic agreements, provided, of course, we realize benefits for the Jordanian people. We oppose one-sided economic agreements, where there is nothing to guarantee any benefit for the people.

JB: What about unemployment, does the IAF have any solutions for this problem?
ZBA: It is a subject we’ve discussed many times and it falls within our economic vision but it is not complete. There is a sense of completion perhaps, such as cooperating with more Arab countries, especially with regards to oil production. Part of our country’s biggest problem is not investing enough in its natural resources. There is a lot of dialogue about the existence of oil, as well as copper and other resources that could, with the right political will, offer alternatives.

Between The Lines
Critics of the government, led by the IAF, accuse it of implementing extensive economic adjustment policies without caring much about the impact these may have on the average Jordanian citizen. Look at the detail, however, and you may despair at the depth and complexity of the problems the IAF faces. For all their rhetoric about offering an alternative to the ruling majority, most of what they have to offer is superficial. With no ready-to-go solutions to such major problems as unemployment, the future looks increasingly uncertain for the IAF.