Regarding Jordan's peace treaty and other treaties with Islamic politico-religious regimes

Submitted by Prashant (India), Jan 8, 2023 at 23:11

Dear Dr Pipes,
Reader Dave in his message entitle "message" suggested that Jordan's peace treated and monarchy cannot be assumed to be permanent. You agreed with Dave. I believe in using Occum's Razor as a tool for analysis (ref1). I also like to make generalizations and run with them until good number of exceptions to them are found. The most recent constitution of Jordan declares itself to be a Islamic regime (Article 2; ref 2). In general, non-separation of church and state hurts both the church and the state. In particular and in the case of Islam, non-separation of church and state is very harmful for Muslim and non-Muslims near those Muslims. History is a witness that anyone who made a peace treaty with Muslims did not live to tell the tale (I invite historians to challenge this assertion with evidence). Right from the time of Muhammad, Arabic tribes that made treaties with Muhammad were destroyed as soon as they made their first mistake (or even if they did not make a mistake).

So, yes, any peace treaty with Jordan will not be permanent. If the monarchy in Jordan dies, the next regime will definitely destroy that treaty.

My advice to all Islamic regimes is to adopt democracy and secularism as soon as possible. That is good for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Ref 1: Occum's razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Ref 2: Constitution of Jordan: https://cco.gov.jo/en-us/Jordanian-Constitutional

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".