This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 AMMAN 004722 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA/RA LAWWON, NEA/IPA RATNEY, OES/PCI SHIPPE 
STATE PASS USAID DAVID O'BRIEN 
TELAVIV FOR GUMBINER 
JERUSALEM FOR RANZ 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/20/2007 
TAGS: SENV PREL JO MEPN
SUBJECT: ARAB-ISRAELI COOPERATION--MERC MAKES THE GRADE 
 
Classified By: DCM GREGORY L. BERRY, REASONS 1.5 (B) AND (D) 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) An embassy survey of Jordanian scientists 
collaborating with Israeli counterparts on MERC (Middle East 
Regional Cooperation) projects confirmed that, despite the 
tense political climate in the region, the projects generally 
are on track.  Creative measures have been taken to maintain 
momentum and continue the cooperative spirit of MERC.  While 
many of those we interviewed stated personal anger toward 
Israel since the second Intifada began in September 2000, 
their personal and professional relationships with Israeli 
colleagues remained intact.  On the whole, Jordanian MERC 
scientists seem to have been able to separate their politics 
and emotions from their professional activities.  Staying 
above the emotionally charged political fray speaks volumes 
about the success of MERC in fostering these kinds of 
enduring people-to-people contacts.  End Summary. 
 
--------------------------------------- 
MERC-urial JORDANIAN/ISRAELI RELATIONS? 
--------------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) In an effort to gauge the effect of the Intifada and 
deteriorating political and security climate on the Middle 
East Regional Cooperation (MERC) projects with a Jordanian 
component, we sounded out a small sampling of Jordanian 
participants.  These projects, funded through the Middle East 
Peace Process mechanism and administered by USAID, typically 
have 3-year funding cycles and project budgets ranging from 
several hundred thousand dollars to two million dollars. 
MERC,s mission is to encourage scientific cooperation 
between Israelis and Arabs by funding collaborative projects 
on topics of mutual concern to the core parties which may 
improve the social, economic, or health conditions of the 
population.  The MERC projects undergo rigorous scientific 
peer review before approval. Each project must include an 
Israeli scientist and at least one Arab scientist from the 
region.  US scientists may also participate, but not as a 
buffer to direct cooperation.  Currently, there are 19 active 
MERC projects, most of which applied and received funding 
approval before September 2000, the beginning of the second 
Intifada. 
 
¶3. (SBU) For this report, we interviewed 10 Jordanian 
scientists or individuals that are actively working on MERC 
projects.  We investigated the impact of two years of 
political unrest on their ability to sustain momentum on the 
MERC projects.  Not surprisingly, most MERC projects 
underwent significant changes with the onset of the Intifada. 
 These changes, from the logistical to the emotional to the 
philosophical, reflect corresponding shifts within Jordanian 
society,s attitudes towards relations with its Israeli 
neighbors. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Nevertheless, the status of those MERC projects we 
investigated gives hope.  A very few projects are not 
functioning and have been postponed indefinitely, while some 
have had great, even inspirational, success despite the 
Intifada.  In some rare cases, other participants have 
initiated totally new cooperative projects after the violence 
began.  Generally speaking, MERC projects remain on track, 
despite the difficult and sensitive political situation. 
 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
BALANCING THE INTIFADA WITH REGIONAL COOPERATION 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶5. (SBU) All ongoing MERC projects have necessarily 
transformed, as the violence of the Intifada became the 
status quo.  The most obvious changes were logistical, as 
joint work necessitating border crossings between Jordan and 
Israel became increasingly difficult for both practical and 
political reasons.  The most commonly reported adjustments 
had to do both with the cancellation of, or relocation and 
reduced frequency of, scheduled meetings.  In most cases, 
MERC participants were scheduled to meet on a regular basis 
and rotate the location of the meetings between the 
participating countries, something that became increasingly 
difficult over time. 
 
¶6. (SBU) With the beginning of the Intifada, travel became 
much more difficult, especially travel to Israel.  Travel 
anywhere by participating Palestinian scientists ebbed and 
flowed with the closures on the ground.  More than half of 
the scientists we spoke to said that at least a few meetings 
had been cancelled, and some individuals admitted they were 
unable to hold entire series of meetings.   Alternate 
&neutral8 meeting spots outside the Middle East, such as 
Cyprus, were often arranged, but it wasn,t just that the 
number of meetings dropped, but also the quality of the 
meetings that were able to take place diminished. 
¶7. (SBU) In about half of the projects that also involved a 
Palestinian component, Palestinian partners were not able to 
attend the meetings.  In other cases, the rotation of meeting 
locations was meant to provide site visits and training on 
specialized equipment, most often located in Israel, which 
could not take place with the outbreak of the Intifada.   In 
one project, training on medical equipment in Israel which 
was vital to the second phase of the project did not take 
place because of the inability of Jordanian and Palestinian 
scientists to get entry visas (MERC Project Number M17-055). 
 
¶8. (SBU) Projects also suffered because of the necessary 
postponement or canceling of research, as a result of 
security concerns on both sides of the Jordan River.  In the 
most extreme example, a MERC project on seismic calibration 
(M18-035) was postponed indefinitely after the Israeli and 
Jordanian militaries prevented scientists from conducting 
controlled underground explosions in the Jordan Valley 
necessary for the research. 
 
----------------------- 
PEER PRESSURE ON CAMPUS 
----------------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) All of the university scientists we met acknowledged 
they felt some form of pressure to postpone their work with 
their Israeli counterparts.  The pressure took several 
forms-- peer pressure, personal convictions/philosophy, and 
external professional pressure. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Most of the interviewees, with one exception 
(M21-065), said that their superiors knew about their 
participation in the MERC program, and, in most cases, had 
openly encouraged them to participate when the projects were 
in their planning stages before September 2000. Most of those 
interviewed did remark, however, that, while their superiors 
approved of their continued participation in MERC, they were 
extremely concerned that their participation not become 
public. 
 
¶11. (SBU) Of greater concern to the university scientists was 
the perception by their professional colleagues of their 
Israeli collaboration.  Most of our meetings with university 
scientists were held furtively, behind closed doors and with 
no acknowledgment of the meeting when interrupted by phone 
calls.  Many of the university scientists took pains to keep 
not only their MERC participation but also our interview 
itself as discreet as possible, in one extreme case even 
asking the interviewer not to &come in an embassy car or 
tell anyone at the university why you are here.8  All the 
university scientists confided to us that most of their 
colleagues did not know of their Israeli collaboration, and 
that if they did, it could be used against them in department 
turf battles, personal disagreements, or passed on to student 
groups that are notorious opponents of Jordan,s peace treaty 
with Israel.  We noted that most of the MERC scientists 
interviewed had no knowledge of other professors 
participating on MERC projects, even when those colleagues 
were in collocated departments. 
 
------------------------------------- 
TOEING THE PARTY LINE AT THE MINISTRY 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶12. (SBU) The government scientists, in contrast, were 
extremely open about their participation in the MERC program. 
 These meetings were held openly, literally with doors left 
ajar. In this public sphere, cooperation with the Israelis 
was taken for granted in many cases, and the MERC projects 
were by no means the only projects with an Israeli component 
their offices had worked on.  Despite the personal 
convictions of the government scientists, which may have been 
antithetical to Israeli collaboration, most felt sincerely 
that their cooperation was an integral element of their job 
and therefore never considered ending their participation. 
 
-------------- 
SOUL SEARCHING 
-------------- 
 
¶13. (SBU) Most scientists went through some degree of 
soul-searching regarding their work with Israelis, despite 
the fact that most of them never truly considered leaving the 
projects.  Often this personal examination ebbed and flowed 
with the fluctuating situation on the ground, despite most 
scientists reporting good to excellent relationships with the 
Israeli individuals they worked with.  Opinions about 
Israelis generally ran the gamut from considering them 
&normal people who have elected terrible leaders8 to 
&cold-blooded child-killers.8  Many MERC participants 
reflected, rather emotionally, that they &just don,t feel 
good8 about working with Israelis, and that they have had to 
justify their continued participation to themselves, as well 
as to others, by placing their scientific endeavors above 
politics. 
 
¶14. (C) Half of those interviewed said they felt some degree 
of pressure from their extended families, especially those 
Jordanian scientists of Palestinian heritage.  30% of the 
scientists said they made a deliberate effort to not disclose 
their Israeli collaboration to their extended families for 
fear that it would elicit too much &talk8 about town and 
reflect negatively on the entire household.  In the end, only 
two scientists, Palestinian-Jordanian brothers, claimed that 
their personal convictions led them to postpone their 
participation (M21-012).  One brother,s highly visible 
position as President of a Jordanian university likely 
contributed to their inability or unwillingness to continue 
their cooperation at this time. 
 
------------------------------ 
ISLAMISTS*BARK WORSE THAN BITE 
------------------------------ 
 
¶15. (C) By far, the type of pressure most widely felt by all 
the scientists came from organizations such as student groups 
and professional associations.  For the university scientists 
especially, fear of the politically active student groups, 
with their newspapers, anti-normalization pamphlets, and 
blacklists, constituted the biggest threat. Most of our 
interlocutors put the number of Islamists and radically 
anti-normalization students at 10-15% of the university 
student body, but described them as extremely organized and 
active on campus, thus attributing to them greater clout than 
their numbers might dictate.  For many university scientists, 
being blacklisted could make them targets of demonstrations, 
petitions, and, in some cases, physical violence.  At the 
time of our survey, a Jordanian university president had 
recently been stabbed by a student, and a third of those MERC 
participants sited this as an example of political violence 
they could face should their names be associated with Israeli 
collaboration. 
 
¶16. (C) Almost as prominent was the fear of being blacklisted 
or targeted by the Islamist-dominated professional 
associations, such as the engineers syndicate.  Most feared 
they would be expelled from their respective syndicates, and 
that their professional reputations could be severely 
tarnished by being listed in the associations, publications 
as an &Israeli collaborator.8  One interviewee confided to 
us that in the beginning of his project he appeared often on 
Israeli TV, each time after which he received threatening 
phone calls from members of the Jordanian Doctors, Syndicate 
telling him to cease his participation or face expulsion 
(M17-055).  He since has toned-down his public profile in the 
project, but cites the support and patronage of the current 
Minister of Health as a reason he continues to have job 
security. 
 
¶17. (C) When pushed about the possible outcomes of being 
blacklisted, most scientists admitted that concrete, negative 
results would be minimal.  One interviewee who was 
blacklisted in the past year said that, despite his anger 
over the publication of his name, inclusion on the list did 
him little harm personally, and no damage to him 
professionally. (M21-065)  Many of the scientists mentioned 
that, despite the fact that being blacklisted would generate 
talk and attract undue attention, the accusations and threats 
of the student groups and professional associations in 
reality &had no teeth.8  With the exception of one 
scientist who said he was questioned for four hours by the 
Jordanian intelligence service about his participation in a 
MERC project and who believes his phone is currently 
monitored, none of the scientists felt any pressure from the 
GOJ. In the end, the moderate (if quietly so) stance of both 
the GOJ and university administrations is what allows these 
scientists to continue their work. 
 
------------------------ 
OVERCOMING THE OBSTACLES 
------------------------ 
 
¶18. (SBU) Despite logistical problems and societal pressures 
posed by working with the Israelis, those interviewed showed 
a great deal of creativity in overcoming these challenges and 
continuing their work.  In many cases, research goals were 
adjusted or, more commonly, MERC scientists creatively 
maneuvered their way around the problems in order to continue 
work. 
¶19. (SBU) In one case, Jordanian students were still sent to 
Israel for training, despite the fact that the interviewed 
scientist had to pay them double the original per diem 
(M20-068).  More commonly, some scientists would add an extra 
day onto personal travel in order to meet with their Israeli 
counterparts in a third country.  In addition, many of our 
Jordanian interlocutors reported that Palestinian 
counterparts would spend an extra day in Amman upon return 
from abroad in order to be trained by Jordanians, even when 
the political climate prevented them from continuing their 
work in the West Bank or Gaza. 
 
-------------------- 
&EAST8 VERSUS &WEST8 
-------------------- 
 
¶20. (C) Throughout the interviews, two major themes emerged: 
the split between Jordanian East Bankers and 
Palestinian-Jordanians (West Bankers) on their view of 
Israelis; and the importance of &professional ethics8 in 
keeping projects on track. 
 
¶21. (C) Our interviews revealed the somewhat schizophrenic 
nature of Jordanian society,s relationship with Israel. 
Those surveyed ranged from a Christian East Banker who viewed 
Palestinians as the greatest threat now facing Jordan to 
Palestinian-Jordanian scientists who have family living under 
curfew in the West Bank.  This range of social backgrounds 
produced a corresponding wide array of opinions on the 
conflict and their participation in the MERC program. 
 
¶22. (C) East Bankers were less virulent in their condemnation 
of Israeli policy, and were much more open to continuing work 
with individual Israeli scientists than were 
Palestinian-Jordanians.  Many of them described their 
experiences on the projects as &excellent8, and had only 
positive interaction with their Israeli counterparts.  Most 
spoke to their belief that cooperation and continued 
interaction between the two countries was the only option, 
and most often self-identified as &pro-peace.8  In the 
words of one East Bank scientist, &Jordan has no option but 
to go West.8  A few of the East Bank scientists went so far 
as to call themselves &pioneers,8 one of whom dismissed the 
pressure he is now under by philosophizing that &those of us 
who start things are bound to suffer.  In 20 years, everyone 
will be working with the Israelis, and I will be seen as one 
of the first.8 
 
¶23. (C) In contrast, the Palestinian-Jordanians spoke more 
vehemently against Israeli policy, often discoursing about 
Israeli occupation and Israeli policy personified in Ariel 
Sharon.  Despite the fact that all of the 
Palestinian-Jordanians described positive, even friendly 
personal relationships with Israeli counterparts, most still 
admitted that they, at times, still felt uncomfortable in 
their presence.  On the whole, the Palestinian-Jordanian 
scientists seemed less able than the East Bankers to see 
their Israeli counterparts as individuals.  One 
Palestinian-Jordanian shared with us his views:  &You know, 
this Israeli, he,s not a bad guy.  I don,t think he likes 
what,s happening.  But you know, in Israel, they,re all in 
the army.  Even this guy goes a few times a year.  I don,t 
know that he,s killed children, but he,s part of it. 
They,re all part of it.8 
 
----------------------- 
SCIENCE TRUMPS POLITICS 
----------------------- 
 
¶24. (SBU) Regardless of the diverse opinions of Israelis 
expressed by the Jordanian scientists, only one MERC project 
(M21-012) postponed work indefinitely because of the 
Intifada.  All of the other participants continued their 
cooperation, whether grudgingly or happily, citing their 
professionalism as the principal reason.  Repeatedly, we 
heard statements like, &I,m a scientist, not a 
politician;8 &My work is science, I leave politics out of 
it;8 or &I,m a professional; I don,t let politics 
interfere in my work.8  Nearly all of the scientists seemed 
to hold strong convictions that, whether out of professional 
duty to their position, financial responsibility to their 
institution, the pure advancement of science or even a strong 
belief in peace, their participation in the MERC was not up 
for debate. 
 
¶25. (SBU) All the members of our sample were members of 
professions that have an overarching ethic--doctors, 
scientists, and academics.  These &professional ethics8 
appear to be contributing to the ongoing success of the MERC 
program, especially helping to overcome some of the personal 
anger about the current violence that might have otherwise 
derailed some projects.  In all but two cases, personal 
feelings came second to professional convictions and a 
commitment to science, health, or regional peace. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
COMMENT:  PROOF OF THE PUDDING IS NEVER IN THE EATING 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶26. (SBU) Two years after the renewed outbreak of violence, 
most MERC projects can still be considered success stories of 
regional cooperation, and the support of the government of 
Jordan as well as the professions the MERC scientists hail 
from are likely a strong element of their success.  Moreover, 
the Jordanian scientists shared with us their enthusiasm for 
joining the MERC program because they recognized the 
intrinsic value of knowledge acquisition from Israeli and 
American colleagues.  The important role professional ethics 
plays in keeping projects active lies in stark contrast to 
those other attempts at fostering peace through 
people-to-people exchanges based on little more than breaking 
bread (or eating hommos) together. 
 
¶27. (SBU) We have similar positive experience in the context 
of the Multilateral Working Groups on Water Resources and the 
Environment.  In these two fora, Israeli scientists routinely 
collaborate with their Arab counterparts on issues such as 
watershed management, environmental curricula, and combating 
desertification.  These successful experiences show the 
continuing effectiveness of bridging the political divide 
through objective and less emotionally sensitive scientific 
endeavors like MERC. 
GNEHM