As Arab leaders gather in Sharm el-Sheikh on Thursday and Friday for what is hoped will be a milestone on the path toward forging a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace, Jordan is set to play a leading role in the process, being one of just two Arab States, with Egypt, to have diplomatic relations with Israel.

But Jordan itself appears divided on the terms of the Arab peace plan as proposed by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah and endorsed by the Arab League.

The Malta Independent on Sunday last week gained an insight into divisions within the peace-broking state just ahead of the Egypt summit, as part of an EU press delegation on the European Neighbourhood Policy.

The visual contrast between east and west Amman is in many ways symbolic of Jordan’s self-designated role as mediator in the Middle Eastern polemic that is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The modern west of the capital houses the city’s hotels, embassies and the aid agencies that have retreated from the Iraqi border. Heavily-armed soldiers guard hotels, gated private homes and street corners, while hotels usher patrons and visitors through metal detectors and baggage checks at their entrances.

The east of the city, on the other hand, holds the run-down tenements that house many of the millions of Palestinians that sought refuge in Jordan during the conflicts with Israel between 1948 and 1967. This Palestinian diaspora, and their descendants, today account for some 60 percent of a Jordanian population of just under six million.

The country is also suffering the brunt of another movement of people, this time Iraqis from the east, who are crossing the Jordanian border at a rate of 1,000 per day and today number an estimated one million – a severe burden on the country’s infrastructure and economy.

With the people of the indigenous tribes co-existing with such overwhelming influxes from the east and the west, tensions are high and conflicting views on Middle Eastern policy are strong.

Diplomatic efforts at mediation by Jordan in recent weeks have been strong, particularly those of King Abdullah II, in trying to iron out a compromise on the Saudi’s peace plan.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Action Front, the political arm of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood, counts itself as Jordan’s largest political party – out of 30 or so that dot the country’s parliamentary landscape – and holds very different views on the validity of the plan.

Dr Mamdouh Abbadi, from the 100,000-strong Abbadi tribe and a long-standing member of parliament and activist, observed, “Most of the Jordanian tribal people are not religious. But on the other side is the Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas more than the actual Palestinian-Jordanians it represents.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is the same party and holds the same policies wherever it is present, and the government is very wary of the group developing further toward the Egyptian model.”

Dr Abbadi, an infectiously friendly Bedouin who practises ophthalmology from his central-Amman office, appears sceptical over the Muslim Brotherhood’s involvement in Jordanian politics. “The Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan is very rich and the government has, in fact, just dissolved its financial arm as part of a crackdown.”

He cites the group’s estimated USD240 million in investments in land, property developments and hospitals – a considerable sum given the an average Jordanian weekly wage is between USD200 and USD400 a month.

Against this backdrop, Jordan’s King Abdullah II has taken the international lead in rekindling the Israeli-Palestinian peace process through the peace plan floated by Saudi Prince Abdullah in 2002, and approved, after modifications, by the Arab League.

In a nutshell, the plan offers recognition of, peace, and normal relations with Israel on the part of all Arab League States, in return for an Israeli withdrawal from all territories it continues to occupy since the 1967 conflict and the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel.

The Arab peace plan, however, has two main sticking points from the Israeli viewpoint. Firstly, it would provide for the return of the Golan Heights to Syria. With the United States frowning on any diplomatic relations with Syria while the Assad regime is in power, it is said to be discouraging any such initiative.

Secondly, the requirement that Palestinian refugees be returned to Israel will most likely prove to be similarly problematic. Recent suggestions of financially compensating such displaced Palestinians, in lieu of allowing their “right of return” to Israel, have not been warmly welcomed by all quarters.

Zaki Bin Arsheed, secretary general the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing, commented, “The Arab League has caved in to US pressure and one clear example is the proposal to compensate displaced Palestinians instead of allowing them the right of return to their homes.”

Bin Arsheed greeted the male segment of the EU press delegation by tapping his hand on his chest, the traditional Arab greeting, and a handshake. The women in the group, however, had been advised not to shake hands with anyone at the IAF’s offices, to appear modest and to cover any exposed leg with scarves when seated.

The meeting was tense but Mr Bin Arsheed quickly made an effort, through a translator, saying he hoped the gathering would inspire better relations between the group and the western press, relations which have not always been good.

He seemed to hold little hope that the Arab peace plan will create a lasting peace: “The plan is the minimum of what the Arab League will accept, but the people themselves will never accept this.

“The violence and killings in Israel will not desist until a Palestinian State is created in which Israelis could live if they choose to do so. The Palestinian right of return is a sacred right.”

On the ambiguity over what, exactly, the right of return refers to – return to a Palestinian State or to Israel if such be the individual case, Bin Arsheed is crystal clear: “The condition of the right of return has to be that every Palestinian should be able to go back to the home that they left.

“Why can the Jews go back to wherever they live, while the Palestinians can’t? The Jews should be allowed to stay in Palestine, not as the superior powers but rather as co-citizens.

“The Palestinian national government is under siege by the US and the EU is also taking part in this siege. There are 11,000 Palestinians in Israeli jails – including 400 women and 300 children.

“Having two people and two States (an Israeli and Palestinian State living side-by-side) is only a temporary solution. There needs to be a single Palestinian State, where the Jews can live if they choose to do so.

“The alternative dealing with the Palestinian resistance is extremist forces such as Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. It is your choice as Europeans whether to deal with the Palestinian resistance or the extremists.

“No one likes violence and killing, but there is no other option. That is why the Americans will eventually leave Iraq and it is also why the Israeli State will not succeed.”

Jordanian foreign minister Abdelelah Al-Khatib, however, takes a more diplomatic approach to the issue but nevertheless stressed the urgency of hammering out a peace deal, which it will attempt at Sharm el-Sheikh this week.

“The peace process has been stalled for seven years now,” he commented. “We need to create a fruitful peace process, as any further deterioration of the situation would be very dangerous for the region.

“It is not enough to see (Israeli Prime Minister Ehud) Olmert and (Palestinian President Mahmoud) Abbas sitting together, we want to go beyond that, and we cannot waste any more time. It’s time for decisions and political will, without which we could negotiate for 15 more years.”

The Palestinian economy has collapsed and the people are in dire need, Mr Al-Khatib stressed, citing the fact that 70 per cent of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza survive on rations.

“Today’s stalemate in the peace process not only prevents progress, but has also killed the right of the Palestinians to enjoy their rights and achieve their aspirations through an end to the occupation.

“The Palestinians need to allow for discussions and to respect the agreements signed with Israel. Suicide attacks have undermined the process, while Israeli actions do not encourage relations either.”

He emphasised that the Arab peace plan the Jordanian government is pushing is not a draft treaty but, rather a statement of principles.

“Jordan will not be negotiating on behalf of the Palestinians,” he added. “The negotiations need to be carried out between the two players, and no one should negotiate on anyone’s behalf.”