Topología 3 – MPLS

‘Social science is becoming more aware of the importance of researcher safety and well-being… although risk in the field is a frightening experience for the researcher, it does on many occasions enrich our understandings of the research site and enables us to think and write about social life as insiders’ (Lee- Treweek and Linkogle, 2000: 2).

One of the most important aspects of empirical research is fieldwork, where events, problems, and emotions arise. It is very important to acknowledge fieldwork events, which sometimes may disrupt the original design of the research, because those events may ‘testify to the existence of an actual situation’ (Pettigrew, 1981: 63). Despite the fact that I have a Jordanian passport, I am originally a Palestinian, and my legal status in Jordan is precarious. One of the main issues that faced me during fieldwork was how to carry out the research, especially because the topic under inquiry is politically sensitive. This political sensitivity forced me to be reflexive.

For Palestinians, speaking about Jordanian nationalism is a taboo in Jordan because it is always assumed that Palestinians are against Jordanian nationalism. As I have previously mentioned in chapter one, the Palestinians constitute more than 70 per cent of the Jordanian population. The history of the Palestinian presence in Jordan reinforces the view that Palestinians are very critical about the whole existence of Jordan as a state, and this is perceived as threatening for the existence of the state of Jordan. This conception was first formed when some Israeli officials said that Jordan should become an alternative homeland for the Palestinians, and some members of the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organisation] suggested that Jordan lacks ‘the principal foundations of statehood’(Al O'ran, 2009: 70), claiming that Jordan has always been part of historic Palestine. The tensions intensified after the PLO’s attempt to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy in the 1970s (See chapter one). For these reasons, Palestinians expressing dissatisfaction with or criticism of the state of Jordan are often persecuted and could face death sentences.

Knowing that, and hearing about cases of Jordanians of Palestinian origins being persecuted, threatened with death and seeking asylum in Western countries, I had to be very careful in relation to the way I presented the research, and gathered the data in the field. The first political problem I faced during fieldwork was obtaining a residence permit. As a Palestinian Jerusalemite, I was interrogated at the borders about the reasons behind my stay, and when I explained that I will be there for research purposes, I was granted one month residence permit, which I had to renew in Jordan, after obtaining a security permit for my research. Before the end of the first month, I went to the Palestinian Division of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, where residence renewals are issued. I was granted a permit to stay for one more month, during which time I had to obtain permission to conduct the research from the internal security services, themukhabarat, the ‘intelligence’.

Fear of the intelligence services, particularly because of my topic, overwhelmed me. I tried to bargain for more than one month, without visiting the intelligence headquarters, and I was granted another permit after explaining that my research is about the Circassian people, who are very loyal to the monarchy, and that my research will draw attention to the ‘generosity’ of the Jordanian people and government towards the Circassian people. This ‘white lie’ allowed me two more months, during which I had to obtain a paper from the Circassian Charitable Association in Amman saying that I was working under their supervision. Despite the fact that I have a Jordanian passport, and I am internationally recognised as a Jordanian, I was also told that I had no right to stay there, without proving my affiliation, and work with the Circassian Charitable Association. The reasons given by the Ministry of Internal Affairs were that my passport does not allow me to stay, work, and live in Jordan without justification, because I am a Palestinian Jerusalemite. During that same period, I contacted a Circassian friend of mine, who offered help and managed to set up a meeting for me with the chair of the Circassian Charitable Association in Amman. The Circassian Charitable Association is the

biggest Circassian organisation in Jordan, and has around seven branches in cities all over the Kingdom. I thought that it would provide a perfect access point to the Circassian community, as it holds names, numbers, and addresses of Circassians. Bursting with excitement, I went to the meeting, explained my research to the chair, who was, at that time, very interested and satisfied with the aims of the research.

To formalise my stay in Jordan, as requested by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, I had asked the chair of the organisation to provide me with a consent paper explaining that I am conducting my research in collaboration with the organisation. In return, he asked me to provide him with a formal letter on headed paper asking the charitable association to provide me with access. Unfortunately, a couple of days later, I tried to call the association several times, and called the chairman on his personal number, but he did not answer my calls. After several attempts and calls, the chairman of the association called back and said that the association refused to provide me with a consent paper and with access to the community as a whole. They said that their refusal was based on the fact that I was a researcher at the University of Warwick, and in 2007 a researcher from the same university accessed the community through the association by lying to them about the nature of his research. They thought that the university itself had some hidden agenda, and that a conspiracy theory was being woven against Circassians in Jordan. Phillips’ research was a comparative study of Circassians and gypsies, and for Circassians it is very offensive to compare them to a marginalised group. Phillips (2008) managed to get away with the data needed for his research, and mentioned in his thesis that in the final months of his fieldwork the Circassians refused to grant him access, and that he received several threats from community leaders because of a comparison that is ‘insulting and potentially dangerous to their standing in Jordan’ (Phillips, 2008: 145). Phillips (2008) mentioned in his thesis that the Circassians spread the word in the community about his thesis, and at that time, I feared that they would do the same in my case.

During this time, I embarked on an analysis of the official documents of the ‘Jordan First’ campaign, books of national education and other official documents. Those revealed that Jerusalemites who have Jordanian passports can de jure stay in Jordan as they please. However, my vulnerability in Jordan does not relate to my legal status; it is mainly based on my Palestinian origin. I found out that legally the ministry of internal affairs has no right to question my presence in Jordan, and all the problems they created for me were not legally sanctioned. I believe that such incidents are very important to mention because they provide a very useful insight into my precarious position in the field. Those incidents also show how the personal is political, not only in terms of gender, but also in relation to origin, ethnicity, and gender. Additionally, ‘all aspects of the political are necessarily and inevitably reflected within the personal’ (Stanley and Wise, 1993: 86). Moreover, such incidents influenced the way I view Jordan. Jordan, the country which claims to be the bearer of ‘Pan-Arabism’, is known for its mistreatment of ‘Arab’ Palestinians. This not only influenced my view of Jordan, but it also made me critical of the whole claim of the existence of a ‘Pan-Arab’ nation. It also influenced the way I perceive my identity; I specifically started feeling less of an ‘Arab’ or a Jordanian and more of a Palestinian. This is because I felt I was not treated as a Jordanian citizen and I was more of a second class citizen. Those feelings intensified throughout my encounters with the state of Jordan during fieldwork. It has been important to account for those personal experiences and changes in my identity as a researcher, because they make sense in political terms and they can partly explain why I believe that Palestinians are disadvantaged in Jordan. If many Palestinians face the same issues with the state of Jordan, then they are less likely to feel Jordanian and more like to feel Palestinian.

Another incident took place in the field, when I had to obtain security clearance from the Jordanian intelligence apparatus so as to be able to work at the US embassy in Jordan. I went to the intelligence services headquarter in Amman, where I filled in an application form, entered after being searched, approached a

counter, and handed an officer the application together with other documents. He asked me to be seated and, as a good citizen, I did. The officer made several phone calls, after which he called my name. He said: ’Nour, you are Palestinian’. I said: ‘yes, originally Palestinian, but I have a Jordanian passport’. He asked me if I had a work permit, I said no, and then he said that I will have to get one. I did not know what to say, but suddenly I felt that I was being stripped of my basic rights, and so I said: ’No, I do not need one. I am a Jordanian citizen. The constitution of Jordan guarantees my rights as a citizen, I deserve equal treatment, unless you want to undermine the authority of deceased King Hussein on the date of his death’. I do not know how I said this, but I knew that King Hussein wanted to maintain Jordan’s sovereignty over Jerusalem, and so residents of Jerusalem are recognised as Jordanians internationally and, supposedly, nationally. My words did not have an impact on the man, he instead started saying you are Palestinian, you are Palestinian, and I continued saying no I am Jordanian. In the end, I decided to leave empty handed with no clearance, and with a completed application form. It occurred to me that such difficulties are being systematically imposed on the Palestinians, and that it is not a matter of law; it appeared to be indirect deterrence measures against the Palestinians in Jordan. Subsequently, I decided to resort to a friend who has connections in the Jordanian intelligence services; he managed to get the permit for me, and I was able to start working.

Being reflexive here and shedding light on my position as a Palestinian researcher in Jordan is very important. First of all, this shows that despite the fact that narratives of ethnicity and nationalism are constructed and (re)constructed by social actors, this does not deny the existence of social power ‘from above’ that can reinforce narratives of ethnicity. In other words, even if I wanted to perceive myself as a Jordanian, discrimination against Palestinians and stripping from them their rights as Jordanians made me feel less of a Jordanian and more of a Palestinian. Secondly, my personal journey of discovery during fieldwork is very important for

this research particularly because it deals with narratives. Thirdly, although the state of Jordan emphasises its adoption of a ‘pan-Arabist’ nationalist ideology in textbooks of national and civic education and despite the fact that the ‘Jordan First’ campaign is designed to promote a form of nationalism that is inclusive to all citizens, my perception of my national identity has been influenced by my experiences in Jordan and by how I am perceived by others as a Palestinian. In that I am saying that the neopatriarchal state of Jordan has power over my experiences that in return influence my own narratives; this supports the idea that narratives are shaped by experiences and can be indicators of integration and this is why I am looking at Circassians’ narratives of ethnicity and nationalism.

Finally, my experience as a Palestinian is not only personal, because it reveals patterns of the treatment of Palestinians in Jordan. For example, I have also heard stories about people who hold the same legal status as myself, and who were illegally deported back to Jerusalem. This made me aware of the fact that I was in a vulnerable position in the field, and that I should be careful in the way I ask my interview questions. To preserve my safety and protect myself, I had to play with the words, and manoeuvre around the aims of my research avoiding political ‘taboos’ that undermine the monarchy. For Palestinians, simply speaking about nationalism and statehood in Jordan is a taboo, let alone evaluating nationalist campaigns, and books of national education. I had originally intended to conduct interviews with members of the Circassian community from different age groups, and analyse the ‘Jordan First’ campaign as well as books of national and civic education used in schools. Although the latter proved to be possible due to the easy access to such documents online and books being easy to obtain from schools in Jordan, the former proved to be impossible to achieve, and this prompted me to change my methods and find other ways to access the community.