Dutch Right-Wing Election Winner Geert Wilders Causes Uproar After Declaring ‘Jordan Is Palestine!’

The country of Jordan should be considered the true national homeland for the Palestinian people, according to Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders, who caused an uproar after making the declaration online.

In a Saturday post on X, formerly Twitter, the right-wing firebrand who won this past week’s election in the Netherlands made the remarks, sharing a Politico article describing Arab states condemning his “push to relocate Palestinians to Jordan.”

The post sparked widespread criticism and disapproval from Arab nations. 

Often compared to former President Donald Trump due to similarities in his ideology and character, Wilders has earned the nickname “the Dutch Donald Trump” by the local press.

Having been under security for years due to his comments on Muslims, the leader of the Freedom Party (PVV) is known for his strong support for Israel, aligning his views with right-wing parties that have gained prominence across Europe. He has also referred to the Jewish state as the West’s first line of defense.

Wilders, who vowed to become the next Dutch prime minister, has long argued that the conflict between Palestinians and Israel could be resolved through the recognition of Jordan as a Palestinian state.

In 2016, he slammed then President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, demanding they “stop bashing Israel about settlements,” as he proclaimed that “Judea and Samaria belong to Israel,” and that “Jordan = Palestine.”

The argument that “Jordan is Palestine” is a recurring topic in the discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and is primarily based on historical, geographical, and political perspectives.

Historically, the British Mandate for Palestine, established after World War I, originally included the territory of both modern-day Israel and Jordan. The mandate incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which expressed Britain’s support for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine.

In 1922, the British divided the mandate into two administrative areas: west of the Jordan River, which became the Jewish national home (later, Israel); and east of the Jordan River, which eventually became the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Those on the east bank, just as the Jews and Arabs on the west bank, were considered Palestinians, subject to British control and carriers of Palestinian passports.

In 1946, Britain established the Kingdom of Transjordan, with Abdullah as king, effectively turning a significant part of the Palestine Mandate into an Arab nation and leaving a much smaller portion, including the West Bank and Gaza, for Jewish statehood. The move marked a significant shift from the original mandate’s intent to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

In 1948, Jordan (then Transjordan) participated in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Following the war, King Abdullah annexed the West Bank and East Jerusalem, renaming the country the Kingdom of Jordan — not “Palestine.”

More than a decade later, in 1964, the Arab League held a summit in Jordan and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan produced a stamp including Jordan and Israel, both parts of territory it regarded as part of the Kingdom of Jordan.

After Israel reunified Jerusalem and captured the West Bank in the 1967 Six-Day War, King Hussein of Jordan insisted that “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.”

Demographically, Jordan has a significant Palestinian population, with a majority of Jordanians ethnically Palestinian. Many Palestinians either fled or were expelled from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the Six-Day War in 1967, and they, along with their descendants, have since lived in Jordan. In addition, most are fully naturalized, making Jordan the only Arab country to fully integrate the Palestinian refugees of 1948.

Proponents have argued that since Jordan is predominantly Palestinian, there is no need for an additional Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and that integrating Palestinians into Jordan could lead to a more stable regional situation, as Jordan has successfully integrated Palestinian refugees.

Yitzhak Shamir, who served twice as Israel’s prime minister, blamed the lack of recognition of Jordan as a Palestinian state to “an accident of history,” as he warned that an additional Palestinian state in the West Bank would serve as a recipe for chaos:

On the subject of a political entity, a homeland for the Arabs of the former British-mandated territory of Palestine, the facts speak for themselves. The state known today as the Kingdom of Jordan is an integral part of what once was known as Palestine (77 percent of the territory); its inhabitants therefore are Palestinian—not different in their language, culture or religious and demographic composition from other Palestinians. No wonder, then, that Palestinian Arab leaders of all political persuasions have on numerous occasions declared that Jordan and Palestine are identical, and that Jordanians and Palestinians are one and the same. It is merely an accident of history that this state is called the Kingdom of Jordan and not the Kingdom of Palestine.

“Reduced to its true proportions,” he continued, “the problem is clearly not the lack of a homeland for the Palestinian Arabs. That homeland is Trans-Jordan or Eastern Palestine,” describing a “second Palestinian state to the west of the river” as a “prescription for anarchy.”

However, King Abdullah II, the Jordanian monarch, has until now emphatically rejected such proposals, claiming “Jordan is Jordan.”

Wilders achieved a electoral “mega victory” on Wednesday in a landslide win regarded as one of the most significant political upheavals the country has known since World War II, and positioning his party as a major force in Dutch politics. 

Hailing the apparent victory, he shared a video on social media of himself celebrating the results while proclaiming that his party was now the strongest force in the country.

Known for his strong stance against Islam and immigration, he has promised to halt the influx of asylum seekers and proposed a referendum for the Netherlands to leave the European Union, akin to Britain’s Brexit. 

His victory, marked by winning 37 of the 150 seats in Parliament, reflects a major turn in Dutch and European public sentiment. 

Wilders’ victory, marking a shift from over a decade of leadership under Prime Minister Mark Rutte, raises questions about potential alliances with other right-wing parties in the Netherlands.

Despite any differences, the center-right may need to collaborate with Wilders to prevent a left-wing ascendancy or another election. The development is part of a broader European trend where populist and right-wing parties are gaining traction against open borders policies.