Mideast watchers are wondering: why did the Muslim Brotherhood decide not to contest upcoming parliamentary elections in Jordan? To listen to the Brotherhood, the boycott is a "direct response" to the passage of a controversial law, based on a complicated one-person, one-vote system it claims will lead to yet another "rubber stamp" parliament dominated by regime loyalists.
But others point to a lacklustre showing by the Muslim Brotherhood branch in Libya last week - with 17 votes to 39 garnered by a liberal coalition headed by former interim prime minister Mahmoud Jibril - ending a string of regional electoral successes. They say the Jordanian branch's boycott announcement, made within hours of parliament's passage of the electoral law on July 12, comes as part of the movement's new "play it safe" approach to elections in the post-Arab Spring Middle East.
The boycott, which surprised both pundits and politicians alike, is set to leave the Jordanian elections, slated for the end of the year, as the first in the post-Arab Spring Middle East to lack the participation of the influential Islamist movement. "This law is proof that the regime has no desire for a parliament chosen by the people and for the people that acts as a check on its authority," Zaki Bani Rsheid, deputy head of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood, told dpa. "We will not take part in such a parliament."
But many observers say the Brotherhood's concern is not for democratic reform. Instead, they say, the Brotherhood's decision shows their desire for an electoral system that guarantees their success. That's even more important to them since their setback in Libya, where they learned that ideology and name recognition alone may not be enough to vault the movement to power.
In its boycott announcement, the movement also demanded a new elections law and constitutional reform transferring the power to form governments from the king to parliament. It also wants an amendment raising the number of seats allocated to party lists.
Observers say that demand is based on the Brotherhood's hope that, by virtue of being the country's largest and only organised political party, they could snare "nearly all" the party quota seats. "By demanding a law that is more favourable to political parties, the Brotherhood is essentially demanding a law that is favourable to them," said Musa Shteiwi, head of the University of Jordan-based Centre for Strategic studies.
"After being spurned in Libya, the Islamist movement will only take part in an election that guarantees them a clear majority," Shteiwi added. According to observers, the Brotherhood's post-Libya election concerns extend far beyond quota seats.
Jordan, like Libya, remains a largely tribal society, with some 50 per cent of Jordanians hailing from influential Bedouin tribes that have long dominated the public sector and serve as gatekeepers to privileges, employment and even basic services. If restricted to one vote, as would be the case under current law, observers say many Jordanians will vote along familial, rather than ideological lines - placing the Muslim Brotherhood at a "severe disadvantage." "History has proven that the one-vote electoral system promotes tribalism," said Mussa Maaytah, former political development minister.
"When faced with a choice between a tribe or party, very few Jordanians will be willing to risk their access to power and vote against their relative." To get around that, another Brotherhood condition calls for an electoral system granting citizens two votes, allowing Jordanians to vote both for tribe and party.
Analysts say the Islamist movement's boycott also stems from the belief that time will only strengthen its bargaining position. The Brotherhood draws that hope based on recent successes in Egypt and growing clout in Palestine and Syria. "The Muslim Brotherhood is looking far beyond this election; they believe that if they continue their success in the Arab world, they can eventually force their demands on the government," said Nasooh Majali, columnist and former information minister.
"For them, it is a matter of when, not if, they come to power in Jordan." The Islamist movement maintains that its boycott decision is not connected to external affairs. "The only factors that will encourage us to take part in Jordanian elections are true efforts by Jordanian authorities for reform," Bani Rsheid said. "If there is any lesson from the Arab Spring, it is that democratic reform in the Arab world is unavoidable," said Bani Rsheid. "Once democratic reforms come to Jordan, we will be ready."