The return of the Naharayim and Tzofar border enclaves to full Jordanian control in 2019 and 2020 marked a highly significant chapter in the modern history of Israel-Jordan bilateral relations. Originally leased to Israel as part of the historic 1994 Treaty of Peace, these unique territories served as agricultural hubs and powerful symbols of cross-border cooperation for twenty-five years. However, a combination of regional diplomatic shifts and domestic political pressures within the Hashemite Kingdom led Jordan to decline the automatic renewal of the lease agreement. The subsequent transition of these lands underscored the complex balance between maintaining security cooperation and managing the public, symbolic dimensions of regional diplomacy.
Background and Historical Context
The origins of the special arrangements at Naharayim and Tzofar are deeply rooted in the geographic and diplomatic negotiations that culminated in the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. Naharayim, known in Arabic as Al-Baqura, is a northern enclave spanning roughly 820 dunams where the Jordan and Yarmouk rivers converge. In the early 1930s, Jewish industrialist Pinhas Rutenberg established a pioneering hydroelectric power plant in this area, cementing historical Jewish land-ownership deeds that were later recognized during the treaty negotiations. In contrast, Tzofar, referred to as Al-Ghamr, is a larger agricultural tract of approximately 1,500 dunams situated in the southern Arava valley. While Tzofar did not have pre-state Jewish private land titles, Israeli farmers from local cooperative communities had developed extensive greenhouse agriculture in this arid territory over decades.
To resolve the territorial disputes during the peace negotiations led by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein, the parties designed an innovative "special regime" codified in the treaty's annexes. According to the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty Annex I, Jordan recognized Israeli private land ownership in Naharayim and land-use rights in Tzofar, while Israel formally recognized Jordanian sovereignty over both sectors. Under this framework, Jordan guaranteed unimpeded access for Israeli farmers, waived customs and immigration procedures for workers crossing the border, and agreed not to impose discriminatory taxes. This pragmatic compromise was intended to run for twenty-five years, with automatic renewals for similar periods unless either party provided a one-year written notice of termination.
Key Facts about the Enclaves
- The 1994 Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty established a special temporary regime for the agricultural enclaves of Naharayim (Al-Baqura) in the north and Tzofar (Al-Ghamr) in the south under Jordanian sovereignty.
- Naharayim encompasses approximately 820 dunams of privately owned Israeli land, while Tzofar covers about 1,500 dunams of land cultivated by Israeli farmers without pre-existing private property titles.
- In October 2018, King Abdullah II of Jordan announced that his nation would not renew the twenty-five year lease, exercising Jordan's legal right under the treaty's annexes to reclaim full sovereign control over both areas.
- The special regime for Naharayim officially terminated on November 10, 2019, while Israeli farmers in Tzofar were granted a temporary six-month extension that ultimately expired on April 30, 2020.
Diplomatic and Strategic Analysis
The decision by King Abdullah II in October 2018 not to renew the land-lease annexes was largely driven by internal political pressures and deteriorating public sentiment regarding regional diplomacy. Jordan faced severe socio-economic challenges, including high unemployment and fiscal strains, which contributed to widespread grassroots protests across the Hashemite Kingdom. Many political activists and parliamentary figures pressured the monarchy to take a firmer stance against Israel, particularly amidst a prolonged deadlock in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Consequently, reclaiming full control over the sovereign Jordanian territories of Al-Baqura and Al-Ghamr became an important political tool to satisfy domestic public opinion and demonstrate royal responsiveness to popular demands.
The diplomatic transition of the enclaves required careful coordination to prevent a wider crisis in bilateral relations. While Naharayim returned to Jordan on schedule in late 2019, the situation in Tzofar required more nuanced negotiations due to the active agricultural investments in the Arava valley. To allow local farmers to harvest their final seasonal crops, the Jordanian government agreed to a temporary extension of access. This pragmatic compromise concluded on April 30, 2020, as detailed by The Jerusalem Post, when the final agricultural gates were closed and Jordanian forces assumed complete administrative control. This orderly transition reflected the deep-seated security channel that continues to operate quietly between Jerusalem and Amman.
Analysts emphasize that while the return of the land enclaves represented a symbolic setback for the public-facing aspects of the peace treaty, it did not dismantle the strategic core of the relationship. According to a detailed policy assessment by the Institute for National Security Studies, the fundamental security, intelligence, and resource-sharing interests between Israel and Jordan remain robust. Both nations share vital concerns regarding border security, regional stability, and joint water management in an increasingly arid region. Consequently, the termination of the land-lease agreements can be viewed as a recalibration of the relationship rather than a rupture, illustrating how stable bilateral treaties can withstand substantial domestic political stresses.
Strategic Significance and Future Outlook
The conclusion of the land leases highlights the importance of institutional resilience in Middle Eastern diplomacy. Despite the visible loss of agricultural lands for Israeli border communities, the legal framework of the 1994 treaty proved successful in resolving a potentially volatile territorial dispute peacefully. The structured exit mechanism provided in the annexes allowed Jordan to exercise its sovereignty legally without violating the core terms of the peace treaty. For Israel, the loss of these lands necessitated domestic investments to compensate affected Arava farmers and develop new agricultural infrastructure within sovereign Israeli borders, showcasing the adaptability of local agricultural sectors.
Moving forward, the primary challenge for Israel and Jordan lies in transitioning their relationship from a "cold peace" to a more sustainable, mutually beneficial partnership. While public sentiment in Jordan remains highly critical of bilateral cooperation, strategic realities dictate that both nations must collaborate on water supply, gas exports, and joint security measures along their shared border. By managing the return of Naharayim and Tzofar professionally and without military escalation, both governments demonstrated that their strategic partnership is built on enduring geopolitical realities. This episode underscores that while territorial compromise is a delicate endeavor, clear legal frameworks and quiet diplomatic channels remain the most effective tools for maintaining long-term regional stability.