Succession in Jordan at the time of King Hussein's Death: Why Was it Changed?

[Princess Mahala]

thats good to heard about prince hamzah, but i wondered why we see so less of him since the change made?

[Amoula]

Originally Posted by Princess Mahala

thats good to heard about prince hamzah, but i wondered why we see so less of him since the change made?

I was wondering the same. I also wonder sometimes if he's in Jordan at all

[Cassy]

Originally Posted by Little_star

Thanks for the link, Cassy.

Funnily enough I've heard similar stories about Sarvath and Hassan, not from Jordanian sources, but from Pakistani individuals.

intelligent people might've learned something from this situation, but i guess not.

[Falconer]

Mouasher's book shows why the line of succession had to be changed. King Hussein did not like what he was seeing under his brother's stewardship and decided to take a chance on his eldest son. The other two were not in any way correcting each other's mistakes and formed an unhealthy partnership for the country.

[bekalc]

I think that if Hassan wanted to be King. He should have made the decision not to marry and have children. I think that if Hassan had remained childless, than King Hussein probably would have been content to let experienced Hassan be King, and let his son be Crown Prince and learn from him.

I think the issue was really who succeeds after Hassan, and let me ask you do really think that it was fair for Hussien sons to be passed over in favor of Rashid? I don't. None of Hussien's sons did anything to deserve that. It was especially unfair in Abdullah's case because when he was born, he was Crown Prince. So when you think about it, they were taking away the guy's BIRTHRIGHT.

It sounds like it was always made clear that Hussien still wanted his sons to be in succession... So if Hassan really wanted to be king, he should have encouraged a constitutional ammendment to ensure that one happened, OR remained single. Given that there was talk when Ali was born, that Ali would become heir apparanet when he was older, and later the same with Hamzah it's possible that Prince Hassan was always told that he might be passed over again.

Here's the deal though I think that King Hussien deserves most of the blame for this mess. He could have and should have made Abdullah Crown Prince, when Abdullah was older....Yes, there was the whole his mother was British, but for what reason than was Hussien later trying to prop up Hamzah was born to an American mother? It sounds like King Hussien was playing the game of pleasing the wife... He's married to Alia, yes Alia, Ali will be King. Then, he's married to Noor, Yes Noor Hamzah will be King. This in my opinion is wrong and unfair...

It's wrong that Abdullah should have to loss his birthright because Dad is in love with a new woman...It also sets up brother against brother and creates hurt feelings where there should be on. For example in Britian, Will is the Heir, Harry is the Spare. But Will is the Heir because he was born older, not because Daddy favors him over his brother.

The thing is though that I think the issue was that King Hussein may have wanted to make Hamzah the heir, but that would have needed a Constitutional ammendment. So I think his choice was one of his brothers, or Abdullah. And Abdullah was the only one who had power to make Hamzah King. Personally, I think it's a ridiculous that King Hussein would even ask or suggest that Abdullah set aside his own son for Hamzah's sake.

I just think Abdullah really SHOULD have been Crown Prince all along. But King Hussein should have made Abdullah Crown Prince 15 years earlier than he did. Then Abdullah could have gotten the experience and there would have been less hard feelings all around.