He’s probably talking about Black September and its aftermath. After the PLO tried to assassinate him and hijacked some airplanes, King Hussein declared martial law, and launched attacks on PLO camps, killing a whole bunch. Hussein and Arafat then negotiated a treaty, which didn’t last, because factions in the PLO called for a takeover of Jordan as part of a greater Palestinian state and the Palestinians kept stockpiling arms. So the Jordanians attacked again and ended up driving the PLO out of Jordan.
There are two million Palestinians currently in Jordan, so Black September didn’t wipe out the palestinians, just ended the conflict between the Palestinians and the Jordan government. I was trying to point out the irony of the King of Jordan presented as a voice of sanity in the Israel, Palestinian conflict when his kingdom rests of the slaughter of thousands of Palestinians.
A solution to the conflict would be beneficial to those involved in it, but would have little to no effect on Al Queda or Iran.
Eh - Jordan would have to beat out an awful lot of parliamentary democracies with figurehead monarchs to have a shot at “most enlightened monarchy”. Heck, there’s a decent argument to be made that Bhutan is well ahead of Jordan - the government seems to be actively pushing for a parliamentary system (though the King retains some real power). Jordan is not a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
That said, the Jordanian monarchs have traditionally been decent sorts for absolute rulers, and they were some of the first in the region to establish normal relations with Israel. So there’s that.