Jordan’s strategic choices in a shifting world order

In light of the rapid geopolitical transformations taking place on the international scene, and the accompanying sharp regional shifts in the balance of power, Jordan finds itself facing increasing and multidimensional American pressure. These pressures are linked to the Kingdom's political positions on core issues, most notably the Palestinian issue and its rejection of the concessions imposed by the "Deal of the Century." They are also linked to its rapprochement with some regional powers, such as China and Iran, and its efforts to establish new strategic balances.

The pressures also include economic issues, which, in this context, raise crucial questions about Jordan's options for protecting its sovereignty and interests without compromising its stability.

In this article, we present three main scenarios that Jordan can adopt in confronting American pressure, outlining the conditions for each scenario and its chances of success on the ground. Scenario one: Flexible Response (Smart Containment): This scenario entails adopting a delicate balancing policy based on accommodating American demands within limits that do not infringe upon Jordanian sovereignty or national principles, particularly on issues related to the Palestinian cause and the Hashemite custodianship of holy sites in Jerusalem. This strategy also involves gaining time and reshuffling internally and regionally.

Conditions for realization: The presence of a political leadership with a long-term strategic vision. Effective diplomatic tools are available that allow Jordan to maneuver in its relations with Washington without escalation. Arab support (particularly from the Gulf) compensates for any economic pressures that may be imposed by Washington. Effective coordination with the European Union, Russia, and China is essential as international actors to counterbalance American influence.

The chances of realization are relatively high, given Jordan's long historical experience in managing its relations with major powers in a manner that relies on wisdom, gradualism, and calm interaction, avoiding escalation. Jordan has traditionally adopted a long-term policy in dealing with pressure, which has given it international credibility and the ability to absorb crises. The United States also recognises the importance of Jordan as a moderate and stable ally in a turbulent region and does not wish to destabilise this balance or lose it to competing powers.

Scenario Two: A shift toward nternational multilateralism (relatively disengaging from Washington): This scenario is based on diversifying political, economic and military partnerships outside the US sphere by strengthening cooperation with China, Russia, and the European Union, and engaging in regional projects that enhance Jordan's economic and security independence.

Conditions for realisation: Building a strong network of relationships with alternative international powers capable of providing the necessary political and economic support; providing a firm political will to reshape Jordan's foreign policy orientations; overcoming obstacles related to US aid, on which the Jordanian economy depends; and possessing the security and economic capacity to deal with any sanctions or harassment that may be imposed by Washington.

The chances of this scenario being realised range from medium to weak in the short term, given Jordan's dependence on US aid, which amounts to more than $1.4 billion annually. However, these opportunities may increase in the medium and long term if the Kingdom succeeds in strengthening its non-traditional partnerships and achieving relative self-sufficiency in some vital sectors, such as energy and water.

Scenario three: Direct confrontation (explicit rejection of pressure): This scenario involves Jordan publicly rejecting American demands that it considers an infringement on its sovereignty or an infringement on its national interests, such as demands to sign unpopular security agreements or adopt political positions that conflict with its principles on the Palestinian issue. This rejection could take political, media, or even legal forms.

Conditions for Realisation: Strong domestic mobilisation and popular support for the official position; the government's ability to bear potential economic consequences, especially the reduction or suspension of aid; the availability of ready alternatives to secure the country's vital needs; and a clear awareness of the limitations of American power to force behavioural change in internally stable countries.

The chances of this scenario coming true are relatively slim at the present time, but it could be used as a temporary pressure card, especially if American pressure accumulates to a degree that threatens national principles. This scenario will likely be used in conjunction with the first scenario as a negotiating tool, rather than as a permanent strategic option.

Despite the strength of American influence on Jordan, represented by economic aid and close security and military relations, the Kingdom possesses effective tools for political and diplomatic maneuvering that enable it to deal with these pressures in a manner that preserves its sovereignty and national interests. These tools include accumulated political experience, Jordan's balanced regional role, and a flexible network of regional and international relations.

The first scenario, a "flexible response," is the most realistic and appropriate option for the current political situation, as it gives Jordan room to maneuver without direct confrontation with Washington, while preserving its national discourse and fundamental principles of foreign policy.

At the same time, strengthening the trend toward the second scenario, related to diversifying international partnerships, is a strategic necessity to ensure gradual independence in the long term.

The third scenario, related to direct confrontation, should remain a backup option, resorted to only if American pressure crosses red lines and essential national interests are threatened. Jordan's success in managing its relationship with the United States depends on a combination of strategic vision, internal cohesion, and regional and international openness, which enhances its sovereignty and protects its interests without losing its traditional allies or compromising its principles.

Hasan Dajah is professor of strategic studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University