Azm Party Center for Strategic Studies
At the moment when institutions' doors are closed against the voice of knowledge, and the light of experience is replaced by the noise of cronyism, the state transforms from an active entity capable of governance into a stage of administrative void.
Jordan has historically been distinguished in building effective institutions despite limited resources. It has managed to offer an Arab model of integrity and competence, where administrative decisions were based on expertise rather than loyalty, and merit rather than relationships. However, recent years have seen troubling transformations in this legacy, with the unqualified climbing to decision-making positions due to narrow loyalties and networks of interests, not because of competence or experience ("Position before competence, loyalty before performance"), and with this shift began a systematic process of emptying institutions of competent individuals through marginalization, exclusion, or silent removal, until many institutions became managed by appeasement, diplomacy, and settling, not by knowledge.
The ascent of the unqualified to positions of responsibility was not a passing event but the result of political and administrative accumulations. The absence of objective evaluation, the weakness of accountability, and the prioritization of loyalties over competence criteria—all these factors opened the door to a system of complacent administrators who focus more on formal stability than on outcomes.
Over time, many talented and creative individuals either found themselves administratively besieged, forcibly removed, or compelled to silence. Meanwhile, a class that excels in rhetoric more than action emerged, and professional advancement turned into an exception, with access to decision-making positions often predicated on personal relationships or non-professional considerations, which diminished the vigor of the administrative system and weakened its strategic decisions.
Thus, some institutions turned into environments that repel minds, with policies of appeasement and diplomacy—essentially postponing confrontations or making temporary concessions to avoid political friction—through short-term settlements and administrative postponements to inhibit necessary decisions, thereby increasing the burden of procedural accumulation, and relying on time in hopes that people will forget, which allows practices of dereliction to take root.
The policies of appeasement and settling came as a result of what might be called the strategic planning for the sabotage of competent individuals' paddles, targeting those with ideas, courage, and decision-making abilities, through smear campaigns, fabrication of narratives, and the use of hired media or digital tools to destroy their public image, in a slowly and intelligently conducted moral assassination. This strategy was promoted under the banner of maintaining stability, but at its core, it was nothing more than a recipe for slow collapse. Appeasement in the face of institutional dysfunction is not wisdom but a gradual weakening of the state's capacity for reform. As confrontations with power centers and interests were postponed for fear of collision, reform was replaced with settlements, accountability with placation, and merit with appeasement. In this way, the efficiency of institutions once a source of pride and dignity declined, even transforming some administrative bodies into entities that consume time and money without tangible impact.
All these measures were practiced under the banner of maintaining a status quo, until they became a tool for postponing reform, as the administrative flaws were tolerated. Thus, administrative decisions were framed to please individuals rather than serve the state, with loyalty becoming the criterion rather than achievement, and the result was a decline in the overall performance level, and the emergence of accumulated crises in education, economics, and public administration.
These policies weakened trust in public institutions, contracted the circle of innovation and initiative in the administration, and symptoms of declining governmental and higher education performance emerged alike. The state experienced a slowdown in decision-making, an expansion in legalized corruption, and a decline in the quality of public services. Education outputs deteriorated, the level of scientific research dropped, and many distinguished professors either left their institutions or adapted to a state of indifference, with some leaving wholesale. Internationally, this institutional weakness was reflected in Jordan's decline in competitiveness, ease of doing business, and quality of management rankings, directly affecting investors' and the international community's confidence in the state's ability to self-develop and sustain growth.
In fact, although the policy of diplomacy may seem like a temporary solution, diplomacy in confrontation is considered a serious institutional flaw (not wisdom as some have claimed), contributing to the destruction of institutional capacity in the medium and long term. Each postponement of addressing the flaws further complicated the administrative scene, making errors the norm and competence the exception.
All this, resulted in the destruction of the symbolic capital of competent individuals, their reputation, and credibility, facilitating their dismissal or weakening their influence within the institution, and causing the state to lose its competitive edge, and undermining the trust of citizens and international institutions in the administrative system's capacity for self-development, with the economy losing its innovative element.
King Abdullah II has been clear when he affirmed that administrative reform is the key to political and economic reform, and that competence should be measured by achievement, not loyalty. Administrative reform cannot occur without education reform. The latest call by the king for education system reform was in the Throne Speech dated 26/10/2025. The king has also called for attracting Jordanian talents both domestically and abroad, building a national system based on merit and decision-making capability, and experience not on relationships, interests, and endorsements from here or there, warning of the risks of turning state institutions into closed circles. These directives represent an explicit call to correct the course. Yet, the gap between the royal vision and the executive policies over the past decades (we do not know why?) requires serious political and administrative will to translate the vision into tangible reality.
In this context, the Azm Party believes that the crisis is not a crisis of individuals but a crisis of method in administration and planning, and that the issue of draining competencies is not a temporary administrative symptom but a national crisis touching on economic, social, and political security. True reform cannot be administered with the same tools that created the crisis, and the nation cannot rise as long as competences are excluded and loyalties rewarded. From here, the party calls for launching a comprehensive national strategy for rebuilding the Jordanian competence system, based on restructuring institutions according to merit and professionalism criteria, placing the right person in the right place, and restoring regard for Jordanian competences through an evaluation system based on achievement rather than relationships and endorsements, establishing a national database of Jordanian minds and expertise both domestically and abroad to facilitate their integration into development projects, and protecting competences from administrative and media targeting through clear legislation for accountability and transparency, alongside reforming national media to support achievement rather than use it as a tool for settling scores among some or promoting rumors meant to assassinate competent figures to push them to leave or withdraw.
The party believes that the strategic plan to sabotage the competences' paddles was not a random act but a systemic and cumulative process that needs to be addressed with determination and transparency. To confront this decline, it is essential to liberate administration from bureaucratic constraints and narrow interests, and move into a new stage of national governance that balances loyalty and competence, and trust and accountability. The problem in Jordan is not a lack of resources but the absence of those capable of managing them (and there are many examples of this). The path towards true reform begins by adopting a comprehensive strategic vision that restores regard for competences and elevates the value of national merit, through adopting transparent and measurable standards, and establishing an independent performance evaluation system that assesses results rather than loyalties, the satisfaction of some in decision-making positions, and enhancing media transparency through independent institutions that monitor administrative behavior and protect professional reputation, and encouraging community participation in monitoring institutional performance and involving experts and civil society in oversight and evaluation.
This is the vision that the Azm Party believes in, which calls for uniting efforts between the state and society to launch a new administrative covenant, whose essence is building the modern state that does not exclude its children but re-empowers them to lead its upcoming renaissance with confidence, mind, and will.
For the future is not built on appeasements nor on diplomacy and settling, but on integrated planning, linking e...
