Jordan is going through a delicate phase in its political history, facing one of those moments that test the state's resilience and its ability to manage internal and external balances simultaneously. The recent American decision to label the Muslim Brotherhood – including the branch in Jordan – as a terrorist organization, has reopened a complicated file that the Jordanian state had legally and sovereignly resolved years ago.
It is important to emphasize from the outset that the American decision does not change the legal reality in Jordan. The group has been officially banned within the kingdom for nearly two years, and a final judicial decision was issued to dissolve it, followed by government actions that included confiscating its properties and closing its headquarters, and considering any activity in its name or under its umbrella as illegal. Thus, the Jordanian state dealt with this file with state logic, not reactions or succumbing to external pressures.
Jordan, as usual, does not wait for others' decisions to protect its security and stability. It is a state of institutions, and its sovereign decisions are built on a precise reading of its national interests and a conscious appreciation of the complexities of the regional scene. What happens today confirms that what the state had previously undertaken was not a temporary measure, but a calculated step in the framework of protecting community peace and preventing the politicization or exploitation of religion in internal conflicts.
Meanwhile, the current stage requires a calm and responsible discourse, far from exaggeration or political investment in the American decision. The issue is not about "who made the decision," but about how we preserve the cohesion of the Jordanian interior and prevent any attempt to drag the street into polarizations or divisions that serve no one.
Jordan has proven, throughout its history, that it is stronger than storms. It has gone through harsher regional crises, wars on its borders, economic and political pressures, and emerged from them more cohesive. The reason for this goes back to the awareness of Jordanians, their trust in their state, and their belief that disagreement does not mean chaos, and difference does not justify tampering with security.
At the heart of this equation, the pivotal role of His Majesty King Abdullah II emerges, who has amassed political and diplomatic experience that has made Jordan a significant figure in regional and international politics. His Majesty's discourse, based on wisdom and balance, has always been able to reproduce the balanced Jordanian condition, without being dragged into axes, and without compromising fundamentals.
Today, Jordan needs solid internal cohesion, mutual trust between the state and society, and between the society and its security institutions, which have contributed to taming the challenges and minimizing the impacts of the storms that ravage the region with awareness beyond the expected, and this is credited to them, and to a collective understanding that protecting stability is a shared national responsibility. External decisions will change, and international policies will fluctuate, but Jordan will remain strong with its leadership, its unity, its awareness, and its perennial ability to calmly and firmly cross crises.
