Political Modernization as a Strategic Choice

It is not in the interest of the nation to begin, politically or in the media, discussing radical political or constitutional measures in response to the executive order issued by U.S. President Donald Trump, which paves the way for designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. Our primary concern here is the Jordanian context and the implications of such a move for the dissolved organization’s network of individuals, groups, and informal clusters. The more pressing question, however, concerns the Islamic Action Front Party (IAF). In recent days, we have seen calls by politicians, commentators, and activists to dissolve Parliament, amend the Constitution, and pursue other extraordinary steps that are typically reserved for moments of exceptional crisis or profound historical turning points. Resorting to such proposals sends internal signals and messages whose implications are largely negative.

Setting aside the deep and longstanding crisis between the state and the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood-along with its political arm, the IAF-the political modernization project should be understood as transcending these immediate tensions. It represents a strategic national choice aimed at developing political life, transitioning toward programmatic and party-based politics, strengthening organized political work, and forming governments on new foundations that differ fundamentally from the traditional criteria of personal ties, geographic distribution, or social balancing. Instead, the envisioned foundations are political, ideological, and programmatic. This project predates the most recent parliamentary elections, extends to the Constitution and to political party and electoral laws, and includes significant strategic components such as integrating youth into the public sphere, enhancing their political participation, and advancing the role of Jordanian women in political life.

It is therefore neither logical nor realistic to sacrifice a major national Jordanian project that embodies the King’s vision for the future of the state-as articulated in the modernization package and, earlier, in the Royal Discussion Papers-merely because of a partial crisis that can be addressed domestically through our own national considerations, or even through dialogue with the Americans, a scenario that has repeatedly occurred in the past. Whatever one’s position on the fate of the IAF, the country’s largest opposition party, it is evident that this issue has not yet been settled within decision-making circles. The matter remains tied to a set of variables, including ongoing investigations and cases related to financial entanglements between the party and the movement, as well as the party’s ability to recognize the gravity of the historical moment and the significant political costs it may incur should it fail to offer clear and reassuring signals-both to the state and to a broad spectrum of domestic political actors.

In this context, my colleague Dr. Gaith al-Qudah published an important analytical article on the website of the Politics and Society Institute, built on the central assumption that a network of pro-Israel and Zionist lobbying groups, along with certain research and policy institutes in Washington, has long been working in ways that could effectively link the IAF to the Muslim Brotherhood. This, he argues, would render the party’s continued existence increasingly complex and difficult. Based on that premise, al-Qudah outlines two potential scenarios for the party’s future: the first is to merge with another political party; the second is to abandon its current organizational framework and reconstitute itself as a new political entity. These are conceivable options, yet they remain premature. What should take precedence over the party and its potential trajectories is the broader project of political modernization. From this standpoint, it is essential to safeguard the current Parliament and ensure that it completes its constitutional term-an objective that is closely connected to the continued presence of the IAF as the parliamentary minority. At the same time, there is a need for a strategic and in-depth dialogue between the party and the state to address any potential outcomes that may arise from President Donald Trump’s decision.

Despite the setbacks, challenges, and structural difficulties it continues to encounter, the political modernization experience carries encouraging signs for the future on multiple fronts. Chief among these is the consolidation of political parties’ roles, the deepening of their presence in public life, and the institutionalization of their organizational practices, all while enabling them to strengthen their mobilization, political engagement, and communication capacities. This represents a critical trajectory for Jordan’s political future. The state has invested substantial political capital in the modernization project, and any signals or messages suggesting a retreat from it would be costly-both in terms of political credibility and in undermining young people’s belief that they can meaningfully contribute to political decision-making through party-based engagement.