Debating Jordan’s Strategy Approach: Documenting Security or Embracing Flexibility?
This material was published in the second issue of the Jordanian Politics and Society magazine (JPS).
“Historically ‘strategy’ has been a reality, if not an articulated concept” Beatrice Heuser.
A vigorous debate is currently unfolding among Jordan’s security researchers and political circles regarding the pressing need for a comprehensive national strategic document. This proposed document seeks to redefine and enhance the concept of Jordan’s national security in a cohesive manner. It will identify the threats and challenges facing Jordan, prioritise national concerns, and organise these issues by their significance. Furthermore, it will outline appropriate defence mechanisms and strategies to address these challenges using the state’s available resources effectively. Advocates of this strategic document suggest that it should be drafted and published periodically, potentially every two years, with its content incorporated into a feedback process for ongoing evaluation of the strategy.
However, these calls may resonate with Jordanian intellectuals and political elites, as they offer a more transparent framework for understanding security, facilitate the tracking and evaluation of Jordan’s security priorities, and enhance research and policy analysis. However, while this perspective is compelling, it tends to present a reductionist view of Jordan’s security dynamics, foreign policy, and the notable absence of a written national security strategy document. This absence does not suggest that strategic planning is lacking in Jordan; instead, it indicates that these strategies often manifest as practical measures, some of which are articulated in official discourse as national constants. Therefore, this article explores the existence of a national strategic document for Jordan, its relevance to the current context, and the central dynamic features of Jordan’s security and foreign policy strategy.
From Written Plans to Practical Strategies:
It is essential to underscore that Jordan has carefully considered security issues since its inception rather than acting randomly in shaping its foreign policy. Although a formal written document outlining a national strategy does not exist, the effective execution of this strategy is evident in Jordan’s foreign policy and defence planning. For much of the country’s century-long history, these practices have enabled Jordan to navigate many of the complexities associated with the Middle East and its surrounding environment in the modern era.
Beginning from the Arab-Israeli wars to the polarisation of the Nasser era, through the ramifications of the Arab Spring and the rise of terrorism and extremism during the Gulf crisis from 2017 to 2021, and extending to the transformations of the war on Gaza in 2023. Thus, Jordan has consistently employed a practical approach that reflects an advanced level of rationality in the decision-making process and has been effective in addressing the challenges faced by the region, fostering a sense of security and stability. In this context, rationality refers to a political model that relies on logical calculations to maximise gains while minimising or avoiding losses. Central to this approach is the notion that profit is essential for advancing national interests, particularly concerning national security, which reflects the application of the Rational Actor Model [1].
In this respect, the experiences of other states demonstrate that they often develop strategic documents through various approaches. These can range from comprehensive written strategies that are published consistently to partially published strategies or even those that remain confidential. It is noteworthy that the definition of security commonly appears in strategic documents issued by defence institutions worldwide, including the United States[2] and others. The creation of such documents has become a bureaucratic norm and is underpinned by multiple justifications in countries that engage in this type of security-related framework.
On the other hand, some states adopted a model of partial publication for their strategic documents, exemplified by the French “White Paper” from 2008 and 2012. Which is hidden due to its articulated use of military force as a strategic tool[3]. Conversely, some nations draft national security strategic documents and develop them without public disclosure, keeping the information relatively secret and limited in scope, such as the “Red Book” issued by the Turkish National Security Council[4]. Overall, there is significant variation among countries regarding the formulation of these national strategic documents, with approaches ranging from complete publication to partial or even non-disclosure.
Thus, the historical tracking concluded that a few decision-makers articulated abstract strategies before the sixteenth century; decisions about ends, means, and ways can be documented since Antiquity[5].
The Jordanian strategy can be described as practical and unwritten, functioning more as a series of practices than as a formal document. This approach is executed by key decision-making institutions, most notably the National Security Council, which was established in 2022. The Council is tasked with addressing critical issues related to security, defence, and foreign policy. Chaired by the King, it comprises the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defence, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of the Interior, the Chief of the Military, the Director of the General Intelligence Department, and the Director of Public Security. Additionally, two members are appointed by the King following the Jordanian Constitution[6]. The leadership framework established within Jordan, along with its proven historical strategies, enhances confidence in the nation’s capability to address and manage security challenges effectively. This duality of structure and past success reinforces trust in Jordan’s resilience and adaptive capacities in the face of evolving threats.
Therefore, the King, or his representative, convenes the National Security Council, making decisions on behalf of most of its members. This Council is structured to incorporate all key figures in the state involved in security affairs and the state’s overarching policies, both domestically and internationally. Since its inception, the Council has closely monitored major developments, with its first session taking place in August 2024, and the latest one occurred following the fall of the Al-Assad regime in Syria in December 2024, demonstrating a high level of adaptability in response to significant events.
This raises the question: Is this Council sufficient to produce a Jordanian strategic document? The answer requires an examination of the activities preceding this Council, particularly those before 2022. As previously stated, strategic practice in Jordan has strong roots and encompasses strategic planning that typically remains unpublished. Therefore, the Jordanian strategy cannot be solely defined by this Council; it also reflects a deep-seated practice with origins dating back to 1921.
Between Appealing Rhetoric and Practical Realities
The discussion surrounding the Jordanian National Security Strategy encompasses a range of perspectives from political, intellectual, and research communities. Proponents argue for the necessity of a comprehensive national strategic document, which they believe would align Jordan’s institutions and society toward shared goals that prioritise the state’s security and interests, as follows:
1. Defining the National Vision and Objectives: A strategic document offers a structured framework for articulating a future vision of national security, outlining core objectives that guide policy and resource allocation. This clarity enhances the effectiveness of initiatives aimed at achieving these goals.
2. Responding to Challenges and Threats: Given the evolving regional and international landscape characterised by security challenges, a strategic document serves as a tool for identifying and assessing risks. These risks may include geopolitical changes, organised crime, terrorism, economic struggles, and natural disasters. Consequently, it facilitates the development of proactive plans that align with overarching strategies to mitigate these threats.
3. Coordination Among National Institutions: A unified strategic framework fosters coordination among various security agencies and governmental bodies, promoting coherence and synergy in their roles. This minimises redundancies and optimises the use of resources.
4. Enhancing Legitimacy and Transparency: An official document fortifies institutional legitimacy by informing citizens of national priorities and plans. This transparency can foster trust between the government and the populace, which is crucial for effective governance.
5. Ensuring Sustainability and Continuity: A formal, written strategy is vital for maintaining the consistency of security policies, regardless of shifts in government or leadership. This consistency serves to uphold stability and ensures that strategic security priorities are preserved over time.
6. Decision Support: The strategic document acts as a vital reference point for decision-making, grounding choices in thorough research and analysis. This reliance helps to prevent hasty or ill-considered responses to security issues.
Collectively, these arguments underpin the calls for the creation and dissemination of a Jordanian National Security Strategy, highlighting its potential to bolster national cohesion and resilience in the face of contemporary challenges.
Practical Realities in Jordan’s National Strategy
Conversely, the practical realities of foreign policy and security in Jordan indicate that the publication of such a document imposes considerable restrictions on Jordan’s ability to manoeuvre. This is particularly evident when considering the complexities of the regional and international landscape in which Jordan operates[7], which can impede the grand strategies of even the most powerful states.
However, many security theorists critique the strategic documents published by states, claiming that they often contain exaggerated narratives. These documents frequently reflect specific political discourse patterns and may lack adequate security measures and intellectual rigour.
Typically, states that periodically issue such strategic documents exhibit specific characteristics, most notably:
(1) Political power dynamics often involve a rotation of leadership and a continuous evaluation of how well each government implements its strategic objectives. This process is particularly evident in countries like the United States, where strategies may also be utilised as electoral propaganda. The formulation of these strategies typically culminates in a doctrine that is presented to the President-elect[8], outlining the key priorities and approaches for the incoming administration. This structured framework not only guides governance but also influences public perception and voter support during electoral cycles.
(2) The dissemination of strategic threat messages[9] to the parties specified in the documents, which is particularly critical when addressing other nations identified within these strategic frameworks as potential threats or strategic challenges.
(3) Developing a significant strategy depends on establishing sustainable national capabilities over extended periods. While substantial strategies are generally linked to larger countries, strategic theorists continue to debate the feasibility of effective strategies for smaller states. Geopolitical constraints and resource limitations primarily drive this discussion.
(4) Attracting allies and identifying collective strategies are crucial for success, which can be accomplished through clear alliances and coalitions. A prime example is the U.S. National Security Strategy, referred to as the Biden Doctrine (2022)[10], which details the administration’s plans for advancing national interests. It underscores the significance of alliances and partnerships in addressing global challenges.
(5) Justifying military or defence spending is often done through government reports, such as the UK Defence and Security Strategic Review (SDSR) 2015[11]. This document outlines the UK’s defence strategy by assessing potential threats and detailing the necessary capabilities to address them. It emphasises the importance of investing in equipment and support, with planned expenditures totalling up to £178 billion through 2025, to ensure national security is maintained.
In this context, practical analysis reveals that none of the above characteristics accurately define the Jordanian situation. Where Jordan is not a large state with a comprehensive long-term strategy; instead, it is a small country situated[12] in a complex region with limited resources. The authority primarily directs the state’s key policies, and the executive branch typically does not play a significant role in strategic decision-making. Regarding alliances and collective policies, Jordan lacks the necessary depth in the Arab world to pursue complementary strategies with its allies, particularly as their priorities evolve and regional dynamics shift. Lastly, Jordan’s defence spending and militarisation index reflect the level of regional tension and instability that surrounds the country. Amman responds to these challenges by enhancing its capabilities through a strategy of self-reliance[13] , which includes defensive measures and political initiatives marked by positive diplomatic engagement and openness to various parties, alongside effectively managing Jordan’s geopolitical position.
Discussing the Jordanian situation in some detail, the most essential features of the Jordanian strategy are as follows:
- Short-term strategy: For a small state[14] like Jordan, developing a comprehensive long-term strategy is complex and often considered nearly impossible. Instead, Jordan is adopting an innovative approach that combines effective management of its geopolitical position with practical, flexible diplomacy and the use of soft power. This approach aims to create a vision of a politically rational state while formulating defence strategies to secure Jordan’s borders.
Thus, Jordan practically adheres to a strategy that I would classify as an “event-by-event” strategy, which involves independently determining the positioning, role, and response to each event without intertwining different strategic files in foreign policy or security matters. A notable example of this hybrid strategy is Jordan’s response to illicit drug networks in Syria, as highlighted in my recent study, which was published by the Policy and Society Institute[15]. This research emphasises the importance of employing diplomatic options alongside Jordan’s security measures to address a significant threat that has posed considerable challenges to the country since 2020.
- Strategic Flexibility: This concept is best illustrated through agile manoeuvres. In this regard, it is crucial to monitor Jordan’s foreign actions, particularly within what is often referred to as the “grey zone” of the Middle East. A key example of this is the introduction of the “Trump peace deal” during the 2018-2019[16] period. However, Jordan emphasises the importance of national priorities, focusing on specific and well-defined issues. Chief among these is the Palestinian question[17], considered a vital national interest. Furthermore, Jordan is committed to the establishment of a Palestinian state along the June 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem designated as its capital. However, there is currently no formal document that articulates this stance.
Ultimately, it is crucial to acknowledge that developing a national security strategy document categorises security threats and delineates foreign policy priorities. This shift imposes more significant constraints on the latitude of foreign policy, particularly in light of the region’s volatility and ever-changing dynamics.
- Absence of external alliances and strategic depth: In terms of collective security and international alliances, Jordan maintains strategic relationships with key players in the Middle East and the broader international political landscape. However, these relationships do not equate to formal inclusion in alliances or coalitions. Jordan’s participation in temporary collaborations, such as the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS[18] or operations like Decisive Storm[19] underscores this point. Thus, Jordan’s prevailing pattern of international cooperation revolves around strong partnerships, likely due to differing priorities between Jordan and other involved parties. For instance, the centrality of the Palestinian issue in Jordan’s strategic planning and national interests sets it apart from other Arab or regional states, which do not prioritise the Palestinian issue to the same extent. This discrepancy complicates the establishment of deep alliances, which, if formed, could provide Jordan with vital strategic depth.
- Constructive Ambiguity: Jordan employs a strategy of constructive ambiguity with regional parties to further its national interests. For instance, in its intricate relationship with Israel and Iran, Jordan’s deliberate strategic ambiguity allows for greater flexibility for decision-makers, particularly in avoiding political confrontations with other parties. While Jordan opposes Iran and its regional ambitions, it refrains from direct hostility. Instead, Jordan maintains open channels for communication and exploration of potential understandings. Notably, the Jordanian foreign minister engaged with his Iranian counterpart more than three times in 2024, including a significant visit to Tehran[20].
- Adaptability: Adjusting to the regional dynamics surrounding Jordan is crucial for safeguarding and advancing Jordanian national interests. The ability to exhibit a high degree of flexibility is particularly evident in the context of the Syrian situation and its developments following the fall of the Syrian regime on December 8, 2024. Key players in the evolving Syrian crisis convened in the Jordanian city of Aqaba, which was soon followed by a visit from the Jordanian Foreign Minister to Damascus—the first visit by an Arab official to meet with the leadership of the transitional administration in Syria[21]. This swift response from Jordan, occurring just 15 days after the regime’s collapse, underscores an impressive capacity to adapt and engage with unfolding events, thereby reinforcing Jordan’s role in the emerging Syrian landscape.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the growing calls for creating and issuing a Jordanian national security document may reflect a genuine desire to frame and define national security and political priorities more clearly. However, the Jordan state’s practical and strategic realities demonstrate a more flexible and agile approach to addressing challenges and threats. Jordan’s strategy is shaped by realistic and rational practices and traditions that navigate foreign policy and determine national security, relying heavily on the effectiveness of diplomatic manoeuvres and the capacity for swift responses to regional developments in the Middle East and international politics.
While some may view the lack of a written strategic document as a drawback, Jordan has adeptly utilised practical strategies to confront threats and navigate constant change. Activating strategic institutions, such as the National Security Council, also plays a key role in coordinating security entities and implementing the state’s overarching policies. In this context, Jordan’s national priorities remain adaptable, allowing for responses that align with the unpredictable regional landscape.
The crucial question that lingers is: Are these practical strategies for Jordan’s national security sufficient to ensure stability and sustainability? The answer hinges on Jordan’s ability to balance established national constants with strategic flexibility amid rapid shifts in its geopolitical landscape. Regardless, Jordan is on a strategic path that seeks to harmonise domestic and international challenges while enhancing its capacity to safeguard national security and its vital interests.
[1] Allison, Graham T. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2nd ed. New York: Longman, 1999.
[2] The White House. 2022. National Security Strategy, October 2022. Washington, DC: The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf.
[3] de Durand, Étienne. 2015. “Planification de défense : la belle Arlésienne ?” In Guerre et stratégie: Approches, concepts, edited by Stéphane Taillat, Joseph Henrotin, and Olivier Schmitt, 479–498. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
[4] Daily Sabah, “‘Red Book,’ Türkiye’s Top-Secret Policy Document, Set to Get Update,” Daily Sabah, February 28, 2024, https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/red-book-turkiyes-top-secret-policy-document-set-to-get-update/news.
[5] Heuser, Beatrice. “The History of the Practice of Strategy from Antiquity to Napoleon.” In Strategy in the Contemporary World. 6th ed, edited by John Baylis, James J. Wirtz, and Jeannie L. Johnson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. doi:10.1093/hepl/9780192845719.003.0002.
[6] The Jordan Times, “Cabinet Approves 2022 Bylaw of National Security Council,” April 10, 2022, https://jordantimes.com/news/local/cabinet-approves-2022-bylaw-national-security-council.
[7] Brands, Hal. What Good Is Grand Strategy? Power and Purpose in American Statecraft from Harry S. Truman to George W. Bush. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2014. p. 14.
[8] Brands, H. W. “Presidential Doctrines: An Introduction.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 36, no. 1 (2006): 1–4. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27552741.
[9] See, for example, China’s inclusion in the NATO document for 2022 (Strategic Concept),
NATO. NATO 2022 Strategic Concept. Brussels: North Atlantic Treaty Organization, June 29, 2022. https://www.act.nato.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/290622-strategic-
[10] United States Government. “National Security Strategy”. Washington, D.C.: The White House, October 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf. And, McCallion, Christopher. “Grand Strategy: Alliances.” Defense Priorities, September 17, 2024. https://www.defensepriorities.org/explainers/grand-strategy-alliances.
[11] United Kingdom. “National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015: A Secure and Prosperous United Kingdom”. London: HM Government, November 2015.
[12] Ortmann, Stefanie, and Nick Whittaker. “Geopolitics and Grand Strategy.” In Strategy in the Contemporary World. 6th ed, edited by John Baylis, James J. Wirtz, and Jeannie L. Johnson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. Politics Trove, 2019. p.321-322.
[13] Waltz, Kenneth N. Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979. pp. 91-93. And: Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. pp. 50-54.
[14] Wivel, Anders, “The Grand Strategies of Small States”, in Thierry Balzacq, and Ronald R. Krebs (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Grand Strategy (2021; online edn, Oxford Academic, 8 Sept. 2021), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198840299.013.32.
[15] Jaber, Hasan, “The Northern War: Drugs Networks in Syria, Jordan’s Response and Regional Options”, Politics and Society Institute & Omran Centre for Strategic Studies, 18. Dec. 2024, link: https://wp.me/pdSIuF-2KS
[16] Al Sharif, Osama. “Why Jordan Was So Quick to Reject Trump’s Peace Plan.” Middle East Institute, February 3, 2020. Accessed January 2, 2025. https://www.mei.edu/publications/why-jordan-was-so-quick-reject-trumps-peace-plan.
[17] Sawalha, Abdullah. “Jordan’s Balancing Act: Overcoming the Challenges Posed by Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’.” The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, February 12, 2020. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/jordans-balancing-act-overcoming-challenges-posed-trumps-deal-century.
[18] U.S. Department of State. “Members – The Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS”. https://www.state.gov/the-global-coalition-to-defeat-isis-partners/#nea.
[19] Al Arabiya News. “Your Guide to ‘Operation Decisive Storm’.” March 26, 2015. https://english.alarabiya.net/perspective/features/2015/03/26/Allies-back-Saudi-led-Decisive-Storm-op-in-Yemen-with-fighter-jets.
[20] The Jordan Times, “Safadi Concludes Official Visit to Iran, Delivers Message from King to President Pezeshkian,” August 4, 2024, https://jordantimes.com/news/local/safadi-concludes-official-visit-iran-delivers-message-king-president-pezeshkian.
[21] The Jordan Times. “Safadi Holds Talks with Syria’s New Leader, Reaffirms Support to Rebuilding ‘Free, Sovereign’ Syria.” December 23, 2024. https://jordantimes.com/news/local/safadi-holds-talks-syrias-new-leader-reaffirms-support-rebuilding-free-sovereign-syria.