Political Polarization in Jordan after the War on Gaza

​Sahm Tell

Political polarization is not a new phenomenon in the Middle East, but in Jordan, the landscape has grown increasingly fragmented in recent years. The war on Palestine, particularly the recurrent hostilities in Gaza and the West Bank after October 7th, has profoundly influenced Jordan’s domestic politics and sociological tapestry, exacerbating existing divisions and creating deeper fault lines. 

To understand the current political polarization, it is essential to grasp Jordan’s historical context; Jordan has always been a unique case in the region, balancing between its role as an Arab nation and its performance as a key ally of Western powers. The country’s demographic makeup, with a significant portion of its population being of Palestinian origin as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, has always influenced its political dynamics, and the ongoing conflict in Gaza has only intensified these dynamics, creating a more pronounced divide within Jordanian society.

​Grassroots Polarization and Public Discourse
 
The Palestinian issue is a deeply emotional and politically charged topic in Jordan. The country has a large Palestinian refugee population, and many Jordanian citizens have familial and emotional ties to the West Bank and Gaza. As the conflict in Palestine has escalated, so too have the political tensions in Jordan; different segments of society have responded in varying ways, leading to increased polarization. On one side, there are those who advocate for a stronger stance against the Zionist state and greater support for the Palestinian cause. This group includes not only Palestinians living in Jordan, but also countless Jordanians who sympathize with the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and freedom. They argue that Jordan should take a more active tangible role in opposing Netanyahu’s actions and supporting Palestinian rights.
 
On the other side, there are those who prioritize stability and security, alarmed that a more confrontational stance could destabilize Jordan. This group is often more supportive of the government’s vigilant approach, which seeks to maintain peace for the welfare of its citizens and avoid war. They argue that Jordan’s stability is paramount and that the country should focus on its own internal challenges rather than getting dragged into the Palestinian conflict. This division is reflected in Jordan’s political landscape; the government, led by King Abdullah II, has traditionally maintained a balanced approach, actively supporting the Palestinian cause, while also engaging in diplomatic efforts with international partners to ensure regional stability. However, this balancing act has become increasingly arduous as public opinion becomes more polarized.
 
The government’s response to the recent genocide in Gaza highlighted this tension. It has consistently condemned Netanyahu’s machiavellian administration, supported South Africa in its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, has provided substantial humanitarian aid to Gaza, and expressed solidarity with the Palestinians. At the same time, Jordan has also sought to avoid escalating the situation, mindful of the potential spill-over consequences for its domestic security and diplomatic relations. This cautious approach has been criticized by some as insufficiently supportive of the Palestinian cause, while others see it as a necessary measure to protect Jordan’s interests. Social media has played a significant role in amplifying these divisions. Platforms like X, Facebook, and TikTok have become battlegrounds for competing narratives, with activists and influencers on both sides using these tools to mobilize support and spread their messages. The speed and reach of social media have made it easier for polarizing views to gain traction and for misinformation to spread, further deepening the divide.
 
Economic factors have also contributed to the polarization. Jordan’s economy has been under strain for years, with high unemployment rates and a growing public debt. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated these issues, leading to widespread economic hardship. In this context, the government’s handling of the Palestinian issue can be seen through the lens of broader discontent with the status quo. For many, frustration with economic conditions spill over into their political views, creating a combustible mix of economic and political grievances. The Syrian refugee crisis adds yet another layer of financial complexity, considering the large influx of refugees exhausted government resources and infrastructures, which only heightened the general malaise amongst Jordanian residents. The ongoing conflict means that many remain in limbo, unable to return to their homeland. The government’s efforts to manage the refugee population, while also addressing the needs of its citizens, has been a delicate controlling act. Any perceived missteps can quickly become flashpoints for political contention.
 
Navigating the Path Forward
 
The polarization is not just a top-down phenomenon but is also evident at the grassroots level. In households, neighborhoods, and community centers across Jordan, debates over the Palestinian issue and the government’s response are a common occurrence. These discussions often take-over Friday lunches – a cherished Jordanian tradition - as families gather and passionately argue their perspectives over a bite of Mansaf. It is a classical spirited mix of politics and cuisine, reflecting broader societal divides, with different groups advocating for distinct approaches based on their backgrounds and experiences. Looking ahead, the implications of this polarization for Jordan are significant, considering it could impede Jordan’s relationships with key allies, including the United States and other Western countries, which value Jordan’s role as a robust partner in a volatile region.
 
In the face of growing difficulties and divisions, the Jordanian administration has shown a history of tremendous determination in maintaining the stability of the nation. With the development of social initiatives, economic reforms, and strategic diplomacy, the government has navigated through a challenging and frequently unstable regional environment. In order to preserve solid international ties and attend to internal issues, Abdullah II and his administration have continuously sought to strike a balance between conflicting interests. This fortitude has been essential in maintaining Jordan's position as a pillar of stability in the Middle East, guaranteeing that the country continues to be a haven of comparatively calm and continuity in the midst of seemingly endless surrounding unrest.

About the Author
Sahm Tell is currently an intern in IFI's Communications Unit.​