Beyond Gaza ceasefire: Jordan, Arab world, and the fragility of peace

In the streets of Amman, the unease is palpable. Café conversations revolve around Gaza; shopkeepers glance more at television screens than at customers; mothers pause in markets, watching news clips with tears and disbelief. For Jordanians, Gaza is not distant; it is part of their collective memory and moral compass.

 

A nation on the razor’s edge

 

Jordan’s foremost strategic priority is no longer an abstract notion of “regional stability.” It is something far more immediate: keeping the nation intact—socially, politically and economically, while upholding justice for the Palestinian cause across the river.

 

The latest US-backed peace initiative envisions a phased ceasefire, expanded humanitarian access, and gradual reconstruction of Gaza. Jordan joined the international call for an immediate truce. These diplomatic steps, however, are existential for Amman. They can mean containment or collapse, both at home and across the region.

 

Every development in Gaza reverberates through Jordanian society. Public empathy for Palestinians runs deep, and citizens expect leaders to do more than offer rhetoric. Yet the leadership confronts an impossible equation: stability without justice will not placate public sentiment, and justice without stability risks tearing the system apart. Jordan walks a narrow line between both imperatives.

 

The fragile ceasefire and the ghosts of the past

 

The recent ceasefire, while welcomed across the Arab world, carries a heavy sense of déjà vu. The Oslo Accords promised peace but delivered stalemate and settlement expansion. The 2014 Gaza truce was hailed as “a step toward calm”, only to be undone by the next cycle of violence. More recently, a US-brokered ceasefire was reportedly breached within days amid pressure from hard-right political factions in Israel, a stark reminder that domestic politics can unravel deals negotiated on the international stage.

 

This pattern of temporary silences followed by renewed bloodshed has conditioned much of the Arab world to greet each new deal with a healthy dose of cynicism. It is not peace itself that is distrusted but the sincerity and structure of its pursuit. Ceasefires have too often been intermissions between wars rather than foundations for justice.

 

The current truce, dependent on fragile understandings among external guarantors and competing local factions, shares that vulnerability. For Jordan, this is not merely a diplomatic concern but a national one. A breakdown could reignite popular outrage, destabilize border regions, and revive fears of displacement. Across the Arab world, it would reinforce the belief that the international system treats Palestinian suffering as a problem to be managed, not resolved.

 

The external and internal fronts

 

Jordan’s borders demand constant vigilance. To the north, the chaos in Syria still spills over. To the west, Gaza threatens escalation. The nightmare scenario, the forced displacement of Palestinians into Jordan, remains existential. Amman has drawn a clear red line: it cannot accept another wave of displacement. This is not simply economic; it is a matter of identity and national survival.

 

The more complex challenge is domestic. Across towns and campuses, young Jordanians voice growing frustration over scarce jobs, rising prices, and shrinking prospects. Layered atop this discontent is the moral weight of Gaza’s devastation. Economic strain plus moral outrage creates a combustible atmosphere that the state must carefully manage. Diplomatic success abroad is therefore inseparable from stability at home. Failure to secure a lasting peace risks igniting domestic anger that no security measure can easily contain.

 

Regional alliances and the search for credibility

 

The recent visit of Qatar’s Emir was more than ceremonial; it signalled recognition that Jordan cannot navigate this crisis alone. Gulf financial assistance is critical, but money cannot buy legitimacy. Jordan needs credibility, at home and in global forums.

 

Credibility begins with ensuring citizens see their government as an engaged advocate for justice. It means Jordan’s red lines, especially the rejection of displacement and the demand for a genuine peace process, must be clearly and consistently articulated. It also requires that global powers translate rhetoric about international law into concrete accountability.

 

Balancing strength and compassion

 

Jordan’s foreign policy has long been guided by pragmatism, moderation and restraint. These remain essential but must be matched with conviction and clarity. The public expects leadership that speaks the language of conscience as well as diplomacy. The kingdom cannot be perceived as complacent or complicit in an unjust status quo.

 

King Abdullah II’s repeated calls for a just and comprehensive peace reflect that balance. His warnings against forced displacement, his emphasis on the sanctity of Jerusalem’s holy sites, and his insistence on humanitarian norms reinforce Jordan’s role as both stabiliser and moral voice in a polarised region.

 

The test of resilience

 

Jordan has weathered regional storms before. It has done so not through military might but through clarity of purpose and resilience of spirit. Its survival has often depended on the delicate ability to mediate, absorb and adapt. Today, that balancing act is more precarious. The kingdom must maintain ties with the United States, Europe and the Gulf while staying true to its people’s demand for dignity and justice.

 

If Jordan falters under the weight of Gaza, the loss will not be its alone. The region would lose one of its last anchors of moderation. In an Arab world struggling with fragmentation and fatigue, Jordan’s steadiness is both a strategic necessity and a moral imperative.

 

The road ahead

 

Jordan’s challenge is to remain steady amid storms: maintaining cohesion in shared grief and guarded hope while pressing relentlessly for a peace that restores justice, not merely calm. The lesson from three decades of failed processes is clear: ceasefires that ignore the root causes of occupation and dispossession are unlikely to hold. For the Arab world, and for Jordan in particular, the cost of another broken promise will be measured not only in lives lost but in trust eroded.

 

Ultimately, Jordan’s survival strategy is profoundly human. Its mission is to protect cohesion at home while standing for a peace abroad that its people can believe in. In this region, stability and justice are not opposing goals; they are the same fight, fought on different fronts.

 

The author is a strategic consulting and national security expert. He is a governing body member of the Society to Harmonise Aspirations for Responsible Engagement (SHARE).

Middle East