Jordan: How will Muslim Brotherhood ban affect the nation's future?

Although the measures taken this month by the Jordanian government to ban the Muslim Brotherhood are unprecedented, marking a new phase in their relationship, this does not represent a complete elimination of the Islamist movement.

The Islamic Action Front (IAF), the Brotherhood’s political wing, still maintains its legal parliamentary status and says it will continue to participate actively in the country’s political and public life.

So what does this move against the Brotherhood mean, and what are the potential consequences?

The ban marks the enforcement of a previous court ruling against the group, which found it had no legal basis to exist in Jordan. But the Brotherhood did not comply with that ruling, and instead continued to operate clandestinely. 

The situation changed after members of the group were recently accused of plotting attacks inside the kingdom, alongside allegations of smuggling arms to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

Jordan’s concerns over what this could mean for the country’s future propelled it to crack down, amid fears of the Brotherhood’s links to Hamas and Iran and the threat of internal destabilisation.

The crisis comes just months after Jordan aided the US and other countries in repelling an Iranian missile attack on Israel, launched in retaliation for Israel’s assassinations of Hamas, Hezbollah and Revolutionary Guards leaders, as regional tensions soared amid Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza.

Deepening rift

The rift between the Jordanian state and the Muslim Brotherhood has steadily deepened for more than a decade since the Arab Spring, reaching a nadir in the fallout from 7 October 2023 and Jordan’s parliamentary elections last September, in which the IAF made significant gains.

The clash between the Brotherhood and the state in the streets, driven by confrontational protests, fuelled the alleged rise of armed cells, which in turn became a justification for the ban.

All of these interpretations overlook the crucial internal dynamics shaping the state's relationship with the Brotherhood

This does not necessarily mean that Jordan is replicating other Arab models, wherein the Brotherhood has been designated a terrorist organisation and its members imprisoned, or that it is moving towards a complete exclusion of political Islam from the nation’s political process. 

Rather, the government appears to be distinguishing between the Brotherhood as an organisation - which, in the state’s view, has lost its legal status - and the IAF, which continues to engage in political and parliamentary activities.

Such a distinction opens the door for IAF leaders to reassess the party’s course and its relationship with the state. It also offers an opportunity for the party to develop a different strategic vision, and to avoid the path that led Brotherhood groups in other Arab countries towards imprisonment and exile.

This is particularly relevant given that Islamists have historically remained a peaceful movement within the political framework of the Jordanian state, aiming to bring about gradual change. Despite recurring crises, the two sides have never reached the point of a full-scale confrontation, as has happened elsewhere, because they have allowed pragmatism and political realism to guide them in moments of crisis. 

Internal dynamics

While some commentators close to the Muslim Brotherhood abroad have attempted to link recent events with international and regional agendas, claiming that external pressures were exerted on Jordan, this is most likely inaccurate. Jordan has historically rejected such pressures and resisted calls from Arab allies to label the Brotherhood a terrorist organisation.

What’s so scary about the Muslim Brotherhood?

Read More »

At the same time, some Arab media outlets have sought to capitalise on the ban and greatly exaggerate its impact, portraying this as evidence that Jordan is following in the footsteps of other Arab states by targeting Islamists. 

All of these interpretations overlook the crucial internal dynamics shaping the state’s relationship with the Brotherhood.

This does not necessarily mean that the crisis between the state and Jordanian Islamists will end at this stage. It could well evolve in the coming days, if both sides fail to develop clear visions and new rules for the political game, in order to safeguard internal stability.

This is especially pressing amid the chorus of conservative voices calling for increasingly repressive policies in dealing with political opposition and human rights issues.

Ultimately, the seriousness and significance of the crisis between the Jordanian state and Islamists - the country’s main opposition force - should not be underestimated.

It marks a critical juncture in Jordanian politics, one that could either take a negative turn towards a gradual retreat from the country’s democratic reform agenda, or serve as a necessary step towards developing Jordan’s political framework into one based on clearer and more coherent internal understandings.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.