jordan pulse -

– Prof. Ali Hiyasat

Without a clear strategy, no state can shape its society or behaviour according to its vision. Yet in Jordan, the only apparent strategy is to have none. At times, the state calls for political parties and organised political life; at others, it revives tribalism as a guarantee of stability—only to turn against it later. Then come civil society organisations, unions, and associations, which are soon silenced once their voices stray from the familiar.

This chronic fluctuation in direction and policy has left Jordanians in a constant state of confusion, asking: to whom do I belong? And what form of loyalty truly pleases the state?

A new generation has thus emerged uncertain whether it is expected to be partisan, tribal, or merely self-serving. Sociology teaches that humans instinctively seek belonging—be it family, tribe, party, or institution. But the state’s inconsistent policies have weakened all these structures, driving individuals to seek safety in personal interest. Over time, national loyalty gave way to narrow loyalties and transactional belonging based on benefit, not conviction.

Meanwhile, the state can no longer buy allegiance with posts and privileges. These benefits now reach barely 2% of the population, leaving the majority waiting on the margins. With traditional control tools fading, governments have turned to distractions—such as the Interior Minister’s recent initiative on “customs and traditions.”

Suddenly, public debate shifted from corruption, unemployment, and justice to weddings, reconciliations, and social etiquette. The problem, it seems, lies not in the absence of planning or transparency but in how people dress or celebrate. It is yet another attempt to control society through morality instead of reforming politics and economics. When vision is lost, regulating behaviour becomes easier than reforming thought—though always temporarily.

The real danger is not tradition but direction. The issue is not how Jordanians live but that the state lacks a unifying national project linking true Jordanian identity with citizenship and belonging.

History shows that nations driven by privilege surrender their power at the first crisis, and societies without compass chase the trivial and forget the essential. Unless the Jordanian state moves from managing crises to shaping purpose and belonging, it will remain trapped in cycles of contradiction and justification.

What’s needed now is not a return to the past, but a redefinition of the future—not the defence of customs, but the defence of the national idea itself. A state without direction will one day find itself without destination, no matter how many slogans it raises.