By: Sanad El-Naser
Jordan Daily - Terrorism is rarely confined to the individual or location directly targeted. Its broader objective is often to shape what follows: how people interpret violence, how members of society view one another, and whether fear displaces a shared sense of belonging. Accordingly, the recent events in Jordan should not be regarded merely as isolated security incidents. The attack on the church in Karak, followed later by the killing of a Public Security Directorate officer (Al Shaheed) in Amman, involved two different institutions, and the authorities have not established an operational link between the incidents. Nevertheless, both raise the same fundamental question: what does extremism ultimately seek to achieve?
The consequences extend beyond physical destruction. Extremism seeks to foster division. Jordan has experienced several terrorist attacks in the past, and these incidents have repeatedly demonstrated that the country’s true test lies not only in confronting the immediate security threat but also in preserving national unity afterwards.
A church is not merely a place of worship; it also represents a community and its recognised place within the national social fabric. Similarly, a police officer is not simply an individual in uniform; the officer represents the authority of the law and the relationship between society and the institutions responsible for its protection.
From a constructivist perspective, divisions between “us” and “them” are not necessarily natural or fixed political realities. Discourse, symbolism, and violence can produce and reinforce them. When an extremist targets a religious community, the objective is not merely to harm the immediate victims, but also to encourage society to perceive that community as distinct from the broader national collective.
This is where the ontology of extremism becomes significant. Extremist thinking often constructs an oversimplified world based on rigid binaries: believer and unbeliever, pure and corrupt, loyal and hostile. Jordanian identity, by contrast, is multifaceted. Citizens may differ religiously, geographically, socially, or professionally, yet remain part of the same national community. Extremism seeks to erase these overlapping identities and replace them with a single dividing line.
The problem is also epistemological. Extremism can create a closed system for determining what is “true,” where contradictory evidence is rejected and rumours or selective information reinforce a pre-existing worldview. This is why the danger of an attack does not end when the attack itself is over. If rumours generate suspicion among Jordanians, then the extremist narrative has already achieved part of its objective.
King Abdullah II’s response following the Karak attack demonstrated an understanding of this broader dimension. It extended beyond security measures to include efforts to counter rumours and misinformation, review policies for addressing extremist ideology, and tackle its underlying causes. The Speech from the Throne likewise underscored national unity and the resilience of both the state and society. Confronting extremism therefore involves not only apprehending attackers, but also preventing violence from redefining relationships among Jordanians.
This can also be understood through the concept of ontological security. Societies require not only physical security but also continuity in their sense of identity and stability. Terrorism seeks to disrupt this continuity by raising questions about whether the state can continue to protect society, whether communities can continue to trust one another, and whether national identity remains stronger than sectarian or ideological divisions. Unity is therefore not merely political rhetoric; it is an element of national security.
The Jordanian state also operates simultaneously on two levels. Putnam’s Two Level Games provides a useful framework for understanding this dynamic. Externally, Jordan operates within a highly unstable regional environment while maintaining relationships with international and security partners. Internally, it must preserve national cohesion, confidence in institutions, and economic stability. These two levels are interconnected, as weak domestic cohesion reduces the state’s ability to respond effectively to external pressure.
Political economy adds another dimension. Jordan’s stability is both a political and economic asset, supporting investment, tourism, and long term decision making. In Keynesian terms, economic actors rely on shared expectations when the future is uncertain. Extremism therefore, threatens not only security, but also the broader sense of stability on which economic activity depends.
Extremism should not be attributed solely to poverty or unemployment. Economic hardship does not automatically produce radicalisation. However, uneven development, limited social mobility, and perceptions of exclusion can create conditions in which narratives of anger and alienation are more easily exploited. Long term efforts to counter extremism therefore require security and intelligence measures, but also education, employment opportunities, credible religious discourse, digital literacy, local development, and institutions that strengthen citizens’ connection to society and the state.
Jordanians should also avoid being drawn into the division and social discord that extremists seek to foster through social media disputes, sectarian accusations, or unnecessary public confrontation. Even limited displays of division may unintentionally advance extremist objectives by suggesting that society is no longer acting as a unified national community. At the same time, the state should strengthen policies concerning individuals convicted of extremist offences who are released from prison, including rigorous risk assessments, rehabilitation and deradicalisation programmes, post release monitoring where legally justified, and structured reintegration into society.
In the end, success should not be measured only by the number of attackers arrested or networks disrupted. The more important question is whether extremists succeeded in changing the way Jordanians see one another.
An attack on a church should not be framed as a Christian issue; it should remain a Jordanian issue. Targeting a police officer should be understood as an attack not only on the individual, but on the state, the rule of law, and the security of all Jordanians.
The extremist seeks to replace citizenship with division, trust with suspicion, and coexistence with fear. The real victory is ensuring this objective fails.
In a period of regional instability, Jordan’s strength continues to rest on national unity, institutional resilience, and the leadership of His Majesty King Abdullah II. May God protect His Majesty and Crown Prince Al Hussein, and preserve Jordan’s security and stability.
