The Israel-Jordan peace agreement has long been considered a cornerstone of regional stability. But beneath that surface, cracks are deepening. Jordan is under mounting internal pressure, its public posture toward Israel is hardening, and the regional balance is shifting. For Israel, assuming that today’s quiet will last into tomorrow is becoming an ever-increasing strategic risk, writes Assaf Yishai.

A Kingdom Under Strain

Jordan was never a natural state. It was built on colonial design, ruled by a dynasty with roots in the Hijaz, and sustained by foreign aid and somewhat fragile legitimacy. Today, that legitimacy is fraying. King Abdullah II faces a restive population burdened by economic stagnation, water scarcity, and disillusionment. Islamist factions are gaining ground. Tribal support is waning. The monarchy survives by walking a narrow line—projecting pro-Western stability abroad while absorbing rising hostility at home. Maintaining that equilibrium is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

Anti-Israel Rhetoric, Ongoing Coordination

Since the October 7 massacre, Jordan’s tone has sharpened. The king withdrew his ambassador. Queen Rania voiced strong criticism of Israel in international interviews. Protests in Amman have turned openly hostile. Yet, away from the microphones, security ties remain intact. In both April and October 2024, Jordan helped intercept Iranian missiles targeting Israel. Intelligence continues to flow between the two countries. This split—between public condemnation and private cooperation—is not a strategy, however. It is a symptom of strain. And as pressure mounts, the gap between street sentiment and palace policy could well collapse altogether.

A Long Border, Loosely Guarded

That risk is not theoretical—it plays out along Israel’s eastern frontier. This border, the country’s longest, has also become its most exposed. Years of relative calm led to complacency; that era is over. In 2023, a Jordanian MP was caught smuggling hundreds of firearms. In 2024, a Jordanian truck driver crossed into Israel and murdered three civilians. These are not isolated incidents—they are red flags. Smuggling networks are active. Extremist ideologies are gaining traction. Israel must act decisively: bolster surveillance, reinforce the border, and maintain a permanent IDF presence in the Jordan Valley. This is not alarmism, it’s strategic foresight.

The Hashemite Question

The more pressing concern is what happens if the Hashemite monarchy falls. The answer is uncertain—and therein lies the danger. A power vacuum in Jordan could be filled by Iran-backed militias, Hamas affiliates, or tribal coalitions hostile to Israel. The Transjordanian Highlands would become a new front, with hostile forces positioned within mortar range of the Jordan Valley. Israel must prepare for instability—not as a hypothetical, but as a near-term scenario. That means war-gaming outcomes, building alliances where possible, and securing critical terrain before events force a reactive response.

Sovereignty in the Jordan Valley

This looming instability is compounded by Israel’s ambiguous hold over the Jordan Valley. While Israel exercises security control, it lacks formal sovereignty—a gap that weakens both defense and development. The valley is more than a buffer; it is the backbone of Israel’s eastern security. Formal sovereignty would enable critical infrastructure projects, population growth, and stronger deterrence. Though opposition is inevitable, history shows that similar resistance greeted Israel’s Golan annexation—a move now widely accepted as necessary. The same rationale demands decisive action in the Jordan Valley.

Reciprocity Must Be Real

But securing the Jordan Valley is not only a matter of geography—it’s also a matter of policy. For decades, Israel has extended support to Jordan through water transfers, economic coordination, and behind-the-scenes security aid. That support has often gone unreciprocated. In recent years, Jordan has intensified its public criticism of Israel—on global stages and in the Arab street—without consequence. That dynamic must shift. Continued Israeli support should be contingent on clear expectations: reduce incitement, calibrate public messaging, and ensure that diplomacy reflects the realities of security cooperation.

Conclusion: Secure the East

Peace with Jordan has brought stability—but stability is not a strategy. The eastern front is now a live vulnerability, and time is running out to address it. Israel cannot afford to treat the Jordan Valley as a backwater or bet on the endurance of the Hashemite regime. It must act now: harden the border, formalize sovereignty, and prepare for regional shockwaves before they arrive. In the Middle East, today’s ally can become tomorrow’s risk. Realism isn’t optional—it’s survival. Israel must look east not later, but now.