The Strategic Implications of Establishing a NATO Liaison Office in Jordan

On July 11, 2024, the Jordanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates announced the establishment of a NATO liaison office in Jordan. This decision was one of the outcomes of the NATO summit in Washington held from July 9-11 this year. Although the summit produced significant results, from a research perspective, we always look at the position of the Middle East and the Arabian Gulf in the outcomes of such summits, which included three main points: First, the discussion by NATO leaders of a special report on the future of NATO’s relationship with the southern countries, including the Middle East, North Africa, the Sahel, and sub-Saharan Africa. Second, the 20th anniversary of NATO’s Istanbul Cooperation Initiative launched in 2004, which included four Gulf countries, while Saudi Arabia and Oman remained outside it. Third, the appointment of the former Prime Minister of the Netherlands as the new Secretary General of NATO.

From the outset, analyzing the official Jordanian statement reveals that the establishment of this office came within the framework of cooperation and demonstrating NATO’s commitment to enhancing cooperation with neighboring countries. It also noted that the final communiqué of the NATO summit in Lithuania in 2023 mentioned this decision.

Before discussing the implications of establishing this center, it is essential to emphasize that Jordan’s relations with NATO have included many areas of cooperation in recent years. Jordan is a member of the Mediterranean Dialogue Initiative launched by NATO in 1994, which includes seven Mediterranean countries. This year marks the 30th anniversary of its launch. In 2005, a NATO minesweeper visited the Jordanian port of Aqaba for three days. In 2013, NATO provided practical training to protect civilians during wars, benefiting 100,000 individuals in several Jordanian cities. These are just examples of NATO’s role in supporting the security capabilities of its partners, an effort NATO has been keen on since launching its partnerships with the region.

Given the above, despite the significance of NATO choosing Jordan to open this office, it represents an important development in the context of NATO’s relations with southern countries in general. This is especially relevant considering the announced activities of the center, which include organizing conferences, courses, and training programs in areas of strategic analysis, emergency planning, public diplomacy, cybersecurity, climate change management, crisis management, and civil defense. These are priority areas of interest for southern countries due to their chronic crises that pose challenges for both allies and partners.

This is not the first of its kind for NATO, whether for southern countries or others. In February 2017, NATO announced the establishment of the South Center aimed at coordinating information on terrorist groups in the Middle East and North Africa, located in Naples, Italy. In January of the same year, NATO opened the Regional Center for NATO and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in Kuwait, with goals including training courses, workshops, and lectures on energy security, strategic planning, civil emergency planning, and crisis management. The three centers, whether based in southern countries or NATO countries, work together to analyze the security environment in which NATO operates, in addition to increasing partner capacities through the mentioned courses.

Some may wonder why such centers are established when there are already other frameworks for cooperation between NATO and partners through individual partnership and cooperation programs under the Istanbul Initiative and regular Mediterranean Dialogue meetings at ministerial and other levels. The answer lies in NATO’s strategy in general and currently in particular. Generally, NATO began establishing partnerships after the end of the Cold War to adapt to its realities and move away from the traditional Arab view of NATO as a tool of Western military intervention in crises. For Arab countries, non-military security provided by NATO through these courses has become a priority, especially in crisis and disaster management in general and maritime security in particular, areas where the region’s countries need NATO’s expertise.

While acknowledging the above, it is also impossible to separate NATO’s decision to establish this center from competition with Russia in the region, as well as NATO’s desire to reaffirm its commitment to southern security. The expert report mentioned earlier recommended appointing a special envoy for NATO to the south, following decisions taken by major countries and the European Union in this regard by naming a special envoy for the region. Despite the importance of this step, my experience with NATO policies highlights three points: First, NATO fully understands that it faces the challenge of changing perceptions about its policies outside its territories, especially after the Afghanistan experience, and is working on this gradually to avoid counterproductive results. Second, although any threat to the southern front means a threat to NATO’s vital interests, explaining NATO’s intervention in Libya on March 11, 2011, through the ‘Unified Protector’ operation due to the unrest in Libya at that time, causing oil prices to rise to $112 a barrel, NATO only intervenes in crises outside its territories under certain conditions, including the necessity of a unanimous decision by its 32 member states and an international resolution mentioning the role of regional organizations. Third, NATO does not want to lead international efforts to confront threats but works within alliances, such as its role in combating piracy threats off the coast of Somalia and the Horn of Africa through the ‘Ocean Shield’ mission that began in 2008 and left for the Black Sea in 2016 for a new mission.

While the decision to open this office is significant, and it will not be the last, as NATO officials’ statements included intentions to open two other centers on climate change and the impact of conflicts on women, the debate continues even among NATO researchers about the broad concept of the south and that the Gulf countries should be prioritized within NATO’s strategies. This is in addition to the deterrent role NATO can play and greater involvement in addressing Gulf regional security threats.

Source: Akhbar Al Khaleej