Hasan Dajah

Recent security developments in the city of Aqaba have brought renewed attention to the evolving nature of conflicts in the Middle East. Military confrontations are no longer confined to traditional battlefields but have expanded to include maritime routes, logistical hubs, and strategically important economic centers. In this context, Aqaba cannot be viewed merely as a coastal city or a maritime gateway for Jordan, but rather as a significant geopolitical point in the regional security equation. This explains the increased interest in the city amidst the escalating military tensions in the region.

Initial data indicates that the Aqaba region was within the scope of the threat during the recent Iranian attacks. This raises questions that extend beyond the immediate military dimension to broader political and strategic implications. The choice of a region with such economic and geographical importance carries not only tactical significance but also sends messages related to redrawing the boundaries of deterrence, expanding the scope of political pressure, and demonstrating the ability to reach locations of high strategic value.

In this context, an important question arises: Why is the threat directed at Aqaba, when there are American military targets in the region at closer distances? One possible explanation is that Tehran seeks to avoid a direct attack that could provoke a broad American response, escalating tensions and intensifying strikes against Iranian targets. Simultaneously, it aims to exert indirect pressure by targeting areas of economic and strategic importance, achieving political, media, and economic impact without crossing the threshold that could lead to a wider military confrontation.

Aqaba derives its importance from its unique location at the crossroads of the Levant and the Red Sea. It is Jordan's only seaport and a key link between land and sea trade. It is also connected to regional transport networks and supply chains that serve the Jordanian economy and several neighboring countries. Therefore, any threat to this city has repercussions that extend beyond security to include trade, investment, maritime transport, insurance, and shipping-elements that have become integral to the modern concept of national security. Aqaba's geographical location also grants it an additional strategic dimension. It lies in a highly geopolitically sensitive region where regional and international interests intersect within a limited geographical area. Therefore, any military escalation near it directly affects maritime security in the northern Red Sea and raises concerns among markets and shipping companies, especially given the ongoing instability in several regional shipping lanes.

From a strategic perspective, the primary message behind expanding operations to areas of economic importance appears to be raising the cost of conflict for all parties, so that its effects are not limited to the military arena but extend to the economy, logistics infrastructure, and trade. This approach is a prominent feature of modern conflicts, which now target economic centers of gravity as much as traditional military objectives based on the premise that economic pressure can sometimes be more effective than direct military confrontation.

At the same time, targeting or threatening a region like Aqaba carries a psychological dimension no less important than the military one. It aims to create anxiety among investors, shipping companies, and insurance firms, and to raise questions about the security of maritime routes. Recent years have demonstrated that even a heightened risk level at strategic ports leads to increased insurance and shipping costs, even in the absence of direct physical damage, ultimately affecting trade and the economy.

However, these developments should be interpreted cautiously, avoiding hasty conclusions or definitive judgments, as the technical details concerning the nature of the ultimate targets and the trajectories of the projectiles are still being investigated. Therefore, strategic analysis requires focusing on the overall implications of the event rather than relying on unproven assumptions. What is certain so far is that the Aqaba region has become part of a more complex regional security environment, and maintaining its security is no longer solely a matter of Jordanian national security, but is also linked to the stability of the Red Sea and the protection of international trade routes.

In this context, Jordan's position stood out as one based on the principles of international law and respect for national sovereignty. Jordan affirmed its rejection of its territory or airspace being used as an arena for settling regional conflicts, emphasizing that protecting its citizens and preserving national sovereignty are non-negotiable priorities. This approach reflects a consistent Jordanian policy of avoiding involvement in regional polarization, while upholding the state's right to take necessary measures to protect its territory and national security.

These developments also reveal a broader shift in the nature of regional security. Political borders alone are no longer sufficient to define the theater of operations. Economic hubs, ports, and maritime routes have become essential elements in the equation of deterrence and strategic balance. Consequently, any threat to these centers increases the cost of maritime insurance, shipping, and transportation, leading to higher import prices and delays in the arrival of essential goods.

These burdens are gradually passed on to the consumer through rising food, energy, and raw material prices, thus putting pressure on purchasing power and the standard of living. Therefore, protecting these centers requires an integrated system combining defense capabilities, logistical readiness, diplomatic coordination, and regional cooperation to ensure maritime security and the stability of supply chains. What happened in Aqaba should not be viewed as an isolated security incident, but rather as an indicator of a new phase of regional conflicts, in which military, economic, and political considerations are intertwined.

This pattern of pressure is likely to persist as long as the region remains tense. Therefore, maintaining Jordan's stability, securing its economic corridors, and strengthening diplomatic efforts aimed at containing crises will remain among the most important pillars contributing to the protection of national security, while simultaneously supporting the security and stability of the entire region.


Hasan Al-Dajah is a professor of strategic studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University