Dr. Hamad Kasasbeh

The Prime Minister’s recent televised interview came at a sensitive transitional moment. It reflected not only the usual economic challenges, but also a critical phase in which the Economic Modernization Vision is expected to move from planning into actual execution. This is no longer a stage of explanation or preparation. It is a stage in which results are expected to begin taking shape, amid growing expectations from both the public and the economic community.

In terms of tone, the interview was calm and disciplined. It emphasized stability, continuity, and caution in making promises. Politically, this approach is understandable, especially in a region facing persistent uncertainty. Economically, however, reassurance alone is not enough. Economic performance is ultimately measured by outcomes, particularly when the government has clearly indicated that this year marks the beginning of major project implementation.

In 2026, widely viewed as a pivotal year for large-scale projects, attention is naturally shifting toward the phase in which these projects are expected to start generating tangible effects on growth, employment, and overall economic performance. At this point, the focus must move beyond general direction and toward clarity on what will actually change, and how progress will be measured in the near term.
The Economic Modernization Vision was clearly present in the discussion, but largely at a general level. The interview did not outline measurable achievements to date, nor did it specify what concrete outcomes are expected as large-scale implementation accelerates. The Prime Minister’s reference to the government’s intention to launch a second executive program reflects an awareness of the need to refine implementation tools and update priorities. However, the success of this step will ultimately be judged by its ability to accelerate visible economic impact, not by the mere introduction of a new programmatic framework.

On public–private partnership, the interview reaffirmed its central role in the Vision. Yet the phase of major projects requires a more precise definition of this partnership. It can no longer be limited to calls for participation or financing. Effective partnership requires clear allocation of roles, stable policies, and genuine risk-sharing. Without these elements, partnership remains a broad concept rather than a true engine for investment and growth.

Public sector reform was also presented as a necessary path, though without a direct link to the current execution phase. As the economy enters a period of major projects, this link becomes essential. The success of any large project depends on an efficient public administration capable of timely decision-making, streamlined procedures, cost control, and consistent follow-up. Without administrative readiness, even well-designed projects risk underperforming.

It should be noted that the government avoided premature claims of success and refrained from presenting unverified figures or rigid timelines. This realism is commendable. Yet in a year when initial results are expected to emerge, realism must be accompanied by clearer management of expectations. The phase ahead requires defining what will be delivered, how success will be measured, and how adjustments will be made if outcomes fall short.

In conclusion, the interview succeeded in reinforcing political stability, but it has not yet entered the full phase of economic testing. The year 2026 is not an ordinary year. It represents a benchmark for assessing the state’s ability to translate vision into practical results. The key challenge is no longer defending the Economic Modernization Vision, but managing the major project phase with clarity and confidence, so that the gap between commitment and reality does not widen, regardless of how sound the vision may be on paper.