The Islamic Action Front in Jordan - the political party of the Muslim Brotherhood - has set itself as opposition to the state in Jordan. It has traditionally positioned itself as the ultimate outsider - critical of everything from the economic policy to foreign policy to the cultural policy of the state. The IAF never held much of a governance role, outside of a few elected seats as MPs or mayors. Its lever of influence, rather, was through 1) numerous members as employees in the Ministry of Education 2) the Teacher’s Union and 3) professional associations.
Now it finds its foundational brand topsy-turvy. The Teacher’s Union was disbanded by the state, the state is launching a new Kingdom-wide civic curriculum (without MB input), and after the September 10 elections, they have a fifth of the Parliament. They have wider governance responsibility without their influential levers over the bureaucracy.
Three Things You Should Know:
The new curriculum. Jordan is launching a new curriculum which would parallel the modernization process. This is to instill civic values and awareness of citizenship. The idea is in line with an underlying philosophy mentioned throughout the modernization documents - to create a Jordanian national identity. However, the generations biased against partisan activity and disappointed by several do-nothing Parliaments are a tough audience. As the modernization process is projected for 12 years, the target audience is still in school. While the 2024 election had a record youth turnout percentage, a realistic goal is to capture the 14-18 year old demographic now in school and turn their minds towards an active citizenship. But this enters into behavior change - adjusting how citizens see their place in society, relationship to the state, and personal identity. It is a powerful tool.
The loss of their power of education. Gradually the Muslim Brotherhood is losing its power over education in Jordan. The loss of the Teacher’s Union was a blow. While the Teachers Union was an opportunity for representation of public sector workers and could have been a vehicle for labor and education reform, it was derailed in favor of IAF pressure tricks and threats of strikes. Calling the bluff of the state, the Union eventually called a massive strike September 2019 which lasted for 30 days. The IAF still uses the banner of the Union, as is seen by their incoming members of Parliament Naser Al Nawasrah and Huda Al Otoum. There is a movement to take back this issue. There is still a union for teachers but under different leadership and guidance. The National Islamic Party, in its campaign debate on Al-Mamlaka TV, called for the rebuilding of the Teacher’s Union. These steps are trying to redirect the union back into a vehicle of representation and less as an opposition tool. The new curriculum is not just a support for the new modernizations, it is a slap in the face to the IAF - a public rebuke of their previous control and a show of force.
The Western donors. The weak spot for the IAF to push back, the vulnerability in the project, is Jordan’s biggest partner - the United States. US involvement in the creation, promotion, and roll-out of the curriculum gives the IAF the target of “this is not our culture”. Arguing that the curriculum represents a US import, allows the IAF to bring up LGBTQI+, gender labels, Netflix, Gaza, Iraq, and a host of other issues. The organizations behind this are likely responding to a need and a grant from the US government. But, almost certainly their webpages will have sections on support for inclusion, and maybe labels like (she/her) under their leadership profiles. Expect to see screenshots of these floating on Telegram or WhatsApp groups in the next few weeks. Additionally the fact the curriculum is no longer under the Ministry of Education adds fuel to their fire.
My Take:
In a region of security states, it is a common misconception that the Ministries of Interior are the power players. They certainly control law and order. But the power ministries are usually Education and Culture (if used effectively) because these affect long-term public perceptions. They influence identity. This drives long-term development of a people and shifts the trajectory of a nation - not quickly like new laws, economic crashes, pandemics, or stimulus, but slowly, like a cargo ship changing course.
The IAF does not operate on policy. It operates on division. The biggest division they can exploit is identity.
Identity is a battlefield the IAF is familiar with. They feel much more comfortable driving a wedge in identity issues than they do debating taxation rates, tariffs, water management or agriculture policies.
The IAF has over two dozen seats in Parliament, and the other parties are scrambling to create a wall of opposition against them (even before they have figured out their own policies). But the battle lines have already been drawn. Instead of focusing on IAF Gaza-solidarity, or relations with Israel (which are popular causes they would lead anyway, even if they weren’t in Parliament) it is very clear the IAF will make the political fight about the curriculum.
Huda Al Otoum, the IAF’s education heavyweight, seems to devote her entire campaign and social media presence to one issue which is aligning the curriculum with the Muslim Brotherhood’s vision of Jordanian identity. This identity has less to do with national character but more to do with the Islamic movement goals. The sheer amount of online content she has produced on the issue of the curriculum shows its priority - videos, posts, seminars etc.
Also, let’s look at the recent contest for Speaker of the Parliament. This was an internal election by MPs. So why did the IAF campaign publicly? They sent posts saying that because Armouti received the most votes in elections that should be honored by the new Parliament. They said this is not about the party but the shaping of the Parliament. The court of public opinion could not gift him the Speakership, but it will come in handy for the divisive arguments.
Now is a sensitive time for the US to be involved in children’s education in the region. I’m surprised this wasn’t handled more delicately since October 7. That said, the curriculum is a Jordanian product. Also, the IAF would have found a way to tie it to America anyway as that is a more sensitive point than blaming the state.
Maybe Mithaq and Eradah and other parties will fight back and defend the curriculum as needed for citizen formation. This is a mistake. Instead of just reacting to the IAF these parties need to create their own brands. Why should the public support them? Just because they are not the IAF? The IAF is about to set the frame of the attack - go after the ‘Western import’.
Just before the September 10 elections, the IAF asked citizens if they would vote “for the normalizers or for the resistance?” They successfully labeled all parties as either with or against Gaza. Their argument frame now will be - “Who do you want shaping the minds of your children? Washington? Or Authentic Jordanians?” “Are we in favor of our family values or the loose morality of the West?” This forces the other parties into a corner. “If this is a Jordanian curriculum, what are the Western countries doing with it? Why are foreigners teaching our teachers what to say to our children?”
The other parties, if they want to move the modernizations forward, have to frame the debate around policies. What are our national priorities? How do we improve the quality of life for Jordanians? Second, they have to create brands for their own parties. If they don’t take these two steps, the IAF frames the debate and makes the other parties only react, instead of act.
This will be the fight. Pay attention. The next months will be about values and identity - not policy.