Saud Al-Sharafat
In April 2025, Jordanian authorities announced the foiling of a major terrorist plot targeting the kingdom, with the arrest of 16 individuals affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic Action Front Party. Despite the significance of the event and its direct impact on Jordan’s national security, no official statements were issued by the United States or European countries regarding the incident. This silence has raised numerous questions about the reasons behind the lack of official responses from Western powers that are considered allies of Jordan in counterterrorism efforts. This article aims to analyze the reasons for this silence and its implications, with a particular focus on the U.S. and European positions
Similar to the U.S., the European Union adopts a cautious stance regarding issues related to the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorism. Although some European countries have expressed reservations about designating the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, the EU aims to maintain stable relations with Jordan and other countries in the region, preferring not to publicly intervene in internal matters. The European reluctance to issue official statements may also reflect the Union’s preference for diplomatic solutions behind closed doors, rather than escalating tensions publicly. Additionally, European countries might avoid taking a strong public position on such matters due to the risk of being perceived as interfering in the internal politics of other nations.
The United States, which has long considered Jordan a key ally in the Middle East, has not classified the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, despite the group’s involvement in several terrorist activities in the region. This policy complicates the U.S. stance on operations involving the group. While the U.S. supports Jordan in its fight against terrorism, it typically avoids issuing official public statements on incidents involving the Brotherhood. The absence of such statements may stem from concerns about escalating tensions in the region or from the desire to avoid alienating other allied countries in the region, such as Qatar and Turkey, where the Brotherhood holds influence. Other factors contributing to the silence may include U.S. strategic interests in the region, which rely on maintaining Jordan’s stability as a security partner. Public statements could complicate these relationships or exacerbate regional crises, which is why the U.S. generally prefers a more cautious approach.
Several factors explain the absence of official statements from the U.S. and the European Union. Western countries generally follow a cautious policy in their relations with Middle Eastern states to maintain stability in their diplomatic ties with all parties involved. A strong public statement could create divisions among regional allies and exacerbate the crisis. Some Western governments may shy away from making public statements due to internal pressures from political parties or civil society organizations that oppose taking a firm stance against the Muslim Brotherhood. The absence of statements may also be a strategic decision to protect Western countries’ interests in the region. Public remarks could negatively impact intelligence or military cooperation with Jordan or the Gulf States.
The absence of official statements by major powers could have several implications. The lack of official statements may reduce international support for Jordan, which could undermine its efforts to combat internal and external security challenges. The silence may face criticism within the U.S. and European countries, with some factions seeing it as a weakness in confronting terrorism or as tacit approval of certain groups. Although the silence may be seen as an attempt to preserve diplomatic relations, it could lead to unnecessary tensions between Jordan and Western countries. Greater transparency in political stances may be key to strengthening future cooperation.
In light of the absence of official statements from the U.S. and the European Union following the foiling of the terrorist plot in Jordan, it can be concluded that this silence reflects complex diplomatic and political considerations. Western powers may prefer to avoid public escalation to maintain stable relations with Jordan and other regional states. However, it may be essential for Western countries to reconsider their positions and public statements moving forward, to avoid the consequences of this silence and enhance effective cooperation in the fight against terrorism.
