Jordan is grappling with a dangerous shift in Iran’s regional strategy, as recent missile attacks have turned the kingdom into what one commentator calls a “central arena” in Tehran’s ongoing confrontation with the United States. In a detailed opinion piece on Al Jazeera Arabic, Jordanian journalist Fahd Al-Khitan argues that Iran now treats Jordan not only as a host to American forces, but as a legitimate target for strategic strikes on ports, airports and other vital installations.
Al-Khitan notes that the latest wave of attacks marks a departure from the dynamics of the earlier “forty-day war” involving the US, Israel and Iran, during which Jordan largely escaped direct, high‑level targeting. The recent Friday strikes, in which Iranian missiles hit US military assets in one of Jordan’s bases and killed three American soldiers, represent a turning point in Tehran’s approach, he writes. American accounts of the attack, confirmed to the writer by official Jordanian sources, describe extensive material damage at two sites and highlight the range and precision of the missiles launched from Iran.
Jordan’s security establishment fears that Iran will treat this operation as a successful template to be repeated, thereby placing the country on a list of continuously targeted states as long as mutual air and missile strikes between Tehran and Washington continue. The article recalls that Amman signed a defense cooperation agreement with the United States years ago, allowing US troops to be stationed inside existing Jordanian bases under specific operational constraints. In return, Jordan has received advanced training, weapons systems and technology to bolster its capabilities against terrorism, drug trafficking and cross‑border smuggling.
However, Al-Khitan stresses that what Amman sought to avoid is precisely what is unfolding: Jordan becoming a theatre of war, regardless of whether the successful Iranian strikes hit allied forces rather than Jordanian units. Strategically, Iran appears intent on widening the map of operations against US forces and certain regional states to demonstrate that its military capacity remains intact and that it will not be forced into submission if Washington prolongs the conflict. Targeting a country like Jordan, he adds, is seen in Tehran as less costly for the global economy and energy markets than direct attacks on major Gulf oil and gas producers.
Jordan, like Gulf capitals, now finds itself caught between “two fires”: an emboldened Iran that is ready to confront all its neighbors, and a United States locked in a war with an uncertain end. Al-Khitan warns that Iran’s current trajectory aims to impose a new regional security order based on permanent threat and coercive use of force, including tighter control over the Strait of Hormuz and renewed efforts to project power through allied militias from Lebanon and Iraq to other parts of the region.
Against this backdrop, Amman is doubling down on diplomacy. The article highlights Jordan’s alignment with Gulf states in backing intensive mediation efforts—particularly by Qatar—to secure a short ceasefire of around ten days and revive negotiations between Washington and Tehran from where they last stopped. Jordanian diplomacy, according to Al-Khitan, believes in Doha’s resolve but doubts the durability of any truce in light of hardline positions in both the American and Iranian leaderships and the collapse of earlier understandings before and after the “forty-day war.”
Complicating matters further is the role of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom the writer accuses of actively seeking to recharge the war atmosphere and expand military operations against Iran, even as parts of the US administration resist such escalation. Jordan is in constant contact with American decision‑makers to warn against this scenario and to push for a return to negotiations, convinced that a renewed war would be even more devastating for all sides.
Al-Khitan concludes that the coming days will be decisive for the Middle East, with Jordan standing more exposed than ever to the costs of a widening confrontation. While the kingdom remains committed to its defense partnership with Washington and rejects Iranian pressure to roll it back, it will continue working with Gulf allies to prevent a “third war” between Iran and the United States and to re‑center diplomacy on the nuclear file, the security of Hormuz and other contested issues. The article by Fahd Al-Khitan, published by Al Jazeera Arabic, underscores that Jordan’s leadership sees no alternative to this dual track of firm defense and persistent diplomatic engagement.