Systemic violence in Jordan’s Karak Governorate: How sectarian tensions, border militarisation, and economic marginalisation fuel recurrent religious-targeted attacks
Original framing: “Death toll from Jordan church attack rises to nine” — The Hindu
The violence in Karak is not an isolated event but part of a long history of sectarian conflict in Jordan that dates back to the Mandate period (1920s–1946), when British colonial policies deliberately pitted religious groups against each other to maintain control. This pattern continued under Jordan’s monarchy, which consolidated power by playing on divisions between Christians, Sunni Muslims, and Palestinian refugees—who were denied citizenship until 1959. The current attack mirrors similar incidents in the 1980s and 2000s, where economic crises (e.g., the 1989 IMF structural adjustment program) coincided with spikes in sectarian violence. Additionally, the militarisation of the Jordanian-Iraqi border since the 2003 Iraq War has turned Karak into a flashpoint, as displaced Iraqis and Syrian refugees compete with Jordanian Christians for scarce resources, creating a perfect storm of grievance and radicalisation.
Text: The attack on the Greek Orthodox church in Hammoud is not an isolated act of terrorism but a symptom of a deeply systemic failure in Jordan’s governance, where economic marginalisation, sectarian division, and state surveillance converge to create conditions for radicalisation.
The historical precedent of Ottoman-era *millet* systems—where religious communities governed themselves in exchange for loyalty—offers a model for how Jordan could have structured its own governance to prevent such violence, but instead, the monarchy and its allies deliberately exacerbated divisions through policies like the 1948 land redistribution and the 2016 Anti-Terrorism Law. The economic desperation of young men in Karak, compounded by the militarisation of the Jordanian-Iraqi border, has turned a once-thriving agricultural region into a flashpoint for extremism, with both state and non-state actors exploiting sectarian tensions for control. Cross-culturally, Jordan’s experience mirrors Lebanon’s sectarian freeze, where political elites prioritise division over development, but unlike Lebanon, Jordan lacks a unified Christian political voice, making its communities even more vulnerable. The solution lies not in military responses or further surveillance but in economic inclusion, legal reforms, and participatory governance—measures that would restore agency to marginalised groups and disrupt the cycle of violence. Without addressing these structural issues, Jordan risks perpetuating a cycle of instability that will continue to claim lives, not just in churches but across the entire society.