The fact that this office is being opened in Jordan and not in Israel, despite the latter's close relations with NATO’s de facto leader United States, is an interesting development, Kargin notes.
“Biden’s stance – who, on one hand, supports Israel, but on the other hand hinders it – must have disappointed Netanyahu who refused to let NATO open liaison office [in Israel],” he speculates. “We can draw different conclusions from what happened, such as that there is a cooling in relations between Israel and NATO.”
NATO’s move points at the strengthening of cooperation between the bloc and Jordan, with Kargin noting that it may well create new problems for the Middle Eastern country.
At the same time, NATO’s Jordan office opening essentially “cements the existing reality” in the Middle East, which is already “divided” between the existing alliances, the analyst explains.
“There are already these blocs, this division: the Gulf monarchies and the Arab countries allied with them on one side, and Iran and its proxies on the other,” he says, adding that the Middle Eastern countries’ reaction to this new NATO office will essentially be determined by which of these two groups they belong to.
The opening of the NATO office also “reflects a strategic response to the volatile security landscape in the Middle East, marked by conflicts, terrorism, and geopolitical tensions,” according to Dr. Mehmet Rakipoğlu, assistant professor at Turkiye's Mardin Artuklu University.
“This move is both preemptive and reactionary: preemptive in strengthening NATO’s influence and preparedness for potential crises, and reactionary in addressing ongoing threats like terrorism and regional instability,” says Rakipoğlu who is also a researcher at the Dimensions for Strategic think tank. “It underscores NATO’s commitment to proactive engagement and crisis management in a strategically crucial region.”
The Jordan office gambit is essentially about “strengthening and powering stance of NATO and expansion in the Middle East,” he adds.