Earlier this month, Jordan experienced its largest act of terrorism in over a decade—an attack on an intelligence complex that resulted in five deaths. This was only the latest and most severe of a recent upsurge of such incidents in the kingdom, most of which have been linked to Islamic State (IS). David Schenker writes:

In November 2015, a Jordanian police officer killed two American and two South African trainers, as well as two of his fellow countrymen, at an international police-training facility in [the city of] Moaqar. More recently, this March, Jordanian counterterrorism forces raided an IS cell at a Palestinian camp in the northern town of Irbid, killing eight militants allegedly planning attacks against civilian and military targets.

Less widely publicized were several other terrorist plots interdicted by Jordanian security forces. In July 2015, for example, seven Jordanians were given lengthy jail sentences and a Syrian was sentenced in absentia for planning attacks on the Israeli embassy in Amman and on U.S. troops in Moaqar. . . .

An estimated 2,500 Jordanians have already joined the ranks of the foreign fighters in Syria.

Jordan is Washington’s best Arab ally and is a key partner in the campaign against IS in Syria, providing the U.S. and other western states with airbases and other critical operational support. More importantly, King Abdullah of Jordan has been a leading voice of regional moderation [and] in countering the IS/al-Qaeda [worldview]. Recognizing the import of the kingdom, the U.S. provides it with over $1 billion in annual economic and military assistance, as well as in support for the absorption of refugees.

At this point, however, money alone is not the answer to Jordan’s terrorist problem. Five years into the revolt, the Obama administration’s continued indifference to Syria is having a pernicious impact on security in the kingdom. The longer the war in Syria persists, the more danger militant Islamist ideological spillover poses to Jordan.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.