Iraqi Oil Pipeline to Aqaba Remains Nothing More Than Ink on Paper

Since 2003 and 2004, Jordanians have been hearing the same story: the Iraqi oil pipeline to Aqaba is discussed at every bilateral meeting, mentioned by every new Iraqi government, and included in every joint communiqué.

Yet, when the time comes for real action, the project disappears, after more than two decades of promises, the outcome remains unchanged it exists only on paper.

The latest decision by the Iraqi Council of Ministers has taken a markedly different direction, the cabinet approved the launch of technical studies for the Basra–Haditha–Baniyas pipeline, alongside the route to Ceyhan, and authorized agreements with American and Qatari companies to move the project forward.

Aqaba, which for years had been presented as a central component of the pipeline project, was notably absent from the decision.

What is even more striking than the decision itself is its timing, The first high-level Arab ministerial delegation to visit Iraq’s new government was the Jordanian delegation, including the ministers of industry, energy, and transport. Only hours after the delegation left Baghdad, the Iraqi cabinet announced its decision.

If economic coordination between the two countries is truly as strong as repeatedly claimed, it is reasonable to ask: What happened? Did Jordan know in advance about this shift, or was it caught by surprise alongside the public?

I personally contacted Jordanian officials, who confirmed that the pipeline issue had been discussed during the recent visit.

According to them, Iraqi officials explained that the project is proceeding along two separate routes: one to Baniyas, while the Aqaba pipeline remains, according to the Iraqi position, on the agenda and has not been cancelled.

However, conversations with Iraqi officials painted a very different picture. They stated plainly that the Iraq–Jordan oil pipeline would remain merely an idea on paper and would not move forward.

While they did not disclose the reasons, they spoke with a level of confidence that suggested the project is far from becoming reality.

This raises important questions. If the project is still officially on the agenda, why has the Baniyas route advanced to the study and implementation stages while the Aqaba route has remained stalled for more than twenty years?

And if Jordanian-Iraqi economic relations are consistently described as strategic, where is the tangible evidence of that partnership in major infrastructure projects?

Jordan has consistently stood by Iraq during difficult times. It kept its borders open, facilitated trade through its crossings, made the Port of Aqaba available to support the Iraqi economy, ensured the smooth movement of goods despite complex regional conditions, and approached the relationship from the perspective of long-term strategic partnership rather than short-term gains.

Yet the results appear to fall far short of the political rhetoric, the proposed joint economic city remains unrealized.

The oil pipeline remains on paper, dozens of agreements and joint announcements have yet to materialize, even Jordanian exports to Iraq continue to face periodic protectionist measures and new market restrictions.

Success should not be measured by the number of meetings, joint statements, or optimistic declarations.

It should be measured by what is actually implemented on the ground by projects that move beyond planning and into execution.

The project may not have been officially cancelled, as Jordanian officials maintain, and it may still appear on Iraq’s agenda. However, the undeniable reality is that Jordanians have been hearing the same assurances for more than twenty years, while implementation repeatedly moves in another direction.

The question today is no longer when the Iraq–Jordan oil pipeline will be built.

A more pressing question has emerged: Is this still a genuine project, or has it become little more than a political slogan revived when convenient, only to be shelved once again as nothing more than ink on paper?